╌>

Biden’s memory is gone. He is unfit to be president

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  s  •  3 weeks ago  •  346 comments

Biden’s memory is gone. He is unfit to be president
HE DID NOT REMEMBER WHEN HE WAS VICE PRESIDENT

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


President Joe Biden   is too mentally deficient to do the job. It would be malpractice for the country to allow him to continue as president or as a candidate for reelection.

In his decision   not to charge   Biden with mishandling   classified documents , special counsel Robert Hur said that Biden was simply an “elderly man with a poor memory” who no jury could reasonably conclude he had the “mental state of willfulness” required to convict him of a felony. The details are far worse: Biden could not remember if he was vice president in 2009, when he started the job, or in 2013, right in the middle of his eight-year tenure.

Along with that, Biden cannot remember details about debates around Afghanistan, a stunning admission given that his   disastrous withdrawal   stranded Americans in the hands of the Taliban, got 13 U.S. service members killed, and finished off with a retaliatory drone strike on an aid worker and multiple children.

Worse still,   quoting   from Hur’s report, “He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died.”

Here is that quote again, with emphasis: “He did not remember,   even within several years , when his son Beau died.” Beau Biden died in 2015. He is Biden’s shield from criticism when he talks to Gold Star families, and is   his son , and he can’t even remember the   range of years   when Beau died.

This is the same Joe Biden who has repeatedly  called out  to dead people or claimed to have recently spoken to people who have been long dead, including saying that he recently met with a French politician who has been dead since 1996. All of this is to say that Biden’s brain is fried. His memory is gone. It is debatable as to if he even knows what is going on during given events, including his rambling rants when he tries to speak for more than one minute. This should be disqualifying for anyone who cares about the security of the United States.

Biden has no business continuing to serve as president, let alone running to do it for another four years when he likely cannot even remember the last four. This is disqualifying for Biden, and it should be disqualifying for every Democrat who has endorsed him for another four years.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

This report is beyond damning.  That the admin and his media allies have been hiding his mental state from the public is probably the biggest scandal since Woodrow Wilson was incapacitated and let others govern in his name following his stroke. 

Here we have a special counsel declaring the President doesn't have the mental facilities to be found to have acted intentionally. He doesn't even know when his son died. It's beyond sad, and his wife should be ashamed for putting him through this. For all the millions he's made for his family by allowing them to grift off his name, there's no one who cares about him enough to protect him.  He's just their ticket to be exploited for fame and fortune. It's elder abuse. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    3 weeks ago

No words..........................none

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1    3 weeks ago

I have two words .........................bull shit

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.1.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.1    3 weeks ago

Based on...?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.1.3  Right Down the Center  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.1.2    3 weeks ago
Based on...?

Bull Shit

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.2  cjcold  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    3 weeks ago

Bullshit! Your far-right wing fascism means nothing.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @1.2    3 weeks ago
Your far-right wing fascism means nothing.

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.2.2  Right Down the Center  replied to  cjcold @1.2    3 weeks ago

The special council is a far right wing fascist or is that just the standard reply?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.2.2    3 weeks ago

yes

jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.2.4  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @1.2    3 weeks ago

Thank you for that well reasoned retort with supporting analysis.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.2.5  Sparty On  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.4    3 weeks ago

Someone needs to go back and retake Types of Government class.    High school level will do as long as it isn’t being taught by a Marxist.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.6  Tessylo  replied to  cjcold @1.2    3 weeks ago

Just a deflection from the former 'president' who we see losing what's left of his mind on a daily basis.   

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.2.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  cjcold @1.2    3 weeks ago
far-right wing fascism

That does not mean what you think it means.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.2.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.6    3 weeks ago

The article has nothing to do with the previous POTUS.  But don't let that stop you from deflecting with your vast volume if wrong information and projection.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    3 weeks ago

Ya got nothin', while the former 'president's' brain rots from tertiary syphilis before our very eyes

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @1.3    3 weeks ago

How are you doing with that Biden poll you referenced today or are you memory challenged like Joe?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.2  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @1.3    3 weeks ago

Proof?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.3.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.3.2    3 weeks ago

To quote from the movie "Wayne's World", "When monkeys fly out my butt."

 
 
 
A. Macarthur
Professor Guide
1.4  A. Macarthur  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    3 weeks ago

Trump said he could not recall, remember or recollect more than 30 times in his answers to Mueller

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.4.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  A. Macarthur @1.4    3 weeks ago

I guess they are both mentally unfit for the office.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.4.2  Right Down the Center  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.4.1    3 weeks ago

At this point I have to wonder if anyone running for president isn't a little off in the head

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.4.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  A. Macarthur @1.4    3 weeks ago

So he used the Hillary Clinton defense. 

¯\_( ツ)_/¯

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.4.4  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  A. Macarthur @1.4    3 weeks ago

An obvious deflection.  But the real problem with your argument is that mueller never suggested trump was incompetent to stand trial, nor has any other prosecutor. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
1.4.5  Greg Jones  replied to  A. Macarthur @1.4    3 weeks ago

Lest we forget.....

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.4.6  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.4.4    3 weeks ago
But the real problem with your argument is that mueller never suggested trump was incompetent to stand trial

Thats true. Mueller had ethics and integrity. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.4.7  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.4.6    3 weeks ago

So put you down in the Biden should be indicted as soon he leaves office camp.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.4.8  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.4.7    3 weeks ago

Hur doesnt say that Biden would have been indicted except for his lack of memory. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.4.9  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.4.8    3 weeks ago

If that’s not your takeaway from the report, I don’t know what to tell you. 

bur sure, rely on  Hur  not using those exact words in that exact order. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.4.10  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @1.4.8    3 weeks ago

Denying the undeniable and defending the indefensible.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.4.11  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @1.4.6    3 weeks ago
Mueller had ethics and integrity.

He just found no evidence of what he was supposed to be investigating.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.4.12  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.4.9    3 weeks ago

Im sure you know what gratuitous means.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.4.13  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.4.9    3 weeks ago

this is from Hur's report

800

" the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

The gratuitous comments Hur made about Biden's memory related to the sympathy a jury might have , in Hur's opinion, for a forgetful old man.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
1.4.14  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @1.4.13    3 weeks ago
in Hur's opinion, for a forgetful old man

Since that's Hur's opinion of Biden, Biden is currently unfit to be the leader of the Free World and is also incapable of making nuclear bombing decisions. Got it!

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
1.4.15  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1.4.6    3 weeks ago
"Mueller had ethics and integrity." 

That's debatable.  But he sure didn't have much of a case.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.4.16  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.4.3    3 weeks ago

All you have is deflection

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.4.17  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @1.4.5    3 weeks ago

Who cares about what that toxic turd Rush Limpballs felt about it!  He' dead!  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.4.18  Texan1211  replied to  A. Macarthur @1.4    2 weeks ago

what's that got to do with Biden again?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    3 weeks ago
This report is beyond damning.

It was damning and crafty.


 That the admin and his media allies have been hiding his mental state from the public is probably the biggest scandal since Woodrow Wilson was incapacitated and let others govern in his name following his stroke.

It was a feat, but most people noticed.


Here we have a special counsel declaring the President doesn't have the mental facilities to be found to have acted intentionally. 

Ah, but the report pointed out that back when he took the documents, he took them willfully. 

Here is the excuse not to prosecute:

“We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” Hur writes.

“Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him – by then a former president well into his eighties – of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

Biden described as ‘elderly man with poor memory’ in classified documents report – as it happened | Joe Biden | The Guardian

I will agree that a DC jury would never convict Joe Biden, regardless of reason, but that was not a justification to not bring charges. A disinterested Special Counsel would have charged Biden. Every one of these cases has involved bias. The logic being used here is incredible: someone who has lost his faculties and who would not be allowed to drive a tractor trailer is nevertheless fit enough to run the United States of America.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
1.5.1  Ronin2  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5    3 weeks ago
I will agree that a DC jury would never convict Joe Biden, regardless of reason, but that was not a justification to not bring charges. A disinterested Special Counsel would have charged Biden. Every one of these cases has involved bias. 

Hur probably didn't want to get Durham'd by a leftist judge and a rampant TDS driven jury. Still no reason not to file charges and further expose our justice system for what it really is. Brandon is guilty; but the system got him off because the Special Counsel didn't feel like putting in the effort of fighting it.

Great testimony to our two tier justice system.

Democrats/leftists are cackling all the way to turning us into a woke, dumber, more racially and economically divided  version of China.

 
 
 
Gazoo
Junior Silent
1.5.2  Gazoo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5    3 weeks ago

It was a feat, but most people noticed.”

It was noticeable back in 2020, yet some from voted for the mental vegetable anyway.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.5.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Gazoo @1.5.2    3 weeks ago

256

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gazoo @1.5.2    3 weeks ago

That is the reason you don't vote against somebody not knowing what you're going to get.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.5.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Ronin2 @1.5.1    3 weeks ago

Every one of your  COMMENTS  is an unhinged rant. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ronin2 @1.5.1    3 weeks ago
Hur probably didn't want to get Durham'd by a leftist judge

Could be. His report was more damning than if he had charged Biden.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.5.7  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @1.5.5    3 weeks ago
Every one of your  COMMENTS  is an unhinged rant. 

Now that is some very serious projection there.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.5.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.4    3 weeks ago

The sad part is, even the slightest bit of research would have told them that they were voting for incompetency.  

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.5.9  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.5.3    3 weeks ago

Saw this cartoon a few times already.  At first it was funny, now I'm not so sure.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.5.10  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.5.9    3 weeks ago

He's been posting it everywhere, all the time, IT'S NOT FUNNY, NONE OF HIS ARE, it's low class and common - especially the one with him in bed with Jill - about farting.

Low class and common, like most of the supporters of the former 'president'.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.5.11  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @1.5.10    3 weeks ago

posting his stupid memes about Biden - all of them are stupid and low class and common

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.5.12  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.5.9    3 weeks ago

It was never funny - to me anyway

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.5.13  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Tessylo @1.5.12    3 weeks ago

That's understandable - you're an American and most likely vote Democrat, but I'm not so it's probable that I'm more objective about such things.  I don't take it personally when either Trump or Biden are criticized, and these days I'm critical of both.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.14  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.5.8    2 weeks ago

I guess sticking him in the basement should have been the big clue.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.5.15  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.14    2 weeks ago

Should have.  But here we are.

 
 
 
A. Macarthur
Professor Guide
1.6  A. Macarthur  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    2 weeks ago

The report exonerates Biden so you begin with a lie.

IMO, Hur conspired/colluded with GOP SPEAKER JOHNSON, MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE & TRUMP HIMSELF TO WRITE THE INAPPROPRIATELY DISPARAGING COMMENTS ABOUT BIDEN. Hur was A DOJ TRUMP APPOINTEE.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2  Right Down the Center    3 weeks ago

In his decision      not to charge       Biden with mishandling      classified documents   , special counsel Robert Hur said that Biden was simply an “elderly man with a poor memory” who no jury could reasonably conclude he had the “mental state of willfulness” required to convict him of a felony. The details are far worse: Biden could not remember if he was vice president in 2009, when he started the job, or in 2013, right in the middle of his eight-year tenure.

 “He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died.”

Not only can the left not spin this to he is competent to be reelected they should be concerned about article 25 now

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Right Down the Center @2    3 weeks ago
is competent to be reelected they should be concerned about article 25 now

That it has not been evoked yet is incredibly depressing. It's basically  been Weekend at Bernies at the White House the entire time and the media kept the secret.  

