|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 22, 2022 14:46:20 GMT
September 8th... then nothing until late on Sept 21st. WHY is it that these threads die, then get resurrected?!? WHY?!?!? where do you go? Were you on vacation without internet, and just got back into town, or what? JUST LET IT GO, ALREADY!!! I know, I'm responding to this thread myself, so I'm not helping anything. I don't expect, or even want, an answer... just my observation that it is a VERY ANNOYING modus operandi. I wonder if there's a correlation to really bad news about Trump. The announcement yesterday in NY of the civil suit? Distract and deflect. Hunter Biden is probably trending on Fox and right wing media, too. eta - right on track. Republican senators demand special counsel authority. And Republicans laying the groundwork to investigate Hunter if they gain control of the House. www.cnn.com/2022/09/20/politics/house-oversight-committee-hunter-biden/index.htmlwww.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?id=E66434EC-65B2-49AE-AEA8-B1AC46078628 |
|
|
|
Post by dizzycheermom on Sept 22, 2022 15:11:09 GMT
September 8th... then nothing until late on Sept 21st. WHY is it that these threads die, then get resurrected?!? WHY?!?!? where do you go? Were you on vacation without internet, and just got back into town, or what? JUST LET IT GO, ALREADY!!! I know, I'm responding to this thread myself, so I'm not helping anything. I don't expect, or even want, an answer... just my observation that it is a VERY ANNOYING modus operandi. I wonder if there's a correlation to really bad news about Trump. The announcement yesterday in NY of the civil suit? Distract and deflect. Hunter Biden is probably trending on Fox and right wing media, too. eta - right on track. Republican senators demand special counsel authority. And Republicans laying the groundwork to investigate Hunter if they gain control of the House. www.cnn.com/2022/09/20/politics/house-oversight-committee-hunter-biden/index.htmlwww.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?id=E66434EC-65B2-49AE-AEA8-B1AC46078628Ding Ding Ding!!! |
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Sept 22, 2022 15:13:10 GMT
Distract and deflect. Hunter Biden is probably trending on Fox and right wing media, too you are correct... Hunter Biden is trending on Twitter again. AGAIN. sigh. Can't we just be DONE with all this, already. I would LOVE to have sanity restored to the world. But even when TFG gets his due (whether it's coming soon, or after he dies, whenever that will be), the insanity he created will never be over. |
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on Sept 22, 2022 15:16:49 GMT
September 8th... then nothing until late on Sept 21st. WHY is it that these threads die, then get resurrected?!? WHY?!?!? where do you go? Were you on vacation without internet, and just got back into town, or what? JUST LET IT GO, ALREADY!!! I know, I'm responding to this thread myself, so I'm not helping anything. I don't expect, or even want, an answer... just my observation that it is a VERY ANNOYING modus operandi. I wonder if there's a correlation to really bad news about Trump. The announcement yesterday in NY of the civil suit? Distract and deflect. Hunter Biden is probably trending on Fox and right wing media, too. eta - right on track. Republican senators demand special counsel authority. And Republicans laying the groundwork to investigate Hunter if they gain control of the House. www.cnn.com/2022/09/20/politics/house-oversight-committee-hunter-biden/index.htmlwww.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?id=E66434EC-65B2-49AE-AEA8-B1AC46078628Bingo! The cow NEEDS the attention to exist. It ramps up with repeated nonsense every time more of the criminal activity of the loser comes out. Distract! Distract! Distract! The people on this board accommodate the cow nicely by letting the thread get derailed and arguing with it. You all are probably arguing with a drunken incel sitting in it's parent's basement typing in between chugs of booze…..or it really Lauren. 😂🤣😂🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by onelasttime on Sept 22, 2022 15:24:10 GMT
A sample…
|
|
|
|
Post by Skellinton on Sept 22, 2022 16:04:13 GMT
