Joe Biden = Spiro Agnew

[myata]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

But when they decided that the MAGA CULT would not blame Trump, they flipped 180 degrees. ?

Yes that would look stinky in any normal setting, like the fact didn't change, none of it. Will you trust someone who would flip their word on a dime for a gain? But here's the problem. In a duopoly there's only two possible options so whatever one of them does has to be acceptable and will be accepted by default and definition. Aka race to the bottom, assured and guaranteed. In a multi-party system, one could punish a party that is sticking with dishonest politicians possibly even voting it out to oblivion. No such option in a duopoly. Moral unraveling of the Republicans will spread and contaminate all of the democracy. And there isn't an obvious good exit.

[robosmith]

31 minutes ago, myata said:

Yes that would look stinky in any normal setting, like the fact didn't change, none of it. Will you trust someone who would flip their word on a dime for a gain? But here's the problem. In a duopoly there's only two possible options so whatever one of them does has to be acceptable and will be accepted by default and definition. Aka race to the bottom, assured and guaranteed. In a multi-party system, one could punish a party that is sticking with dishonest politicians possibly even voting it out to oblivion. No such option in a duopoly. Moral unraveling of the Republicans will spread and contaminate all of the democracy. And there isn't an obvious good exit.

Actually, when one branch of the duopoly is forced out of power for an extended period, that forces them to CHANGE.

[myata]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Actually, when one branch of the duopoly is forced out of power for an extended period, that forces them to CHANGE

In theory but in reality many will choose the other just to show dissatisfaction, boredom etc. In a duopoly there's no incentive to make an intelligent choice. If you don't vote for your tribe, you lose.

[Rebound]

14 hours ago, myata said:

Sh*t blowers: we have no evidence but everybody knows wink. They have no principles, no honesty anything they say should be considered a lie unless proven otherwise. There's no excuses for pushing the button for whatever they represent. You know from the outset it's wrong and will be all wrong.

They repeat their lies and that should tell them and everyone else that they’re on the same side as the Devil himself. 

[robosmith]

16 hours ago, myata said:

In theory but in reality many will choose the other just to show dissatisfaction, boredom etc. In a duopoly there's no incentive to make an intelligent choice. If you don't vote for your tribe, you lose.

Republicans were forced out of House leadership for 40 years, and that could happen again with the anti-majoritarian policies they're pushing.

[WestCanMan]

On 8/6/2023 at 5:24 AM, Rebound said:

Repeat: There is ZERO evidence that Joe Biden received any money.  

After all that Joe Biden did for Zlochevskiy and Burisma, and all the lying that he did to cover it up, you'd think that they'd have at least given him something, right? Or was the fact that they paid his kid $83K/mo enough for him?

What would you do for someone how gave your kid $83k/mo? 

[myata]

21 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Republicans were forced out of House leadership for 40 years, and that could happen again with the anti-majoritarian policies they're pushing.

Which is still not the most effective answer. Anyone dissatisfied with one party for whatever reasons at all: individual, local, accidental you name it, is almost forced to vote for the only other alternative. In a complex modern society and the world, simply doesn't make much sense.

[Rebound]

2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

After all that Joe Biden did for Zlochevskiy and Burisma, and all the lying that he did to cover it up, you'd think that they'd have at least given him something, right? Or was the fact that they paid his kid $83K/mo enough for him?

What would you do for someone how gave your kid $83k/mo? 

REPEATING: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE! 
 

It’s just you talking. 
If Biden didn’t get the prosecutor fired, you’d accuse him of getting paid off by the prosecutor. 

[WestCanMan]

9 minutes ago, Rebound said:

REPEATING: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE! 
 

It’s just you talking. 
If Biden didn’t get the prosecutor fired, you’d accuse him of getting paid off by the prosecutor. 

Are you saying that you don't think Hunter Biden got paid the $83K/month? Or that he got the $11M from his dealings with the Communist Bank of China?

