How to spot a liar:
Frist,
they quote FOX News. That's not a great starting point.
Second, they don't cite their sources.
More importantly:
As I clearly posted before, your statement is objectively false. The funds were approved by the DoD July 18, the phone call was July 25, the funds were
officially withheld (first info made public) Aug 3.
The statement made is an
objective falsehood.
There's more, of course:
1) There is a difference between "retraction" and "different news source finding a different Ukrainian official". Also,
it wasn't one Ukrainian official, it was multiple, so the entire argument is dead in the water anyhow.
2) Any defense that goes with "as you can see by the transcript" is useless, because we don't
have the transcript. The transcript is locked away. We have some
recollections about the transcript. Trump edited the evidence. Saying "Trump is not guilty because he edited the evidence to appear not guilty" is just dishonest.
3) Saying it is false that Trump pushed Giuliani towards Ukraine, because it happened before the phone call...uh...what? That's nonsensical.
4) "Maguire says the report is a lie" is no more defense than "Trump says the report is a lie". Considering the charges include a cover up, the word of the accused is meaningless as defense.
And of course, the telltale sign that really leap off the page:
5) "I don't support Trump, but isn't everything he does great and isn't all this evidence handwavable?"
There's one more sign of concern, not evidence of being a liar -- we have enough of that, I posted the timeline of events and addressed these objectively false talking points in earlier posts. Please read this line of the post:
Now, go back and read the post again.
Really read it. I think someone was, well,
rushin' to post.