Bingo! The cow NEEDS the attention to exist. It ramps up with repeated nonsense every time more of the criminal activity of the loser comes out. Distract! Distract! Distract! The people on this board accommodate the cow nicely by letting the thread get derailed and arguing with it. You all are probably arguing with a drunken incel sitting in it's parent's basement typing in between chugs of booze…..or it really Lauren. 😂🤣😂🤣 I agree. I think most people think it is Gia, but I think it is Lauren. She could never stay away. I don't get the point of arguing with them anyway. It is pointless, but to the each their own. |
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Sept 22, 2022 16:11:58 GMT
Honestly these threads end up reading to me like I've wandered into a nest of Dungeons and Dragons players or Lord of the Rings cosplayers where people have lived in whatever ecosystem they are in for so long that they perhaps genuinely don't realize that people think they are nuts when they start talking about orcs because orcs are the most important thing ever because they've spent months of their lives talking to other people in their ecosystem about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Sept 24, 2022 2:07:27 GMT
No one said it did. It was referring to "You also need an accurate and dependable timeline about when the computer was dropped off." That's where Tony Bobulinski's emails and computer forensics come in. But he has to be creditable and he’s not. Even the store owner has a creditably problem. Computer forensics can’t tell who actually used/imput the data on the laptop. Hunter Biden has a drug problem so who knows who he let use the laptop while he was on drugs. As to the contents in emails. There has to be creditable verifiable proof the actions outlined in the emails actually happened. That's what the FBI is investigating. Where is your proof that Bobulinski isn't credible? |
|
|
|
Post by onelasttime on Sept 24, 2022 2:31:06 GMT
But he has to be creditable and he’s not. Even the store owner has a creditably problem. Computer forensics can’t tell who actually used/imput the data on the laptop. Hunter Biden has a drug problem so who knows who he let use the laptop while he was on drugs. As to the contents in emails. There has to be creditable verifiable proof the actions outlined in the emails actually happened. That's what the FBI is investigating. Where is your proof that Bobulinski isn't credible? Two reasons why Bobulinski is not credible. 1. He was on the Tucker Carlson’s show. 2. This from PolitiFact… Are Bobulinski’s claims credible? There’s reason to be skeptical about Bobulinski’s allegations, which credible news organizations have not corroborated. The Associated Press, for example, reported that it could not independently verify Bobulinki’s claims. PolitiFact has not been able to, either. The Wall Street Journal reviewed his documents and found no evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden — or that he was active in his family’s foreign business endeavors, as Bobulinski claimed. Bobulinski’s overarching claim is that Joe Biden was involved in, and may have profited from, his son and brother’s business dealings in China. He called Joe Biden’s claim that he never played a role in Hunter Biden’s foreign business endeavors "a blatant lie." But the Journal reported that the text messages and emails Bobulinski shared from 2017 "don’t show either Hunter Biden or James Biden discussing a role for Joe Biden in the venture." The venture in China "never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals, according to people familiar with the matter," the outlet reported. "Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden." The Journal also quoted Gilliar, the British national involved in SinoHawk, as saying he was "unaware of any involvement at any time of the former vice president." Gilliar added that "the activity in question never delivered any project revenue." |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 24, 2022 3:15:23 GMT
 Of course he hasn’t “testified” under oath. We’d have heard about it from a more qualified legal authority than morecowbell . He was interviewed for 5 hours by the FBI Have we seen/heard any of his testimony? You said he has “testified” about Joe Biden’s involvement. Has that been publicly released? Or were you referring to his statements in the right-wing media? |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 24, 2022 3:19:34 GMT
I don’t know who the OP’s former persona was, but I don’t believe for a minute that she’s Lauren. Lauren has never been able to control her anger on these threads. She’d be screaming invective at us by now if it was Lauren.
Well, I guess maybe unless she got some help with her issues. In which case I doubt she’d come back here.