Is it fair for politicians to bring the weight of their public office to bear for foreign companies just so that their kids can be lavishly paid? Does that pass muster in your opinion, Rebound?

Don't worry, we already know. 

[robosmith]

30 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Are you saying that you don't think Hunter Biden got paid the $83K/month? Or that he got the $11M from his dealings with the Communist Bank of China?

Is it fair for politicians to bring the weight of their public office to bear for foreign companies just so that their kids can be lavishly paid? Does that pass muster in your opinion, Rebound?

Don't worry, we already know. 

You BELIEVE you "know."

But there is evidence which says otherwise. AKA, contradicts your FOS LIES source.

"The Independent" never had to pay $800M for LYING.

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Are you saying that you don't think Hunter Biden got paid the $83K/month? Or that he got the $11M from his dealings with the Communist Bank of China?

Is it fair for politicians to bring the weight of their public office to bear for foreign companies just so that their kids can be lavishly paid? Does that pass muster in your opinion, Rebound?

Don't worry, we already know. 

No, I do not believe that payments to so-called “Biden-linked companies” is the same as “payments to Hunter Biden.”

And no, I do not believe that Joe Biden is liable for his son’s actions and no, I don’t think Joe Biden broke any laws and no, I don’t see what laws Hunter Biden broke because (repeat) THERE IS NO EVIDENCE.  

[WestCanMan]

6 hours ago, Rebound said:

No, I do not believe that payments to so-called “Biden-linked companies” is the same as “payments to Hunter Biden.”

And no, I do not believe that Joe Biden is liable for his son’s actions and no, I don’t think Joe Biden broke any laws and no, I don’t see what laws Hunter Biden broke because (repeat) THERE IS NO EVIDENCE.  

Having Hunter as a 10% owner of a Communist Bank of China-financed company is just a way for the Chinese gov't to give him gobs of money and some fat diamonds without putting Hunter's full legal name right on the cheque. 

Do you really think it's any more legit for America's main geopolitical rival to give Hunter money through a company than it is to give it directly to him? He still gets to buy the same number of hookers and the same amount of crack either way, right? And does a diamond on his pillow count as a corporate payment?

You don't think Joe is liable for Hunter's actions because you are desperately clinging to Joe's story that he never talked to Hunter about Burisma  for  the  2.5 yrs  that  Hunter  was  on  the  board  while  Joe  was  VP (May 2014 - Jan 2017). It's not a question of whether or not Joe's liable for things Hunter said and did, it's a question of whether or not Joe had a hand in Hunter's hiring, and how Joe wielded the power of his office to aid Burisma in return. One thing we know for sure is that Biden got rid of a prosecutor that Zlochevskiy didn't like, and then the new guy that Biden appointed dropped the charges against Zlochevskiy and he returned to Ukraine. 

Here's a small sampling of Joe pretending that he never talked to his son about his overseas business dealings:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-repeatedly-denied-discussing-business-deals-hunter-evidence-suggests-otherwise

ABC News: Hunter was named to Burisma's board 3 weeks after Joe's first visit to Ukraine. What a coincidence: https://www.google.ca/search?q=joe+biden+tells+ABC+interviewer+that+he+was+unaware+of+Hunter's+overseas+jobs &biw=1440&bih=812&tbm=vid&ei=QZLRZIvYA5aq0PEPq5ycyAo&ved=0ahUKEwjL_KTv7MuAAxUWFTQIHSsOB6kQ4dUDCAw&uact=5&oq=joe+biden+tells+ABC+interviewer+that+he+was+unaware+of+Hunter's+overseas+jobs &gs_lp=Eg1nd3Mtd2l6LXZpZGVvIk9qb2UgYmlkZW4gdGVsbHMgQUJDIGludGVydmlld2VyIHRoYXQgaGUgd2FzIHVuYXdhcmUgb2YgSHVudGVyJ3Mgb3ZlcnNlYXMgam9ic8KgSABQAFgAcAB4AJABAJgBAKABAKoBALgBA8gBAPgBAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-video#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:1d1ab8e4,vid:lH_sdTC7Anw

Quote

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE. 

