Democrat attempts to gaslight American public

[*Nately120*]

(08-03-2023, 09:50 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote: You got that right. 

A lot of voters want Biden to step aside so someone who isn't Joe Biden can beat Trump in 2024.  What benefit do democrats get out of Biden being the nominee in 2024, much less get so much benefit out of it that they'll do anything in their power, including breaking every law on the books, to keep him as their nominee?

The idea that both political parties are currently fighting tooth and nail to keep an elderly and unpopular candidate who can at best win a single term rather than move on to younger and more popular candidates who can win 2 terms in office is crap, even by political blustery standards.


As I've said before, I wish the GOP and conservatives weren't full of shit because the idea of Biden being sent out to pasture while Trump has to deal with a candidate like Mark Kelly, or Josh Shapiro, or a number of other popular democrats who have already beaten MAGA candiates in their own races (in a number of key swing states, no less) would be a lot better than an 82 year old Biden tripping and/or literally dying on the campaign trail.

Only one political party is convinced there is a single man who can save this country, and it ain't democrats.  I'm begging you guys...please get Biden out of the 2024 election.  Do it.  

[*pally*]

(08-03-2023, 04:45 PM)Nately120 Wrote: A lot of voters want Biden to step aside so someone who isn't Joe Biden can beat Trump in 2024.  What benefit do democrats get out of Biden being the nominee in 2024, much less get so much benefit out of it that they'll do anything in their power, including breaking every law on the books, to keep him as their nominee?

The idea that both political parties are currently fighting tooth and nail to keep an elderly and unpopular candidate who can at best win a single term rather than move on to younger and more popular candidates who can win 2 terms in office is crap, even by political blustery standards.


As I've said before, I wish the GOP and conservatives weren't full of shit because the idea of Biden being sent out to pasture while Trump has to deal with a candidate like Mark Kelly, or Josh Shapiro, or a number of other popular democrats who have already beaten MAGA candiates in their own races (in a number of key swing states, no less) would be a lot better than an 82 year old Biden tripping and/or literally dying on the campaign trail.

Only one political party is convinced there is a single man who can save this country, and it ain't democrats.  I'm begging you guys...please get Biden out of the 2024 election.  Do it.  

The only reason that Biden will be the candidate in 2024 is because no one wants to risk a primary fight that could divide the party and potentially leave the door open for Trump.  The 2 leading candidates as a successor to Joe would be a black woman Kamala Harris or a gay man Pete Buttigieg.  Sadly, there are still too many bigots out there who would never vote for either person because of their sex, ethnicity, or sexual orientation.  And with democracy at risk with Trump, now is not the time to have that fight

[Luvnit2]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/devon-archer-torpedoes-biden-camps-defense-controversial-dinner-burisma-exec

Hmmm..Biden lied about being involved with any HB business partners. He lied about any Biden family money taking money from China.

Now we know from Archer testimony Joe Biden had dinner.
"Hunter Biden's ex-business partner confirmed during his recent closed-door interview with the House Oversight Committee that then-Vice President Biden was at the infamous spring 2015 dinner with son Hunter's foreign business associates, despite the Biden campaign repeatedly saying Biden was never there.

Devon Archer told investigators that the elder Biden "had dinner" with him and several others, including "Vadym P. from Burisma." When Biden arrived, Archer said Biden "shook everybody's hand" and joined their conversation.

It looks to me like Joe was very involved with Burisma's future viability unless a prosecutor was fired. I ask again, anyone SHOW US A VP GING TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY AND HOLDING UP 1 BILION DOLLARS UNLESS THEY FIRE A PROSECUTOR.

[Belsnickel]

(08-03-2023, 07:19 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: It looks to me like Joe was very involved with Burisma's future viability unless a prosecutor was fired. I ask again, anyone SHOW US A VP GING TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY AND HOLDING UP 1 BILION DOLLARS UNLESS THEY FIRE A PROSECUTOR.

Doing so under the orders of the POTUS and the agreement of the international community because the prosecutor was corrupt.

One of the reasons I pay zero attention to the stuff being spouted is because it is wrapped up with so many things that have been proven to be non-issues. When you keep repeating them after we know they amount to nothing, then anything to try to wrap them around also appears inconsequential. If you keep having to dig up the old hits then there must not be anything new that is actually problematic. It really is a Chicken Little situation.

What amazes me is how incapable you seem to be in seeing how similar your infatuation with Biden and his family is to the obsession that existed with Trump during his presidency. It really is amazing how blind partisanship can make people, causing them to lose any common sense.

[Dill]

(08-03-2023, 11:28 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: The transcript for Archer was released. As far as Dill propaganda, Durham was very clear the FBI had no basis for an investigation. He was clear the FBI never verified the dossier even after offering 1 million dollars to anyone who could verify it.

