Sleepy J refuses to acknowledge his granddaughter who was conceived in Hunter's drug fueled relations with a stripper

[Americana Antifa]

Just now, CdnFox said:

Well no, they're not.  Turns out the trump russian thing was entirely fake.  So they're very different

 

Is it really a witch hunt if they keep finding witches?

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, ironstone said:

 

Apparently there has been a DNA test which indicates Hunter is the father. He got this lady pregnant while he was also dating his brothers widow.

Hunter Biden DID father child with ex-stripper Lunden Roberts while dating his brother’s widow, judge rules – The US Sun | The US Sun (the-sun.com)

Hunter Biden's ex-stripper baby mama was on his payroll while pregnant: texts (nypost.com)

Isn't is sad that that Joe won't acknowledge this seventh grandchild at all? The Biden family is quite wealthy and this little girl gets left out, no birthday cards, nothing. She does not exist to the Biden family.

Biden fails to acknowledge seventh grandchild at center of Hunter's court case | Washington Examiner

The younger Biden had initially denied paternity and any memory of meeting the mother at the Mpire Club in Washington, D.C. A DNA test in 2019 proved his paternity, and Biden settled with Roberts for $2.5 million in 2020, but the case was later reopened.

This is not the first time Joe Biden has publicly snubbed Hunter Biden’s out-of-wedlock daughter. For Christmas displays at the White House in 2021 and 2022, the Bidens hung Christmas stockings for each of their grandchildren, with the exception of the daughter Hunter Biden had with Roberts.

It's actually quite common for conservatives, esp religious ones, to disown THEIR children (esp daughters) who have out of wedlock children. Not to mention the out of wedlock grandchildren.

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Ahhh and here again we see how the left loves to lie.

I never said there was no evidence of RUSSIANS interfereing,  I said there was no evidence of TRUMP interfering. Nothing TRUMP did helped interfere with the election

And you knew that's what i said. But because you know i'm right you tried to CHANGE what i said

You're busted little guy   You HAVE to lie to try to make  your point, i can make mine with the truth  

The FACT is, you didn't specify to whom you were talking about when you referred to interference. Duh.

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, West said:

How? Did he know kilimnik is a Russian agent? 

Kilimnik knows a Russian therefore collusion ??

Kilimnik was no stranger to Manafort, since they'd been working together FOR YEARS.

Manafort was also working for Russian Oligarch Deripaska FOR YEARS, even while he was Trump's campaign manager.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

The FACT is, you didn't specify to whom you were talking about when you referred to interference. Duh.

Sure i did. We discussed trump's activities and i pointed out that there's no evidence he interfered. Doesn't get more specific than that.

Again with your english language challenges.

[CdnFox]

Just now, robosmith said:

Kilimnik was no stranger to Manafort, since they'd been working together FOR YEARS.

Manafort was also working for Russian Oligarch Deripaska FOR YEARS, even while he was Trump's campaign manager.

So?  Where's the collusion? So far all we've seen is he passed over data they could have gotten themselves that wouldn't help them target anyone else - simply KNOWING someone isn't collusion.  Where's the collusion.

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, West said:

So Manafort gave polling data that he could've gotten just as easily from the news to Ukrainian who lefties claim, without evidence, works for Putin. 

It was PRIVATE CAMPAIGN polling data; which you would know if you watched more than FOS LIES.

2 hours ago, West said:

That's not even taking into account that Manafort gave the info with the intent on it being given to Vladimir Putin, which is a wild lefty conspiracy theory

Of course it was shared with Russian Internet Research Agency officers so they could BEST target their trolls and bots online.

[robosmith]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

So?  Where's the collusion? So far all we've seen is he passed over data they could have gotten themselves that wouldn't help them target anyone else - simply KNOWING someone isn't collusion.  Where's the collusion.

Sharing PRIVATE POLLING data IS THE COLLUSION.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

Is it really a witch hunt if they keep finding witches?