How can he possibly be President when he lacks the mental capacity to be responsible for his actions?  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1    3 weeks ago

Complete nonsense. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.2  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    3 weeks ago

Assuming you actually read the report your reply of complete nonsense is complete nonsense.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.2    3 weeks ago

I believe he will be the only one trying to defend it. The rest will go into hiding.

It has been a bad day for old Joe, the state of Colorado and the radical left.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.1.4  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    3 weeks ago

Exactly, his press conference last night should have put any concerns to rest.

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Freshman Silent
2.2  Igknorantzruls  replied to  Right Down the Center @2    3 weeks ago
ot only can the left not spin this to he is competent to be reelected they should be concerned about article 25 now

Why was this as well as other memory issues mentioned within report? They were not required to mention something like this as cause to not proceed. They only mentioned it why? Because it seems like great Fox News Fodder, to go on and on and speculate about Bidens mental abilities. To date, I have seen some missteps and misstatements by Biden, but have also witnessed as much committed by Trump. Would you not agree? 

  What the main differences between Trump's case and this one are, Trumps' deliberate actions and lies about not having any documents, due to having returned them all, all as he had people moving them around his complex after multiple times being asked, as was Required return said documents, as Trump NEVER had authority to take any of these records. Trumps' stories and reasoning have varied into fantasy, as he claimed he could magically declassify just by thinking about it, and I find that more concerning to alleged memory issues that Biden is accused of. Perhaps it was Bidens defense strategy to play the senile old kook part, how do we know? Both are poor choices for America, but one should never even be considered, and just my humble opine.

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
2.2.1  George  replied to  Igknorantzruls @2.2    3 weeks ago

And the first deflection to trump has arrived. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.2.2  Texan1211  replied to  George @2.2.1    3 weeks ago

right on time!

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Freshman Silent
2.2.3  Igknorantzruls  replied to  George @2.2.1    3 weeks ago

deflection is by the reasoning to not charge Biden due to being "memory challenge old man", don't you think ?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.2.4  Right Down the Center  replied to  Igknorantzruls @2.2    3 weeks ago

They only mentioned it why? Because it seems like great Fox News Fodder, to go on and on and speculate about Bidens mental abilities

You suggesting the special council that stated he should not charged is biased?

The rest of your comment is but but but trump and in no way relevant. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2.5  Ronin2  replied to  Igknorantzruls @2.2.3    3 weeks ago

See post 6; and thank you for completely proving my point.

America is now effectively China or Russia legally. 

Thank you Democrats.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.2.6  Right Down the Center  replied to  Igknorantzruls @2.2.3    3 weeks ago

They said they think it would be hard to get a jury to conclude a doddering old man willfully did anything. That doesn't sound like deflecting 

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Freshman Silent
2.2.7  Igknorantzruls  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.2.6    3 weeks ago

you either have a case or you don't

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.2.8  Right Down the Center  replied to  Igknorantzruls @2.2.7    3 weeks ago

Sounds like they did but looked for a way out

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.2.9  Texan1211  replied to  Igknorantzruls @2.2.7    3 weeks ago

whats your case. Biden isn't as bad as Trump?

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
2.2.10  George  replied to  Igknorantzruls @2.2.7    3 weeks ago

There is a defense of not guilty by mental disorder or defect, they are effectively saying they cannot disprove this defense. Biden is absolutely mentally defective.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2.11  Ronin2  replied to  George @2.2.10    3 weeks ago

Hur is not qualified to make that decision. He should have charged Brandon to the full extent of the law and let a judge decide.

A judge can force Brandon to take a cognitive test issued by a qualified professional.

Hur and Comey are prime examples of how the Establishment protects itself.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
2.3  Jasper2529  replied to  Right Down the Center @2    3 weeks ago
no jury could reasonably conclude he had the “mental state of willfulness” required to convict him of a felony.

What Hur didn't say - and this is important - is that Biden did have the "mental state of willfulness" when he took the classified/secret/etc. documents when he was a US Senator and VP. I saw a photo of one box that had the year 1979 written on it. Was Biden senile then?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.3    3 weeks ago

I just read through the executive summary of the report. Hur gives numerous reasons why Biden was not being indicted, and none of them are uniquely dependent on Biden's inability to remember. 

The irresponsible media is framing this as if Biden's mental state is THE reason he is not being indicted, and that is not true according to what the Hur report actually says. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.3.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @2.3.1    3 weeks ago

Then there is no other excuse for not going forward, that being the case.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.3.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.3.2    3 weeks ago

Lord only knows what you are talking about. The report gives specific reasons why Biden is not being indicted, and his lack of memory is only a small part of those reasons.  Put plainly , if Bidens memory was perfect he still would not have been indicted. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.4  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.3.2    3 weeks ago

Since the controversy here is perceived unfair treatment of Trump, I will offer this:

If Trump had willingly taken classified documents (which he actually did!) and then voluntarily returned them when asked to do so, there would be no legal actions taken against Trump.   The public might have never known he had classified documents.

In other words, if Trump had done what Biden did, Trump would be treated just like Biden.

But Trump went waaaay beyond this.   He engaged in obstruction and coerced others to hide documents from the authorities.   Trump crossed well passed the line into solid criminality.

Key words:  cooperation vs. obstruction.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.3.5  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.4    3 weeks ago
If Trump had willingly taken classified documents (which he actually did!) and then voluntarily returned them when asked to do so, there would be no legal actions taken against Trump.
In other words, if Trump had done what Biden did, Trump would be treated just like Biden.

The Hur report specifically cites this as one of the reasons Biden is not being indicted. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.4    3 weeks ago
If Trump had willingly taken classified documents (which he actually did!) and then voluntarily returned them when asked to do so, there would be no legal actions taken against Trump.   The public might have never known he had classified documents. In other words, if Trump had done what Biden did, Trump would be treated just like Biden.

Now we actually have BOTH Traitor Joe and Trump do the  same thing and only one is facing charges.  There's a word for that...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.3.7  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.6    3 weeks ago
Now we actually have BOTH Traitor Joe and Trump do the  same thing and only one is facing charges.  There's a word for that...

The Hur report specifically says they were not the same thing. Back to the drawing board for you. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.3.7    3 weeks ago

What we have is Hur making the unprofessional claim that he's incompetent to stand trial.  No competency hearing, no medical professional examination.  Really no different than your unprofessional (and unfounded claims) about Trump.

And yes, they are the same thing.  Both removed classified materials.  Both moved classified materials.  Both neglected to return them in a timely manner.  They are the same.  But you and those like yourself willfully ignore all of that.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.9  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.6    3 weeks ago
Now we actually have BOTH Traitor Joe and Trump do the  same thing and only one is facing charges. 

Amazing.   You take a clear explanation, quote it, and then pen a response that shows absolutely no understanding of what you quoted.

Prior to this both Trump and Biden had illegal possession of classified documents.   So they were 'the same' already if one disregards all other factors.

Disregarding all other factors is simply confirmation bias.   It is fooling oneself.   It is intellectual dishonesty.   It is also a profoundly stupid argument.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.3.10  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.9    3 weeks ago

It is a waste of time. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.3.11  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.4    3 weeks ago

The amount of hoops some are willing to jump through to defend Brandon is sickening.

Brandon didn't have any right to take classified documents as a Senator- zip, zero, none nada. Unless he personally classified documents as VP he had no right to take or declassify documents. 

Brandon willingly didn't return anything. The classified documents were stumbled upon while he was president; and knowing the shit storm his administration had unleashed by calling for the raid on Mar-a-Lago his handlers rushed to try and gather them up. They used people that didn't have authority to even view them to find them (talk about the height of hypocrisy); and did such a shitty job the FBI found even more when they were forced to search Brandon's residences.

There is no chain of custody for the classified documents; they were not stored in a secured location under armed guard; and they were just as in a disorganized mess as Trump's. Brandon's garage proves it.

 there would be no legal actions taken against Trump.   The public might have never known he had classified documents.

Bullshit. Go back and look at the timeline- the leaks to the media negate your point. 

Bottom line Brandon broke the fucking law; and should be charged to the full extent of it. But Hur pulled a Comey and let Brandon off. Garland chose his patsy well when he appointed Hur.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.3.12  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.9    3 weeks ago
So they were 'the same' already if one disregards all other factors.

So if neither one is charged with illegally having documents they shouldn't then all the other factors go away.  It is hard to say Trump obstructed much of anything if there is no issue that he had the documents in the first place.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.3.13  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.9    3 weeks ago

Seems that is all some have to offer - 'a profoundly stupid argument', and debating certain folks, as John says, 'it is a waste of time'.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.3.14  Right Down the Center  replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.11    3 weeks ago
The amount of hoops some are willing to jump through to defend Brandon is sickening.

The pretzel logic is fun to watch though.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.15  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.11    3 weeks ago
Brandon didn't have any right to take classified documents as a Senator-

Correct.   Where do you read where I stated otherwise?   You did not!  You, as usual, have put forth a dishonest strawman.

Brandon willingly didn't return anything.

A flat out lie.   Biden (your use of Brandon is childish) did not engage in any obstruction.   He cooperated with the return of documents.

There is no chain of custody for the classified documents;

Again a strawman since I have not claimed otherwise.  

Go back and look at the timeline- the leaks to the media negate your point. 

Trump was playing games with the authorities for many months.   Had he simply returned the documents, he would not have been in any trouble and likely would have never been news.   It was Trump's intentionally delays that lengthened the process and made leaks more likely.

Bottom line Brandon broke the fucking law; and should be charged to the full extent of it. 

It is true that Biden broke the law.   Technically he could be charged.   But you are pretending (and this is just pathetic) that Trump did nothing more than Biden.   That is demonstrably false.   Biden cooperated while Trump obstructed.   If Trump had cooperated like Biden, Trump would not be in trouble.   Trump's obstruction actions is the difference that solidly placed him well into criminality.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.16  TᵢG  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.3.12    3 weeks ago
So if neither one is charged with illegally having documents they shouldn't then all the other factors go away.  It is hard to say Trump obstructed much of anything if there is no issue that he had the documents in the first place.

Both Trump and Biden broke the law (this has been true from day one).   

Obstructing authorities from securing their safe return is thus a very significant issue.

Biden cooperated.   Trump obstructed.    That is the key difference.   This should be obvious.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.17  TᵢG  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.3.14    3 weeks ago
The pretzel logic is fun to watch though.

Illustrate the pretzel logic.

Be very clear.   Show where my logic is unsound and contradictory.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.3.18  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.16    3 weeks ago

If it wasn't a problem having them that it should be no problem that he didn't want to give them back.  This should be obvious.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.3.19  devangelical  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.17    3 weeks ago

I would never subject myself to risking that kind of brain damage, but this could be entertaining...

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.3.20  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.17    3 weeks ago
 Show where my logic is unsound and contradictory.

I was responding about "some"  people.  You have a guilty conscious?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.21  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.9    3 weeks ago
Amazing.   You take a clear explanation, quote it, and then pen a response that shows absolutely no understanding of what you quoted.

I understand every bit of it.  The problem is it's not what you want to hear, which is not my problem.  

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
2.3.22  Jasper2529  replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.11    3 weeks ago
Brandon willingly didn't return anything.

Correct. Some boxes of his classified documents that were recently discovered were clearly marked dating back to the 1970s when he was a senator.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.23  TᵢG  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.3.18    3 weeks ago

Given I have stated that it was against the law to hold the documents that means it was a problem to hold them.

