Biden's cognitive decline.

[jerryskids 6,789]

57 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Of course not.  You seriously think he'd still be standing there if Obama didn't grab his hand?  This is why you're a joke.

Biden needed to be led off.  Grow up 

Still? No, he'd have fallen over by now. 

You are either a troll or have the perception of an autistic child, like squistion. I'll error on the latter to not be mean. Have a good night, Gutter.

[GutterBoy 2,899]

8 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Still? No, he'd have fallen over by now. 

You are either a troll or have the perception of an autistic child, like squistion. I'll error on the latter to not be mean. Have a good night, Gutter.

You watch this video and conclude that Biden was unable to walk off stage on his own.  And then you accuse others who don't share your same opinion of being children with autism.

Man you are so far gone.

And just last week you admitted you didn't know much about cognitive decline after I showed you what trump is suffering from.

[Maximum Overkill 1,985]

2 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

trump

 

 

[Tree of Knowledge 1,843]

Remember when leftists got their panties in a bunch when Trump allegedly mocked a reporter?  I’m sure this is different or manipulated video…..
 

Biden mocks reporters

[Hardcore troubadour 15,395]

Watching Obama having to walk Biden off the stage really ought to concern all of us. 

[shadrap 228]

10 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Sorry it’s nonsense. 
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Entertainment/wireStory/fact-focus-bidens-pause-left-star-studded-la-111201276

Dont take me seriously if you don’t want to. Take the people there seriously. 
 

More important, find some clips of Biden answering Jimmy Kimmel’s questions. Listen to him talk about the Supreme Court, about Trump, about democracy. And keep in mind that he gave this performance after flying in straight from several days in Europe in which he got almost no rest. Then decide if he really shows the decline you claim. It’s just not true. 

so why would Garland take a contempt of court instead of handing over the Hur interview with Biden?  & don't tell me because they handed over a transcript.  the transcript was edited.  pretty telling & I take no pleasure in watching Biden look & talk like a bumbling idiot.

[HellToupee 1,768]

34 minutes ago, Tree of Knowledge said:

Remember when leftists got their panties in a bunch when Trump allegedly mocked a reporter?  I’m sure this is different or manipulated video…..
 

Biden mocks reporters

CHEAP FAKE!!

[HellToupee 1,768]

20 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Watching Obama having to walk Biden off the stage really ought to concern all of us. 

It’s plain as day but the do-gooders go into Baghdad Bob mode 

[thegeneral 3,203]

18 minutes ago, shadrap said:

so why would Garland take a contempt of court instead of handing over the Hur interview with Biden?  & don't tell me because they handed over a transcript.  the transcript was edited.  pretty telling & I take no pleasure in watching Biden look & talk like a bumbling idiot.

It was mentioned before in here that this Hur interview with Biden transcript was edited. Is there a link with this?

[shadrap 228]

41 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

It was mentioned before in here that this Hur interview with Biden transcript was edited. Is there a link with this?

not going to scour around.  Biden is now claiming executive privilege on the audio recording.  that should tell you all you need to know.  

[thegeneral 3,203]

14 minutes ago, shadrap said:

not going to scour around.  Biden is now claiming executive privilege on the audio recording.  that should tell you all you need to know.  

Where did you hear that this transcript was edited? I hadn’t seen this anywhere. The other person I asked about this claim didn’t respond. 

Why do they want these recordings if they have the transcript? For me wanting these tapes is obviously purely for the campaigns. Biden doesn’t want to have audio of him used in ads and Trump via ball huggers in Congress wants to use the audio for ads.

[squistion 2,193]

https://x.com/AndrewJBates46/status/1803015194773164399

Rightwing cheap fakes keep being cut apart by nonpartisan fact checkers:

@AP: "THE FACTS: Biden paused amid cheers and applause as he exited the stage with his predecessor following an interview moderated by late-night host Kimmel."

[seafoam1 3,012]

7 minutes ago, squistion said:

https://x.com/AndrewJBates46/status/1803015194773164399

Rightwing cheap fakes keep being cut apart by nonpartisan fact checkers:

@AP: "THE FACTS: Biden paused amid cheers and applause as he exited the stage with his predecessor following an interview moderated by late-night host Kimmel."

This guy keeps trying. 

[jerryskids 6,789]

3 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

You watch this video and conclude that Biden was unable to walk off stage on his own.  And then you accuse others who don't share your same opinion of being children with autism.

Man you are so far gone.

And just last week you admitted you didn't know much about cognitive decline after I showed you what trump is suffering from.

