Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The Biden Burisma Connection...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post

    Please give a yes or no answer to my question. The reason you won't do that is obvious by your hasty effort to rewrite your analogy when you realized that it ultimately ends with you agreeing that there is a valid reason to mistrust the laptop story as currently reported.
    I genuinely have no idea what you're talking about.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

    Comment


    • Originally posted by seanD View Post

      To answer you second question, they didn't have the evidence they have now -- you know, like the emails and the eyewitnesses.
      What has actually been demonstrated by these emails, even if accurate? At most it shows that Biden lied about never participating in business with his son.


      Your first point doesn't really address the point I made. It's not inaccurate to say they were furiously trying everything they could to get at Trump. That's exactly what they did, from Russiagate to Ukrainegate, and everything in between for four years. They knew the senate wouldn't impeach Trump but did it anyway I guess to try and sway the public against Trump. They didn't have the senate, but they had a more powerful weapon, the MSM, which is why I suspect they went through with it anyway. They didn't touch the corruption angle through. Why not if it's as solid as you claim it is? My guess is because it isn't has solid as you claim it is. What's your explanation?
      Clinton was impeached with a certainty of acquittal for a matter far less consequential than Ukraine. Impeachment is one tool for exacting a political price for severe behavior. Impeaching Trump was also necessary to prevent further shakedowns of that sort being applied to other countries (he continues this transactional behavior with individual states). Surely you agree that withholding money from states or cities who don't do what he personally wants is wrong.

      We know Mueller was instructed not to pursue Trump's finances. That was Trump's directive and that was Rosenstein's directive. And we know that significant portions of the Mueller report were improperly redacted (as stated by the judge overseeing the relevant case) so we really don't know everything that he found. The unredacted Mueller report is still not even available to Congress.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post

        What has actually been demonstrated by these emails, even if accurate? At most it shows that Biden lied about never participating in business with his son.



        Clinton was impeached with a certainty of acquittal for a matter far less consequential than Ukraine. Impeachment is one tool for exacting a political price for severe behavior. Impeaching Trump was also necessary to prevent further shakedowns of that sort being applied to other countries (he continues this transactional behavior with individual states). Surely you agree that withholding money from states or cities who don't do what he personally wants is wrong.

        We know Mueller was instructed not to pursue Trump's finances. That was Trump's directive and that was Rosenstein's directive. And we know that significant portions of the Mueller report were improperly redacted (as stated by the judge overseeing the relevant case) so we really don't know everything that he found. The unredacted Mueller report is still not even available to Congress.
        You still seem to be avoiding the question and I'm getting bored, so I'll ask it plainly. My stand is Trump's family corruption doesn't have teeth, therefore the Dems didn't go there even though they were looking for anything to get at Trump or make him look bad for four years. If you believe Trump and his family's corruption is strong enough to warrant an investigation, why didn't the Dems look into it? If you give me another run around, I'll just quit the discussion and move on to something else.
        "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

          I genuinely have no idea what you're talking about.
          Yes or no, if Rudy claimed those three notables gave him a copy of the emails in person on a flash drive would the release of the emails provide evidence that that actually happened?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post

            Yes or no, if Rudy claimed those three notables gave him a copy of the emails in person on a flash drive would the release of the emails provide evidence that that actually happened?
            Argh, I meant to write "proof" not evidence. Well, I mean a certainty akin to a security recording per your analogy.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by seanD View Post

              You still seem to be avoiding the question and I'm getting bored, so I'll ask it plainly. My stand is Trump's family corruption doesn't have teeth, therefore the Dems didn't go there even though they were looking for anything to get at Trump or make him look bad for four years. If you believe Trump and his family's corruption is strong enough to warrant an investigation, why didn't the Dems look into it? If you give me another run around, I'll just quit the discussion and move on to something else.
              The Democrats have been suing to try to get access to Trump's financials from Mazars and Deutsche bank. Democrats have been suing to get access to Trump's pre 2017 taxes and are stuck in court. They have been suing in court for years to force testimony for people who have first hand knowledge of Trump's corruption (McGahn). Democrats have done they best they can under the circumstances but Trump successfully ran out the clock in all the lawsuits, many (all?) of which were filed more than a year ago. How can they perform meaningful oversight when, in the words of Trump himself, "We're fighting all the subpoenas."