Are you not aware of the Presidential Records Act?

Holding them is not itself criminal.   Obstructing their safe return is criminal.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.24  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.21    3 weeks ago

You present no argument, just illogical bullshit.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.25  TᵢG  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.3.20    3 weeks ago

Context speaks volumes.  

Okay, then you are not claiming that my logic is pretzel logic.   Just somebody else (unnamed).

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.26  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.24    3 weeks ago
[deleted]
 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.27  TᵢG  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.3.22    3 weeks ago

Trump obstructed the return of classified documents.

Biden cooperated in the return of classified documents.

If Biden had operated as Trump, he would have been indicted.

If Trump had operated as Biden, he would not have been indicted.

Cooperation vs. obstruction.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
2.3.28  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.4    3 weeks ago
"He engaged in obstruction and coerced others to hide documents from the authorities.   Trump crossed well passed the line into solid criminality."

Proof of such claims would be welcome.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.3.29  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @2.3.28    3 weeks ago

The former 'president' has provided ample proof of his crimes.  Your acknowledgement of reality would be welcome.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.30  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @2.3.28    3 weeks ago

I doubt proof would be welcome to you.   The proof will be the trial.   If Trump is found guilty, I expect you to deem the trial a fraud.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.3.31  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.24    3 weeks ago

That seems to be certain folks' only contribution(s) here.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.3.32  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.27    3 weeks ago

Then you should be calling for charges to be filed against Brandon's ghost author for destroying evidence and obstruction.

Mark Zwonitzer worked with Biden on two memoirs, 2007’s “Promises to Keep” and “Promise Me, Dad,” which was published 10 years later. According to a report released Thursday by   special counsel Robert Hur , Biden   was sloppy in his handling of classified material   found at his home and former office, and shared classified information contained in some of them with Zwonitzer while the two were working on the Biden’s second book. Hur’s report says no criminal charges are warranted against Biden. It says his office considered charging Zwonitzer with obstruction of justice because the ghostwriter destroyed recordings of interviews he conducted with Biden while they worked on his second memoir together once he learned of the documents investigation. But Hur also said Zwonitzer offered “plausible, innocent reasons” for having done so and cooperated with investigators subsequently, meaning the evidence against him was likely “insufficient to obtain a conviction.”

Demand Garland prosecute Zwonitzer.

Also Hur should be disbarred and sued for wasting tax payer money.

Pretty obvious he didn't want to hold anyone accountable.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.3.33  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @2.3.19    3 weeks ago

There's going to be an entire Psychiatric DSM dedicated to this mental illness.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.34  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.32    3 weeks ago
Then you should be calling for charges to be filed against Brandon's ghost author for destroying evidence and obstruction.

There is a big difference between evidence that is unlikely to obtain a conviction and that which is overwhelming.

Based on your apparent glee, surely you will now be willing to admit that Trump's classified documents case has merit.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.3.35  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.21    2 weeks ago

They just can't get it through their heads that Joe Biden "willfully retained classified material."  We knew they were never going to charge Biden. They had to come up with some shit reason. They claimed that a jury would sympathize with a forgetful old man. That is the reason they gave for not charging fucking Biden,

The only guy they would charge is Trump.

And we all know it!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.36  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.35    2 weeks ago
They just can't get it through their heads that Joe Biden "willfully retained classified material." 

The problem Vic is that you refuse to recognize the difference.

Even if Biden willfully retained classified material (very bad!), he cooperated in the return.   He did not obstruct.

Trump obstructed the return of classified documents.   

Cooperation vs. obstruction.   Big difference.   Just suppress the bias and think critically.

If Trump had returned the documents when asked, he would not have been indicted and we probably would not even know he had taken them.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.37  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.35    2 weeks ago
They just can't get it through their heads that Joe Biden "willfully retained classified material."

Denial is a hard habit to break.

Of course he willfully did it going all the way back to his Senate days.

And the very best liberals can come up with is "But Trump" crapola--as if THAT excuses Biden's own actions.

Traitor Joe is unfit for office and no one should ever vote for him again. He is not good for America.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.38  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.15    2 weeks ago
Technically he could be charged.

But because he has a "D" after his name, you, et all, are absolutely fine with letting him off the hook.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.39  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.36    2 weeks ago
He did not obstruct.

In a way he did.

He has had much of the documentation for up to 40 years. Are you going to tell us he did not know he had such documentation over those 40+ years. He had 40+ years to return such documentation, but he did not, thus, he obstructed in returning them.

Trump had the documents for a little over 1 year and was in negotiation for returning them, even the FBI went as far as to request he add a second lock to the room they were in , which he did.

You are right it is not comparable. Biden has been a criminal, outside of his bribery, for over 40 years, a lot longer than what you perceive Trump as being a criminal.

Just as much a criminal charge as Trump.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.3.40  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.36    2 weeks ago
The problem Vic is that you refuse to recognize the difference.

The problem TiG is that you refuse to recognize the double standard.


Even if Biden willfully retained classified material (very bad!), he cooperated in the return.   He did not obstruct.

That is still enough to be charged and the report confirms that.


Trump obstructed the return of classified documents.   

That is debatable. Other presidents have had little problem KEEPING such documents. How do you explain that. Why should Donald Trump, the people's representative, be different? 


Cooperation vs. obstruction.   Big difference.

Republican as opposed to a dirty D. Big difference. A double standard we have seen since Comey fudged an investigation to let Hillary Clinton walk.


 Just suppress the bias and think critically.

Quite a suggestion coming from you.


If Trump had returned the documents when asked, he would not have been indicted 

FALSE. Let me fix it for you: If Trump said, "I'm not running again," he wouldn't be seeing any indictments.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.41  bugsy  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.40    2 weeks ago
If Trump said, "I'm not running again," he wouldn't be seeing any indictments.

Biggest truth telling today.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.3.42  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @2.3.37    2 weeks ago
Of course he willfully did it going all the way back to his Senate days.

Which means he doesn't have the same claims over classification that Trump has.


And the very best liberals can come up with is "But Trump" crapola--as if THAT excuses Biden's own actions.

Biden underscored the commentary in the report with his press conference right after the report was released. It was a disaster and the people saw how mentally challenged he was. That had to be followed by another press conference with what could best be described as a communication/ propaganda expert by the name of Ian Sams. The people have it now and as we heard on "This Week" this morning, the polls indicate the coming election looks more like 2016 than 2020.


Traitor Joe is unfit for office and no one should ever vote for him again.

Hopefully he will be defeated in November. After that I wish him all the worst.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.43  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.40    2 weeks ago
The problem TiG is that you refuse to recognize the double standard.

The problem is that you have contrived a double standard.   Trump was given all sorts of leeway.  They treated him with kid gloves and allowed him to drag this on for months.   You ignore all the deference given to Trump and focus strictly on the consequences of his ongoing refusal to cooperate.

If Trump had simply cooperated in the safe return of the classified documents, we would likely not even know he had them.

That is still enough to be charged and the report confirms that.

Yes, Vic, he could be charged if he willfully kept them.   And as I have stated, Trump could have been charged merely by his willful holding of classified documents.   But Trump would have not been charged had he cooperated.

That [Trump obstructed the return of classified documents] is debatable.

There is no reasoning with someone who denies that Trump obstructed the return of classified documents.

FALSE. Let me fix it for you: If Trump said, "I'm not running again," he wouldn't be seeing any indictments.

Again, you ignore all the deference given to Trump for months and deem the consequences of his failure to cooperate and acts of obstruction to be simply political.   It is more conspiratorial 'thinking'.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
2.3.44  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.40    2 weeks ago
FALSE. Let me fix it for you: If Trump said, "I'm not running again," he wouldn't be seeing any indictments.

Bullshit. 

The investigations on all of his charges were underway when he announced his candidacy. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
2.3.45  Jasper2529  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.36    2 weeks ago
Even if Biden willfully retained classified material (very bad!), he cooperated in the return.   He did not obstruct.

Biden retained classified documents since he was a lucid US senator and VP. Why didn't he return them in the 1970s - 2000s? One box in a photo was clearly marked "1979". I find it hard to believe that, as a lawyer and elected official, he didn't know that what he did for 30+ years was illegal.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.46  Texan1211  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.3.45    2 weeks ago

Biden is pure as the driven snow, don't ya know?

And if he DID anything wrong, it is to be forgiven and swept under the rug because he is a Democrat. 

That's the type of deluded thinking we are dealing with here.

And even if it is admitted that Biden did wrong, it doesn't matter as they will STILL vote for him.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.47  TᵢG  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.3.45    2 weeks ago
I find it hard to believe that, as a lawyer and elected official, he didn't know that what he did for 30+ years was illegal.

One can speculate forever.   So go with the hypothetical I offered.

Assume that Biden willingly kept classified documents.    That is against the law and he could be prosecuted if there is an argument of bad intent.   It is clearly wrong regardless.

Biden cooperated with the return of the documents.   He did not try to obstruct the return;  he did the opposite.

If Trump had done as Biden did (Trump willfully (by his own words) kept the documents), Trump would have had no issues.   The documents would have been secured and likely nobody would even have known he had them.    Nobody would have raised charges on Trump if he had merely cooperated in the return of the documents.

But Trump did not do that.   The government granted him all sorts of leeway and deference.   He just keep delaying for months and then in the end began to actually obstruct the return of those documents.   

Biden cooperated.   Trump obstructed.   

Trump brought this on himself.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.48  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.3.46    2 weeks ago
Biden is pure as the driven snow, don't ya know?

As usual, I made no such comment.   Not even a hint.   I have stated repeatedly that Biden willfully keeping classified documents is wrong and arguably criminal.

Endless bullshit in lieu of an actual argument.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
2.3.49  Jasper2529  replied to  Texan1211 @2.3.46    2 weeks ago
Biden is pure as the driven snow, don't ya know?

Of course he is. He told us that his administration is the most transparent in history, and I certainly believe him. /s

And if he DID anything wrong, it is to be forgiven and swept under the rug because he is a Democrat. 

Americans are constantly told that we do not have a two-tiered justice system, but I'm still waiting for evidence.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
2.3.50  Jasper2529  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.47    2 weeks ago
Biden cooperated with the return of the documents.   He did not try to obstruct the return;  he did the opposite.

Only when it was discovered in 2023 that he'd had classified docs since the 1970s in several unsecured locations did he (or his handlers) decide to return them.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.51  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.48    2 weeks ago
As usual, I made no such comment.   Not even a hint.   I have stated repeatedly that Biden willfully keeping classified documents is wrong and arguably criminal. Endless bullshit in lieu of an actual argument.

As usual, you didn't read my post. I never said YOU made ANY comment at all.

Strawman.

It is indeed bullshit in lieu of rational argument.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.52  TᵢG  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.3.50    2 weeks ago
Only when it was discovered that he'd had classified docs since the 1970s in several unsecured locations.

Does not matter.    What matters is what Biden did upon discovery.

Do you recognize that Biden cooperated and Trump DID NOT?   That Trump even went so far as to obstruct the investigation?

If Trump had cooperated as Biden did, he would have had no problems.   Do you recognize that?

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
2.3.53  Jasper2529  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.52    2 weeks ago
Do you recognize that Biden cooperated and Trump DID NOT? 
  • Did you recognize that Trump was POTUS when he took those documents and that they were guarded by Secret Service?
  • Did you recognize that ALL modern day presidents took classified documents and as POTUS had the authority to declassify?
  • Did you recognize that Biden took those classified documents as senator and VP and did NOT have authority to keep them or declassify? 

