The reason Hunter Biden's actions matter

Y'all are really going in with the name calling and accusations today.

Glad I don't have to stoop that far. It's what happens I suppose when you can't deny the facts, or according to the GOP committee members, the lack of facts 3 years later of an actual crime.

a reply to: frogs453

Except you've not brought any facts.......

You've brought your unshakable belief in the govt system(s).

I also see you used a metric of 3 years. Now why on earth would you do that? Is it because there has been movement in the past 3 years? A path of say, facts and evidence?

For those of us with memories, the beginning was Joe never talking about, to or with Hunter about business.....

a reply to: JinMI

For the 3rd time. Comer said they found things that should be illegal. Grassley recently stated the facts have not taken him to a point where the President is guilty of anything. These are their words. Not mine. They have been investigating for 3 years, ever since Comer ditched the Jared investigation.

I'm not sure what more you would like me to say. It appears your anger should be at these committee members who are riling you up every chance they get, but when it comes to a point blank question about any crime, they have none.

originally posted by: frogs453
Y'all are really going in with the name calling and accusations today.

Glad I don't have to stoop that far. It's what happens I suppose when you can't deny the facts, or according to the GOP committee members, the lack of facts 3 years later of an actual crime.

If you can’t see Joe Biden is guilty of a ton of crimes then I think you’re a partisan hack . It’s the .0001 percent vs the res5 of us freedom loving people. What side are you on buddy ? Jeez quit crying about your feelings and toughen up

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: JinMI

For the 3rd time. Comer said they found things that should be illegal. Grassley recently stated the facts have not taken him to a point where the President is guilty of anything. These are their words. Not mine. They have been investigating for 3 years, ever since Comer ditched the Jared investigation.

I'm not sure what more you would like me to say. It appears your anger should be at these committee members who are riling you up every chance they get, but when it comes to a point blank question about any crime, they have none.

Well yeah , It's just a twisting of words mate .

If they don't want any of it to be a Crime then it's not crime , They just talk in circles and end up at " There is no Proof " .

The Left cannot afford for Joe to be the criminal he is so they say he isn't , The Left cannot afford for Hunter to be the Burden that he is, so he isn't made to seem as so.

Lets put the shoe on the other foot . The Laptop belongs to Donald Trumps Son ' Donald Jr ' . It's over , Trump is done , his Son is done . Trump would be in Jail along with his entire extended family .

Joe Biden has committed every single Crime Trump is accused of and far far more and everyone knows he is the " BIG GUY " and yet here we are .

At least Nixon had the common #ing curiosity to resign .

a reply to: Friendlyfella

I've said over and over again. Let's see it. Lay it all out, release the full testimony of everyone, take us through the crime step by step, show us, how, when, with who. Hard to do I suppose because again, the GOP committee members won't even say a crime occurred. So apparently they "can't see Joe Biden is guilty of a ton of crimes" either.

Feelings? Have I called anyone names? Have I accused anyone of anything? And some say women are emotional? Obviously not, I've not called people names nor accused anyone of anything.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Cool, if the GOP committee "doesn't want it to be a crime", then what? They want to just rile up their base? And the base falls for it?

a reply to: frogs453

Feelings? Have I called anyone names? Have I accused anyone of anything? And some say women are emotional? Obviously not, I've not called people names nor accused anyone of anything.

your passive aggressive nature is no excuse.

a reply to: frogs453

Yet, Hunter is due to be deposed in February. Morris has been deposed.

Everytime a new batch of evidence reaches the committee, it opens up another thread to track down.


And for the record, Trump was impeached on MUCH less.


I don't want you to tell me anything, nor am I here to change your mind. You do your best to provide the site with the MSM talking points and buzz terms. Then we get to debunk them, challenge them of of course, show how there are clearly different standards of justice.

Don't blame me though, blame the people who profit off of your gullibility and yourself for repeatedly falling into it.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Cool, if the GOP committee "doesn't want it to be a crime", then what? They want to just rile up their base? And the base falls for it?

Hey you've got me .....

The GOP has everything they need to hang Joe and his son and yet they will not pull the handle .

Why ? I suppose Blackmail is better than actually going public , at least that's my theory.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Interesting angle. Everyone is probably blackmailing each other over there.

Not sure why it cracks me up to imagine them all trying to keep up with all their blackmail.

originally posted by: network dude
.......
Joe Biden, Hunter's father, is the President of the United States. It's where I live. And as President of the United States, Joe makes decisions that affect me and everyone else living in this nation, and perhaps others around the world. Would it be wrong to be concerned about what drives his decisions?
.......