Anyway, I don’t really care who she used to be. I doubt she’s Gia, either. *shrug*
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 24, 2022 3:21:56 GMT
He was interviewed for 5 hours by the FBI Have we seen/heard any of his testimony? You said he has “testified” about Joe Biden’s involvement. Has that been publicly released? Or were you referring to his statements in the right-wing media? Exactly. Has the FBI confirmed that they interviewed him? Or do we just have his statements to conservative media from 2 years ago that he was interviewed for "hours"? |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 24, 2022 3:30:16 GMT
Have we seen/heard any of his testimony? You said he has “testified” about Joe Biden’s involvement. Has that been publicly released? Or were you referring to his statements in the right-wing media? Exactly. Has the FBI confirmed that they interviewed him? Or do we just have his statements to conservative media from 2 years ago that he was interviewed for "hours"? Well, and also these slippery-type people will make all kinds of claims to the Tucker Carlsons of the world, but when faced with testifying under oath and risking prison time if they lie, often the story changes and/or there’s a lot of taking the 5th. That’s why I want to know if we’ve seen his actual testimony (if it does, in fact, exist). |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Sept 24, 2022 4:21:27 GMT
That's what the FBI is investigating. Where is your proof that Bobulinski isn't credible? Two reasons why Bobulinski is not credible. 1. He was on the Tucker Carlson’s show. 2. This from PolitiFact… Are Bobulinski’s claims credible? There’s reason to be skeptical about Bobulinski’s allegations, which credible news organizations have not corroborated. The Associated Press, for example, reported that it could not independently verify Bobulinki’s claims. PolitiFact has not been able to, either. The Wall Street Journal reviewed his documents and found no evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden — or that he was active in his family’s foreign business endeavors, as Bobulinski claimed. Bobulinski’s overarching claim is that Joe Biden was involved in, and may have profited from, his son and brother’s business dealings in China. He called Joe Biden’s claim that he never played a role in Hunter Biden’s foreign business endeavors "a blatant lie." But the Journal reported that the text messages and emails Bobulinski shared from 2017 "don’t show either Hunter Biden or James Biden discussing a role for Joe Biden in the venture." The venture in China "never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals, according to people familiar with the matter," the outlet reported. "Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden." The Journal also quoted Gilliar, the British national involved in SinoHawk, as saying he was "unaware of any involvement at any time of the former vice president." Gilliar added that "the activity in question never delivered any project revenue." How old is that article? Politifact also reported on the claim that the laptop was Russian disinformation. Now that we know it's not Russian disinformation, where is Politifact's article correcting that? Joe Biden has also been caught in a lie saying he doesn't talk to his son about his overseas business dealings. Joe's voicemail that was leaked telling Hunter that "the article in the Times is coming out tomorrow and it looks like you're in the clear" shows otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Sept 24, 2022 4:22:41 GMT
He was interviewed for 5 hours by the FBI Have we seen/heard any of his testimony? You said he has “testified” about Joe Biden’s involvement. Has that been publicly released? Or were you referring to his statements in the right-wing media? The investigation is ongoing and as they have said, they don't comment on ongoing investigations. |
|
|
|
Post by onelasttime on Sept 24, 2022 4:56:19 GMT
Two reasons why Bobulinski is not credible. 1. He was on the Tucker Carlson’s show. 2. This from PolitiFact… Are Bobulinski’s claims credible? There’s reason to be skeptical about Bobulinski’s allegations, which credible news organizations have not corroborated. The Associated Press, for example, reported that it could not independently verify Bobulinki’s claims. PolitiFact has not been able to, either. The Wall Street Journal reviewed his documents and found no evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden — or that he was active in his family’s foreign business endeavors, as Bobulinski claimed. Bobulinski’s overarching claim is that Joe Biden was involved in, and may have profited from, his son and brother’s business dealings in China. He called Joe Biden’s claim that he never played a role in Hunter Biden’s foreign business endeavors "a blatant lie." But the Journal reported that the text messages and emails Bobulinski shared from 2017 "don’t show either Hunter Biden or James Biden discussing a role for Joe Biden in the venture." The venture in China "never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals, according to people familiar with the matter," the outlet reported. "Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden." The Journal also quoted Gilliar, the British national involved in SinoHawk, as saying he was "unaware of any involvement at any time of the former vice president." Gilliar added that "the activity in question never delivered