There is no evidence that Joe specifically said things like "drop the charges against Zloch!", that's not on tape. But we know that Zl wanted Shokin fired, Biden fired him, and then Biden appointed a guy who dropped the charges, and Zloch was allowed to waltz back into Ukraine a free man. Thanks Joe!  

Edited August 8, 2023 by WestCanMan

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Having Hunter as a 10% owner of a Communist Bank of China-financed company is just a way for the Chinese gov't to give him gobs of money and some fat diamonds without putting Hunter's full legal name right on the cheque. 

Do you really think it's any more legit for America's main geopolitical rival to give Hunter money through a company than it is to give it directly to him? He still gets to buy the same number of hookers and the same amount of crack either way, right? And does a diamond on his pillow count as a corporate payment?

You don't think Joe is liable for Hunter's actions because you are desperately clinging to Joe's story that he never talked to Hunter about Burisma  for  the  2.5 yrs  that  Hunter  was  on  the  board  while  Joe  was  VP (May 2014 - Jan 2017). It's not a question of whether or not Joe's liable for things Hunter said and did, it's a question of whether or not Joe had a hand in Hunter's hiring, and how Joe wielded the power of his office to aid Burisma in return. One thing we know for sure is that Biden got rid of a prosecutor that Zlochevskiy didn't like, and then the new guy that Biden appointed dropped the charges against Zlochevskiy and he returned to Ukraine. 

Here's a small sampling of Joe pretending that he never talked to his son about his overseas business dealings:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-repeatedly-denied-discussing-business-deals-hunter-evidence-suggests-otherwise

ABC News: Hunter was named to Burisma's board 3 weeks after Joe's first visit to Ukraine. What a coincidence: https://www.google.ca/search?q=joe+biden+tells+ABC+interviewer+that+he+was+unaware+of+Hunter's+overseas+jobs &biw=1440&bih=812&tbm=vid&ei=QZLRZIvYA5aq0PEPq5ycyAo&ved=0ahUKEwjL_KTv7MuAAxUWFTQIHSsOB6kQ4dUDCAw&uact=5&oq=joe+biden+tells+ABC+interviewer+that+he+was+unaware+of+Hunter's+overseas+jobs &gs_lp=Eg1nd3Mtd2l6LXZpZGVvIk9qb2UgYmlkZW4gdGVsbHMgQUJDIGludGVydmlld2VyIHRoYXQgaGUgd2FzIHVuYXdhcmUgb2YgSHVudGVyJ3Mgb3ZlcnNlYXMgam9ic8KgSABQAFgAcAB4AJABAJgBAKABAKoBALgBA8gBAPgBAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-video#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:1d1ab8e4,vid:lH_sdTC7Anw

There is no evidence that Joe specifically said things like "drop the charges against Zloch!", that's not on tape. But we know that Zl wanted Shokin fired, Biden fired him, and then Biden appointed a guy who dropped the charges, and Zloch was allowed to waltz back into Ukraine a free man. Thanks Joe!  

Your previous quote is correct: "THERE IS NO EVIDENCE." and your link has ONLY QUESTIONS, not even CLAIMS of anything but "conflict of interest." 

Yes. there is an appearance of a conflict of interest, but that is NOT ILLEGAL and Joe does NOT CONTROL HUNTER.

I remember reading that Joe's sole comment to Hunter about Burisma was "I hope you know what you're doing."

[reason10]

On 8/5/2023 at 6:32 PM, August1991 said:

Both were crooks. Everyone in the world now knows this.

The difference maybe is that Republicans had the decency to install Gerald Ford.

====

As a foreigner, this started with the impeachment of Clinton. It was stupid and wrong. (If you don't like a political leader, argue.)

These two impeachments of Trump were even worse. Like Clinton, he was elected.

You Americans are worthy of far more. Surely your Republic will not become another failed state.

Actually, Biden would have more in common with a retarrded Adolf Hitler.