I can play this game all day, dude.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.54  Texan1211  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.3.49    2 weeks ago

You know its a pretty weak argument when it includes any variation of the now infamous "But Trump" line.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.55  TᵢG  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.3.53    2 weeks ago
I can play this game all day, dude.

The difference is that I am not playing a game 'dude'.   Get serious.

Did you recognize that Trump was POTUS when he took those documents and that they were guarded by Secret Service?

That makes absolutely no difference under the law.   Trump was in violation of the PRA by taking and holding the documents.   

Did you recognize that ALL modern day presidents took classified documents and as POTUS had the authority to declassify?

It does not matter unless the PotUS actually declassified the documents.   And even then, they are not to be removed when he is out of office. 

Did you recognize that Biden took those classified documents as senator and VP and did NOT have authority to keep them or declassify? 

Yes, how many times must I write that Biden had no right to take those documents before it sinks in?    Neither Trump nor Biden had the right to hold those documents.


Trump obstructed.   Biden cooperated.   That is the profound legal difference.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.56  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.55    2 weeks ago
That makes absolutely no difference under the law. Trump was in violation of the PRA by taking and holding the documents.

And yet Biden wasn't?... weak

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.57  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.56    2 weeks ago
And yet Biden wasn't?... weak

What is weak is you making a strawman argument.   

I have stated repeatedly that Biden had no right to those documents.   

Most recent statement:

TiG@2.3.48I have stated repeatedly that Biden willfully keeping classified documents is wrong and arguably criminal.
TiG@2.3.55 Yes, how many times must I write that Biden had no right to take those documents before it sinks in?    Neither Trump nor Biden had the right to hold those documents.
 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.58  Texan1211  replied to  GregTx @2.3.56    2 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.59  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.57    2 weeks ago

I don't think it's a strawman.

arguably criminal.

Is that a watered down way of saying he was in violation of the PRA?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.60  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.59    2 weeks ago

No, Greg, the PRA does not involve criminality.

Criminality gets into 18 USC § 1924.    That then requires getting into legal specifics such as intent.   

I say arguably because I think a criminal case could be made against Biden if evidence shows that he willingly and knowingly intended to keep classified documents without proper authorization.

And again, Trump did this and then went beyond by failing to cooperate and then, much worse, engaging in obstruction.   If Trump had cooperated in the safe return of the documents (even though he willingly and knowingly intended to keep classified documents without proper authorization), he would have not been charged.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.61  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.60    2 weeks ago

I see, so the only difference you see in these two cases is that Trump obstructed and Biden cooperated?

Willful retention of national defense information

False statements and representations

Conspiracy to obstruct justice

Withholding a document or record

Corruptly concealing a document or record

Concealing a document in a federal investigation

Scheme to conceal

Altering, destroying, mutilating, or concealing an object

Corruptly altering, destroying, mutilating, or concealing a document, record, or other object

So none of these charges could apply in both cases?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.62  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.60    2 weeks ago
if evidence shows that he willingly and knowingly intended to keep classified documents without proper authorization.

Do you think taking classified information out of a SCIF and taking to your house shows intent?

If you agree this is true then you would also have to agree that he willingly did not return them, nor did he intend to, as evidenced by having many of those documents since early in his Senator years.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.63  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.61    2 weeks ago
The fundamental difference is that Trump obstructed and Biden cooperated.

Cooperation, especially by high-ranking individuals such as presidents and vice-presidents, will lead to a clean resolution of the problem.   The documents will be confiscated and properly safe-guarded.    End of story.

We saw how much deference and patience was given to Trump for months as he played delay games with the classified documents.   They cut him all sorts of slack and he just kept pushing the envelope.

Clearly, if Trump would have just cooperated this would have ended with no criminal charges and likely quietly (not being made public).

Willful, knowledgeable intent to take and hold classified documents is criminal.  But as with all things, judgment comes into play.   If one can attribute the technical criminal acts as no intent to do harm, it is very likely that no prosecution would ensue.   But when someone goes to the next step and tries to obstruct the safe return of documents, they have now crossed the line into solid criminality.

Trump crossed that line, substantially.   Biden, in contrast, cooperated.    Fundamental difference.


Willful retention of national defense information

False statements and representations

Conspiracy to obstruct justice

Withholding a document or record

Corruptly concealing a document or record

Concealing a document in a federal investigation

Scheme to conceal

Altering, destroying, mutilating, or concealing an object

Corruptly altering, destroying, mutilating, or concealing a document, record, or other object

As noted, I think Biden could be found to have willfully retained classified documents.   False statements and representations might apply if they can show Biden deliberately lied.  

As for the rest, make your case.

And note, that all of these apply to Trump.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.64  GregTx  replied to  bugsy @2.3.62    2 weeks ago

Ahh but as TiG made note of.....

(b)For purposes of this section, the provision of documents and materials to the Congress shall not constitute an offense under subsection (a).

Interesting, no?..

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.65  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @2.3.62    2 weeks ago
Do you think taking classified information out of a SCIF and taking to your house shows intent?

Intent to do what?   Be specific.   If he knew he had classified documents then he certainly would have the intent to hold classified documents.   That alone is arguably criminal.   But the level of criminality now depends on the actual intent.

If you agree this is true then you would also have to agree that he willingly did not return them, nor did he intend to, as evidenced by having many of those documents since early in his Senator years.

If Biden knew that he had classified documents then he is at fault.   Apparently you have not read or do not understand what I have written in this thread.  


And when all is said and done, the fundamental difference remains that Biden cooperated and Trump obstructed.   If Trump had cooperated, he would not be facing criminal charges on the classified documents case.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.66  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.64    2 weeks ago
Interesting, no?..

What is the 'interesting' aspect?   The PRA was designed to ensure presidential records are properly secured when a PotUS (and VP) leave office.   It was not intended to be criminal but rather intended to ensure sensitive information was properly secured.

All Trump had to do was cooperate and execution of the PRA would have secured the documents and we would have end of story.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.67  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.63    2 weeks ago
Willful retention of national defense information

False statements and representations

Conspiracy to obstruct justice

Withholding a document or record

Corruptly concealing a document or record

Concealing a document in a federal investigation

Scheme to conceal

Altering, destroying, mutilating, or concealing an object

Corruptly altering, destroying, mutilating, or concealing a document, record, or other object

1. Took classified documents out of a SCIF, something that is criminal

2. Nothing has been reported, so can't make a case

3. Keeping classified documents in your home, office, garage, and other places, shows you have no intent to return,

4. Biden did that multiple times since the 70s

5. See number 4

6. We were told several times that documents that were found were all of them, then oops, there was more

7. Hiding them in your office, garage , etc is concealing

8. According to the Hur report, many of the documents in the broken up box in the garage had damaged documents.

9. See number 4

Plenty there to charge, but, alas....a D did it, so no harm, no foul

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.68  Texan1211  replied to  bugsy @2.3.67    2 weeks ago
alas....a D did it, so no harm, no foul

Now you're catching on.

jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.69  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.65    2 weeks ago
Intent to do what?

Steal the documents. You don't just walk out of a SCIF with documents without concealing them in some way.

"the fundamental difference remains that Biden cooperated"

Only because he got busted having them. If he did not get busted, he had no intent on returning them.; This cannot be argued any other way.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.70  Texan1211  replied to  bugsy @2.3.69    2 weeks ago

What is alarming is these docs can go missing for a decade or more and no one even knows it.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.71  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @2.3.67    2 weeks ago
Plenty there to charge, but, alas....a D did it, so no harm, no foul

That is partisan bullshit.  

Your arguments would be laughed out of court.   You translate knowingly holding documents as obstruction.  You translate storage of documents as concealment.  You translate damage to documents as intentional damage.

There is no way any prosecutor would bring those charges based on the evidence.   Your legal analysis is a fantasy.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.72  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.3.70    2 weeks ago
What is alarming is these docs can go missing for a decade or more and no one even knows it.

A very good point.    Nice to see.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.73  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @2.3.69    2 weeks ago
Steal the documents. You don't just walk out of a SCIF with documents without concealing them in some way.

You are making a lot of assumptions.   We do not even know the nature of the documents, the history of how they came into Biden's hands, etc.   I guess you can dream that legal experts have the evidence and think the same way you do.   (Don't get your hopes up.)

Only because he got busted having them. If he did not get busted, he had no intent on returning them.; This cannot be argued any other way.

Irrelevant.   When discovered, Biden cooperated.   When discovered, Trump did NOT cooperate and then after months, obstructed.

Trump brought his legal woes on himself.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.74  Texan1211  replied to  GregTx @2.3.64    2 weeks ago

An argument could be made about Biden's mental faculties since he didn't remember even having the documents.

Doesn't say much about him, does it?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.75  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.73    2 weeks ago
You are making a lot of assumptions

As are you.

"We do not even know the nature of the documents,"

It has been reported multiple times that they were classified, with some even SCI level. Read Hur's report and you will see.

"the history of how they came into Biden's hands"

Do you think Trump hand carried out the documents that were in his house?  If you do, then you should believe the same about Biden. Either way, it doesn't matter. It is Biden's home, he is responsible for what is in it. You can slightly make your argument about the documents at the Penn center.

"(Don't get your hopes up."

Nice taunt

"When discovered, Biden cooperated"

Irrelevent. He was probably told by his handlers that it would be his best interest to give them up. If nothing was said to him or not leaked to the press, then the documents would still be in his house.

I just don't see how someone can defend Biden as much as what is going on here.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.3.76  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.71    2 weeks ago
You translate storage of documents as concealment. 

Because it is true. He stole the documents, took them to his house, and put them in a box in his garage. Concealment

"You translate damage to documents as intentional damage."

If they were stored properly, ie, in the archives, they would not have been damaged.

"There is no way any prosecutor would bring those charges based on the evidence. "

Robert Mueller, is that you?

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.77  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.63    2 weeks ago
The fundamental difference is that Trump obstructed and Biden cooperated.

I agree, yet fundamentally the law is the same for both.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.78  TᵢG  replied to  bugsy @2.3.75    2 weeks ago
As are you.

Wrong.   My comments are based on available evidence.

It has been reported multiple times that they were classified, ...

There are many levels of classified documents.   We do not know the nature of these documents.

Do you think Trump hand carried out the documents that were in his house?  

Irrelevant.   As I have stated, the knowing possession of the documents is criminal.  But the details will determine the severity.

Again, Biden cooperated while Trump obstructed.   Had Trump cooperated, he would have had no legal issues here.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.79  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.77    2 weeks ago
I agree, yet fundamentally the law is the same for both.

I have been quite clear in speaking of the law.   So what are you trying to say here?

Biden did not obstruct, he cooperated.   Trump obstructed.   The law is the same but the actions of these two men are different.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.80  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.78    2 weeks ago
We do not know the nature of these documents.

Have you not read the special counsels report?

Irrelevant. As I have stated, the knowing possession of the documents is criminal.

I thought you stated that violation of the PRA wasn't criminal?

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.81  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.79    2 weeks ago
Biden did not obstruct, he cooperated. Trump obstructed. The law is the same but the actions of these two men are different.

I see, so application of the law is dependent on the men involved?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.82  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.80    2 weeks ago
I thought you stated that violation of the PRA wasn't criminal?