any project revenue." Politifact also reported on the claim that the laptop was Russian disinformation. Now that we know it's not Russian disinformation, where is Politifact's article correcting that? Joe Biden has also been caught in a lie saying he doesn't talk to his son about his overseas business dealings. With the voicemail that was leaked telling Hunter that "the article in the Times is coming out tomorrow and it looks like you're in the clear". Ah, they used reporting from two other news agencies, including one that leans more right then left to make that determination. As to the leaked voicemail. I tracked it down and listened to it. So it proves what exactly? That maybe Hunter knowing about the story gave his dad a heads up because it might affect him in some way even though he had nothing to do with Hunter’s business dealings. Or maybe he just gave his dad a head’s up on what could be seen as a negative story so he’s not blindsided and find out by reading it in the paper instead of hearing about it from his son? And Joe being a dad who cares about his kids looks to see what he could find out. None of this is proof that Joe Biden was involved in Hunter Biden’s business dealings. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Sept 24, 2022 5:11:03 GMT
Politifact also reported on the claim that the laptop was Russian disinformation. Now that we know it's not Russian disinformation, where is Politifact's article correcting that? Joe Biden has also been caught in a lie saying he doesn't talk to his son about his overseas business dealings. With the voicemail that was leaked telling Hunter that "the article in the Times is coming out tomorrow and it looks like you're in the clear". Ah, they used reporting from two other news agencies, including one that leans more right then left to make that determination. As to the leaked voicemail. I tracked it down and listened to it. So it proves what exactly? That maybe Hunter knowing about the story gave his dad a heads up because it might affect him in some way even though he had nothing to do with Hunter’s business dealings. Or maybe he just gave his dad a head’s up on what could be seen as a negative story so he’s not blindsided and find out by reading it in the paper instead of hearing about it from his son? And Joe being a dad who cares about his kids looks to see what he could find out. None of this is proof that Joe Biden was involved in Hunter Biden’s business dealings. So, where's the correction from Politifact? Since he made the voicemail before he made the claim, the voicemail shows that he lied about never talking to his son about it. |
|
|
|
Post by onelasttime on Sept 24, 2022 5:59:11 GMT
Ah, they used reporting from two other news agencies, including one that leans more right then left to make that determination. As to the leaked voicemail. I tracked it down and listened to it. So it proves what exactly? That maybe Hunter knowing about the story gave his dad a heads up because it might affect him in some way even though he had nothing to do with Hunter’s business dealings. Or maybe he just gave his dad a head’s up on what could be seen as a negative story so he’s not blindsided and find out by reading it in the paper instead of hearing about it from his son? And Joe being a dad who cares about his kids looks to see what he could find out. None of this is proof that Joe Biden was involved in Hunter Biden’s business dealings. So, where's the correction from Politifact? Since he made the voicemail before he made the claim, the voicemail shows that he lied about never talking to his son about it. Correction from PolitiFact about what? And what specifically does any correction have to do with their comments about that Tony guy? Remember this is only about that Tony guy so don’t introduce a red herring to distract from what PolitiFacts wrote about him. Talked to his son about what specifically? You don’t know, nobody knows except Biden and his son. You and your buddies have no idea what the conversation between Biden & his son was that eventually prompted that voicemail. So you are making assumptions with no facts to back them up. |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 24, 2022 6:31:25 GMT
Have we seen/heard any of his testimony? You said he has “testified” about Joe Biden’s involvement. Has that been publicly released? Or were you referring to his statements in the right-wing media? The investigation is ongoing and as they have said, they don't comment on ongoing investigations. So in other words, we have no idea whether he has testified under oath about Joe Biden being involved in Hunter’s business dealings. Please don’t make claims like that when we don’t actually know. So, where's the correction from Politifact? Since he made the voicemail before he made the claim, the voicemail shows that he lied about never talking to his son about it. Talking to his son about possible bad (or good) publicity isn’t the same thing as discussing his son’s business dealings with him. Two completely separate things. You are extrapolating something that isn’t there, and then doubling down on it. Actually, this IS starting to feel familiar now. |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Sept 24, 2022 10:35:35 GMT
This is interesting. Seems like the Trump organization discovered that having Qanon loons raising their fingers at his rallies is NOT a good idea. How will the loons react, I wonder?
Interesting thread.