Same ideology. Same tactics.

On 8/5/2023 at 8:09 PM, robosmith said:

Agnew was the crook. Joe is NOT. Are you thinking of Trump or Nixon? Nixon was pardoned before he could be charged.

Joe is a fugging CRIMINAL. He is a FELON. He is a PEDOPHILE. He is a TRAITOR.

And the IDI0TS WHO VOTED FOR HIM ARE MOR0NS.

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, reason10 said:

Actually, Biden would have more in common with a retarrded Adolf Hitler.

Same ideology. Same tactics.

Joe is a fugging CRIMINAL. He is a FELON. He is a PEDOPHILE. He is a TRAITOR.

And the IDI0TS WHO VOTED FOR HIM ARE MOR0NS.

 

Actually, Trump would have more in common with a retarrded Adolf Hitler.

Same ideology. Same tactics.

Truml is a fugging CRIMINAL. He is a FELON. He is a PEDOPHILE. He is a TRAITOR.

And the IDI0TS WHO VOTED FOR HIM ARE MOR0NS.

 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, reason10 said:

Joe is a fugging CRIMINAL. He is a FELON. He is a PEDOPHILE. He is a TRAITOR.

And the IDI0TS WHO VOTED FOR HIM ARE MOR0NS.

Unlike Trump, Joe has never been charged with a crime. IOW, you're delusional.

[WestCanMan]

22 hours ago, robosmith said:

Your previous quote is correct: "THERE IS NO EVIDENCE."

Of course there is evidence.

There is evidence that Joe fired Shokin: Joe said that he did. 

There is evidence that Joe chose Ukraine's new prosecutor: he said that he did.

Then Joe's "solid guy" that he appointed prosecutor dropped the charges and Zlochevskiy was allowed to come back to Ukraine a free man.

There is evidence that Joe feels like Hunter's job there wasn't legitimate, because Joe pretended that he never spoke to him about it. He actually lied very forcefully and was quite rude about it. 

There is evidence that Hunter's job came as a result of his dad's presence in Ukraine: 1) Hunter admitted it and 2) Hunter got that job 3 weeks after Joe's first visit to Ukraine.

There is evidence that Joe spoke to board members, which he swore up and down he never did. That reeks of controversy.

To wrap it up in a couple of quick sentences:

One one side, a corrupt Ukrainian company paid Joe's son $83K/mo for 5 years.

One the other side, Joe pretended that he had no part in Burisma's exoneration and now we know he lied. He was in there like a dirty shirt and played a huge role in Burisma's problems vanishing.

 

If you do the contract math: one side of the equation we have services blatantly rendered by Joe Biden using the weight of the WH, on the other side we have a big, fat payout to Joe's son. 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Of course there is evidence.

There is evidence that Joe fired Shokin: Joe said that he did. 

There is evidence that Joe chose Ukraine's new prosecutor: he said that he did.

Then Joe's "solid guy" that he appointed prosecutor dropped the charges and Zlochevskiy was allowed to come back to Ukraine a free man.

There is evidence that Joe feels like Hunter's job there wasn't legitimate, because Joe pretended that he never spoke to him about it. He actually lied very forcefully and was quite rude about it. 

There is evidence that Hunter's job came as a result of his dad's presence in Ukraine: 1) Hunter admitted it and 2) Hunter got that job 3 weeks after Joe's first visit to Ukraine.

There is evidence that Joe spoke to board members, which he swore up and down he never did. That reeks of controversy.

To wrap it up in a couple of quick sentences:

One one side, a corrupt Ukrainian company paid Joe's son $83K/mo for 5 years.

One the other side, Joe pretended that he had no part in Burisma's exoneration and now we know he lied. He was in there like a dirty shirt and played a huge role in Burisma's problems vanishing.

 

If you do the contract math: one side of the equation we have services blatantly rendered by Joe Biden using the weight of the WH, on the other side we have a big, fat payout to Joe's son. 

