Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Biden's big lies
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #1
Biden's big lies
https://johnsolomonreports.com/joe-biden...the-facts/

"The memo by Biden campaign aides Kate Bedingfield and Tony Blinken specifically warned reporters covering the impeachment trial they would be acting as “enablers of misinformation” if they repeated allegations that the former vice president forced the firing of Ukraine’s top prosecutor, who was investigating Burisma Holdings, where Hunter Biden worked as a highly compensated board member....

It is irrefutable, and not a conspiracy theory, that Joe Biden bragged in this 2018 speech to a foreign policy group that he threatened in March 2016 to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid to Kiev if then-Ukraine’s president Petro Poroshenko didn’t immediately fire Shokin....

n early February 2016, Shokin’s office secured a court order allowing prosecutors to re-seize some of the Burisma founder’s property, including his home and luxury car, as part of the ongoing probe.

Two weeks later, in mid-February 2016, Latvian law enforcement sent this alert to Ukrainian prosecutors flagging several payments from Burisma to American accounts as “suspicious.” The payments included some monies to Hunter Biden’s and Devon Archer’s firm. Latvian authorities recently confirmed it sent the alert.

Shokin told both me and ABC News that just before he was fired under pressure from Joe Biden he also was making plans to interview Hunter Biden....

Burisma’s main U.S. lawyer John Buretta acknowledged in this February 2017 interview with a Ukraine newspaper that the company remained under investigation in 2016, until he negotiated for one case to be dismissed and the other to be settled by payment of a large tax penalty.

Documents released under an open records lawsuit show Burisma legal team was pressuring the State Department in February 2016 to end the corruption allegations against the gas firm and specifically invoked Hunter Biden’s name as part of the campaign. You can read those documents here.

In addition, immediately after Joe Biden succeeded in getting Shokin ousted, Burisma’s lawyers sought to meet with his successor as chief prosecutor to settle the case....

The New York Times reported in this December 2015 article that the Burisma investigation was ongoing and Hunter Biden’s role in the company was undercutting Joe Biden’s push to fight Ukrainian corruption. The article quoted the vice president’s office.

In addition, Hunter Biden acknowledged in this interview he had discussed his Burisma job with his father on one occasion and that his father responded by saying he hoped the younger Biden knew what he was doing.

And when America’s new ambassador to Ukraine was being confirmed in 2016 before the Senate she was specifically advised to refer questions about Hunter Biden, Burisma and the probe to Joe Biden’s VP office, according to these State Department documents...."

I just don't understand why the Democrats are so determined to protect a corrupt AND senile politician. And he's not even a minority or female.
01-25-2020 05:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


mptnstr@44 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,047
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 427
I Root For: Nati Bearcats
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Biden's big lies
(01-25-2020 05:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://johnsolomonreports.com/joe-biden...the-facts/

"The memo by Biden campaign aides Kate Bedingfield and Tony Blinken specifically warned reporters covering the impeachment trial they would be acting as “enablers of misinformation” if they repeated allegations that the former vice president forced the firing of Ukraine’s top prosecutor, who was investigating Burisma Holdings, where Hunter Biden worked as a highly compensated board member....

It is irrefutable, and not a conspiracy theory, that Joe Biden bragged in this 2018 speech to a foreign policy group that he threatened in March 2016 to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid to Kiev if then-Ukraine’s president Petro Poroshenko didn’t immediately fire Shokin....

n early February 2016, Shokin’s office secured a court order allowing prosecutors to re-seize some of the Burisma founder’s property, including his home and luxury car, as part of the ongoing probe.

Two weeks later, in mid-February 2016, Latvian law enforcement sent this alert to Ukrainian prosecutors flagging several payments from Burisma to American accounts as “suspicious.” The payments included some monies to Hunter Biden’s and Devon Archer’s firm. Latvian authorities recently confirmed it sent the alert.