But they didn't. None of the people connected with trump were actually charged with a criminal version of collusion.  And a number of those things didn't even have anything to do with the investigation.

Meanwhile they leave all the crap about her illegal mail server off, the fact that she was fined for colluding with the russians over the steel dossier and trying to hide the payments, etc.

Again - the left has to lie to try to make its point.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

Sharing PRIVATE POLLING data IS THE COLLUSION.

That's not collusion in the slightest.  It's not even close. It's not even private - the russians can pay to have the same poll done if they want.

That's like saying giving someone your phone number is collusion when they could look it up in the phone book.

If THAT is your collusion - then you just admitted you've been lying all along.

[robosmith]

16 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Sure he did. He said specifically there was no evidence of him interfering with the election.

Any collusion that resulted in an effect on the election would have been illegal. So - no collusion. 

At least you admit it now. Took you long enough

12 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The FACT is, you didn't specify to whom you were talking about when you referred to interference. Duh.

 

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Ahhh and here again we see how the left loves to lie.

I never said there was no evidence of RUSSIANS interfereing,  I said there was no evidence of TRUMP interfering. Nothing TRUMP did helped interfere with the election

And you knew that's what i said. But because you know i'm right you tried to CHANGE what i said

You're busted little guy   You HAVE to lie to try to make  your point, i can make mine with the truth  

Funny  how there is NO REFERENCE to Trump in the first post above. Just says "he" and "him."

Like I said, you didn't mention Trump in the post to which I responded.

Trump didn't have to collude with Russians; cause Manafort was DOING IT FOR HIM. Duh.

 

 

[CdnFox]

7 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Funny  how there is NO REFERENCE to Trump in the first post above. Just says "he" and "him."

It's literally who we were talking about. If i say "Mr Trump is innocent. There's nothing guilty about him." , then it's understood that 'him' refers to Trump.

however - it's clear that i was referring to a person - "Him".  Not a country, like Russia. So even if you were too stupid to figure out who i was talking about, you had to know it wasn't russia.

Or is this another example of your terrible english skills?

Quote

Like I said, you didn't mention Trump in the post to which I responded.

Sure i did - that post specifically was in response to a discussion about trump and i mentioned him.  And him definitely doesn't mean a country, as you claimed. Or lied.

10 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Trump didn't have to collude with Russians; cause Manafort was DOING IT FOR HIM. Duh.

Well we know that's a lie too, the senate committee determined that.  All manafort did was meet with a russian and give him some polling data the russians could have gotten themselves. He had a discussion, not collusion

But what you seem to be saying now is you think trump was innocent all along, and it wasn't him - only manafort.

Your story changes by the hour

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Polling data?  Yeah - so what. He could have given him the weather forecast for the next day as well.

This is the kind of thing you'd pass on if you're trying to impress upon the russians you're going to win. It's not the kind of thing that HELPS you win.

What did you think they did with polling data? Place bets in vegas to help fund their secret ops?  There's no hint of collusion here.

Uhhhhhh.. yeah kid, that's called Mens Rea and it is in fact necessary to prove many crimes. 

LOL - man, you really effed that one up didn't you   look it up

It definitely is not. That's your addled brain trying desperately to make something true that isn't.

Giving polling data - which the russians could EASILY have just paid for themselves, ANYBODY can have polls done, is not 'collusion. It's just not. There is no dictionary definition that would come close to applying to that. there is nothing secret about that information, there is no evidence of a plot. To "collude" means that there's a scheme afoot - not that someone just gave someone some data that was pretty easily available.

Sorry kid. No collusion.

As you know by now, but continue to lie about, it wasn't just polling data. It was sensitive strategy and targeting data, you know, exactly what the Russians would need to align strategically and more effectively target Americans in key swing states. But you just keep lying.