Not watching that video.  That video conveniently pans to a distant shot when Biden freezes and Obama jump starts him, around the 32 second mark.  Your own X thread shows as much, if you had bothered to read it.  But you, Olga, and the other leftist sycophants see what you want to see.  And the "impartial" fact checks like the AP.   

And I didn't admit I didn't know "much," I admitted that I didn't know that using derogatory names can be a sign of cognitive decline.  I also provided a link with the thousand or so such names Trump has used for people since at least 2015.  Nevertheless I said I'd keep my eyes open for signs of it worsening with Trump.  Seems one of us is trying to be objective.   

[HellToupee 1,768]

51 minutes ago, squistion said:

https://x.com/AndrewJBates46/status/1803015194773164399

Rightwing cheap fakes keep being cut apart by nonpartisan fact checkers:

@AP: "THE FACTS: Biden paused amid cheers and applause as he exited the stage with his predecessor following an interview moderated by late-night host Kimmel."

 nonpartisan fact checkers

[shadrap 228]

1 hour ago, thegeneral said:

Where did you hear that this transcript was edited? I hadn’t seen this anywhere. The other person I asked about this claim didn’t respond. 

Why do they want these recordings if they have the transcript? For me wanting these tapes is obviously purely for the campaigns. Biden doesn’t want to have audio of him used in ads and Trump via ball huggers in Congress wants to use the audio for ads.

Biden–Hur Interview Audio: DOJ Uses Executive Privilege, AI Fears to Fight Access Lawsuit | National Review

[squistion 2,193]

3 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

 nonpartisan fact checkers

You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

Prove the fact checkers wrong here. (Spoiler, you can't). 

[thegeneral 3,203]

2 minutes ago, shadrap said:

Biden–Hur Interview Audio: DOJ Uses Executive Privilege, AI Fears to Fight Access Lawsuit | National Review

“Top Justice Department official Bradley Weinsheimer submitted a sworn affidaviton Friday and declared that the Biden–Hur transcripts matched the audio except for “minor differences,” such as the use of filler words and repetition.

“Besides these exceedingly minor differences, based on my simultaneous review of the transcripts while listening to the audio recording, the transcripts accurately capture the words spoken during the interview on the audio recording with no material differences between the audio recording and the tapes,” Weinsheimer stated.”

Pretty clear this is for political ads. Why else would Congress want this?

 

[seafoam1 3,012]

2 minutes ago, squistion said:

You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

Prove the fact checkers wrong here. (Spoiler, you can't). 

It's impossible to prove the truth to a liberal. Because liberals live in a dimension where opinion is their truth.

[shadrap 228]

27 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

“Top Justice Department official Bradley Weinsheimer submitted a sworn affidaviton Friday and declared that the Biden–Hur transcripts matched the audio except for “minor differences,” such as the use of filler words and repetition.

“Besides these exceedingly minor differences, based on my simultaneous review of the transcripts while listening to the audio recording, the transcripts accurately capture the words spoken during the interview on the audio recording with no material differences between the audio recording and the tapes,” Weinsheimer stated.”

Pretty clear this is for political ads. Why else would Congress want this?

 

"minor differences"?   depends on a person's opinion.  lets hear or see what the "minor differences" are.   Yea, there so minor Biden had to use executive privilege & Garland is in contempt of court over not releasing these "minor differences".  believe what you want but it stinks.

[seafoam1 3,012]

6 minutes ago, shadrap said:

"minor differences"?   depends on a person's opinion.  lets hear or see what the "minor differences" are.   Yea, there so minor Biden had to use executive privilege & Garland is in contempt of court over not releasing these "minor differences".  believe what you want but it stinks.

It depends...which drug was creepy joe on at the time?

[thegeneral 3,203]

4 minutes ago, shadrap said:

"minor differences"?   depends on a person's opinion.  lets hear or see what the "minor differences" are.   Yea, there so minor Biden had to use executive privilege & Garland is in contempt of court over not releasing these "minor differences".  believe what you want but it stinks.

The guy in your article gave a sworn affidavit what the differences were.

Is Biden under investigation for being old by Congress now? Why do think they want the audio.

People are free to bash on him for this but it’s obvious what the point is here.

[shadrap 228]

1 hour ago, thegeneral said:

The guy in your article gave a sworn affidavit what the differences were.

Is Biden under investigation for being old by Congress now? Why do think they want the audio.

