Republicans = Trump

[TexasTiger 12,897]

Just now, Cardin Drake said:

Here's a brief twitter summary from Benny Johnson:

If you’re still confused about the Joe and Hunter Biden crime scheme, let me break it down for you in the simplest way possible: Joe Biden was in charge of Ukrainian relations during his term as Vice President. During Joe’s term, a Ukrainian prosecutor named Viktor Shokin was investigating corruption at an oil & gas company Burisma. Burisma hired Joe’s son Hunter to their board and paid him $83k a month for access to his father, the Vice President. Burisma begged Joe to help them stop Shokin’s investigation. Joe demanded Burisma pay $10 mil for his help. Joe Biden then threatened to withhold a $1 billion loan from the US to Ukraine if the Ukrainian President Poroshenko didn’t fire the prosecutor. The prosecutor was fired. Ukraine got $1 billion from the US. The Biden’s got $10 million from Burisma. Hopefully that helps.

Some of you may remember when Spiro Agnew was forced to resign as VP for taking a 35K bribe. He wasn't clever enough to have the money paid to his son.  Of course, people in the 70's never would have been gullible enough to swallow the big lie that paying a drug addicted son for work he was totally unqualified for somehow made the bribery okay.

If there was anything to that, Trump’s DOJ would have prosecuted. Benny Johnson is a FOS POS.

[Cardin Drake 1,829]

Trump's DOJ, LOL.  The same one that spent 2 1/2 years trying to destroy Trump over Russian collusion nonsense that originated with Hillary Clinton even though they knew from the very beginning it wasn't true?

[GoAU 1,600]

5 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Same standard for everyone. I’ve read two damning indictments of very serious intentional crimes. 
 

In regard to Biden, what specific crime is even alleged and on what facts? 

Well, the first (and easiest because it is non deniable) is the same exact crime Trump is also guilty of - the unlawful possession/ retention of classified material.   Having materials in multiple unsecured offices and his garage is a crime - full stop.

Secondly, and it’s also ironic because Trump actually faced impeachment for this as well, is quid pro quo influence peddling.  If you refuse to connect the dots yet on him bragging about getting a Ukrainian prosecutor fired for investigating a company that his son held a Board position (that he was completely unqualified for) for you are clearly in denial.  But don’t worry - the multiple shell companies and “art deals” his son and brother were running to peddle influence from “the Big Guy” will keep coming to light.  You can continue to deny it, your credibility continues to erode the longer you keep your head in the sand about it.  

[tomcat 569]

Fascinating perspectives….while mine is admittedly left leaning, it is interesting that none of us…especially the defenders sat on a grand jury issuing an indictment. There was certainly evidence of a magnitude that a jury voted to indict.

Whether a trial jury votes to convict is another matter. Time will tell. However, Trump has violated one of my mommas key principles…don’t look like you’ve done something wrong.

 

[TexasTiger 12,897]

2 hours ago, GoAU said:

Well, the first (and easiest because it is non deniable) is the same exact crime Trump is also guilty of - the unlawful possession/ retention of classified material.   Having materials in multiple unsecured offices and his garage is a crime - full stop.

Secondly, and it’s also ironic because Trump actually faced impeachment for this as well, is quid pro quo influence peddling.  If you refuse to connect the dots yet on him bragging about getting a Ukrainian prosecutor fired for investigating a company that his son held a Board position (that he was completely unqualified for) for you are clearly in denial.  But don’t worry - the multiple shell companies and “art deals” his son and brother were running to peddle influence from “the Big Guy” will keep coming to light.  You can continue to deny it, your credibility continues to erode the longer you keep your head in the sand about it.  

You don’t display an understanding of any of these situations. Trump isn’t charged with unlawful possession of documents. Read the indictment. Read something other than right wing talking points on the Ukrainian prosecutor. Your facts are all wrong. If he did anything criminal Trump would have prosecuted him when he had the chance. Republican House would have found something. They didn’t because that’s not what happened. “Influence peddling” — what did he get in exchange for doing something illegal in regard to Hunter? Name it.

[TexasTiger 12,897]

7 hours ago, Cardin Drake said:

Trump's DOJ, LOL.  The same one that spent 2 1/2 years trying to destroy Trump over Russian collusion nonsense that originated with Hillary Clinton even though they knew from the very beginning it wasn't true?

That’s BS for many reasons. There was reason to appoint a special prosecutor. Sessions did that and was fired. Barr hamstrung him. Barr was willing to go pretty far for Trump. Just not the crap at the end. He’d gone after Biden in a heartbeat if he had a case.