              There is also corruption is out in the open -- Ivanka has received things of significant value from China while serving in a high level government role, Trump has steered millions of taxpayer $ to his own properties, even to the extent of overcharging the secret service who had no choice but to stay at them. Trump agreed to allow transparency into the PPP loans and then reneged. Democrats impeached Trump for good cause in response to his corruption.

              As an aside, I don't dodge questions. If I'm not answering your question it's likely because I'm misunderstanding your point.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post

                Yes or no, if Rudy claimed those three notables gave him a copy of the emails in person on a flash drive would the release of the emails provide evidence that that actually happened?
                Stop wasting my time repeating a question that I've already answered. I think you're just trolling now.
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                  Stop wasting my time repeating a question that I've already answered. I think you're just trolling now.
                  You did not answer my question, you sidestepped it. Please provide a yes or no answer and then further context to your answer if you feel that is necessary.

                  ETA: after rereading you didn't even sidestep the question, you just insisted that it was incoherent which it clearly isn't.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post

                    The Democrats have been suing to try to get access to Trump's financials from Mazars and Deutsche bank. Democrats have been suing to get access to Trump's pre 2017 taxes and are stuck in court. They have been suing in court for years to force testimony for people who have first hand knowledge of Trump's corruption (McGahn). Democrats have done they best they can under the circumstances but Trump successfully ran out the clock in all the lawsuits, many (all?) of which were filed more than a year ago. How can they perform meaningful oversight when, in the words of Trump himself, "We're fighting all the subpoenas."

                    There is also corruption is out in the open -- Ivanka has received things of significant value from China while serving in a high level government role, Trump has steered millions of taxpayer $ to his own properties, even to the extent of overcharging the secret service who had no choice but to stay at them. Trump agreed to allow transparency into the PPP loans and then reneged. Democrats impeached Trump for good cause in response to his corruption.

                    As an aside, I don't dodge questions. If I'm not answering your question it's likely because I'm misunderstanding your point.
                    But now you're contradicting yourself in the same post. On one hand you say Trump's family corruption is out in the open, so this should be easy for the Dems to make a case and launch an investigation. On the other hand, you argue that the Dems are digging into his private records in order to find corruption they don't know is there but suspect is there but can't prove until they have the records. Which is it? Is Trump's family corruption naked for all to see, or buried somewhere in records that the Dems are trying to find? You initially said we don't need emails to prove Trump's corruption. So I asked why the Dems haven't launched an investigation if it's as obvious as you claim? Then you argued that the Dems are digging into his private records to try and find corruption. You can't seem to make up your mind. We know Biden is corrupt because we have the emails and eyewitnesses accounts, thus the corruption is out in the open as you claim about Trump, so they've launched an investigation as a result. Why haven't the Dems launched one?
                    "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

                    Comment


                    • Headline: "Oops: Photograph of Joe Biden and Hunter's Business Partner Found on Burisma's Website"
                      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                      Than a fool in the eyes of God