And while you seem super proud of yourself for googling "mens rea" you seem to understand that about as well as anything else, which is to say not at all. People are regularly convicted of crimes without confessing, because their knowledge and state of mind can be inferred from their actions. That's why I explained at some length the number of behaviors Manafort exhibited which make it painfully obvious that he knew what he was doing was wrong. One does not establish multilayer secrecy protocols unless there is activity and information one must keep hidden. And then lying about it over and over again. (You and Manafort seem to be cut from the same cloth in that regard.) It takes a MASSIVE willing suspension of disbelief to pretend that Manafort didn't know exactly what he was doing.

And, again, get yourself a damn dictionary. Collusion may not be a legal term, but Manafort's behavior is the very definition of collusion. Sorry, "kid" but your obsequious self debasement is of no value in an actual debate. 

[CdnFox]

50 minutes ago, Hodad said:

As you know by now, but continue to lie about, it wasn't just polling data. It was sensitive strategy and targeting data, you know, exactly what the Russians would need to align strategically and more effectively target Americans in key swing states. But you just keep lying.

The only one lying is you. They gave information regarding their campaign which AS I PREVIOUSLY NOTED BUT YOU PRETEND I DIDN"T would only be useful  in targeting his own campaign.

So - sorry. Still no collusion.  But i'm glad you've at least realized that there is no such thing as 'sensitive' polling data.

50 minutes ago, Hodad said:

And while you seem super proud of yourself for googling "mens rea"

Yeah.... kinda learned about that about 35 years ago. That was a little before google was super popular.

50 minutes ago, Hodad said:

People are regularly convicted of crimes without confessing, because their knowledge and state of mind can be inferred from their actions.

You literally said they can't possibly know someone's state of mind. Now you completely go back on that and say 'of course they can'.   Yeah. I know. That's why -I- mentioned mens rea.

You're a liar and a scumbag. Trying to pretend you're explaining something that i had to explain to you is beyond pathetic.

50 minutes ago, Hodad said:

 

That's why I explained at some length the number of behaviors Manafort exhibited which make it painfully obvious

The senate report ACTUALLY SPECIFICALLY STATES they couldn't know his mind.  You're lying again.

And his actions don't speak to collusion - mens rea or not. Nothing he did 'colludes'. He shared some pollling data and how trump though he might win the election. That's it. nothing there is collusion, which is what the senate committee was forced to admit.

50 minutes ago, Hodad said:

And, again, get yourself a damn dictionary. Collusion may not be a legal term, but Manafort's behavior is the very definition of collusion.

Nope-  it isn't even close. Pick a dictionary - lets go over it.  You'll find they all require some sort of planning for some species of scheme. 

Here - i'll start you off:

collusion

kə-loo͞′zhən

noun

1. An often secret action taken by two or more parties to achieve an illegal or improper purpose.

So - was there an illegal or improper purpose that they were attempting to achieve? Mueller says no, senate says no.

1. Secret agreement for a fraudulent or harmful purpose; a secret or crafty understanding for unworthy purposes.

Does giving polling data or your game plan demonstrate a secret agreement for any purpose at all never mind a crafty or unworthy one? Nope.  What did they agree to? What would that data be used for'? It's useless.

1. Specifically, in law, a secret understanding between two or more persons to act or proceed as if adversely or at. variance with, or in apparent defiance of, one another's rights, in order to prejudice a third person or to obtain a remedy which could not as well be obtained by open concurrence.

Obviously not relevant here.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.

 

So - it absolutely does not meet the definition. At all

[Americana Antifa]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

But they didn't. None of the people connected with trump were actually charged with a criminal version of collusion. 

Collusion wasn't the only thing they were looking for.

Quote

And a number of those things didn't even have anything to do with the investigation.

Such as?

Quote

Meanwhile they leave all the crap about her illegal mail server off, the fact that she was fined for colluding with the russians over the steel dossier and trying to hide the payments, etc.

Duh. They're comparing one of Hillary's scandals to one of Trump's scandals. Trump has tons of other scandals the meme didn't acknowledge.

