You ducked the question of what questions I supposedly ducked
and you're misrepresenting my stance. Shocking.
Deflection? I keep asking for people here to articulate exactly what corruption is taking place and it's nothing but crickets. And I'm the partisan?
You're conflating one instance of expediting paperwork with "general fitness". Come on bro. Step it up. You can't even say someone was harmed by it. Did some poor Muslim not get into the country because Jared reserved the spot for his buddy? If not, you might as well be crying about how many scoops of ice cream are being eaten. You may care about anything and everything under the sun but I don't. In life you're generally wise to pick your battles. That's why I'm hoping for something significant here and am questioning what the actual events are and the applicable law. No different than I did with Hilary.
That's your opinion and it's not based on any reality (but go ahead and prove me wrong). And you should probably stop using the word deflection because it seems to be stunting your understanding. Do I really need to explain to you how legal precedent works? Or how punishment is administered? Hard to take you seriously if you're going to maintain that it's never appropriate to compare situations when that's exactly how the aforementioned work. Cruel and unusual punishment doesn't exist in a vacuum. You look at how various instances of similar conduct/accusations are treated.
So again, what corruption and where's the evidence? It's all I've wanted to talk about here but since there's apparently so little substance to this it's easy for everyone to get distracted by me suggesting inconsistency on Jack's part (which is why I brought up Hilary
to him).