“Put your finger down-slowly!” 😁
|
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Sept 24, 2022 11:20:56 GMT
These people are out of their minds.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 24, 2022 13:05:22 GMT
Some Trump supporters are abandoning him, his poll numbers are lower than ever. Only his hard core supporters are left and he’s doubling down on the Q anon stuff to keep them.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 24, 2022 13:26:27 GMT
The investigation is ongoing and as they have said, they don't comment on ongoing investigations. So in other words, we have no idea whether he has testified under oath about Joe Biden being involved in Hunter’s business dealings. Please don’t make claims like that when we don’t actually know. So, where's the correction from Politifact? Since he made the voicemail before he made the claim, the voicemail shows that he lied about never talking to his son about it. Talking to his son about possible bad (or good) publicity isn’t the same thing as discussing his son’s business dealings with him. Two completely separate things. You are extrapolating something that isn’t there, and then doubling down on it. Actually, this IS starting to feel familiar now. Moving the goal posts again, definitely familiar. And presenting things as facts without any actual evidence, also familiar. I’m guessing the next tactic will either be deflection or playing the victim card, the mean liberals are bullying her because we’re not accepting her statements as factual, we’re questioning her posts and asking for evidence. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Sept 25, 2022 21:59:41 GMT
So, where's the correction from Politifact? Since he made the voicemail before he made the claim, the voicemail shows that he lied about never talking to his son about it. Correction from PolitiFact about what? And what specifically does any correction have to do with their comments about that Tony guy? Remember this is only about that Tony guy so don’t introduce a red herring to distract from what PolitiFacts wrote about him. Talked to his son about what specifically? You don’t know, nobody knows except Biden and his son. You and your buddies have no idea what the conversation between Biden & his son was that eventually prompted that voicemail. So you are making assumptions with no facts to back them up. That isn't a red herring. The correction that it isn't Russian disinformation. That update is important information that should be found if someone is searching for info on the previous claim of Russian disinformation. Speculation happens on this board all the time. You SUDDENLY having a problem with it when you don't like the info about your side, IS a red herring. Biden's claim that he doesn't talk to his son about his business dealings seems to be blown out of the water with that voicemail. Those aren't words you say when you don't know anything about the content of what Hunter is "in the clear" about. |
|
|
|
Post by onelasttime on Sept 25, 2022 23:23:47 GMT
Correction from PolitiFact about what? And what specifically does any correction have to do with their comments about that Tony guy? Remember this is only about that Tony guy so don’t introduce a red herring to distract from what PolitiFacts wrote about him. Talked to his son about what specifically? You don’t know, nobody knows except Biden and his son. You and your buddies have no idea what the conversation between Biden & his son was that eventually prompted that voicemail. So you are making assumptions with no facts to back them up. That isn't a red herring. The correction that it isn't Russian disinformation. That update is important information that should be found if someone is searching for info on the previous claim of Russian disinformation. Speculation happens on this board all the time. You SUDDENLY having a problem with it when you don't like the info about your side, IS a red herring. Biden's claim that he doesn't talk to his son about his business dealings seems to be blown out of the water with that voicemail. Those aren't words you say when you don't know anything about the content of what Hunter is "in the clear" about. Today on Meet the Press in an interview with some Republican Congresswoman talked about what they would do when they took the majority in Congress. On the top of their list was to impeach President Biden. Chuck Todd did not ask the logical question of impeach President Biden for what exactly? Twitter went crazy calling out Chuck Todd for not asking the question. One person did give the perfect answer of why the Republicans want to impeach President Biden. It was because trump was impeached. The Republican’s guy, dumpster don, is being investigated and sued for wrong doing a lot. So the Republicans are desperate to find something they can pin on Joe Biden and it really doesn’t matter if it’s based on facts or not because folks like yourself are going to buy into what they are selling. In other words you are the perfect parrot for the right’s talking points where