Shokin told both me and ABC News that just before he was fired under pressure from Joe Biden he also was making plans to interview Hunter Biden....

Burisma’s main U.S. lawyer John Buretta acknowledged in this February 2017 interview with a Ukraine newspaper that the company remained under investigation in 2016, until he negotiated for one case to be dismissed and the other to be settled by payment of a large tax penalty.

Documents released under an open records lawsuit show Burisma legal team was pressuring the State Department in February 2016 to end the corruption allegations against the gas firm and specifically invoked Hunter Biden’s name as part of the campaign. You can read those documents here.

In addition, immediately after Joe Biden succeeded in getting Shokin ousted, Burisma’s lawyers sought to meet with his successor as chief prosecutor to settle the case....

The New York Times reported in this December 2015 article that the Burisma investigation was ongoing and Hunter Biden’s role in the company was undercutting Joe Biden’s push to fight Ukrainian corruption. The article quoted the vice president’s office.

In addition, Hunter Biden acknowledged in this interview he had discussed his Burisma job with his father on one occasion and that his father responded by saying he hoped the younger Biden knew what he was doing.

And when America’s new ambassador to Ukraine was being confirmed in 2016 before the Senate she was specifically advised to refer questions about Hunter Biden, Burisma and the probe to Joe Biden’s VP office, according to these State Department documents...."

I just don't understand why the Democrats are so determined to protect a corrupt AND senile politician. And he's not even a minority or female.

"I just don't understand why the Democrats are so determined to protect a corrupt AND senile politician."

Guessing ole Joe's got the goods on a number of them.
01-25-2020 05:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SuperFlyBCat Offline
Banned

Posts: 49,583
Joined: Mar 2005
I Root For: America and UC
Location: Cincinnati
Post: #3
RE: Biden's big lies
(01-25-2020 05:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://johnsolomonreports.com/joe-biden...the-facts/

"The memo by Biden campaign aides Kate Bedingfield and Tony Blinken specifically warned reporters covering the impeachment trial they would be acting as “enablers of misinformation” if they repeated allegations that the former vice president forced the firing of Ukraine’s top prosecutor, who was investigating Burisma Holdings, where Hunter Biden worked as a highly compensated board member....

It is irrefutable, and not a conspiracy theory, that Joe Biden bragged in this 2018 speech to a foreign policy group that he threatened in March 2016 to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid to Kiev if then-Ukraine’s president Petro Poroshenko didn’t immediately fire Shokin....

n early February 2016, Shokin’s office secured a court order allowing prosecutors to re-seize some of the Burisma founder’s property, including his home and luxury car, as part of the ongoing probe.

Two weeks later, in mid-February 2016, Latvian law enforcement sent this alert to Ukrainian prosecutors flagging several payments from Burisma to American accounts as “suspicious.” The payments included some monies to Hunter Biden’s and Devon Archer’s firm. Latvian authorities recently confirmed it sent the alert.

Shokin told both me and ABC News that just before he was fired under pressure from Joe Biden he also was making plans to interview Hunter Biden....

Burisma’s main U.S. lawyer John Buretta acknowledged in this February 2017 interview with a Ukraine newspaper that the company remained under investigation in 2016, until he negotiated for one case to be dismissed and the other to be settled by payment of a large tax penalty.

Documents released under an open records lawsuit show Burisma legal team was pressuring the State Department in February 2016 to end the corruption allegations against the gas firm and specifically invoked Hunter Biden’s name as part of the campaign. You can read those documents here.

In addition, immediately after Joe Biden succeeded in getting Shokin ousted, Burisma’s lawyers sought to meet with his successor as chief prosecutor to settle the case....

The New York Times reported in this December 2015 article that the Burisma investigation was ongoing and Hunter Biden’s role in the company was undercutting Joe Biden’s push to fight Ukrainian corruption. The article quoted the vice president’s office.

In addition, Hunter Biden acknowledged in this interview he had discussed his Burisma job with his father on one occasion and that his father responded by saying he hoped the younger Biden knew what he was doing.

