The Hunter Biden Thread

#1,826
#1,826
Hunerwadel said:
Yes there was overwhelming evidence Trump engaged in pay for play as in abuse of power. The Senate shirked their duty and sworn oath however. There may be overwhelming evidence that Joe and Hunter did too but we're a long way from that and no one but Trump's right hand toadies have produced any kind of proof.
Click to expand...
😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, ButchPlz, StarRaider and 1 other person
#1,827
#1,827
BowlBrother85 said:
I was worth the effort of this response. LOL.

Emotions seem to be running higher the closer we get to the 3rd. Anxiety is kicking in from the right. I see nothing positive posted about Trump. Everything is a Biden attack. It's a strategy that worked when your candidate wasn't the incumbent with a record to defend. You guys are in for a hard night on November 3rd. Just check back here in 12 days... please.
Click to expand...

So, attacking an opponent is "anxiety"? Your last three years must have required truckloads of medication.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and volinsd
#1,828
#1,828
BowlBrother85 said:
I was worth the effort of this response. LOL.

Emotions seem to be running higher the closer we get to the 3rd. Anxiety is kicking in from the right. I see nothing positive posted about Trump. Everything is a Biden attack. It's a strategy that worked when your candidate wasn't the incumbent with a record to defend. You guys are in for a hard night on November 3rd. Just check back here in 12 days... please.
Click to expand...
I will. Do you agree with the Biden-Sanders Manifesto

https://joebiden.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/UNITY-TASK-FORCE-RECOMMENDATIONS.pdf
 
#1,829
#1,829
Hunerwadel said:
Yes there was overwhelming evidence Trump engaged in pay for play as in abuse of power. The Senate shirked their duty and sworn oath however. There may be overwhelming evidence that Joe and Hunter did too but we're a long way from that and no one but Trump's right hand toadies have produced any kind of proof.
Click to expand...
Links? Thanks.

That "evidence" was repeated nothing-burgers. As a matter of fact, the impeachment you alluded to wasn't even for anything resembling your claims. That should tell you how much "evidence" there was for them.

Sorry. I still just can't get past this post. Edited to add:

So... Your argument is:

There's damning evidence coming out that Joe and Hunter had a pay-for-office corruption game going on in Ukraine, and we'll need to wait and see what comes of that. But the Dems impeached a sitting president for mentioning that Ukraine should investigate whether Joe and Hunter had a criminally corrupt pay-for-office game going in Ukraine. So, there is "overwhelming evidence" that Trump is corrupt.

That's the line of logic you want to lean on here?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ButchPlz, tennvols77 and NorthDallas40
#1,830
#1,830
BowlBrother85 said:
I was worth the effort of this response. LOL.

Emotions seem to be running higher the closer we get to the 3rd. Anxiety is kicking in from the right. I see nothing positive posted about Trump. Everything is a Biden attack. It's a strategy that worked when your candidate wasn't the incumbent with a record to defend. You guys are in for a hard night on November 3rd. Just check back here in 12 days... please.
Click to expand...
Saved for posterity
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinsd
#1,831
#1,831
I'd seriously like to revisit the impeachment on this.

There was no evidence that Trump did anything wrong--even at the time.

But what does it look like in hindsight? Just say that Trump has based the money on an investigation. Would that have been abuse of power, if he'd known/suspected what's coming out now?

Biden's claim was: "We refused to give them money until the corruption was rooted out."

If Trump's line of reasoning was: "We refused to give them money until the corruption was rooted out."

I think that was Trump's defense? "We didn't base the money on an investigation, but we'd have had every right to do that if we'd wanted to."

???
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#1,832
#1,832
Orange_Crush said:
Links? Thanks.

That "evidence" was repeated nothing-burgers. As a matter of fact, the impeachment you alluded to wasn't even for anything resembling your claims. That should tell you how much "evidence" there was for them.

Sorry. I still just can't get past this post. Edited to add:

So... Your argument is:

There's damning evidence coming out that Joe and Hunter had a pay-for-office corruption game going on in Ukraine, and we'll need to wait and see what comes of that. But the Dems impeached a sitting president for mentioning that Ukraine should investigate whether Joe and Hunter had a criminally corrupt pay-for-office game going in Ukraine. So, there is "overwhelming evidence" that Trump is corrupt.

That's the line of logic you want to lean on here?
Click to expand...