                      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by seanD View Post

                        But now you're contradicting yourself in the same post. On one hand you say Trump's family corruption is out in the open, so this should be easy for the Dems to make a case and launch an investigation. On the other hand, you argue that the Dems are digging into his private records in order to find corruption they don't know is there but suspect is there but can't prove until they have the records. Which is it? Is Trump's family corruption naked for all to see, or buried somewhere in records that the Dems are trying to find? You initially said we don't need emails to prove Trump's corruption. So I asked why the Dems haven't launched an investigation if it's as obvious as you claim? Then you argued that the Dems are digging into his private records to try and find corruption. You can't seem to make up your mind. We know Biden is corrupt because we have the emails and eyewitnesses accounts, thus the corruption is out in the open as you claim about Trump, so they've launched an investigation as a result. Why haven't the Dems launched one?
                        There is a investigation (multiple, in fact. I think 5 subcommittees have launched them though I might be off by one). As a normal part of those investigations relevant documents and witnesses have been subpoenaed. Because Trump is "fighting" all the subpoenas the investigations have stalled because they cannot access materials and witnesses deemed likely to be material. If these lawsuits were just a fishing expedition as you seem to assume then Trump would have likely prevailed in short order. Obviously the democrats were able to present evidence and arguments which convinced the relevant judges that the information they seek is likely to be material to their investigations. But you seem to now accept that the democrats have launched investigations so we're making progress.

                        Trump's corruption is out in the open. Not all corruption is illegal. Campaign contributions are, at least in large quantities, a legal avenue for corruption. But proving illegal corrupt acts has a very high evidentiary bar. Surely you agree that Ivanka Trump receiving things of significant value from China while holding a high government position absolutely reeks. But we'd need a very clear quid pro quo to really go after her. Surely you agree that Trump steering business to his properties when acting in his official capacity (and not comping the rooms) absolutely reeks. Both of those are examples where Trump or his daughter directly received things of value. What things of value has Joe Biden received based on these emails? Cite Townhall or whatever site which can directly point to $ received by Biden in any way, even tangentially, related to Hunter's business activities.

                        Either the actions of the democrats in launching these investigations are right and proper (despite lacking proof of corruption) or you don't have standing to call for an investigation of Biden until you can, at a bare minimum, show that Biden received things of value relating to his son's activities.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post

                          There is a investigation (multiple, in fact. I think 5 subcommittees have launched them though I might be off by one). As a normal part of those investigations relevant documents and witnesses have been subpoenaed. Because Trump is "fighting" all the subpoenas the investigations have stalled because they cannot access materials and witnesses deemed likely to be material. If these lawsuits were just a fishing expedition as you seem to assume then Trump would have likely prevailed in short order. Obviously the democrats were able to present evidence and arguments which convinced the relevant judges that the information they seek is likely to be material to their investigations. But you seem to now accept that the democrats have launched investigations so we're making progress.

                          Trump's corruption is out in the open. Not all corruption is illegal. Campaign contributions are, at least in large quantities, a legal avenue for corruption. But proving illegal corrupt acts has a very high evidentiary bar. Surely you agree that Ivanka Trump receiving things of significant value from China while holding a high government position absolutely reeks. But we'd need a very clear quid pro quo to really go after her. Surely you agree that Trump steering business to his properties when acting in his official capacity (and not comping the rooms) absolutely reeks. Both of those are examples where Trump or his daughter directly received things of value. What things of value has Joe Biden received based on these emails? Cite Townhall or whatever site which can directly point to $ received by Biden in any way, even tangentially, related to Hunter's business activities.

                          Either the actions of the democrats in launching these investigations are right and proper (despite lacking proof of corruption) or you don't have standing to call for an investigation of Biden until you can, at a bare minimum, show that Biden received things of value relating to his son's activities.
                          Then what you initially argued is wrong. You tried to make it seem like the investigation of Biden was based on the same evidence. It's not. Contrary to what you said, emails ARE required, or at least records that show clear evidence of corruption of Trump's family. I'm definitely not a fan of Ivanka receiving anything from China, but I admit I don't know the details. I wasn't following the Trump family before he became president and still don't really care much about them. All I know is the Dems are doing nothing about what Ivanka did, so it must not be that big of a deal. When did she receive these gifts? After all, she was a businesswoman before Trump got into office. Biden did all this when he was VP.
                          "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by seanD View Post