NONE of ^this is evidence of a CRIME. Duh

Joe was implementing OFFICIAL US POLICY in Ukraine. AKA, doing his job.

He's NOT Trump and therefore would NOT brag about what he was doing if were illegal. LMAO

[August1991]

19 hours ago, robosmith said:

NONE of ^this is evidence of a CRIME. Duh

Joe was implementing OFFICIAL US POLICY in Ukraine. AKA, doing his job.

He's NOT Trump and therefore would NOT brag about what he was doing if were illegal. LMAO

I think you miss the point here. It is the appearance of bribery that matters.

Eisenhower famously said that his vice-president had to be "cleaner than a hound's tooth".

====

I happen to think that Biden like Agnew in fact took the money.  But in public affairs, it is often a higher standard: the appearance of taking the money.

[robosmith]

14 hours ago, August1991 said:

I think you miss the point here. It is the appearance of bribery that matters.

Eisenhower famously said that his vice-president had to be "cleaner than a hound's tooth".

====

I happen to think that Biden like Agnew in fact took the money.  But in public affairs, it is often a higher standard: the appearance of taking the money.

Joe does NOT control what Hunter does. Duh.

[Rebound]

15 hours ago, August1991 said:

I think you miss the point here. It is the appearance of bribery that matters.

Eisenhower famously said that his vice-president had to be "cleaner than a hound's tooth".

====

I happen to think that Biden like Agnew in fact took the money.  But in public affairs, it is often a higher standard: the appearance of taking the money.

But at the same time you’re COMPLETELY IGNORING actual money paid to Trump family members.  And you’re COMPLETELY IGNORING 78 felonies charged.  
 

Instead: There’s an “appearance of impropriety” by the President’s son… not the President himself, but by his son. And people keep telling you they can prove Joe Biden received money as a result of this, but they never show us the proof. 
 

Here is what I do not understand: The Money. Sometimes they say it so $80,000 a month. Other times they say $17 million. Other times they say $20 million.  But they never say who paid how much money to who.  

Edited August 10, 2023 by Rebound

[August1991]

On 8/10/2023 at 12:19 PM, Rebound said:

But at the same time you’re COMPLETELY IGNORING actual money paid to Trump family members.  And you’re COMPLETELY IGNORING 78 felonies charged.

...

You Leftist-Americans refer to this as "what-aboutism".

=====

Biden, Trump. Whatever. You Americans deserve better. We in the civilised world want better.

We want a multi-polar world - a world of sustainable peace for a century at least. 

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, August1991 said:

You Leftist-Americans refer to this as "what-aboutism".

=====

Biden, Trump. Whatever. You Americans deserve better. We in the civilised world want better.

We want a multi-polar world - a world of sustainable peace for a century at least. 

No, you’re more concerned about the APPEARANCE of bribery than actual crimes.  
 

There is no evidence that Joe Biden committed a crime, and the crimes Hunter Biden were charged with aren’t charged as crimes when others commit them. Yes, Hunter took a lot of money from Burisma, but there’s no evidence at all that he or is father we’re engaged in any wrongdoing. 
 

There isn’t an appearance of crime, there’s a story the GOP wants you to believe. That’s the truth, and you don’t like the truth because it doesn’t help your agenda.  

[August1991]

2 minutes ago, Rebound said:

...

There is no evidence that Joe Biden committed a crime, and the crimes Hunter Biden were charged with aren’t charged as crimes when others commit them. Yes, Hunter took a lot of money from Burisma, but there’s no evidence at all that he or is father we’re engaged in any wrongdoing. 
 

There isn’t an appearance of crime, there’s a story the GOP wants you to believe. That’s the truth, and you don’t like the truth because it doesn’t help your agenda.  

As any foreigner can see, there is ample evidence that your president is a crook: he took money.

[Rebound]

26 minutes ago, August1991 said:

As any foreigner can see, there is ample evidence that your president is a crook: he took money.

There is not any evidence that Joe Biden received five cents from a foreign entity.