1. There is no such evidence. There is innuendo.

2. He didn't just "mention" that Joe and Hunter should be investigated. He withheld already appropriated money from them if they didn't agree to open an investigation into his probable opponent for his personal political benefit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lostsheep
#1,834
#1,834
Orange_Crush said:
I'd seriously like to revisit the impeachment on this.

There was no evidence that Trump did anything wrong--even at the time.

But what does it look like in hindsight? Just say that Trump has based the money on an investigation. Would that have been abuse of power, if he'd known/suspected what's coming out now?

Biden's claim was: "We refused to give them money until the corruption was rooted out."

If Trump's line of reasoning was: "We refused to give them money until the corruption was rooted out."

I think that was Trump's defense? "We didn't base the money on an investigation, but we'd have had every right to do that if we'd wanted to."

???
Click to expand...
There was plenty of evidence that Donald Trump withheld Congressionally authorized military aid to the Ukraine, pending the willingness of President Zelensky to perform a political campaign favor for him by making an appearance on CNN (which was scheduled at the end of August '19) and announcing that he was opening an investigation into the Bidens. In a statement released to the public just before Senate Republicans voted against calling new witnesses during the trial, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) acknowledged that Trump had acted inappropriately by withholding the military aid, in effort to "encourage" an investigation into a political opponent. So, the determination of wrongdoing on Trump's part, was not completely partisan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#1,835
#1,835
Hunerwadel said:
1. There is no such evidence. There is innuendo.

2. He didn't just "mention" that Joe and Hunter should be investigated. He withheld already appropriated money from them if they didn't agree to open an investigation into his probable opponent for his personal political benefit.
Click to expand...

1. There is a statement from a named source with access to know. That's evidence. FAR more evidence than what you claim of Trump.

2.a. No. He didn't. He gave them the money, with no investigation. And the leader he was talking to stated that he never felt any pressure or tie between the money and the investigation.

2.b. The testimony to the contrary turned out to be less than "innuendo", thus less than "evidence"? The testimony came out to be personal assumptions--not about what was said--but about what was "meant".

2.c. Even if he had tied the money to an investigation, is that corruption, especially considering what's coming out now? THIS is what Trump wanted investigated! And it's looking more and more like that investigation desperately needed to happen. Are you saying that it's corrupt to ask that a political rival be investigated? Does that mean the entire D party was corrupt for all of their investigations into Trump?

Your mental gymnastics must be torturous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, NorthDallas40, ButchPlz and 1 other person
#1,837
#1,837
BowlBrother85 said:
There was plenty of evidence that Donald Trump withheld Congressionally authorized military aid to the Ukraine, pending the willingness of President Zelensky to perform a political campaign favor for him by making an appearance on CNN (which was scheduled at the end of August '19) and announcing that he was opening an investigation into the Bidens. In a statement released to the public just before Senate Republicans voted against calling new witnesses during the trial, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) acknowledged that Trump had acted inappropriately by withholding the military aid, in effort to "encourage" an investigation into a political opponent. So, the determination of wrongdoing on Trump's part, was not completely partisan.
Click to expand...

So, everyone listened to the call. The whistle-blowers testified that it wasn't so much what Trump, said, but what they assumed he meant. The Ukrainian President stated that he never interpreted a quid pro quo.

And I'll say it again. Everything coming out now is what Trump wanted investigated! There is at least the DEEP appearance of pay-for-office and at the least conflict of interests for the benefit of your son.

Biden: "We're holding the money until corruption is rooted out!"
Dems: "YAY!!!!! Yah!"

Trump: "They really should invest the Bidens in Ukraine."
Dems: Trump threatened to withhold money! He's corrupt.

Later:

Well, well, well...

All that stuff Trump wanted investigated? Looks like it may even be worse than we thought!

Dems: "Well, it's getting harder to deny Biden is corrupt in the Ukraine, so we'll whatabout and keep claiming Trump was corrupt for wanting this corruption investigated.

I mean... Those mental gymnastics could cause long term damage. I hope you guys stretched first.

I mean... Geez! Huntz's comment: "Well, maybe Biden is corrupt. I'm willing to wait and see. But Trump was impeached for wanting THIS investigated!"

Translation: The DEMS impeached a duly elected president to protect their former Vice President, and then stood him up as their nominee.