facts don’t matter. And with Hunter Biden’s laptop they think they may have found a way to drag Joe Biden down and it really doesn’t matter if their chosen narrative is based on facts or not. What we know for sure is Hunter Biden is being investigated for tax fraud and the FBI has the laptop and are looking into the information on it. By the way, you may want to look up the definition of “speculation”. There is a difference between speculation and claiming something is true based on information without looking at the entire context involving the information. You keep claiming Joe Biden lied based on the leaked voicemail message. And you are not speculating about you are pushing it as a fact. But I will tell you this, if Joe Biden was to say the day after tomorrow that he won’t run in 2024, the Republicans would drop their interest in Hunter Biden’s laptop and turn their attention to any Democrat they think may run in 2024. They have already started with comments about Secretary Pete. Some bimbo Congresswoman referred to him as a little girl. I guess he should take that as a compliment that he is on the right’s radar as potential candidate for President that could win. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Sept 26, 2022 2:04:14 GMT
That isn't a red herring. The correction that it isn't Russian disinformation. That update is important information that should be found if someone is searching for info on the previous claim of Russian disinformation. Speculation happens on this board all the time. You SUDDENLY having a problem with it when you don't like the info about your side, IS a red herring. Biden's claim that he doesn't talk to his son about his business dealings seems to be blown out of the water with that voicemail. Those aren't words you say when you don't know anything about the content of what Hunter is "in the clear" about. Today on Meet the Press in an interview with some Republican Congresswoman talked about what they would do when they took the majority in Congress. On the top of their list was to impeach President Biden. Chuck Todd did not ask the logical question of impeach President Biden for what exactly? Twitter went crazy calling out Chuck Todd for not asking the question. One person did give the perfect answer of why the Republicans want to impeach President Biden. It was because trump was impeached. The Republican’s guy, dumpster don, is being investigated and sued for wrong doing a lot. So the Republicans are desperate to find something they can pin on Joe Biden and it really doesn’t matter if it’s based on facts or not because folks like yourself are going to buy into what they are selling. In other words you are the perfect parrot for the right’s talking points where facts don’t matter. And with Hunter Biden’s laptop they think they may have found a way to drag Joe Biden down and it really doesn’t matter if their chosen narrative is based on facts or not. What we know for sure is Hunter Biden is being investigated for tax fraud and the FBI has the laptop and are looking into the information on it. By the way, you may want to look up the definition of “speculation”. There is a difference between speculation and claiming something is true based on information without looking at the entire context involving the information. You keep claiming Joe Biden lied based on the leaked voicemail message. And you are not speculating about you are pushing it as a fact. But I will tell you this, if Joe Biden was to say the day after tomorrow that he won’t run in 2024, the Republicans would drop their interest in Hunter Biden’s laptop and turn their attention to any Democrat they think may run in 2024. They have already started with comments about Secretary Pete. Some bimbo Congresswoman referred to him as a little girl. I guess he should take that as a compliment that he is on the right’s radar as potential candidate for President that could win. I'm not pushing my speculation as fact. The facts are that the laptop was pushed as Russian disinformation and now we know it isn't Russian disinformation. The fact is that there is a CLAIM of 14 whistleblowers saying that the FBI is who was trying to discredit the information about the laptop. The fact is that Joe Biden said he never talked to his son about his business dealings. The fact is that a voicemail was leaked of Joe talking about the news story that was being reported the next day about his laptop and overseas business dealings and telling Hunter that "it looks like he's in the clear". My SPECULATION is Biden's claim that he doesn't talk to his son about his business dealings SEEMS to be blown out of the water with that voicemail. Those aren't words you say when you don't know anything about the content of what Hunter is "in the clear" about. Now that I've labeled everything thing for you and cleared up any misconception, where's the correction from Politifact? |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 26, 2022 2:10:06 GMT
More and more familiar. I’m starting to feel I’m the last one to the party.