And when America’s new ambassador to Ukraine was being confirmed in 2016 before the Senate she was specifically advised to refer questions about Hunter Biden, Burisma and the probe to Joe Biden’s VP office, according to these State Department documents...."

I just don't understand why the Democrats are so determined to protect a corrupt AND senile politician. And he's not even a minority or female.

They are not protecting Biden, they just used Trump's call whistleblower stuff as an excuse to push impeachment. Joe was just a casualty that they thought would not materialize because they operate in a bubble. And to date the big criminal deep state folks have not been brought to justice. So hey even if the Bidens are criminal nothing will happen to them.
01-25-2020 05:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Biden's big lies
Rudy says he has 5 witnesses on tape that he will be releasing over the next week implicating Biden in not one, but 3 bribery schemes. lol...the story he's telling is earth shattering IF he can back it up. Says the witnesses began coming to him saying the DOJ refused to look at the information they had.
(This post was last modified: 01-25-2020 06:04 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-25-2020 06:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Biden's big lies
Rather interesting that the Democrats are claiming a quid pro quo for something the Ukraine was ALREADY doing:

"...Fact: Ukraine law enforcement reopened the Burisma investigation in early 2019, well before President Trump mentioned the matter to Ukraine’s new president Vlodymyr Zelensky.

This may be the single biggest under-reported fact in the impeachment scandal: four months before Trump and Zelensky had their infamous phone call, Ukraine law enforcement officials officially reopened their investigation into Burisma and its founder.

The effort began independent of Trump or his lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s legal work. In fact, it was NABU – the very agency Joe Biden and the Obama administration helped start – that recommended in February 2019 to reopen the probe...."
01-25-2020 06:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,278
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #6
RE: Biden's big lies
(01-25-2020 06:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Rudy says he has 5 witnesses on tape that he will be releasing over the next week implicating Biden in not one, but 3 bribery schemes. lol...the story he's telling is earth shattering IF he can back it up. Says the witnesses began coming to him saying the DOJ refused to look at the information they had.

I suspect its similar to the left's arguments... long on innuendo and unconfirm(ed/able) accusations. I hope this doesn't get much coverage... unless somehow he really does have FACTS. If he has what dems have, he needs to not give such things credibility... would be a huge strategic mistake
01-25-2020 06:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Biden's big lies
(01-25-2020 06:38 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(01-25-2020 06:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Rudy says he has 5 witnesses on tape that he will be releasing over the next week implicating Biden in not one, but 3 bribery schemes. lol...the story he's telling is earth shattering IF he can back it up. Says the witnesses began coming to him saying the DOJ refused to look at the information they had.

I suspect its similar to the left's arguments... long on innuendo and unconfirm(ed/able) accusations. I hope this doesn't get much coverage... unless somehow he really does have FACTS. If he has what dems have, he needs to not give such things credibility... would be a huge strategic mistake

