[** Official President Joe Biden Thread **]

[seafoam1 2,898]

Nothing to see here folks. Bidens don't lie. 

 

Photos show Hunter Biden in dad's Corvette at Delaware home on same day as 'shakedown' message

 

Photos from Hunter Biden’s laptop show he was at then-Vice President Joe Biden’s home in Delaware the same day of his alleged "shakedown" messages to a Chinese business partner.

President Biden recently shouted at a New York Post reporter when asked if he was with his son during the alleged WhatsApp discussion with Henry Zhao, CEO of Chinese asset management firm Harvest Fund Management, on July 30, 2017, during which Hunter said he was "sitting with" his father.

Asked if Biden was with Hunter during the digital discussion, the president laughed at the question before yelling, "No!"

"And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction," Hunter added.

Top House Republicans have described the message as a "shakedown" by the Biden family.

Photos on Hunter's abandoned laptop taken on July 30, 2017, the same day as the threatening message to Zhao, show Hunter posing in the driver’s seat of Biden’s 1967 Corvette Stingray with two young girls in bikinis in the driveway of his father’s Wilmington home.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/photos-show-hunter-biden-dads-corvette-delaware-home-same-day-shakedown-message

[RLLD 4,187]

His protectors at the FBI in particular must cringe anytime he talks.   The leadership who protected him might never be held to account, but history will mark them for the corrupt puppets they certainly are. 

[Ultra Max Power 214]

1 hour ago, Dizkneelande said:

It doesn’t matter they don’t care. They won’t believe Devon Archer.

I know, they will call him a criminal and a bad person because of his past charges.  Then ignore the fact that he is Hunter's best friend and has spent many days with the Biden family in their homes. 

Then assume because Joe surrounds himself with sketchy people, he isn't involved in anything bad.  Mind blowing....

[Dizkneelande 1,093]

11 minutes ago, Ultra Max Power said:

I know, they will call him a criminal and a bad person because of his past charges.  Then ignore the fact that he is Hunter's best friend and has spent many days with the Biden family in their homes. 

Then assume because Joe surrounds himself with sketchy people, he isn't involved in anything bad.  Mind blowing....

I don’t think he testifies he cancelled again today. Subpoena be damned. I bet they’re working on a pardon. Republicans need to haul him in asap. 

[dogcows 1,030]

2 hours ago, RLLD said:

No. in summary there is enough evidence to continue the investigation and potentially assign a special prosecutor (but I hope they do NOT assign one).  There is more evidence than was available for say, the first fake impeachment for Trump.  But again, unless the criminal has the wrong political stance you will not care about criminality, we have established this.

More will come out, nothing short of a confession from Biden will ever suffice for you.  Not sure why people are inclined to protect the powerful, when they are clearly corrupt.  That one will continue to be baffling. 

Guilty until proven innocent from your point of view then. Got it. No proof necessary. Just “investigate” forever until you find something. Because @RLLD says it’s “clear” that Biden did something. And someday they’ll figure out what it was. This is like believing Jesus is coming back any day now. No offense to those who do believe that, but it’s faith-based, not fact-based.

Review: No evidence of Joe Biden corruption. No evidence of DOJ cover-up. None. Zilch. Zero. But Comer and Jordan will keep trying as long as they control the House. Why? It keeps the “Let’s Go Brandon” folks riled up, and it’s a heck of a lot easier than actually governing.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,204]

3 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Guilty until proven innocent from your point of view then. Got it. No proof necessary. Just “investigate” forever until you find something. Because @RLLD says it’s “clear” that Biden did something. And someday they’ll figure out what it was. This is like believing Jesus is coming back any day now. No offense to those who do believe that, but it’s faith-based, not fact-based.

Review: No evidence of Joe Biden corruption. No evidence of DOJ cover-up. None. Zilch. Zero. But Comer and Jordan will keep trying as long as they control the House. Why? It keeps the “Let’s Go Brandon” folks riled up, and it’s a heck of a lot easier than actually governing.

Whistleblowers testified to a cover up. Is that not evidence? 

[RLLD 4,187]

29 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Guilty until proven innocent from your point of view then. Got it. No proof necessary. Just “investigate” forever until you find something. Because @RLLD says it’s “clear” that Biden did something. And someday they’ll figure out what it was. This is like believing Jesus is coming back any day now. No offense to those who do believe that, but it’s faith-based, not fact-based.

Review: No evidence of Joe Biden corruption. No evidence of DOJ cover-up. None. Zilch. Zero. But Comer and Jordan will keep trying as long as they control the House. Why? It keeps the “Let’s Go Brandon” folks riled up, and it’s a heck of a lot easier than actually governing.

