appointment. It was a clear conflict of interest, and it was equally clear that nothing wrong was done beyond the creation of that conflict. Which does not diminish it - the conflict itself is serious. But the US did not follow any policy in conflict with its (or the EU's or IMF's) official policy as a result.

Should Joe go down this rabbit hole with a bunch of conspiracy theorists who won't even acknowledge a quid pro quo in plain English on a transcript the pres released himself? Who will use these ever shifting narratives from "he did nothing wrong" to "he did something wrong but it isn't impeachable" and back again? Who are pushing Russian propaganda dreamed up out of thin air to deflect attention? Who have no problem with Trump's own conflicts, lack of transparency, and actively participate in his own conflicted business interests, like at the Trump hotel?

Right now, Joe has to play to the dems, and they don't read "Red State". They ain't buyin' the Burisma nonsense. If Joe gets the nomination, and if he simply operates on the promise that he will never appoint family members to key roles, then Trump should be disarmed. But I say deal with it then, if necessary, based on the climate at that point, which will likely be totally different from now.