This was a reply to you:

TiG@2.3.60 ☞ No, Greg, the PRA does not involve criminality.  Criminality gets into 18 USC § 1924.    That then requires getting into legal specifics such as intent.   

It is knowing possession that opens the door to laws such as 18 USC § 1924.   But the likelihood of charging someone with a crime is based heavily on intent ... determined based on the evidence of the case.

The PRA is not criminal and you can bet that every PotUS who has documents in their possession related to their office (and this in violation) will be handled using the PRA and will not immediately trigger legal proceedings on 18 USC § 1924.

Unless, of course, they do not cooperate ... and especially if they obstruct.

Trump's actions took him out of the realm of the PRA and into the realm of criminality.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.83  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.81    2 weeks ago
I see, so application of the law is dependent on the men involved?

Clearly you do not see.

The men are irrelevant, it is the circumstances and the behavior of the men that matters.

If Trump had behaved as Biden did, he would not have been indicted.

If Biden had behaved as Trump did, he would have been indicted.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.84  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.83    2 weeks ago
The men are irrelevant, it is the circumstances and the behavior of the men that matters.

I think that's ridiculous. It's the law that matters in my opinion. 

If Biden had behaved as Trump did, he would have been indicted.

Mmmmkay....

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.85  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.84    2 weeks ago
It's the law that matters in my opinion. 

Yes, Greg, we are talking about the law.   Adjudication involves the law and the specific circumstances and actions of the case.

It is illegal to kill someone.   There are many laws on the books.   The adjudication depends on the specific circumstances and actions of the case.

Surely you understand this.   Well, same with classified documents.   Law + circumstances + actions are what determine legal actions.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.86  Texan1211  replied to  GregTx @2.3.84    2 weeks ago

let's just say Biden is too feebleminded to remember taking the docs and possessing them for years.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.87  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.85    2 weeks ago

K, too feeble-minded?...

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.88  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.87    2 weeks ago
K, too feeble-minded?...

Vague nonsense.

Adjudication involves the law, the circumstances, and the actions.

  • When a crime is involved, the specific laws alleged to be broken are identified.
  • The attorneys from both sides make their cases using evidence and legal arguments.  
  • The legal arguments describe the circumstances and actions and make respective arguments in the context of same.
  • The judge ensures proper legal protocols are followed.
  • The jury makes its decision about the circumstances and actions in light of the law based on the evidence and the arguments.

If Biden engaged in the same circumstances and behaved as Trump did, Biden would be facing criminal charges.

If Trump had engaged in the same circumstances and behaved as Biden did, Trump would not be indicted in his handling of classified documents.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.89  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.88    2 weeks ago
If Biden engaged in the same circumstances and behaved as Trump did, Biden would be facing criminal charges. If Trump had engaged in the same circumstances and behaved as Biden did, Trump would not be indicted in his handling of classified documents.

I think I see where you're coming from now. In your world partisanry doesn't happen, right?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.90  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.89    2 weeks ago
In your world partisanry doesn't happen, right?

That question suggests that you believe partisan dynamics determines adjudication.   Our legal system is a farce ... no better than a banana Republic?

Partisanship influences most everything.   And that includes our legal processes.   But you take this to the next level and actually imply that Trump would have been indicted even if he cooperated.   That is a cynical denial of reality.

On May 6, 2021 NARA asked Trump to return missing documents.   They worked (with deference and kid gloves) with Trump for 15 months as he continued to NOT cooperate.   This culminated in the Aug 8, 2022 execution of the search warrant.

15 months to get back the full set of documents and Trump did not cooperate.   The documents were finally taken by force.

15 months trying to gently get the documents back to safety, but you somehow think that if Trump had behaved like Biden and cooperatively returned the documents that he would have been indicted.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.3.91  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.90    2 weeks ago
15 months

Out of how many years of precedent?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.92  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.3.91    2 weeks ago

I just noted that the government attempted to work with Trump, granting him all sorts of deference, for 15 months.   That illustrates that the intent was NOT to bring criminal charges but rather to secure the documents and end it.

Your question is a non-sequitur so you will need to be clearer if you expect people to understand whatever point you are trying to make.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.93  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.35    2 weeks ago
They just can't get it through their heads that Joe Biden "willfully retained classified material." 

And some of this classified material he should not have had access to.  God forbid we look at the WHOLE SITUATION.  Not only did he willfully take it, he moved it around as well. 

We knew they were never going to charge Biden.

Without a doubt.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.94  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.36    2 weeks ago
Even if Biden willfully retained classified material (very bad!), he cooperated in the return.

He had this stuff for years.  Why don't you all acknowledge that?

 he cooperated in the return.

Only after he was caught.  Why don't you all acknowledge that?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.95  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.94    2 weeks ago
He had this stuff for years.  Why don't you all acknowledge that?

Yes, Biden had the documents for years.   The duration has absolutely nothing to do with the law.

Only after he was caught.  Why don't you all acknowledge that?

Yes, after the documents were discovered, Biden fully cooperated.   Trump, however, did NOT cooperate for 15 months at which point the documents were seized from Mar-a-Lago.   After that he continued to insist that he had the right to the documents.    Worse, Trump obstructed the efforts to retrieve the documents.

Now let's see you acknowledge the profound difference between the two cases:  Biden cooperated, Trump obstructed.


Any other obvious, irrelevant facts you need me to acknowledge?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.3.96  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.95    2 weeks ago

Try to get past the “Trump bad” component.    The operant point is:  Both handled classified materials poorly and likely illegally.     Both are equally guilty of same and should dealt with equally from a legal standpoint on that point.

Do you believe that is what’s happening right now?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.3.97  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.52    2 weeks ago
What matters is what Biden did upon discovery.

Biden removed files improperly both as a Senator and Vice President. He held some of them for the better part of 14 years without a word to authorities. 
 In 2017 Biden was fully aware that he had wrongly removed these classified files. As Hur noted: there is a taped conversation on record between Biden and his ghostwriter. Biden, at home in Virginia, was recorded as remarking,
“I just found all the classified stuff downstairs”. And yet Biden apparently did nothing.

He never came forward to any federal authorities for nearly the next five years.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.98  Texan1211  replied to  Sparty On @2.3.96    2 weeks ago
Try to get past the “Trump bad” component.

That may not be possible.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.99  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.95    2 weeks ago

I ask you a question and in response all I see is you making pathetic excuses for the incompetency of Biden.  

When you are done playing childish partisan games, we'll talk.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.100  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Sparty On @2.3.96    2 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.101  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.99    2 weeks ago

You asked two questions and I answered both of them.

How stupid do you think readers are?   My direct answers @2.3.95 are blatantly obvious yet here you are lying about what I wrote.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.102  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.101    2 weeks ago
You asked two questions and I answered both of them.

In 2.3.95 your gave pathetic excuses.  You  didn't answer a damn thing.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.103  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.97    2 weeks ago
Biden removed files improperly both as a Senator and Vice President. He held some of them for the better part of 14 years without a word to authorities.  In 2017 Biden was fully aware that he had wrongly removed these classified files. As Hur noted: there is a taped conversation on record between Biden and his ghostwriter. Biden, at home in Virginia, was recorded as remarking, “I just found all the classified stuff downstairs”. And yet Biden apparently did nothing.He never came forward to any federal authorities for nearly the next five years.

The amount of time holding documents is not a factor in the law.   Holding them for one second or one century makes no difference.

So what are you trying to argue?   I have already stated that if Biden knowingly held classified documents then he committed a crime. 

Biden (and Trump and Pence) could be charged with 18 USC § 1924 (as an example).   Note that intent is a factor here too.

So if Biden and Trump and Pence knowingly took classified documents without authorization then they could be charged with a crime such as violation of 18 USC § 1924.

Note that Trump and Pence have NOT been charged with violation of 18 USC § 1924.    Trump's charges deal with his obstruction rather than the mere possession of classified documents.

If Trump had simply cooperated with NARA and allowed the safe return of the documents (rather than NOT cooperate and obstruct for 15 months and then continue to claim he had the right to hold those documents thereafter), he would have not been indicted.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.104  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.3.102    2 weeks ago

I answered both of your questions with 'Yes' and then qualified my answers for clarity.

You again have lied about what I wrote.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.3.105  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.104    2 weeks ago

_v=63f541705258373

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.106  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @2.3.96    2 weeks ago
The operant point is:  Both handled classified materials poorly and likely illegally.     Both are equally guilty of same and should dealt with equally from a legal standpoint on that point.

If Biden knowingly held the documents then on the count of illegal possession, both he and Trump would be equally at fault.    It would then be possible to bring forth a law such as 18 USC § 1924 and charge both with a crime.

What you refuse to recognize is that Trump went well beyond this.   Not only did he knowingly and willingly possess the documents, he obstructed their return.

Biden cooperated, Trump obstructed.   Trump's criminal charges deal primarily with his obstruction, not his possession.    Thus if Trump had simply cooperated (as Biden did), he would not be facing criminal charges for his handling of classified documents.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.3.107  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.106    2 weeks ago
Biden cooperated, Trump obstructed.

Irrelevant to the main issue at play here.   Both are responsible for proper and legal handling of those documents.   Ignorance of the law is no excuse and does not excuse illegal behavior.

Any supposition that Biden is somehow excused from or less guilty of illegal behavior because he cooperated is simply obtuse.    That might get one some sentencing consideration over the other but that’s about it.

This is a kangaroo court against Trump.    Nothing more, nothing less.   And Biden “skating” so far because he simply cooperated just solidifies that thought.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.108  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @2.3.107    2 weeks ago
Irrelevant to the main issue at play here.

No, Sparty, it is the key distinguishing factor.   

Both are responsible for proper and legal handling of those documents.

You write this as if I have argued to the contrary.   Did you even read what I wrote?

Any supposition that Biden is somehow excused from or less guilty of illegal behavior because he cooperated is simply obtuse.

Yet again, you illustrate a failure to read what I wrote.

I stated that Biden, Trump, and Pence would all be equally guilty of willful possession of classified documents if they all knew they had same.   So that is the equality part.

The part where Trump breaks from the pack and distinguishes himself is his obstruction.   Both Biden and Pence cooperated.   Trump did NOT cooperate and then went to the point of obstructing the safe return of the documents.

Do you recognize that Trump obstructed?   Do you recognize that his obstruction is the foundation of his indictment?   If not, you do not understand what is taking place here.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.109  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.97    2 weeks ago
Biden, at home in Virginia, was recorded as remarking, “I just found all the classified stuff downstairs”. And yet Biden apparently did nothing.

Facts have no relevance to the Biden defenders here.

Of course Biden took the items. Of course he held them, some of them for YEARS. Of course he had no intention of returning them or he WOULD HAVE DONE SO.

Excuses can be made and comparisons to Trump can be made, but it is all just deflecting from Biden.

Trump doesn't have one damn thing to do with Biden's actions no matter how hard it gets spun.

One day there will be an article specifically about Biden and folks will not talk about Trump, but probably not in our lifetimes. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Participates
2.3.110  1stwarrior  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.108    2 weeks ago

So, understand me this - Trump is a Repub - Biden is a Liberal/Dem - Clinton is a Liberal/Dem - why is Trump being castigated and the other two were/will be be given $200 Get outta Jail Free card???

James Comey said “one of the mistakes I made” in connection to the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server was his choice of words.

“I should've worked harder to find a way to convey that it's more than just the ordinary mistake, but it's not criminal behavior, and find different words to describe that,” Comey said.