Are you suggesting that the approach used by Democrats against Trump is no longer suitable.  On this point we will have to agree to disagree. Investigate by all means, people in power should be watched, investigated and held accountable.  That you might not feel this way is perhaps not the best approach.

We have MORE information, and even evidence, than the Democrats had when they went after Trump.  It seems fitting to give Joe the same level of scruitiny, given the abundance of evidence. 

[seafoam1 2,898]

Dang. Liberals have no shame.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,204]

Archer canceled.  For a third time. Maybe he’s negotiating a pardon. Please do it. 

[Dizkneelande 1,093]

Kind of weird that Burisma cut Hunters monthly salary in half 2 months after Joe left office. 

[dogcows 1,030]

1 hour ago, RLLD said:

Are you suggesting that the approach used by Democrats against Trump is no longer suitable.  On this point we will have to agree to disagree. Investigate by all means, people in power should be watched, investigated and held accountable.  That you might not feel this way is perhaps not the best approach.

We have MORE information, and even evidence, than the Democrats had when they went after Trump.  It seems fitting to give Joe the same level of scruitiny, given the abundance of evidence. 

TRUMP!

[seafoam1 2,898]

3 minutes ago, dogcows said:

TRUMP!

So, you admit defeat. Good for you peanut.

[League Champion 1,909]

 

[seafoam1 2,898]

6 minutes ago, League Champion said:

 

Hope they end up like bud light.

[jerryskids 6,695]

4 hours ago, dogcows said:

Guilty until proven innocent from your point of view then. Got it. No proof necessary. Just “investigate” forever until you find something. Because @RLLD says it’s “clear” that Biden did something. And someday they’ll figure out what it was. This is like believing Jesus is coming back any day now. No offense to those who do believe that, but it’s faith-based, not fact-based.

Review: No evidence of Joe Biden corruption. No evidence of DOJ cover-up. None. Zilch. Zero. But Comer and Jordan will keep trying as long as they control the House. Why? It keeps the “Let’s Go Brandon” folks riled up, and it’s a heck of a lot easier than actually governing.

I had to read this a couple of times to make sure I wasn't imagining it.  Oh, the irony!    Your side has been shotgun blasting crap at Trump since 2015, making up dossiers and fake corroborations from alleged experts, and finally 8 years later you found something (new, not from the past 7.5 years) to indict him on.  All justified by just knowing deep in your heart that he is a bad orange man and if we keep looking wide enough we'll find something, anything, to pin on him.   

Regarding the evidence, we went through this with the Hunter laptop.  You need to investigate to get more evidence.  Who is the man sitting next to Hunter that he referenced?  Is it the same guy who apparently is seen in photos in Hunter's car that day?  Who is the big guy?  You dismissed this the other day with some crap excuse of "why should we care about a private business deal."  Oh I dunno, who else in Hunter's life could be the big guy?  One of his second-hander mooch uncles?   

[TheNewGirl 1,443]

2 hours ago, dogcows said:

TRUMP!

This is your only rebuttal? 

[dogcows 1,030]

23 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

This is your only rebuttal? 

No, but after pointing out 100x in a row that there is no evidence to somebody who doesn’t understand what evidence is, I was sick of it.

Comparing this to anything involving Trump is a false equivalency. I could go through all the differences, but there’s no need to, since they are obvious.

[Dizkneelande 1,093]

23 minutes ago, dogcows said:

No, but after pointing out 100x in a row that there is no evidence to somebody who doesn’t understand what evidence is, I was sick of it.

Comparing this to anything involving Trump is a false equivalency. I could go through all the differences, but there’s no need to, since they are obvious.

[dogcows 1,030]

25 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I had to read this a couple of times to make sure I wasn't imagining it.  Oh, the irony!    Your side has been shotgun blasting crap at Trump since 2015, making up dossiers and fake corroborations from alleged experts, and finally 8 years later you found something (new, not from the past 7.5 years) to indict him on.  All justified by just knowing deep in your heart that he is a bad orange man and if we keep looking wide enough we'll find something, anything, to pin on him.   

Regarding the evidence, we went through this with the Hunter laptop.  You need to investigate to get more evidence.  Who is the man sitting next to Hunter that he referenced?  Is it the same guy who apparently is seen in photos in Hunter's car that day?  Who is the big guy?  You dismissed this the other day with some crap excuse of "why should we care about a private business deal."  Oh I dunno, who else in Hunter's life could be the big guy?  One of his second-hander mooch uncles?   