People are free to bash on him for this but it’s obvious what the point is here.

sworn affidavit!  different interpretations on minor/major.  It's up to the person.  so while he says it's minor it could just as well be major.

sworn affidavit though!!!!!!!!!  on minor or major.  that settles it for me.

[shadrap 228]

1 hour ago, thegeneral said:

The guy in your article gave a sworn affidavit what the differences were.

Is Biden under investigation for being old by Congress now? Why do think they want the audio.

People are free to bash on him for this but it’s obvious what the point is here.

then just release the damn thing.  Executive privilege! 

[thegeneral 3,203]

1 minute ago, shadrap said:

then just release the damn thing.  Executive privilege! 

They don’t want to release it. They don’t want it to show up in ads. I get that.

As I said it’s fair to complain about it but let’s be honest that’s what this is all about. 

[thegeneral 3,203]

3 minutes ago, shadrap said:

sworn affidavit!  different interpretations on minor/major.  It's up to the person.  so while he says it's minor it could just as well be major.

sworn affidavit though!!!!!!!!!  on minor or major.  that settles it for me.

I trust it is what he says. Removing of “ums” and the like. A bit of a stretch to imply this is “edited” that makes it sound as if important things are removed.

[GutterBoy 2,899]

7 minutes ago, shadrap said:

then just release the damn thing.  Executive privilege! 

Maybe stop acting like a crybaby.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,395]

Libtards ok with impeachment and convictions for political purposes, but the presidents own words is too far. Got it. 

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

1 hour ago, thegeneral said:

The guy in your article gave a sworn affidavit what the differences were.

Is Biden under investigation for being old by Congress now? Why do think they want the audio.

People are free to bash on him for this but it’s obvious what the point is here.

The point is the Administration has invoked executive privilege not to protect the Office of the President but the campaign of the candidate.  They are using executive privilege to deny information to the voters.  Seems I recently heard of a candidate being charged and convicted of 34 felonies for such action except instead of using the power of the Presidency and the authority of the Department of Justice he used his own checkbook. 

[thegeneral 3,203]

Just now, Engorgeous George said:

The point is the Administration has invoked executive privilege not to protect the Office of the President but the campaign of the candidate.  They are using executive privilege to deny information to the voters.  Seems I recently heard of a candidate being charged and convicted of 34 felonies for such action except instead of using the power of the Presidency and the authority of the Department of Justice he used his own checkbook. 

Thats a legal argument. Take it up in the courts like they did with Trump. Good luck.

[seafoam1 3,012]

Just now, thegeneral said:

Thats a legal argument. Take it up in the courts like they did with Trump. Good luck.

But you are still wrong. 

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

1 minute ago, thegeneral said:

Thats a legal argument. Take it up in the courts like they did with Trump. Good luck.

Are you Marco from Tropoja?

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

1 minute ago, thegeneral said:

Thats a legal argument. Take it up in the courts like they did with Trump. Good luck.

It is a legal argument and a very valid one at that.

[thegeneral 3,203]

Just now, Engorgeous George said:

It is a legal argument and a very valid one at that.

Isn’t Trump arguing that the Prez is immune from anything? 

[thegeneral 3,203]

2 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

It is a legal argument and a very valid one at that.

That remains to be seen I suppose.

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

3 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Isn’t Trump arguing that the Prez is immune from anything? 

To my knowledge that was one of his arguments made by counsel.  I do not give any credence to that argument, one made before by Nixon as well.

[thegeneral 3,203]

5 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

To my knowledge that was one of his arguments made by counsel.  I do not give any credence to that argument, one made before by Nixon as well.

Well legal opinions are just that until they get time in court, appeals, etc.

All I’m saying with these tapes is that it’s transparent why they want them as it is why team Biden is giving them the stiff arm.

The line that they are “edited” is a red herring. 

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

1 minute ago, thegeneral said:

Well legal opinions are just that until they get time in court, appeals, etc.

All I’m saying with these tapes is that it’s transparent why they want them as it is why team Biden is giving them the stiff arm.

The line that they are “edited” is a red herring. 

I have some passing familiarity with the legal process.

[thegeneral 3,203]

Just now, Engorgeous George said:

I have some passing familiarity with the legal process.

So you have said

[Hardcore troubadour 15,395]

11 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Well legal opinions are just that until they get time in court, appeals, etc.

All I’m saying with these tapes is that it’s transparent why they want them as it is why team Biden is giving them the stiff arm.

The line that they are “edited” is a red herring. 

How do you know it’s a red herring if you haven’t heard them?