Im fine with it. Remember, the whole case rests on whether or not it was reasonable for a US president to ask the Ukrainian President to look into the whole Biden mess. The Democrats have largely avoided even talking much about it except to quickly give out the Biden talking points, declare the whole thing a "crazy conspiracy theory", and claim it has been completely debunked. The Democrats don't want that looked at too hard because their entire case crumbles if there is enough evidence of wrongdoing that it seems suspicious enough to look into. Understand---Biden doesnt have to to be be proven guilty here (though I think he is guilty as sin), there just needs to be enough probable cause to trigger looking into it. In this case---since Trump is the defendant. Reasonable doubt it the hurdle to be cleared. Was there enough evidence being funneled to Trump that its reasonable to believe that Trump could have thought Biden may have indeed had ulterior motives for firing the Ukrainian prosecutor. If so, asking for the investigation was a reasonable action and not an abuse of power. To me, all you have to do is take whatever Rudy has and add Solomons work and you have more than enough to think its reasonable to look into the matter further.
(This post was last modified: 01-25-2020 07:02 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-25-2020 06:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,647
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #8
RE: Biden's big lies
(01-25-2020 06:54 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-25-2020 06:38 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(01-25-2020 06:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Rudy says he has 5 witnesses on tape that he will be releasing over the next week implicating Biden in not one, but 3 bribery schemes. lol...the story he's telling is earth shattering IF he can back it up. Says the witnesses began coming to him saying the DOJ refused to look at the information they had.
I suspect its similar to the left's arguments... long on innuendo and unconfirm(ed/able) accusations. I hope this doesn't get much coverage... unless somehow he really does have FACTS. If he has what dems have, he needs to not give such things credibility... would be a huge strategic mistake
Im fine with it. Remember, the whole case rests on whether or not it was reasonable for a US president to ask the Ukrainian President to look into the whole Biden mess. The Democrats have largely avoided even talking much about it except to quickly give out the Biden talking points, declare the whole thing a "crazy conspiracy theory", and claim it has been completely debunked. The Democrats don't want that looked at too hard because their entire case crumbles if there is enough evidence of wrongdoing that it seems suspicious enough to look into. Understand---Biden doesnt have to to be be proven guilty here (though I think he is guilty as sin), there just needs to be enough probable cause to trigger looking into it. In this case---since Trump is the defendant. Reasonable doubt is the hurdle to be cleared. Was there enough evidence being funneled to Trump that its reasonable to believe that Trump could have thought Biden may have indeed had ulterior motives for firing the Ukrainian prosecutor? If so, asking for the investigation was a reasonable action and not an abuse of power. To me, all you have to do is take whatever Rudy has and add Solomo'ns work and you have more than enough to think its reasonable to look into the matter further.

Hunter Biden's absurdly outrageous contract with Burma is suspicious enough to look into. The rest is gravy.

Remember, it's not as simple as Biden guilty=Trump innocent, Biden innocent=Trump guilty. The Biden guilty=Trump innocent part still holds, but there is a lot of room for Biden innocent but looked suspicious=Trump innocent.

If Joe or Hunter has to testify, then Biden's campaign is toast. Democrats will have achieved exactly what they accused Trump of trying to do.
(This post was last modified: 01-25-2020 07:31 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
01-25-2020 07:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rath v2.0 Offline
Wartime Consigliere
*

Posts: 51,147
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 2147
I Root For: Civil Disobedience
Location: Tip Of The Mitt

Donators
Post: #9
RE: Biden's big lies
Lindsey Graham said it best...someone needs to investigate whether Bursima was buying insurance because they sure weren’t buying expertise.
01-25-2020 10:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WKUYG Away
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,148
Joined: Oct 2012
Reputation: 1644
I Root For: WKU
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Biden's big lies
(01-25-2020 07:28 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(01-25-2020 06:54 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-25-2020 06:38 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(01-25-2020 06:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Rudy says he has 5 witnesses on tape that he will be releasing over the next week implicating Biden in not one, but 3 bribery schemes. lol...the story he's telling is earth shattering IF he can back it up. Says the witnesses began coming to him saying the DOJ refused to look at the information they had.
I suspect its similar to the left's arguments... long on innuendo and unconfirm(ed/able) accusations. I hope this doesn't get much coverage... unless somehow he really does have FACTS. If he has what dems have, he needs to not give such things credibility... would be a huge strategic mistake
Im fine with it. Remember, the whole case rests on whether or not it was reasonable for a US president to ask the Ukrainian President to look into the whole Biden mess. The Democrats have largely avoided even talking much about it except to quickly give out the Biden talking points, declare the whole thing a "crazy conspiracy theory", and claim it has been completely debunked. The Democrats don't want that looked at too hard because their entire case crumbles if there is enough evidence of wrongdoing that it seems suspicious enough to look into. Understand---Biden doesnt have to to be be proven guilty here (though I think he is guilty as sin), there just needs to be enough probable cause to trigger looking into it. In this case---since Trump is the defendant. Reasonable doubt is the hurdle to be cleared. Was there enough evidence being funneled to Trump that its reasonable to believe that Trump could have thought Biden may have indeed had ulterior motives for firing the Ukrainian prosecutor? If so, asking for the investigation was a reasonable action and not an abuse of power. To me, all you have to do is take whatever Rudy has and add Solomo'ns work and you have more than enough to think its reasonable to look into the matter further.