Believe what you want. But if you see the evidence and think there’s anything there showing Joe Biden is corrupt? You’re going to be VERY disappointed. I’m tired of trying to explain that hearsay, unverified intelligence, and innuendo are not admissible evidence.

And it’s also not worth explaining the differences between the Mueller report and the 2 impeachments of Trump vs this clown show. It’s all out there for anybody who chooses to see it.

[jerryskids 6,695]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Believe what you want. But if you see the evidence and think there’s anything there showing Joe Biden is corrupt? You’re going to be VERY disappointed. I’m tired of trying to explain that hearsay, unverified intelligence, and innuendo are not admissible evidence.

And it’s also not worth explaining the differences between the Mueller report and the 2 impeachments of Trump vs this clown show. It’s all out there for anybody who chooses to see it.

Somebody on this site doesn't understand evidence, but it's not who you think it is:

Quote

In everyday speech, the terms “evidence” and “proof” are frequently used interchangeably in casual speech. There is, however, a distinction to be made between evidence and proof. Evidence is data or facts that assist us in determining the reality or existence of something. A total collection of evidence can prove a claim. Proof is a conclusion that a certain fact is true or not. In the case of a court of law, it is up to a judge or a jury to decide whether an assertion has been proven or not, based on the evidence presented. 

Evidence

Evidence is unprocessed pieces of data, material, or information. In the legal context, it is typically gathered and presented  by one party to a case in an attempt to either prove or disprove a certain legal conclusion.

https://www.cohenwinters.com/whats-the-difference-between-evidence-and-proof/#:~:text=There is%2C however%2C a distinction,fact is true or not.

 

[dogcows 1,030]

4 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Somebody on this site doesn't understand evidence, but it's not who you think it is:

https://www.cohenwinters.com/whats-the-difference-between-evidence-and-proof/#:~:text=There is%2C however%2C a distinction,fact is true or not.

We could play a game of semantics. But here’s the bottom line: They ain’t got sh!t.

[porkbutt 893]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cu5NLpRruWQ/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

[Hardcore troubadour 15,204]

Hard to believe that democrats are taking up for this guy when they should be pushing him to declare he won’t run for re-election. If he is re-elected President Kamala Harris is a near certainty.  

[Hardcore troubadour 15,204]

1 hour ago, dogcows said:

We could play a game of semantics. But here’s the bottom line: They ain’t got sh!t.

The difference between evidence and proof is not a matter of semantics. The fact that you think it is shows your level of ignorance about our judicial system. And that’s sad.  You just live here. 

[League Champion 1,909]

16 hours ago, dogcows said:

Guilty

Keep vouching for this scumbag. 

 

 

[RLLD 4,187]

15 hours ago, dogcows said:

TRUMP!

Give me the same zeal in pursuit of Biden, that is all I ask. If it can be done to Trump then it can be done to Biden. I want ALL PEOPLE in power the same treatment. If people are to hold power, they need to be watched and held accountable.  <insert name> should be held to account, regardless of political affiliation. The difference between you and I is that while I support what was done to Trump, you would defend Biden from it.  Sadly this allows the corruption.

[The Real timschochet 6,576]

26 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Give me the same zeal in pursuit of Biden, that is all I ask. If it can be done to Trump then it can be done to Biden. I want ALL PEOPLE in power the same treatment. If people are to hold power, they need to be watched and held accountable.  <insert name> should be held to account, regardless of political affiliation. The difference between you and I is that while I support what was done to Trump, you would defend Biden from it.  Sadly this allows the corruption.

Your statement is false. @dogcows is defending Biden because he honestly believes that Biden has done nothing seriously wrong. I share that belief. If we thought, as you do, that Biden was guilty of serious crimes, we would not defend him. There is no double standard. 

[dogcows 1,030]

29 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Give me the same zeal in pursuit of Biden, that is all I ask. If it can be done to Trump then it can be done to Biden. I want ALL PEOPLE in power the same treatment. If people are to hold power, they need to be watched and held accountable.  <insert name> should be held to account, regardless of political affiliation. The difference between you and I is that while I support what was done to Trump, you would defend Biden from it.  Sadly this allows the corruption.

False equivalency.

Has anybody ever heard of probable cause? Or do we just investigate every president just because they are president? Biden was in office for 40+ years and there was never a whiff of corruption ever brought up. Until Trump started making insinuations. So if you want to bring up Trump, remember his desire to get “dirt” on his political was the genesis of all this.