Getting back to Joe Biden, the current sitting president. If things that Hunter did while he was coked to the gills might be an issue. We know for a fact that Joey loves his boy and would do anything for him. Anything. Would anything include making policy decisions that benefit China due to balckmale? It's possible. What reason could there have been to withdraw from Afghanistan in the way that we did? Military experts said it was wrong, even DERP's like me saw it and knew it was wrong. Not getting out, but HOW we did it. Did someone else have his ear on that move? How would we ever know?

......

And for the record, if Trump was colluding with Russia, that would have been a problem as well. Luckily, the opposition spend millions of dollars and many years looking for any issues that could point to that, and didn't find any, so he's not owned based on that.

1) No, It isn't wrong to be concerned about what drove Biden's decisions and its not wrong to be concerned about what drove Trump's. What is wrong is to just make crap up about either one, with no real factual basis.

For example, the going RWNJ premise, as far as I can make out, is that Hunter was doing business with Chinese Businessmen (true), was taking money from them for the service of introducing them to movers and shakers in DC (true), and that Joe Biden was getting some of this money for the purpose of altering US policy in favor of China, which would be a corrupt practice, if true. But the money that Hunter was receiving from China came in 2017 when Joe was not in any public office and it was very far from obvious that he ever would be again. He didn't actually have any political decision-making power to sell. That makes him a pretty lousy target to try to bribe. No credible witnesses have actually come forward to definitively say that they saw Joe getting bribed by China. Also, can anyone point to any US policies toward China since he became POTUS that Joe has taken that would in any way suggest that he is in the tank for China? I can think of a lot of actions he took that are very confrontational toward China, such as putting a lot of Chinese officials on sanctions lists, giving US Nuclear Submarine technology to Australia so they can patrol the South China Sea, signing treaties with numerous countries in the South Pacific to surround China with new military bases, saying explicitly that he would support Taiwan militarily if the mainland invades Taiwan, bringing high-tech manufacturing back to the US, etc., etc. Bribery like this requires a quid pro quo. Nobody has come up with either a quid or a quo.

Now let's compare that with the famous Trump-Zelensky phone call in 2019. Many individual US officials listened into the phone conversation because that was their job. It struck a number of them as being probably corrupt in its intent, and they reported it up the chain to the Inspector General of the IC, within a matter of days. Within a matter of weeks, word got out and Trump had released a version of the transcript and it was clear as day that Trump had asked Zelensky to "do us a favor" by opening up an investigation of Joe Biden, after Zelensky asked Trump to sell him some more Javelin missiles. So, Trump was the POTUS at the time and definitely had decision-making power. The fact of the phone call and its contents were publicly known within days to weeks so nobody had to go digging for evidence years after the fact. There was clearly a quid and a quo. Now, you may think there was nothing wrong with that call, but the point is that there was never any doubt that it took place, what the intent of it was, and that Trump was in charge of it. Show me a similar fact pattern with Joe Biden and you might be onto something.

The reason that Joe withdrew from Afghanistan the way he did is because he made it very clear when he was campaigning that his highest priorities in international relations would be to counter the influence of China and Russia, more or less in that order. To do that, he wanted to end involvement in Afghanistan and redirect military resources from there toward those two adversaries. When Biden took office, the Taliban were in the strongest military position that they had been in since 2001, controlling or contesting nearly half of the country. At the same time, the United States had only 2,500 troops on the ground—the lowest number of troops in Afghanistan since 2001—and President Biden was facing President Trump’s near-term deadline to withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by May 2021, or the Taliban would resume its attacks on U.S. and allied troops. Secretary of Defense Austin testified on September 28, 2021, “the intelligence was clear that if we did not leave in accordance with that agreement, the Taliban would recommence attacks on our forces.”

www.whitehouse.gov...

In order to prepare the Afghani government and remove all the remaining US equipment would have taken much more time than was available and would have required putting troops back in to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban. In other words it would have required getting back IN the war instead of getting OUT. It was a crappy position to be in because there was no good path either way. But it was all caused by Trump's impulsive decision to try to have all troops out by the time he left office--without any consideration for what the end game would be.