Hunter Biden's absurdly outrageous contract with Burma is suspicious enough to look into. The rest is gravy.

Remember, it's not as simple as Biden guilty=Trump innocent, Biden innocent=Trump guilty. The Biden guilty=Trump innocent part still holds, but there is a lot of room for Biden innocent but looked suspicious=Trump innocent.

If Joe or Hunter has to testify, then Biden's campaign is toast. Democrats will have achieved exactly what they accused Trump of trying to do.

I think it needs to be a nexus other than his father was VP. Big money is paid to a lot of people by companies for who they know instead of what they know. So that in itself, while it might look bad, isnt enough to start an investigation.

But add in the video of Biden saying what he did...questions should be answered. It doesnt matter if it was U.S. policy. What matters is if someone that had the right to tell Biden to withhold the money and the threat he made. Told Biden to do just that. There should be a paper trail if Biden was told to do this.

Now if Biden took it upon himself then a investigation is the only way to find out why he did it and the time frame. If the fact the company in which the VP's son was working was under investigation. Because even if it was policy it doesnt mean Biden didnt have other reasons to do what he did. That it wasnt a crime to do it.

It's a helluva lot more there than they started and ended with in this witch hunt against the President
01-25-2020 11:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Biden's big lies
(01-25-2020 10:26 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Lindsey Graham said it best...someone needs to investigate whether Bursima was buying insurance because they sure weren’t buying expertise.

lol...Lindsey can certainly turn a phrase. Lets not forget that the State Department had been instructed that all inquiries about Urkrain corruption and Burisma were to be funneled through the Vice Presidents office. So, when reporters say this has been looked into and debunked---the squeaky clean explanations of "nothing to see here folks" were all coming from the Bidens VP office.
(This post was last modified: 01-25-2020 11:44 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-25-2020 11:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Biden's big lies
(01-25-2020 11:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-25-2020 10:26 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Lindsey Graham said it best...someone needs to investigate whether Bursima was buying insurance because they sure weren’t buying expertise.

lol...Lindsey can certainly turn a phrase. Lets not forget that the State Department had been instructed that all inquiries about Urkrain corruption and Burisma were to be funneled through the Vice Presidents office. So, when reporters say this has been looked into and debunked---the squeaky clean explanations of "nothing to see here folks" were all coming from the Bidens VP office.

Since nothing happened but a delay what does it matter whether there was reason?
01-26-2020 12:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,647
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #13
RE: Biden's big lies
(01-25-2020 11:10 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  It's a helluva lot more there than they started and ended with in this witch hunt against the President

Agree. But Trump doesn't have to prove any of that to justify his action. If you're driving drunk and weaving all over the road, an officer doesn't need to prove that he knew you were driving drunk before he stopped you in order to justify the stop. He just has to prove that you were weaving all over the road. Maybe you were drunk, maybe something else, but whatever the reason, the officer was justified to stop you and find out.

Hunter's contract is the equivalent of the weaving all over the road. Why he got the contract is worthy of investigation. Joe's threat lends some credence to the equivalent of drunk driving, and for that reason is germane, but is not essential to establish an affirmative defense for Trump.

One fear I have is that in their blood thirst for Biden, republicans are going to let this narrative get distorted, like they did with Hillary over Benghazi. It really is stupid party versus evil party.
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2020 09:38 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
01-26-2020 09:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.