The truth is, the Benghazi scandal was completely manufactured by the media. Whereas the Russia scandal was real, but the Republicans pretend Trump didn't do anything wrong because he wasn't arrested.

[West]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

It was PRIVATE CAMPAIGN polling data; which you would know if you watched more than FOS LIES.

Of course it was shared with Russian Internet Research Agency officers so they could BEST target their trolls and bots online.

?.. 

Can you prove such claims? 

[West]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

Kilimnik was no stranger to Manafort, since they'd been working together FOR YEARS.

Manafort was also working for Russian Oligarch Deripaska FOR YEARS, even while he was Trump's campaign manager.

So? 

[West]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

Kilimnik was no stranger to Manafort, since they'd been working together FOR YEARS.

Manafort was also working for Russian Oligarch Deripaska FOR YEARS, even while he was Trump's campaign manager.

And? 

The Republicans on the intel committee said there was no collusion. Mueller said he couldn't establish collusion. 

Yet here you are claiming there's evidence they don't have that proves collusion. ?

[West]

Keep in mind the same loonie bins claiming Kilimnik is Vladimirs right hand man also claimed Jussie Smollett was beat up by two white dudes in Maga hats over a subway sandwich or read a fake conversation between Trump and Zelenskyy into the congressional record. Then they wonder why we don't believe what they say lol

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

Collusion wasn't the only thing they were looking for.

True - didn't find anything else either.

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

Such as?

Trump university was not part of the russian investigation.

Did you really need me to explain that to you? Wow - you really don't know what your'e talking about do you.

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

Duh. They're comparing one of Hillary's scandals to one of Trump's scandals.

No - they're comparing one of hillary's to ALL of donalds from the looks of things - and pretty unfairly too, if they were ACTUALLY comparing it there would be this line:

Number of Americans killed due to incompetence:

Hillary - 4

trump - 0

 

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

The truth is, the Benghazi scandal was completely manufactured by the media. Whereas the Russia scandal was real, but the Republicans pretend Trump didn't do anything wrong because he wasn't arrested.

You got it backwards kiddo.  Bengazi happened.  People died. More were injured. And Hillary played a big role in that.

"Russian Collusion" was a fake story started by a fake dossier commissioned and paid for by hillary and friends.

Those are the known facts.

but of course the left has to lie to try to make it's point, where as truth and facts is enough for the right.

[West]

Joe's son is in court today being a slime bag trying to skirt child support. True left wing hero. 

[CdnFox]

36 minutes ago, West said:

Joe's son is in court today being a slime bag trying to skirt child support. True left wing hero. 

Poor kid is only 4 and he can't show her even a drop of love.

In unrelated news Hunter and Joe biden announce they now support abortion up to  57 months.

[Hodad]

On 4/30/2023 at 8:25 PM, CdnFox said:

The only one lying is you. They gave information regarding their campaign which AS I PREVIOUSLY NOTED BUT YOU PRETEND I DIDN"T would only be useful  in targeting his own campaign.

So - sorry. Still no collusion.  But i'm glad you've at least realized that there is no such thing as 'sensitive' polling data.

 

You are being (I hope for your sake) deliberately--and massively--obtuse. Sharing information about campaign strategy isn't only useful for targeting the Trump campaign. It's useful (and this is a YUGE "duh!") for coordinating your efforts. Which was the entire point. The Russians were trying to help Trump win and Manafort was trying to help them. 

Quote

 

Yeah.... kinda learned about that about 35 years ago. That was a little before google was super popular.

You literally said they can't possibly know someone's state of mind. Now you completely go back on that and say 'of course they can'.   Yeah. I know. That's why -I- mentioned mens rea.

You're a liar and a scumbag. Trying to pretend you're explaining something that i had to explain to you is beyond pathetic.