Comey said people may occasionally “mishandle” a classified document, but he described the former secretary of state’s use of emails as “really sloppy.”

“This was over the course of four years, dozens of conversations on email about secret topics,” Comey said of Clinton’s handling of emails. “And I think eight about top secret topics…. So if I'm gonna be honest, I have to say somehow it's more than ordinary sloppiness.”

Andrew Weissman, who served on special counsel Robert Mueller’s team, said Thursday on MSNBC that Hur’s decision to lodge criticisms of Biden’s memory problems was “gratuitous” and reminded him of when former FBI Director James Comey held a news conference criticizing Hillary Clinton in the months before the 2016 election.

“This is not being charged. And yet a person goes out and gives their opinion with adjectives and adverbs about what they think, entirely inappropriate,” he said. “I think a really fair criticism of this is, unfortunately, we’re seeing a redux of what we saw with respect to James Comey at the FBI with respect to Hillary Clinton in terms of really not adhering to what I think are the highest ideals of the Department of Justice.”

Simple fact - if you're a Dem/Lib, DOJ ain't gonna touch you.

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
2.3.111  George  replied to  1stwarrior @2.3.110    2 weeks ago
So, understand me this - Trump is a Repub - Biden is a Liberal/Dem - Clinton is a Liberal/Dem - why is Trump being castigated and the other two were/will be be given $200 Get outta Jail Free card???

Well.....Hillary kills people and Biden is to senile to aid in his defense. that may be why.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.3.112  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.108    2 weeks ago
No, Sparty, it is the key distinguishing factor.   

Wrong, the legality of keeping classified files is the main factor at play here.    You can keep trying to spin it otherwise but that is all it is.    Spin.

You write this as if I have argued to the contrary.   Did you even read what I wrote?

Yet again, you illustrate a failure to read what I wrote.

I stated that Biden, Trump, and Pence would all be equally guilty of willful possession of classified documents if they all knew they had same.   So that is the equality part.

The part where Trump breaks from the pack and distinguishes himself is his obstruction.   Both Biden and Pence cooperated.   Trump did NOT cooperate and then went to the point of obstructing the safe return of the documents.

Do you recognize that Trump obstructed?   Do you recognize that his obstruction is the foundation of his indictment?   If not, you do not understand what is taking place here.

And you conveniently gloss over the fact that Trump is being hounded legally and Biden is not.    I see this much more clearly than many here.    Hanging your hat on obstruction as the main reason trump is being prosecuted, ignores the reason there’s obstruction in the first place.    Improper handling of documents.    And yet, only Trump is being held responsible.    Two tier justice, kangaroo court, etc, etc.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.113  Texan1211  replied to  Sparty On @2.3.112    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.114  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @2.3.112    2 weeks ago
Wrong, the legality of keeping classified files is the main factor at play here.

You do not seem to have an argument.   I have stated that willingly keeping classified documents is a criminal offense.   You seem to want to ignore the other criminal offenses of obstruction.

Yeah, only Trump obstructed so of course you want to sweep that under the rug.

And you conveniently gloss over the fact that Trump is being hounded legally and Biden is not.  

Yet again, you either fail to read what I have written or you will not comprehend it.

Real simple Sparty, look at the Trump indictment.   It is predominantly focused on obstruction, not possession.

If Trump had cooperated rather than obstructed, he would have not been indicted.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.3.115  TᵢG  replied to  1stwarrior @2.3.110    2 weeks ago
So, understand me this - Trump is a Repub - Biden is a Liberal/Dem - Clinton is a Liberal/Dem - why is Trump being castigated and the other two were/will be be given $200 Get outta Jail Free card???

In the classified documents case, Trump obstructed the return of classified documents.    Had he not done so, he would have not been indicted.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.116  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.104    2 weeks ago
I answered both of your questions with 'Yes' and then qualified my answers for clarity.

If you had read my questions you would see they aren't "yes" or "no" questions. [deleted]

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.3.117  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.115    2 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.3.118  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @2.3.114    2 weeks ago
You do not seem to have an argument.

Nah, you just don’t accept it as an argument which is a much different thing.

   I have stated that willingly keeping classified documents is a criminal offense.   You seem to want to ignore the other criminal offenses of obstruction.

Bullshit, I’ve denied no such thing but feel free to show me where I did.   You on the other hand seem to accept that Biden’s activity, which you admit is criminal, doesn’t deserve penalty but Trumps does simply because he obstructed.    Again, you can’t obstruct, if you did nothing criminal.

Yeah, only Trump obstructed so of course you want to sweep that under the rug.

Wrong and stop trying to put words in my mouth.

Yet again, you either fail to read what I have written or you will not comprehend it.

No failure on my part ……

Real simple Sparty, look at the Trump indictment.   It is predominantly focused on obstruction, not possession.

Which is the thing you don’t get.    Again, the indictment is BS because it looks past the illegal activity which obstruction comes from.    Improper handling of classified documents.   Both did it.    Both broke the law.   Only Trump is being tried on it.    Saying that’s just because of obstruction, is just more “resist” bullshit in the face of the law.

You can have the last word now though.    This conversation is going the usual circle jerk direction.   No interest here in that ….

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3  Texan1211    3 weeks ago

I wonder if this changes anyone's mind about Biden now?

ah, who am I kidding?

This will be met with a bunch of "but Trump" crapola.

Let's see people justify voting for Biden now!

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
3.1  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @3    3 weeks ago

More likely they will stay away from the topic altogether and the media will only focus on no charges.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
3.1.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Right Down the Center @3.1    2 weeks ago

No.  They'll try to spin it.  Anything to avoid admitting they are supporting an utter failure and incompetence.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @3.1.1    2 weeks ago
Anything to avoid admitting they are supporting an utter failure and incompetence

Well, in all fairness, they may feel they need to justify or rationalize their vote for Biden when he is clearly unfit.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
3.1.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.2    2 weeks ago

all that would do is admit their stupidity and culpability in all the problems that we see.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @3.1.3    2 weeks ago
all that would do is admit their stupidity and culpability in all the problems that we see.  

True enough.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
3.2  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Texan1211 @3    3 weeks ago
wonder if this changes anyone's mind about Biden now?

They're more than happy to keep exploiting him so long as they think they gain from it.  

 
 
 
Gazoo
Junior Silent
3.3  Gazoo  replied to  Texan1211 @3    3 weeks ago

I wonder if this changes anyone's mind about Biden now?”

They’ll deny it like they have for the past 8 years or so.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.3.1  Texan1211  replied to  Gazoo @3.3    2 weeks ago

nothing but a whole lot of But Trump 

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
4  George    3 weeks ago

At least with Kamala in charge of the border we have a good idea what the next 4 years might be like.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1  Texan1211  replied to  George @4    3 weeks ago
least with Kamala in charge of the border we have a good idea what the next 4 years might be like.

Probably a little worse than the last 3.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
5  afrayedknot    3 weeks ago

Let us hope that those closest to him will give him wise council. Let us hope that those considering the necessary political consequences think first about our country. And let us hope that those making it a personal affront will never have to endure the same scrutiny. Peace. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @5    3 weeks ago
Let us hope that those closest to him will give him wise 

That ship sailed a few years back.

we should be worried that Democrats will bamboozle their members into voting for him.

Now THAT would be tragic.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.2  cjcold  replied to  afrayedknot @5    3 weeks ago
Peace. 

Unfortunately, thanks to Trump, peace doesn't and will not exist in American politics for many years. Trump is a divider. Trump and his low IQ Fox fools thrive on hate of the "other".

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5.2    3 weeks ago

As do Biden and Democrats.

People living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
5.2.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @5.2    3 weeks ago

Exactly, it’s just like that here on NT.  The Trump supporters thrive on the open hatred that they continually display against anyone that respectfully disagrees while the Dem supporters meet that hate with charity and compassion for all in their comments.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
5.2.3  Right Down the Center  replied to  cjcold @5.2    3 weeks ago

What does that have to do with the article 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @5.2.3    3 weeks ago

Can you say "deflection"?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
5.2.5  Right Down the Center  replied to  cjcold @5.2    3 weeks ago
Trump is a divider.

Unlike those (including Joe) who spew MAGA MAGA MAGA all day long.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.2.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5.2.2    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Participates
5.2.7  Jasper2529  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5.2.2    3 weeks ago
Dem supporters meet that hate with charity and compassion for all in their comments.

To paraphrase what a Biden Marxist recently told me ... I hate everything about you because you disagree with me.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
5.2.8  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Jasper2529 @5.2.7    3 weeks ago

Probably just teasing you and didn’t really mean it.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
5.2.9  bugsy  replied to  cjcold @5.2    2 weeks ago
Trump and his low IQ Fox fools thrive on hate of the "other".

Says the guy that labels everyone slightly left of him a far right fascist.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
5.3  afrayedknot  replied to  afrayedknot @5    3 weeks ago

[removed] 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.3.1  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @5.3    3 weeks ago

thank you for your revealing post.

 
 
 
Gazoo
Junior Silent
5.3.2  Gazoo  replied to  afrayedknot @5.3    3 weeks ago

it is littered with morons at best, and is actually nothing short of toxic.”

i could not agree more.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.3.3  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  afrayedknot @5.3    3 weeks ago
Fuck this fucking place…it is littered with morons at best, and is actually nothing short of toxic.

No reason to be that mad at the people here who've spent years shilling for Biden and  refusing to admit what was obvious to everyone.  While they are guilty of enabling the charade, they aren't guilty of actual  elder abuse, like Biden's family and friends are. 

I, for one, hope someone cares enough for Biden the person  to get him the help he needs and let him enjoy his remaining time enjoying his grandkids and some peace and quiet. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.3.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.3.3    3 weeks ago
No reason to be that mad at the people here who've spent years shilling for Biden and  refusing to admit what was obvious to everyone.  While they are guilty of enabling the charade, they aren't guilty of actual  elder abuse, like Biden's family and friends are. 

Donald Trump tried to steal the 2020 election and it isnt even a close call. You have been refusing to admit that for over three years now. 

Donald Trump sat, doing and saying nothing , to anyone, while outmanned police were fighting with a much larger mob. This is not speculation or a guess, it is known fact from multiple testimonies from people who were there. 

refusing to admit might as well be your middle name

[This comment stands, as the seeder has responded to it.]

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.3.5  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.3.4    3 weeks ago

I’ve said since 2015 trump is unfit for office and never changed my opinion. I have no problem admitting that.

But thanks for the Perfect example of what I’m talking about. Biden could poop his pants and throw his feces at Schumer and you’d only  say “but trump…”

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.3.6  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.3.5    3 weeks ago

as long as Trump is the GOP nominee you have no case. 

end of story. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.3.7  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.3.5    3 weeks ago
I’ve said since 2015 trump is unfit for office

please show us your post where you called for him to drop out of the race, or be removed

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.3.8  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.3.7    3 weeks ago

I wish he would drop out. Happy?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.3.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.3.8    3 weeks ago
I wish he would drop out. Happy?

you have said, at least 50 times, that biden is senile.

if i pull your teeth you will say one time that you wish trump would drop out

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
5.3.10  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @5.3.9    3 weeks ago
you have said, at least 50 times, that biden is senile

Imagine some one here repeating themselves over and over.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
5.3.11  Right Down the Center  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.3.8    3 weeks ago

Until next time

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
5.3.12  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @5.3.6    3 weeks ago
as long as Trump is the GOP nominee you have no case.  end of story. 