Good gracious!
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, TN-POSSUM, DC_Vol and 3 others
#1,838
#1,838
Orange_Crush said:
1. There is a statement from a named source with access to know. That's evidence. FAR more evidence than what you claim of Trump.

2.a. No. He didn't. He gave them the money, with no investigation. And the leader he was talking to stated that he never felt any pressure or tie between the money and the investigation.

2.b. The testimony to the contrary turned out to be less than "innuendo", thus less than "evidence"? The testimony came out to be personal assumptions--not about what was said--but about what was "meant".

2.c. Even if he had tied the money to an investigation, is that corruption, especially considering what's coming out now? THIS is what Trump wanted investigated! And it's looking more and more like that investigation desperately needed to happen. Are you saying that it's corrupt to ask that a political rival be investigated? Does that mean the entire D party was corrupt for all of their investigations into Trump?

Your mental gymnastics must be torturous.
Click to expand...

Your alternate universe is crumbling.
 
#1,839
#1,839
Orange_Crush said:
1. There is a statement from a named source with access to know. That's evidence. FAR more evidence than what you claim of Trump.

2.a. No. He didn't. He gave them the money, with no investigation. And the leader he was talking to stated that he never felt any pressure or tie between the money and the investigation.

2.b. The testimony to the contrary turned out to be less than "innuendo", thus less than "evidence"? The testimony came out to be personal assumptions--not about what was said--but about what was "meant".

2.c. Even if he had tied the money to an investigation, is that corruption, especially considering what's coming out now? THIS is what Trump wanted investigated! And it's looking more and more like that investigation desperately needed to happen. Are you saying that it's corrupt to ask that a political rival be investigated? Does that mean the entire D party was corrupt for all of their investigations into Trump?

Your mental gymnastics must be torturous.
Click to expand...
Well it would take both a conscience and a brain to feel torture, which you ain't getting from the two clowns representing the left in here.
 
#1,841
#1,841
Hunerwadel said:
Your alternate universe is crumbling.
Click to expand...
Sure. Sure it is.

Your whataboutism is telling. Again... The fact that it depends on Trump being "corrupt" for wanting this investigated... And the fact that your defense depends on nothing less than the Democrat machine impeaching a duly elected President to hide this corruption?

It must be absolutely, mentally excruciating to be you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#1,842
#1,842
Orange_Crush said:
So, everyone listened to the call. The whistle-blowers testified that it wasn't so much what Trump, said, but what they assumed he meant. The Ukrainian President stated that he never interpreted a quid pro quo.

And I'll say it again. Everything coming out now is what Trump wanted investigated! There is at least the DEEP appearance of pay-for-office and at the least conflict of interests for the benefit of your son.

Biden: "We're holding the money until corruption is rooted out!"
Dems: "YAY!!!!! Yah!"

Trump: "They really should invest the Bidens in Ukraine."
Dems: Trump threatened to withhold money! He's corrupt.

Later:

Well, well, well...

All that stuff Trump wanted investigated? Looks like it may even be worse than we thought!

Dems: "Well, it's getting harder to deny Biden is corrupt in the Ukraine, so we'll whatabout and keep claiming Trump was corrupt for wanting this corruption investigated.

I mean... Those mental gymnastics could cause long term damage. I hope you guys stretched first.

I mean... Geez! Huntz's comment: "Well, maybe Biden is corrupt. I'm willing to wait and see. But Trump was impeached for wanting THIS investigated!"

Translation: The DEMS impeached a duly elected president to protect their former Vice President, and then stood him up as their nominee.

Good gracious!
Click to expand...
Donald Trump was corrupt for leveraging Congressionally authorized military aid to the Ukraine, against their President's willingness to announce an investigation into a political opponent. That is called bribery.

Once again, the determination of inappropriate behavior on Trump's part, was acknowledged by Republican Senator Lamar Alexander in a statement posted to Twitter during the Senate trial in January. In that statement, Sen. Alexander admitted that House managers had proven that Trump withheld military aid to the Ukraine, at least in part, to "encourage" (Sen. Alexander's word; not mine) an investigation into Joe Biden - a likely opponent of his in the Presidential General Election.

The determination of inappropriate conduct by Donald Trump was not purely partisan, when factoring in Sen. Lamar Alexander's statement, which was posted to Twitter.
 