[I_M4_AU 7,848]

6 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

He’d gone after Biden in a heartbeat if he had a case.

The FBI slow played the investigation into Hunter’s laptop during Barr’s tenure.  Barr must not have had the power to overcome the FBI’s high level of corruption.   Why do you think the whistleblowers in the IRS and FBI have come forward?

[Didba 5,256]

10 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Few Democrats are devoted to Biden.

It’s true. 

[TexasTiger 12,897]

28 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

The FBI slow played the investigation into Hunter’s laptop during Barr’s tenure.  Barr must not have had the power to overcome the FBI’s high level of corruption.   Why do you think the whistleblowers in the IRS and FBI have come forward?

Well, one’s a Chinese spy, so who knows what his motivation is? The US Attorney in that case said is Trump’s appointee. Biden could have replaced him, but didn’t. You think Trump would allow a Biden appointee investigating his child to continue?

[I_M4_AU 7,848]

22 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

The US Attorney in that case said is Trump’s appointee. Biden could have replaced him, but didn’t.

To say the US Attorney from Delaware is a Trump appointee and think Biden didn’t approve of him is ridiculous.  That attorney had to have both Senators from Delaware approve of him and both are Dems.

Of course Biden didn’t replace him, why would he?

The *Chinese Spy* wasn’t needed, they have others that are damning enough.

[TexasTiger 12,897]

50 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

To say the US Attorney from Delaware is a Trump appointee and think Biden didn’t approve of him is ridiculous.  That attorney had to have both Senators from Delaware approve of him and both are Dems.

Of course Biden didn’t replace him, why would he?

The *Chinese Spy* wasn’t needed, they have others that are damning enough.

Biden was out of office in 2018 when he was appointed. You’re going to excuse anything that doesn’t align with your predetermined view. Evidence bounces off you like bullets off Superman.

[AU9377 4,935]

51 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

To say the US Attorney from Delaware is a Trump appointee and think Biden didn’t approve of him is ridiculous.  That attorney had to have both Senators from Delaware approve of him and both are Dems.

Of course Biden didn’t replace him, why would he?

The *Chinese Spy* wasn’t needed, they have others that are damning enough.

That just isn't how it works.  Weiss was a Trump appointee and could have been replaced when Biden took office.  He didn't replace him in order to satisfy the concerns that doing so would have looked like he was derailing the investigation. 

Had Weiss charged a list of things that he couldn't prove, you would have hailed him as a hero.  When he didn't do that, you assail him as a puppet. 

[I_M4_AU 7,848]

15 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Biden was out of office in 2018 when he was appointed. You’re going to excuse anything that doesn’t align with your predetermined view. Evidence bounces off you like bullets off Superman.

 

12 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

That just isn't how it works.  Weiss was a Trump appointee and could have been replaced when Biden took office.  He didn't replace him in order to satisfy the concerns that doing so would have looked like he was derailing the investigation. 

Had Weiss charged a list of things that he couldn't prove, you would have hailed him as a hero.  When he didn't do that, you assail him as a puppet. 

I know he was appointed by Trump, what I am saying is to say he has loyalty to Trump because he appointed him is disingenuous.  If he was partial to Trump, Biden would have replaced him.  

Both of you assume way too much.

[TexasTiger 12,897]

43 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

 

I know he was appointed by Trump, what I am saying is to say he has loyalty to Trump because he appointed him is disingenuous.  If he was partial to Trump, Biden would have replaced him.  

Both of you assume way too much.

You’re assuming that Trump’s appointee was partial to Biden. Proof? Trump appointed him and said he shared his MAGA vision, but Biden didn’t replace him so he must actually be partial to Biden. Of course, if Biden had replaced him it would also be with a guy partial to Biden, so no scenario exists in which Hunter would possibly be subjected to real accountability, even though the investigation started with 2 years left in Trump’s term. Does that sum up your position on this?

[I_M4_AU 7,848]

18 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

You’re assuming that Trump’s appointee was partial to Biden. Proof? Trump appointed him and said he shared his MAGA vision, but Biden didn’t replace him so he must actually be partial to Biden. Of course, if Biden had replaced him it would also be with a guy partial to Biden, so no scenario exists in which Hunter would possibly be subjected to real accountability, even though the investigation started with 2 years left in Trump’s term. Does that sum up your position on this?

No, that would describe your fantasy.  The fact that this guy negotiated a *creative* plea deal that was not accepted by a judge that felt the plea deal was not defined enough for her to agree with it without more clarification.