                            Then what you initially argued is wrong. You tried to make it seem like the investigation of Biden was based on the same evidence. It's not. Contrary to what you said, emails ARE required, or at least records that show clear evidence of corruption of Trump's family. I'm definitely not a fan of Ivanka receiving anything from China, but I admit I don't know the details. I wasn't following the Trump family before he became president and still don't really care much about them. All I know is the Dems are doing nothing about what Ivanka did, so it must not be that big of a deal. When did she receive these gifts? After all, she was a businesswoman before Trump got into office. Biden did all this when he was VP.
                            According to this she's received a total of 41 trademarks since entering the government, many of which were fast tracked. As I said, proving illegal corruption is very difficult practically requires the principal to explicitly say "I'm giving you this in exchange for that." I hope that will change because corruption is corrosive to democracy.

                            If I implied that electronic communications were necessary to warrant investigation then I misspoke. Obviously that's not true or the democrats' lawsuits would have been quickly dismissed. So, you have Biden emails, what thing of value has he received? Joe Biden explicitly said he hasn't received even $1 from foreign sources in the debate last night. if these electronic communications demonstrate that then we should expect that evidence to come out ASAP as that would show him a liar and make this laptop story impossible to ignore.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post

                              According to this she's received a total of 41 trademarks since entering the government, many of which were fast tracked. As I said, proving illegal corruption is very difficult practically requires the principal to explicitly say "I'm giving you this in exchange for that." I hope that will change because corruption is corrosive to democracy.

                              If I implied that electronic communications were necessary to warrant investigation then I misspoke. Obviously that's not true or the democrats' lawsuits would have been quickly dismissed. So, you have Biden emails, what thing of value has he received? Joe Biden explicitly said he hasn't received even $1 from foreign sources in the debate last night. if these electronic communications demonstrate that then we should expect that evidence to come out ASAP as that would show him a liar and make this laptop story impossible to ignore.
                              The emails reference the "Big Guy," meaning Joe, receiving percentages of the deals that we're made, and the eyewitness corroborates the fact he was leveraging his position to profit. I mean how many times do we all have to go over this. Personally, I'm done with that, so you can have the last word about it.

                              You implied emails weren't required, not that they were, meaning there's sufficient evidence without emails to get me to support an investigation of corruption of the Trump family. I still don't agree there's sufficient evidence and the Dems are just fishing through his private records for anything they can find because they have no evidence. Just because they get some corrupt judge (who probably has TDS) to sign off on it means nothing to me. We've come full circle, so I'll just repeat what I said before. If they find similar emails on Trump Jr's laptop (or any Trump family member), an unusual jump in net worth, and a business partner who comes out and says Trump and his family are corrupt and abused his last four years in office, then I'll support an investigation.
                              "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by seanD View Post

                                Then what you initially argued is wrong. You tried to make it seem like the investigation of Biden was based on the same evidence. It's not. Contrary to what you said, emails ARE required, or at least records that show clear evidence of corruption of Trump's family. I'm definitely not a fan of Ivanka receiving anything from China, but I admit I don't know the details. I wasn't following the Trump family before he became president and still don't really care much about them. All I know is the Dems are doing nothing about what Ivanka did, so it must not be that big of a deal. When did she receive these gifts? After all, she was a businesswoman before Trump got into office. Biden did all this when he was VP.
                                LiconaFan97 is just playing an impotent game of "whataboutism" because I think it's finally starting to dawn on him that none of his conspiracy theories are convincing, and that the evidence against the Biden family is authentic and damning.
                                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 07:13 AM
                                11 responses
                                88 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Started by shunyadragon, 12-02-2020, 10:50 PM
                                30 responses
                                172 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-02-2020, 08:47 AM
                                5 responses
                                58 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by LiconaFan97, 12-01-2020, 11:56 PM
                                51 responses
                                325 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post oxmixmudd  
                                Started by mikewhitney, 12-01-2020, 08:39 PM
                                2 responses
                                28 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post mikewhitney  
                                Working...
                                X