#1,847
#1,847
Dunno about the Ukraine stuff but if the CEO (Bobulinsky) of a company is stating that Joe Biden had a "secret" interest in his company and corroborates that Joe was the "Big Guy" with 10% from the laptop emails - that were further corroborated by another partner (Gillian) who gave the exact same email. And that company was being paid directly by the chinese government, given contracts for billions of USD, specifically as that CEO says for "political or influence investment". I mean, that has nothing to do with Hunter. Does Joe Biden own a 10% stake or not in a company bought and paid for with Chinese gov money? Has he declared that on his taxes?

I dont know how much more evidence you want except Joe to confess on TV. I mean all this needs to be double checked and verified but this is not just some anonymous source. These are named sources who are first hand witnesses and participants with a treasure trove of documents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, ajvol01, ButchPlz and 1 other person
#1,848
#1,848
volfanhill said:
That is the perfect description of Trump.
Click to expand...
Ill give you the narcissistic but you are dead wrong on the rest.

Lazy? Hes done a ton of work in 4 yrs......mathematically probably 1324.78% more than biden in his 47 yrs...(dont check that math, I'm sure its close)

Good for nothin? Hes pretty great for America. Check his stats

Weak? Hiw can he be considered weak when he beat the Covid? Covid is destroying the world and its Trumps fault, just check EL and LG's posts this year. Hes so badass he purposely got infected with the vurus he created.....then kicked its ass.....and is about to kick bidens ass tonight.


Lots of wrong in your "I tried to be funny" post.

Thank you for participating though......you at least tried. You will not be getting a trophy for losing though. That crap doesnt happen in my world cupcake.
 
#1,849
#1,849
BowlBrother85 said:
Donald Trump was corrupt for leveraging Congressionally authorized military aid to the Ukraine, against their President's willingness to announce an investigation into a political opponent. That is called bribery.

Once again, the determination of inappropriate behavior on Trump's part, was acknowledged by Republican Senator Lamar Alexander in a statement posted to Twitter during the Senate trial in January. In that statement, Sen. Alexander admitted that House managers had proven that Trump withheld military aid to the Ukraine, at least in part, to "encourage" (Sen. Alexander's word; not mine) an investigation into Joe Biden - a likely opponent of his in the Presidential General Election.

The determination of inappropriate conduct by Donald Trump was not purely partisan, when factoring in Sen. Lamar Alexander's statement which was posted to Twitter.
Click to expand...

What's telling is what you once again refuse to talk about. I don't care about a Senator's opinion. The actual testimony turned out to be assumptions about Trump's motives. Nothing more.

And again... Even if Trump had tied the money to a quid pro quo, it was no less than what Biden bragged about, and you mindlessly applauded.

And again... THIS is what Trump wanted investigated. It looks like that investigation has been desperately needed, and overdue.

I have a hint for you: Just because someone is a political rival to someone you don't like, doesn't make them immune to scrutiny and investigation. You're still applauding the three year Trump colo-rectal from the Dem machine.

But Biden... ? Oh, hands off!
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002
#1,850
#1,850
Orange_Crush said:
So, everyone listened to the call. The whistle-blowers testified that it wasn't so much what Trump, said, but what they assumed he meant. The Ukrainian President stated that he never interpreted a quid pro quo.

And I'll say it again. Everything coming out now is what Trump wanted investigated! There is at least the DEEP appearance of pay-for-office and at the least conflict of interests for the benefit of your son.

Biden: "We're holding the money until corruption is rooted out!"
Dems: "YAY!!!!! Yah!"

Trump: "They really should invest the Bidens in Ukraine."
Dems: Trump threatened to withhold money! He's corrupt.

Later:

Well, well, well...

All that stuff Trump wanted investigated? Looks like it may even be worse than we thought!

Dems: "Well, it's getting harder to deny Biden is corrupt in the Ukraine, so we'll whatabout and keep claiming Trump was corrupt for wanting this corruption investigated.

I mean... Those mental gymnastics could cause long term damage. I hope you guys stretched first.

I mean... Geez! Huntz's comment: "Well, maybe Biden is corrupt. I'm willing to wait and see. But Trump was impeached for wanting THIS investigated!"

Translation: The DEMS impeached a duly elected president to protect their former Vice President, and then stood him up as their nominee.

Good gracious!
Click to expand...
Pretty sure they have pulled at leasy one hammy and tore some ligaments with their dismounts
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top