I'm not sure who you are referring to as the opposition doing the investigation into Trump's Russia connections, but it was actually Trump's own DOJ who appointed Special Counsel Mueller, a lifetime Republican. They're the ones who spent the millions. I'm not sure why it is--maybe poor reading comprehension or something--but Trump and his supporters have never been able to understand the distinction between collusion and conspiracy. As soon as the Mueller investigation was over Trump immediately began saying that the DOJ had cleared him of "collusion", and all his worshippers began parroting that line. Mueller said no such thing. He made it very clear that there is no federal crime of "collusion", but there are numerous federal crimes that involve "conspiracy". Mueller never investigated Trump for collusion, he investigated Trump and his team to see if there was sufficient evidence to support an indictment on any conspiracy charge and said he couldn't find enough. In 2020, the Senate Select Committee that investigated this found that Paul Manafort had in fact, colluded with Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian intelligence agent, by giving him Trump Team sensitive campaign polling data and the campaign's strategy for beating Hillary Clinton. Not a criminal conspiracy, but Trump team and Putin team were clearly working for the same result.

a reply to: Boomer1947

1) No, It isn't wrong to be concerned about what drove Biden's decisions and its not wrong to be concerned about what drove Trump's. What is wrong is to just make crap up about either one, with no real factual basis.

Make something up about Trump and it's generally accepted as fact .

Make something up about Biden and it's a conspiracy bordering on an FBI visit clearing your home with Live Fire.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

The thing is, and maybe the Mueller thing is similar to the GOP committee, some stuff is hinky, but no crime they can prove. Although what, like 30 people including multiple people in Trumps campaign were indicted.

And maybe some stuff is made up, but the big ones, the refusal to turn over highly classified and top secret docs? Trump himself in his tirades has admitted he had them and wanted to keep them. With varying excuses of why, sometimes just because he wanted to. The case is well laid out with testimony from his very own attorneys, text messages among his employees,surveillance video, etc. In his election case, there is his phone calls seeking a specific number of votes, his allies working with him and the whole scheme. Again, laid out in court filings, testimony, emails, etc. Heck he even said this week on a post that he should have immunity even if "acts cross the line".

To be perfectly honest, some of the rumors, etc are often caused by his own words in an interview or at a rally or Truth Social posts. He's his own worst enemy.

I've stated before, I will likely change my opinion on crimes Biden committed, when I can see it all laid out like these cases. Until then, with the not too optimistic words of the committee members, they do not see any crime to charge.

Whether he got away with something? We'll probably never know, just like the rest of the politicians in DC. I'm sure there is a crime or two among them.

ETA: thank you for actually bringing a conversation to the table.

a reply to: frogs453

Trump was president, he can have classified docs . This thread is about Biden . You never answered my question about Biden’s classified docs and instead brought up trump . Classic derailing technique. Why do they let you post when you derail threads ? Trumps livin in your head rent free .

a reply to: Friendlyfella

Well actually I was responding to a post about Trump.

And Biden docs and Pence docs? Should they have them heck no. Was it on purpose or was was it by mistake? For the special counsel to decide. If they charge him with a crime, so be it. I'll post the links and affadavits and stuff because many here do not ever read that kind of thing.

I mean one thing going for both these guys is they voluntarily turned them over, let them search, etc. Not like they told their lawyer as the former guy did, to only return "some" maybe make some dissappear, move and hide them and lie after being served a subpoena and fraudulently state they were all returned.

He can have all the docs he wants when he's in office as President. After? Really? The docs noted in the affadavit? Why does a former President need docs on covert human intelligence agents in the field? Nuclear docs? Top Secret docs? Docs on US military vulnerability? And at MAL? Strewn about everywhere?A site that has had how many spies arrested there? Numerous Chinese spies. In his office where numerous random people post photos of themselves in? Why is he moving them to Bedminster (in text messages about moving them to the plane)where he invites Saudi heads of state?

a reply to: frogs453

One guy could have them and one couldn’t . Case closed . Hunter was placed on the board of burisma because daddy was VP. Daddy took 10 percent. Daddy got the prosecutor fired for investigating their company burisma . Daddy was peddling influence for money . You thought the Steele dossier was true also. You thought hunters laptop was fake . You saw all the vile disgusting things Hunter did to these women ? Do you have kids?

a reply to: Friendlyfella

Now, what you need to do, is tell Comer and Grassley that you know crimes were committed and that you can prove it, because again according to to them, "the facts haven’t taken me to that point where I can say that the president’s guilty of anything.”

I'm the mom of 3 daighters. Thankfully I've raised them in a way so that they are college educated and doing well in their careers and the youngest who really excelled, will be getting her Batchelors degree after two years at a university and starting law school before her 21st birthday. They didn't fall into a path of using drugs and being a hooker, willing to sell themselves for some money and drugs as those women did. I can't judge a woman who does that though. No idea of her upbringing or her life. Since I've not heard one make any claims, I guess to them they were satisfied, whether I agree with it or not. Hunter is an asshole, but he's not the first to spend money on hookers and drugs, he won't be the last.