 

 

Deeply skeptical that you are telling the truth about 35 years ago, because you casually lying now about something I said just the same day. It's right there in writing. Just go look. Again, this is what I posted: "And you are surely dumber than you present if you think guilt is only established if authorities can prove what was in a defendant's brain. We have always relied on the actions of the individuals under suspicion to reveal what we can reasonably assume they knew." 

 

^^WTF do you think I am explaining to you there? We don't have to know what is in a person's mind through confession. We can infer it. Jeebus.

 

And in this case it's unbelievably obvious that Manafort that manafort knew that his actions were wrong. Clandestine meeting, a shared email account, encrypted messages, burner phones, and other means of concealing the communication that you, stupidly, still try to represent as casual and insignificant. These were NOT casual meetings and they were certainly significant enough for Manafort to take extraordinary steps to conceal. 

 

I'm imagining you right now discovering that your husband has a secret burner phone full of text messages to his yoga instructor about when and where he'll be at certain hotels. "No, big deal. Nothing suspicious or incriminating there. She was probably just curious and that information is useless and she could have figured it out in other ways. Hyuk"

 

Quote

 

The senate report ACTUALLY SPECIFICALLY STATES they couldn't know his mind.  You're lying again.

And his actions don't speak to collusion - mens rea or not. Nothing he did 'colludes'. He shared some pollling data and how trump though he might win the election. That's it. nothing there is collusion, which is what the senate committee was forced to admit.

 

 

Complete bullshit. 

 

 

Quote

 

Nope-  it isn't even close. Pick a dictionary - lets go over it.  You'll find they all require some sort of planning for some species of scheme. 

Here - i'll start you off:

collusion

kə-loo͞′zhən

noun

1. An often secret action taken by two or more parties to achieve an illegal or improper purpose.

So - was there an illegal or improper purpose that they were attempting to achieve? Mueller says no, senate says no.

1. Secret agreement for a fraudulent or harmful purpose; a secret or crafty understanding for unworthy purposes.

 

The ONLY way it's not collusion is if you can turn off the reasoning part of your brain and pretend that Manafort didn't know what he was doing. That he went to extraordinary lengths to hide his communications and contacts for no reason. Which beggars belief. 

^^This is exactly what I mean when I say you are dishonest. You'd have to be too stupid to tie your shoes to honestly believe that Manafort did not understand how serious his actions were. All of those precautions and protections were NOT just the trappings of a casual conversation. The repeated information deliveries were not just coffee talk.

I assume you do not wear velcro shoes, but rather tie your laces. Yet you are so dishonest that you would rather appear unbelievably stupid than to admit what plainly happened. Whatever floats your boat, I guess. 

 

 

 

Edited May 5, 2023 by Hodad

[CdnFox]

29 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You are being (I hope for your sake) deliberately--and massively--obtuse. Sharing information about campaign strategy isn't only useful for targeting the Trump campaign. It's useful (and this is a YUGE "duh!") for coordinating your efforts.

But they were pretty clear that all that was shared was stragegy.  And you still couldn't use that to 'TARGET" the other side. At best you could use it to improve your own campaign and there was NO EVIDENCE THAT THERE WAS SUCH AN EFFORT FROM THE RUSSIANS. The reports were explicit that they coudln't see what was done with the data.
 

So where was this co-ordinated effort?  Where did that show up?

I  guess if you lie in a funny accent it's less of a lie?

29 minutes ago, Hodad said:

 

Deeply skeptical that you are telling the truth about 35 years ago,

Well that's because you're not very smart and couldn't think of an intelligent reply.

Quote

 

WTF do you think I am explaining to you there? e

 

I think you're trying (Badly) to cover up your earlier blunder.  You claimed that you didn't need to know a person's mind for a crime. I pointed out that you did, there's a legal term. Then you said butbutbut iof course i meant you COULD understand their mind. And then i said but you just said you couldn't.  And now you've settled on "well you can't, but you CAN sort of". 

Buddy - you make yourself look dumber with every post

 

Quote

Complete bullshit.

absolute truth - but once again you run and hide because you don't have an intelligent counter argument.