After reading the article which only supports what everybody already knew 

as long as Biden is the DEM nominee you have no case. 

end of story. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.4  Tessylo  replied to  afrayedknot @5    3 weeks ago

You take this nonsense seriously?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.5  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @5    3 weeks ago
Let us hope that those closest to him will give him wise council.

They've been running this country....right into the ground.


Let us hope that those considering the necessary political consequences think first about our country.

Political consequences to what?  A free & fair election?


And let us hope that those making it a personal affront will never have to endure the same scrutiny. 

May they get half the protection Joe got!

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.5.1  Ronin2  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.5    3 weeks ago
Political consequences to what?  A free & fair election?

That ship has sailed. Democrats have ensured we will never have one of those again. 

May they get half the protection Joe got!

Good luck with that Garland/DOJ/Wray/FBI are looking to Jan 6th in the legal system anyone that even thinks about holding a Democrat accountable. Only Democrats may hold other Democrats accountable- and that is if the ever changing racial, gender, woke slide rule says they are part of a more offended minority.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.5.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ronin2 @5.5.1    3 weeks ago
Democrats have ensured we will never have one of those again. 

I fear that is true.


Good luck with that Garland/DOJ/Wray/FBI are looking to Jan 6th in the legal system anyone that even thinks about holding a Democrat accountable. Only Democrats may hold other Democrats accountable- and that is if the ever changing racial, gender, woke slide rule says they are part of a more offended minority.

Even democrats see it.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
6  Ronin2    3 weeks ago

Let me be perfectly blunt.

Hur just pulled a Comey and is letting Brandon off free and clear.

Democrats/leftists don't care if Brandon is a vegetable. If he is able to breath he is able to be their president.

They will claim Hur is not qualified to make a decision on Brandon's mental state. 

That Hur wasn't able to come up with a strong enough case against Brandon- and used the "“elderly man with a poor memory.” as an excuse to try and keep guilt on Brandon without filing charges.

Hur should have charged Brandon to the full damn extent of the law and forced a judge to declare Brandon legally incompetent to stand trial.

Hur has just completely reenforced the two tier justice system.

Another great waste of tax payer money to protect Democrats. Garland chose his patsy well.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
6.1  bugsy  replied to  Ronin2 @6    2 weeks ago
They will claim Hur is not qualified to make a decision on Brandon's mental state. 

The left is already calling for Biden to fire Hur because of this.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
6.1.1  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  bugsy @6.1    2 weeks ago

And just a couple years ago it was an “attack on democracy” to criticize a special prosecutor 

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
6.1.2  bugsy  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.1    2 weeks ago

Yea, that certainly went out the window to fit a narrative, didn't it?

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
7  charger 383    3 weeks ago

Uncle Joe, he's moving kind 'a slow at the Shady Rest Hotel at Petticoat Junction

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
7.1  cjcold  replied to  charger 383 @7    3 weeks ago

Pretty sure that Joe Biden is much smarter than any of his low IQ MAGA detractors.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @7.1    3 weeks ago

Many liberals are sure of many things, many of which aren't true.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
7.1.2  Right Down the Center  replied to  cjcold @7.1    3 weeks ago

What does MAGA have to do with the article 

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
7.1.3  cjcold  replied to  Right Down the Center @7.1.2    3 weeks ago

Far right wing fascism, lies and innuendo has everything to do about it. Maga has everything to do with far-right wing lies.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @7.1.2    3 weeks ago

yet another deflection.

Some get upset when their hero gets criticized.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @7.1.3    3 weeks ago

So you are contending that Biden has no mental issues?!?

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
7.1.6  cjcold  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.5    3 weeks ago

[removed]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @7.1.6    3 weeks ago

Ah I see.

is this what passes as humor in liberal circles now?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @7.1.6    3 weeks ago

more deflection.

sigh.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @7.1.2    3 weeks ago
What does MAGA have to do with the article 

Why, everything of course.

Don't you remember when we bribed someone to say mean things about Biden?

Read the minutes of our last secret meeting!

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
7.1.10  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.8    3 weeks ago

I have seen fits, SHIT fits and kaniptions 

I think I just saw a shit fit kaniption / kaniption shit fit ( ? )

(now looking for the puddy tat )

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @7.1.10    3 weeks ago

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.1.12  Sparty On  replied to  cjcold @7.1    3 weeks ago

He’s is most definitely sharper than the useful idiots who would vote for him.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
7.1.13  Right Down the Center  replied to  cjcold @7.1.3    3 weeks ago
Far right wing fascism, lies and innuendo has everything to do about it. Maga has everything to do with far-right wing lies.

What far right wing lies are in the article?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.14  Tessylo  replied to  cjcold @7.1    3 weeks ago

That's a fact, Jack!

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
7.1.15  cjcold  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.5    2 weeks ago

I am contending that far right-wing fascists have mental issues right up there with Trump's that are on display..

Biden is sane compared to Trump and his far right fascists.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
7.1.16  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @7.1.15    2 weeks ago
I am contending that far right-wing fascists have mental issues right up there with Trump's that are on 

I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender! I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let's face it.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.1.17  Sparty On  replied to  cjcold @7.1.15    2 weeks ago

Contentions that are, like usual, erroneous.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
8  seeder  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

From Guy Benson:

TRUMP 2024: The only major party nominee competent to stand trial

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
8.1  Right Down the Center  replied to  Sean Treacy @8    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
8.1.1  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Right Down the Center @8.1    3 weeks ago

DITTO

 
 
 
Robert in Ohio
Professor Guide
9  Robert in Ohio    3 weeks ago

Perhaps he could set up a meeting with James Madison and we could get Madison on tape with exactly what the framers meant with the Bill of Rights?  jrSmiley_7_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
9.1  Ronin2  replied to  Robert in Ohio @9    3 weeks ago

I don't think Brandon wants to channel anyone that might challenge him to a duel.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
10  Drinker of the Wry    3 weeks ago

Excerpts from the report:

Pg 9 “Biden's memory was significantly limited, both during his recorded interviews with the ghostwriter in 2017, and in his interview with our office in 2023.”

Pg 10, “ Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.“

Pg 211, “Biden’s memory also appeared to have significant limitations-both at the time he spoke to Zwonitzer in 2017, as evidenced by their recorded conversations, and today, as evidenced by his recorded interview with our office.

Pg 212, “Biden's memory was worse. He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended ("if it was 2013 - when did I stop being Vice President?") He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died. And his memory And his appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him.

Pg 213, “Biden will likely present himself to the jury, as he did during his interview with our office, as a sympathetic, well meat, elderly man with a poor memory.”

Pg 252, “2017 will likely appear consistent with the diminished faculties and faulty memory he showed in Zwonitzer's interview recordings and in our interview of him. Therefore, we conclude that the evidence does not establish that Mr. Biden…

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
10.1  Ronin2  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @10    3 weeks ago

Hur should have let a judge decide if Brandon was mentally competent or not to stand trial.

His worry about Brandon presenting himself as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory" should have had no influence if he had enough evidence. Which by the scope of what they found between the time he was VP and Senator they had more than enough to charge him.

Comey is smiling broadly right now. He isn't the only special counsel to let a guilty Democrat walk. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
10.2  Right Down the Center  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @10    3 weeks ago

There is absolutely no way for a rational person to justify voting for biden anymore. None.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @10.2    2 weeks ago
There is absolutely no way for a rational person to justify voting for biden anymore. None.

That is how I feel, too.

He is unfit and doesn't deserve another term.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
10.2.2  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.1    2 weeks ago
He is unfit and doesn't deserve another term.

How do you propose to help stop him?

Vote for Haley?    Would certainly be sensible if she is the nominee.

And if she is not the nominee (near certainty), vote for her as a third party candidate?   

And if she does not run third party (very likely), write-in her name?   (A waste of effort.)

Staying home or the equivalent is not going to help address the problem.  

Face it, the best way to help stop Biden is to vote for Trump.   You engage in incessant ragging on Biden yet insist that you will never vote for Trump.   jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @10.2.2    2 weeks ago
How do you propose to help stop him?

I can't stop Traitor Joe. I never claimed I could alone. If enough people wake up, maybe there's a chance, and I prefer to take a chance than return someone like him to office.

Vote for Haley?    Would certainly be sensible if she is the nominee.

Been through all that before. Next.

Staying home or the equivalent is not going to help address the problem.

You should tell someone planning on doing that, not me.

Face it, the best way to help stop Biden is to vote for Trump.   You engage in incessant ragging on Biden yet insist that you will never vote for Trump.  

You insist on incessant ragging on Trump but admit you'll be voting for Biden if it comes to those two, so I guess that makes us even. jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

The main difference I see is that I refuse to vote for anyone I deem as unfit to serve the country and you will, however grudgingly.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
10.2.4  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.3    2 weeks ago
I can't stop Traitor Joe. I never claimed I could alone.

As usual you fail to read what I wrote:

TiG@10.2.2How do you propose to help stop him?

You insist on incessant ragging on Trump but admit you'll be voting for Biden if it comes to those two, so I guess that makes us even.

You are confused.   I will be using my vote to help stop Trump.   That is the point.   You rag on Biden yet claim you will NOT use your vote to help stop Biden.

Your claim is not credible.   Mine is.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.5  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @10.2.4    2 weeks ago
As usual you fail to read what I wrote:

That's a tired, completely false, overused line.

You are confused.

Ridiculous nonsense.

I will be using my vote to help stop Trump.  

How wonderful. I will be using my vote to help the country.

You rag on Biden yet claim you will NOT use your vote to help stop Biden.

You rag on Trump. So what? I prefer to vote for someone qualified who I think will help America.

Your claim is not credible.   Mine is.

You may not like my claim (and it doesn't matter at all to me whether you do or not) but it is every bit as credible as yours.

I am not willing to settle for voting for anyone I don't think should be President. I won't settle for someone I don't think can help.

I believe voting for the lesser of two evils is a stupid and unpatriotic act.  

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
10.2.6  bugsy  replied to  TᵢG @10.2.4    2 weeks ago
I will be using my vote to help stop Trump. 

Unpatriotic at best.

You should vote for the person you believe would be the best for the country, not because someone sent mean tweets 5 years ago.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
10.2.7  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @10.2.4    2 weeks ago
I will be using my vote to help stop Trump.

Over half of Amerricans don't want either Biden or Trump

This is the third cycle and it seems more people than ever don't want either candidate.

How do we stop the cycle of being put in a position to vote for the lesser of two evils or use our vote to help stop one of the candidates if we keep voting for the lesser of two evils or use our vote to help stop one of the candidates?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
10.2.8  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.3    2 weeks ago
The main difference I see is that I refuse to vote for anyone I deem as unfit to serve the country and you will, however grudgingly.

We are allowing the parties to give us shit candidates as long as we continue the cycle of voting for the lesser of two evils or voting against one of the candidates even if we don't like the other.  You would think people would know this by now since this is the third time in a row they are doing this to us.  And now it is even how they are framing their candidate.  Vote for X because he is not as bad as Y.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
10.2.9  Right Down the Center  replied to  bugsy @10.2.6    2 weeks ago
You should vote for the person you believe would be the best for the country,

Hard to believe people have to be told this.  We are allowing the parties to give us shit candidates as long as we continue the cycle of voting for the lesser of two evils or voting against one of the candidates even if we don't like the other.  It is time for at least independents (especially ones not in a swing state) to make their displeasure known.  It would be nice if even the party people to make their displeasure known also.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
10.2.10  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.5    2 weeks ago
I believe voting for the lesser of two evils is a stupid and unpatriotic act.