|
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Sept 26, 2022 2:22:04 GMT
More and more familiar. I’m starting to feel I’m the last one to the party. You are. It's already been discussed. I'm pixiechick. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 26, 2022 2:52:02 GMT
Today on Meet the Press in an interview with some Republican Congresswoman talked about what they would do when they took the majority in Congress. On the top of their list was to impeach President Biden. Chuck Todd did not ask the logical question of impeach President Biden for what exactly? Twitter went crazy calling out Chuck Todd for not asking the question. One person did give the perfect answer of why the Republicans want to impeach President Biden. It was because trump was impeached. The Republican’s guy, dumpster don, is being investigated and sued for wrong doing a lot. So the Republicans are desperate to find something they can pin on Joe Biden and it really doesn’t matter if it’s based on facts or not because folks like yourself are going to buy into what they are selling. In other words you are the perfect parrot for the right’s talking points where facts don’t matter. And with Hunter Biden’s laptop they think they may have found a way to drag Joe Biden down and it really doesn’t matter if their chosen narrative is based on facts or not. What we know for sure is Hunter Biden is being investigated for tax fraud and the FBI has the laptop and are looking into the information on it. By the way, you may want to look up the definition of “speculation”. There is a difference between speculation and claiming something is true based on information without looking at the entire context involving the information. You keep claiming Joe Biden lied based on the leaked voicemail message. And you are not speculating about you are pushing it as a fact. But I will tell you this, if Joe Biden was to say the day after tomorrow that he won’t run in 2024, the Republicans would drop their interest in Hunter Biden’s laptop and turn their attention to any Democrat they think may run in 2024. They have already started with comments about Secretary Pete. Some bimbo Congresswoman referred to him as a little girl. I guess he should take that as a compliment that he is on the right’s radar as potential candidate for President that could win. I'm not pushing my speculation as fact. The facts are that the laptop was pushed as Russian disinformation and now we know it isn't Russian disinformation. The fact is that there is a CLAIM of 14 whistleblowers saying that the FBI is who was trying to discredit the information about the laptop. The fact is that Joe Biden said he never talked to his son about his business dealings. The fact is that a voicemail was leaked of Joe talking about the news story that was being reported the next day about his laptop and overseas business dealings and telling Hunter that "it looks like he's in the clear". My SPECULATION is Biden's claim that he doesn't talk to his son about his business dealings SEEMS to be blown out of the water with that voicemail. Those aren't words you say when you don't know anything about the content of what Hunter is "in the clear" about. Now that I've labeled everything thing for you and cleared up any misconception, where's the correction from Politifact? Talking with his son about a story in the news is not the same thing as talking with him about his business dealings. President Biden didn't lie despite conservative media reports to the contrary. What President Biden knew or didn't know is pure speculation. In searching for the quote from President Biden from his campaign, I found lots of links conservative media articles and videos over the last month, so I'm guessing Fox and friends have been hitting this pretty hard in an attempt to smear President Biden. www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/09/21/joe-biden-never-talked-ukraine-son-trump-needs-investigated/2401830001/“I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings,” Biden said. We started with Chuck Grassley's politically motivated allegations, but I don't think you ever answered the question about what exactly the FBI is being accused of covering up. NY Times and Washington Post both looked at the laptop and didn't find anything. So what did the FBI cover up? The existence of a lap top? We covered Toni Bobulinski's unproven statements to conservative media and have now moved on to a voicemail and speculation. There is very little actual evidence. Hunter is being investigated, President Biden is steering clear of the investigation. If Hunter did anything illegal, he should be prosecuted. Can you say the same for Trump with his multiple legal battles? |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Sept 26, 2022 3:06:15 GMT
I'm not pushing my speculation as fact. The facts are that the laptop was pushed as Russian disinformation and now we know it isn't Russian disinformation. The fact is that there is a CLAIM of 14 whistleblowers saying that the FBI is who was trying to discredit the information about the laptop. The fact is that Joe Biden said he never talked to his son about his business dealings. The fact is that a voicemail was leaked of Joe talking about the news story that was being reported the next day about his laptop and overseas business dealings and telling Hunter that "it looks like he's in the clear". My SPECULATION is Biden's claim that he doesn't talk to his son about his business dealings SEEMS to be blown out of the water with that voicemail. Those aren't words you say when you don't know anything about the content of what Hunter is "in the clear" about. Now that I've labeled everything thing for you and cleared up any misconception, where's the correction from Politifact? Talking with his son about a story in the news is not the same thing as talking with him about his business dealings. President Biden didn't lie despite conservative media reports to the contrary. What President Biden knew or didn't know is pure speculation. That would be pure speculation on your part too, now wouldn't it? Of course, absolutely. |
|
Of course he hasn’t “testified” under oath. We’d have heard about it from a more qualified legal authority than 