 

40 minutes ago, Hodad said:

The ONLY way it's not collusion is if you can turn off the reasoning part of your brain

 

Or if you read the dictionary.

 

I literally gave you the definiton.  It wasn't collusion. Sorry.  It's not even close.

Continue to lie to yourself if it makes you feel better about your pathetic little life.  But don't lie to me.  I'm more intelligent than a 5th grader.

[Hodad]

On 5/5/2023 at 11:41 AM, CdnFox said:

But they were pretty clear that all that was shared was stragegy.  And you still couldn't use that to 'TARGET" the other side. At best you could use it to improve your own campaign and there was NO EVIDENCE THAT THERE WAS SUCH AN EFFORT FROM THE RUSSIANS. The reports were explicit that they coudln't see what was done with the data.
 

So where was this co-ordinated effort?  Where did that show up?

 

You can't even keep your lies straight. You've already acknowledged that they also shared polling. They shared detailed campaign strategy AND sensitive, proprietary polling data.

This is now, I think the third time I've posted from the report, for the very slow among us:
"Prior to joining the Trump Campaign in March 2016 and continuing throughout his time 6n the Campaign, Manafort directly and indirectly communicated with Kilimnik, Deripaska, and the pro-Russian oligarchs in Ukraine. On numerous occasions, Manafort sought to secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik. The Committee was unable to reliably determine why Manafort shared sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy with Kilimnik or with whom Kilimnik further shared that information. The Committee had limited insight into Kilimnik's communications with Manafort and into Kilimnik's communications with other individuals connected to Russian influence operations, all of whom used communications security practices. The Committee obtained some information suggesting Kilimnik may have been connected to the GRU's hack and leak operation targeting the 2016 U.S. election." 

^^The hacks which, BTW, were fed back to Roger Stone through Wikileaks to further coordinate the attack on Clinton. 

And again, for the very slow among us, it has since been confirmed--not just suspected, but confirmed--that Kilimnik did, in fact, take the Manafort intel straight to the Kremlin.

Again, you'd have to be willfully obtuse or massively stupid to think that Manafort didn't know why his Russian comrade wanted Manafort to keep feeding him information in secret. This is not dinner chit-chat. It's coordinated, clandestine information sharing. The Trump campaign worked to help the Russians target Americans with campaign interference to tilt the election to Trump. It happened. Deal with it. 

 

Quote

I think you're trying (Badly) to cover up your earlier blunder.  You claimed that you didn't need to know a person's mind for a crime. I pointed out that you did, there's a legal term. Then you said butbutbut iof course i meant you COULD understand their mind. And then i said but you just said you couldn't.  And now you've settled on "well you can't, but you CAN sort of". 

Again, jackass, I'm not covering up any blunder. You can't KNOW what is in a person's mind. We must make inferences and assumptions based on external action. Which is exactly what I explained to you before you posted your google scavenger hunt prize. Like, literally anyone in this thread can click the back arrows and see that you are lying. 

Quote

 

absolute truth - but once again you run and hide because you don't have an intelligent counter argument.

 

Or if you read the dictionary.

 

I literally gave you the definiton.  It wasn't collusion. Sorry.  It's not even close.

 

Except that it's an exact match to the definition you shared, lol. The only way it could be more obviously collusion is if Manafort and Kilimnik had grown mustaches for twirling. You can lie till you die, and it won't change this recorded history. 

Quote

Continue to lie to yourself if it makes you feel better about your pathetic little life.  But don't lie to me.  I'm more intelligent than a 5th grader.

My life is pretty great. Lovely family. Nice house. Big job. Unlike you, I have more important things to do post on this forum 20 or 30 times a day. 

And I don't doubt that you're more intelligent educated than a 5th grader. But it's all for naught, as you're wildly dishonest. There's no value in being intelligent or educated if you simply put those gifts to work spinning lies and making the world a shittier place.