[dogcows 1,030]

6 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Your statement is false. @dogcows is defending Biden because he honestly believes that Biden has done nothing seriously wrong. I share that belief. If we thought, as you do, that Biden was guilty of serious crimes, we would not defend him. There is no double standard. 

I agree with this statement. Anybody claiming similarities between this investigation and the 2 impeachments of Trump and the Mueller report are either being dishonest... or simply poorly informed. But can I blame them when I see false representations of fact from GOP members of Congress almost daily? Heck, even the supposedly liberal “MSM” often repeats their statements without much of a critical eye.

[The Real timschochet 6,576]

Kevin McCarthy floats impeachment of Joe Biden: 

https://www.axios.com/2023/07/25/mccarthy-biden-impeachment-inquiry-raised

Based on what I’m hearing or reading, the thrust of the argument seems to be “OK, we know that the evidence against Joe Biden is flimsy at best, but we believe the impeachments against Donald Trump were completely political and without real justification, so what goes around comes around.” 
 

My prediction is that a strong majority  American public will not agree with this argument and will punish the House Republicans during the next election cycle if they pursue this. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,204]

7 minutes ago, dogcows said:

False equivalency.

Has anybody ever heard of probable cause? Or do we just investigate every president just because they are president? Biden was in office for 40+ years and there was never a whiff of corruption ever brought up. Until Trump started making insinuations. So if you want to bring up Trump, remember his desire to get “dirt” on his political was the genesis of all this.

How come Trumps taxes weren’t an issue for his 40 years in business then all of a sudden they were? 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,204]

4 minutes ago, dogcows said:

I agree with this statement. Anybody claiming similarities between this investigation and the 2 impeachments of Trump and the Mueller report are either being dishonest... or simply poorly informed. But can I blame them when I see false representations of fact from GOP members of Congress almost daily? Heck, even the supposedly liberal “MSM” often repeats their statements without much of a critical eye.

The Meuller special counsel investigation wqs based on the Steele dossier. That’s the Rosetta Stone of the Russia hoax. Care to explain that evidence? And the spying that was signed off by the courts based on it ? You can’t.   So you won’t.

[The Real timschochet 6,576]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

How come Trumps taxes weren’t an issue for his 40 years in business then all of a sudden they were? 

Because he wasn’t a public servant? 
 

No offense but this doesn’t seem like a very smart question. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,204]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

Because he wasn’t a public servant? 
 

No offense but this doesn’t seem like a very smart question. 

Oh, so we only hold (certain) public servants with having their taxes looked into? Wow. I thought no one is above the law? 

[The Real timschochet 6,576]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

The Meuller special counsel investigation wqs based on the Steele dossier. That’s the Rosetta Stone of the Russia hoax. Care to explain that evidence? And the spying that was signed off by the courts based on it ? You can’t.   So you won’t.

Your first stamens is false. Mueller was appointed because Trump fired James Comey because Comey wouldn’t agree to stand down from investigating Michael Flynn. Please get it right. 

[Dizkneelande 1,093]

Come on guys where’s the proof that Biden is actually corrupt?

Hunter, Jim and Frank Biden collecting millions from foreign adversaries for doing virtually nothing.

No I want proof.

Emails, text messages, and bank statements that explicitly detail the scam the Bidens were running.

No I want real proof.

Video of Biden himself extorting.

No I want real proof.

Whistleblowers and business partners that have spent hours detailing the scam that the Bidens were running.

No I want real proof. See, you don’t have any. You are in a cult!!

[Hardcore troubadour 15,204]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Your first stamens is false. Mueller was appointed because Trump fired James Comey because Comey wouldn’t agree to stand down from investigating Michael Flynn. Please get it right. 

Huh? What was Meuller appointed to then? 

[The Real timschochet 6,576]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

Oh, so we only hold (certain) public servants with having their taxes looked into? Wow. 

You’re not making any sense. 
 

Donald Trump is the first major candidate for President in modern times who refused to release his taxes. He was the first President ever who refused to release his taxes. That’s why he received attention on the subject: 

[seafoam1 2,898]

2 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

Come on guys where’s the proof that Biden is actually corrupt?

Hunter, Jim and Frank Biden collecting millions from foreign adversaries for doing virtually nothing.

No I want proof.

Emails, text messages, and bank statements that explicitly detail the scam the Bidens were running.

No I want real proof.

Video of Biden himself extorting.

No I want real proof.

Whistleblowers and business partners that have spent hours detailing the scam that the Bidens were running.

No I want real proof. See, you don’t have any. You are in a cult!!

So focking true.

[The Real timschochet 6,576]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Huh? What was Meuller appointed to then? 

I just told you.