If more people believed that and acted accordingly we would not be in the position we find ourselves in.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.11  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @10.2.10    2 weeks ago
If more people believed that and acted accordingly we would not be in the position we find ourselves in.

That's how I feel.

Makes zero sense to gripe and complain all about partisanship and voting for the lesser of two evils, and then turn around and KEEP DOING IT!

Senseless blather.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.12  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @10.2.9    2 weeks ago

isn't voting for the lesser of two evils still voting for evil---knowingly??

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
10.2.13  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.11    2 weeks ago
Makes zero sense to gripe and complain all about partisanship and voting for the lesser of two evils, and then turn around and KEEP DOING IT!

Seems there is no real desire to change things if you keep rationalizing why you keep doing the same thing

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
10.2.14  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.12    2 weeks ago
isn't voting for the lesser of two evils still voting for evil---knowingly??

It would seem that way to the rational but some can rationalize to themselves that it is not the case for them.  Millions it seems.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.15  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @10.2.8    2 weeks ago
You would think people would know this by now since this is the third time in a row they are doing this to us. 

One would LIKE to think people would know by now, but it is painfully obvious that is not the case.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.16  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @10.2.13    2 weeks ago
Seems there is no real desire to change things if you keep rationalizing why you keep doing the same thing

I believe that many will continue to gripe and complain and then pull the lever for someone they KNOW in their hearts isn't good for America. To me, that is being dishonest with yourself to pull that kind of stunt.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.17  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @10.2.14    2 weeks ago
It would seem that way to the rational but some can rationalize to themselves that it is not the case for them.

Its a tricky road to navigate--the problems start, IMO, when folks are forced to "rationalize" their vote.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
10.2.18  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.17    2 weeks ago
Its a tricky road to navigate--the problems start, IMO, when folks are forced to "rationalize" their vote.

Exactly. Which is why it is best if people just vote who they think is best and not play games with their votes.  But I will always say they have the right to vote for whoever they want, for whatever reason they want. I just can't (and don't have to) understand it.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
10.2.19  TᵢG  replied to  Right Down the Center @10.2.18    2 weeks ago

My reply to this thread is here:  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.20  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @10.2.18    2 weeks ago
Which is why it is best if people just vote who they think is best and not play games with their votes.  

Some can't see it that way.

When push comes to shove, they will hold their noses and vote for someone they know isn't good for America.

Talk of a viable third party is merely talk as long as folks vote the same old way anyway.

Sometimes one has to BE the change!

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
10.2.21  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.20    2 weeks ago
Talk of a viable third party is merely talk as long as folks vote the same old way anyway. Sometimes one has to BE the change!

It seems people are waiting for a viable third party candidate to appear.  In the mean time they will vote for someone other than the best candidate.  Not sure how they expect a third party candidate to appear without starting someplace other than the top but here we are.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
11  Greg Jones    3 weeks ago

Sounds like the lefties are setting Biden up to be given the hook off center stage and away from the limelight due to "health issues"

The big question for today is, who is waiting in the wings to replace him before the convention. 

I think this election thingy is about to get very interesting.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
11.1  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Greg Jones @11    3 weeks ago

Past week I have seen at least 5 news blurbs saying Michelle is ready.

Blurbs from my news feeds only and sources I wouldn't consider reliable, but hey even the national enquirer reported a political sex scandal correctly and made a prez candidate drop out.....once.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
11.1.1  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @11.1    3 weeks ago

The only thing keeping Biden in office and somehow running for another term is the Kamala problem.  They have no idea how to deny her the nomination, especially since the primaries were essentially uncontested.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
12  seeder  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

The desperation has really set in, they dragged him out tonight to speak and he called el-sisi of Egypt the President of Mexico.  It’s just sad. What’s even sadder is the shilling and excuses from CNN and the like. It’s a cult protecting their leader.

im old enough to remember when misspelling potato was disqualifying for public office.   Every time he’s allowed to speak  in public there’s a ‘potato like gaffe.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
12.1  Ronin2  replied to  Sean Treacy @12    3 weeks ago

Dan Quayle was destroyed by the whole potato  or potatoe gaff.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
12.1.1  JBB  replied to  Ronin2 @12.1    3 weeks ago

Not according to Candace Bergen / Murphy Brown...

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
12.1.2  Ronin2  replied to  JBB @12.1.1    3 weeks ago

Leftists getting their marching orders from leftist actresses/actors- what else in new?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
13  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

800

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
13.1  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @13    3 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
13.2  JBB  replied to  JohnRussell @13    3 weeks ago

original

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
13.2.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JBB @13.2    3 weeks ago

256 256

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
13.2.2  JBB  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @13.2.1    3 weeks ago

original

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @13    3 weeks ago

Once they get down to name calling, we know we won the debate.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
13.3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.3    3 weeks ago

800

No "name calling", just a description of reality.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.3.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @13.3.1    3 weeks ago

If you were interested in reality, you would have called out Biden for lying about what was in the report yesterday.

You agree with Biden's handlers and their policies. I doubt you give a shit about Biden.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
13.3.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.3.2    3 weeks ago

As soon as you remove Trump from the Republican nomination, I will call for Biden to retire. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.3.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @13.3.3    3 weeks ago

I don't remove candidates from ballots. That is something that democrats and Putin try to do.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
13.3.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.3.4    3 weeks ago

that was a collective "you" Vic. 

Biden has completely competent people advising him, and he will be fine. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
13.3.6  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.3.4    3 weeks ago

Yep, part and parcel for militant “state” Secretaries of State.

Democrat “Democracy” in action ……

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
13.3.7  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @13.3.6    3 weeks ago

We have to destroy it in order to save it.

You just heard about the "competent" people who told Joe to open the southern border.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
13.3.8  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @13.3.5    3 weeks ago
Biden has completely competent people advising him, and he will be fine.

So now having a president that can't think for himself but has good people advising him is acceptable.

Defending the indefensible.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.3.9  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.3    3 weeks ago

Yes 13.2.1 is proof that you've lost.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.3.10  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.3.4    2 weeks ago

Some say the former 'president' shouldn't be removed from ballots because it denies voters a choice.  But the former 'president' is being removed from ballots because he tried to deny voters a choice, deny voters their votes.

Some seem to think that since the former 'president' didn't get away with it, that he shouldn't be held accountable either.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
14  Jeremy Retired in NC    3 weeks ago

What really makes this pathetic is there are many who admittingly think Traitor Joe is the right choice to run the country.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
15  evilone    3 weeks ago

This is where I wished there was well named, well funded moderate 3rd party candidate was waiting. They could come out right now and probably sweep the polls with a proper campaign. It would take a bit of money to get all the air time they would need to eclipse the Biden/Trump circus, but it could be done. Recent polling suggests Haley would clean up in a general by double digits where Biden and Trump are essentially tied.

Sadly will still only have the choices of Sleepy or Dopy.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
15.1  TᵢG  replied to  evilone @15    3 weeks ago

Clearly.    The D and R parties are controlled by a minority of their electorate yet they collectively determine the candidates for PotUS.    A cohesive minority within each party can amass enough votes to override the wishes of the majority in the party.   Worse, a small minority of the party (those who respond to polls and those who vote) are the ones ultimately controlling the nominee.

So the majority of the nation can be entirely against Biden or Trump for the presidency yet a small minority is calling the shots.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
16  Just Jim NC TttH    3 weeks ago

If EVER there was a time to invoke the 25th Amendment, that time is now.................except for the consequences of doing so. Kamala? Hell no. This is one hell of a rock and a hard place example.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
17  Right Down the Center    3 weeks ago

The debate is over.  Rachel Maddow says Joe is not too old to be president because he rides a bike.  You can't argue with that far left wing logic.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
17.1  Sparty On  replied to  Right Down the Center @17    3 weeks ago

lol ….. Madcow logic.     Classic.

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
17.2  George  replied to  Right Down the Center @17    3 weeks ago

Maddow? isn't she the one who said trump paid no taxes and then proved he paid 38 million in one year? and then still insisted he paid no taxes? and then some morons still repeat that?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
17.2.1  Right Down the Center  replied to  George @17.2    3 weeks ago

Yep, I think the left actually calls her Saint Maddow

 
 
 
George
Sophomore Guide
17.2.2  George  replied to  Right Down the Center @17.2.1    3 weeks ago

It must make their eyes twitch knowing that Tucker Carlson gave her, her start in TV with her first gig. She actually credits him for that.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
17.3  Thrawn 31  replied to  Right Down the Center @17    2 weeks ago

And Trump should because he is such an eloquent speaker?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
17.3.1  Right Down the Center  replied to  Thrawn 31 @17.3    2 weeks ago

Please show me where I said that

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
18  Drinker of the Wry    3 weeks ago

Try to remember..,

 
 
 
Robert in Ohio
Professor Guide
19  Robert in Ohio    3 weeks ago

So the special prosecutor determined that while laws had been broken, but there would be no charges because Biden is old, fragile and a bit addled with numerous memory issues.

Sounds almost like non compos mentis

He remembered a recent conversation with a guy that has been dead several decades, interesting I wonder which other characters from history he talks to

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
19.1  Tessylo  replied to  Robert in Ohio @19    3 weeks ago

Where did you get your doctorate or your law degree??????

 
 
 
Robert in Ohio
Professor Guide
19.1.1  Robert in Ohio  replied to  Tessylo @19.1    2 weeks ago

That probably sounded pithy and funny in your head, not so much once you write it down.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
19.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Robert in Ohio @19.1.1    2 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
20  Buzz of the Orient    3 weeks ago

I've got to say it must be a real problem to be stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea. 

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
21  Thrawn 31    2 weeks ago

Are we really at the point to where we are arguing over who is less senile and should therefore lead the country? 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
21.1  Sparty On  replied to  Thrawn 31 @21    2 weeks ago

Pretty much but it’s also pretty clear which is worse off.    To the unbiased that is.

 
 
 
Thomas
Senior Guide
21.2  Thomas  replied to  Thrawn 31 @21    2 weeks ago
¯\_( ツ)_/¯

Looks like it. Personally, I would go for Biden, if only because he looks the least capable of doing damage willingly. Trump looks like he would be a violent dementoid.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
21.2.1  bugsy  replied to  Thomas @21.2    2 weeks ago
Trump looks like he would be a violent dementoid.

Yes, because the 4 years he was ALREADY in office clearly showed that s/

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
21.2.2  JBB  replied to  bugsy @21.2.1    2 weeks ago

Yes, Bugsy, they did / do! Trump's was a FAILED PRESIDENCY!

original

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
21.2.3  bugsy  replied to  JBB @21.2.2    2 weeks ago

Well, maybe if you replied to something I actually responded to , maybe you would have a point s/

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
21.2.4  bugsy  replied to  JBB @21.2.2    2 weeks ago

If you have been deemed an incompetent, confused old fool by a special prosecutor, how can you continue to be Commander in Chief?

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
21.2.5  JBB  replied to  bugsy @21.2.4    2 weeks ago

Joe still has it in him to whoop Trump...

original

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
21.2.6  JBB  replied to  bugsy @21.2.3    2 weeks ago

I did Bugsy! I did reply to your comment...

Are you incapable of understanding that?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
21.2.7  bugsy  replied to  JBB @21.2.6    2 weeks ago

Yes...yes you did reply to my comment. Very good.

Problem is...it had nothing to do with what I posted.

I'll give you another try.