I don’t think Biden would have left the man in that position if his son would have been in jeopardy in any way.  During the plea deal the judge asked him if Hunter could be charged with any other crime later.  Weiss said that he could and the defense, being surprised, said *no deal*.

Because of the whistleblowers Weiss had to say the investigation was on going, otherwise Hunter is a free man today.

Weiss doesn’t sound like a judge that is sharing a MAGA vision.

[Son of A Tiger 561]

13 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Few Democrats are devoted to Biden.

I hope that is the case but almost all the ones I know are.

[Son of A Tiger 561]

This must describe someone reading this thread.

[Didba 5,256]

43 minutes ago, Son of A Tiger said:

I hope that is the case but almost all the ones I know are.

well you know what they say about anecdotal evidence

[Didba 5,256]

26 minutes ago, Son of A Tiger said:

This must describe someone reading this thread.

Your link is broken

[AU9377 4,935]

2 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

 

I know he was appointed by Trump, what I am saying is to say he has loyalty to Trump because he appointed him is disingenuous.  If he was partial to Trump, Biden would have replaced him.  

Both of you assume way too much.

As a U.S. Attorney, he shouldn't have loyalty to any President.  However, when there is a new administration, the new President is entitled to appoint prosecutors of his/her choosing.  Jeff Sessions asked for the resignation of 46 U.S. Attorneys and they complied.  A tradition in the Senate is that when an appointment is contained within one state, as is Delaware, the sitting Senators are consulted and their consent is sought. Weiss is a registered Republican. Both Democratic Senators signed off on his selection and he was thereafter nominated by Trump.

Joe Biden could have requested his resignation when he became President.  At that time, instead of asking for his resignation, Biden announced that he would allow Weiss to remain in his post in order to complete the ongoing investigation into his son.  He stated that he wanted to do this in order to shield the investigation from allegations of being influenced by the appointment of another prosecutor.

That all factually took place.  The only reason that Weiss is being accused of protecting Hunter Biden is that his investigation didn't end with the charges many Republicans wanted.  Weiss has one duty and that is to the Constitution and the enforcement of the laws of the United States in an impartial manner.  They don't always get it right, but to assume that they always go to bat for whoever the President is would be a bad assumption.

[homersapien 11,379]

On 8/1/2023 at 1:55 PM, TexasTiger said:

Are you serious?

Yes.  He's serious. 

 

[homersapien 11,379]

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/06/gop-republican-party-fbi-authoritarian-acceleration.html

The GOP’s Authoritarian Acceleration

Internal resistance to its anti-democratic turn has all but vanished.

[homersapien 11,379]

11 hours ago, GoAU said:

Well, the first (and easiest because it is non deniable) is the same exact crime Trump is also guilty of - the unlawful possession/ retention of classified material.   Having materials in multiple unsecured offices and his garage is a crime - full stop.

Secondly, and it’s also ironic because Trump actually faced impeachment for this as well, is quid pro quo influence peddling.  If you refuse to connect the dots yet on him bragging about getting a Ukrainian prosecutor fired for investigating a company that his son held a Board position (that he was completely unqualified for) for you are clearly in denial.  But don’t worry - the multiple shell companies and “art deals” his son and brother were running to peddle influence from “the Big Guy” will keep coming to light.  You can continue to deny it, your credibility continues to erode the longer you keep your head in the sand about it.  

Biden is not guilty of "unlawful" retention anymore than  Pence is.

They both volunteered to return what they had.  Trump did just the opposite. 

How many times does this need to be explained?

[homersapien 11,379]

9 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

You don’t display an understanding of any of these situations. Trump isn’t charged with unlawful possession of documents. Read the indictment. Read something other than right wing talking points on the Ukrainian prosecutor. Your facts are all wrong. If he did anything criminal Trump would have prosecuted him when he had the chance. Republican House would have found something. They didn’t because that’s not what happened. “Influence peddling” — what did he get in exchange for doing something illegal in regard to Hunter? Name it.

Trust me, he's not listening.

[aubiefifty 16,798]

On 8/1/2023 at 11:16 AM, KansasTiger said:

The media and the left dug this hole themselves. They lied and slanted the news for years about trump, then want people to believe them about trump now. Maybe he committed federal crimes, maybe he didn't, but most on the right know that when it comes to news on Trump, the MSM can't be trusted. They cried wolf too many times, and now they've greatly diminished their ability to affect the narrative for half the country.

maybe my ass..................hell at least be truthful. geez