That is a fact concluded by Durham clearly written in his report. Yet Dill refuses to refer to dossier was a hoax and remove it and no basis for an investigation

Dill "propaganda" comes from the Durham Report, juxtaposed with those that preceded it.

For a guy who sees Dem bias everywhere, you are mighty comfortable with the results of Barr/Trump directed investigation carried about by yet another life long Republican. It was the judgment of the Durham Report that the FBI was justified in opening a preliminary investigation. It disputed whether the evidence warranted a full investigation. The latter is a judgment which could have gone the other way in the hands of another investigator. The previous IG report did not conclude the full investigation should not have been opened. What did Durham add to its factual findings? 

You keep referring to the Steele Dossier as if that were the basis of the Russia investigation. It was not. Whence came the evidence which produced over two dozen convictions? Not from the dossier. You are not disputing that over two dozen convictions resulted from the Russia investigation, are you? You are not disputing that Trump jr met with a Russian agent looking for dirt on HRC, are you? Or that Flynn met secretly with the Russian ambassador and lied about it, do you? You are disputing that the Australians warned us about Papadopoulos, are you? The question was never whether collusion occurred, only whether it rose to a prosecutable level. To know whether it did required an investigation.

You keep claiming this dossier, which was not the basis of the investigation, was not "verified." Who determined that then, if not the FBI, whom you are accusing of bias? Did Hannity do a bias-free job for them? 

Why didn't the biased FBI just claim it was verified then, if their power to bias investigation is that great? What held them back? 

A "hoax" is an intentional fraud. The Steele Dossier was not that. you appear not to notice that two important claims in the "hoax" turned out to be quite true--the Russians had Dem emails and they were hacking the election. You are not going to dispute that the FBI has verified these two points, are you? And the Dossier said it first. How could the dossier have been right about that?  Any intel agent would see that it was worth looking into. 

You appear to trust the FBI when they judge the dossier's provenance questionable, and when they say they did not find enough collusion to prosecute Trump, but you follow Hannity and Fox in calling them untrustworthy--on the points you want them to be. 

It seems you have a rather lower standard for "corruption" evidence against Biden. You want to open a full investigation of him on much less, basically Jordan's say so. And 2 1/2 years of Hannity screaming "scandal" "bombshell" "breaking news."  You listen to hannity breathlessly recounting how "the Biden Crime Family "got money from Ukraine" or "money from China," which keeps turning out to be legal income. "10 million!" Like that was slipping right into Joe's pocket. This is rather like the infamous pee tapes, which the FBI immediately discounted. But if they do in Joe's case you scream "two tier law"!

[Dill]

(08-03-2023, 07:19 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Hmmm..Biden said lied about being involved with any HB business partners. He lied about any Biden family money taking money from China.

Now we know from Archer testimony Joe Biden had dinner.
"Hunter Biden's ex-business partner confirmed during his recent closed-door interview with the House Oversight Committee that then-Vice President Biden was at the infamous spring 2015 dinner with son Hunter's foreign business associates, despite the Biden campaign repeatedly saying Biden was never there.

Devon Archer told investigators that the elder Biden "had dinner" with him and several others, including "Vadym P. from Burisma." When Biden arrived, Archer said Biden "shook everybody's hand" and joined their conversation.

It looks to me like Joe was very involved with Burisma's future viability unless a prosecutor was fired. I ask again, anyone SHOW US A VP GING TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY AND HOLDING UP 1 BILION DOLLARS UNLESS THEY FIRE A PROSECUTOR.

Jeezus, how many billionaires has Trump had dinner with who had business dealings with his children? You don't hear Dems screaming about that because it is legal and doesn't mean anything. There is no Dem Hannity whipping up nonsense connections every night. 

I've answered the bolded a number of times before. Here was the first time (#154),(07-25-2023, 08:50 AM)
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Whistleblower-s-from-IRS-sworn-testimony-on-Biden-Investigation?pid=1372576&highlight=IMF#pid1372576
 with requisite links supporting it. Your first post in response (#156) was a Russian collusion whattabout. Your second(#159) was a deflection to Benghazi and Susan Rice. You still have not acknowledged that Biden could only have been a messenger here, acting on behave of the U.S. and other international institutisons. 

Biden did not "extort" Ukraine. Obama, the U.S. State Department, the EU, and IMF wanted the Prosecutor fired because he was NOT prosecuting Burisma.  Get it--NOT because Shokin was "after Hunter." 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/03/what-really-happened-when-biden-forced-out-ukraines-top-prosecutor/3785620002/
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/10/trump-revives-false-narrative-on-biden-and-ukraine/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/29/business/media/fact-check-biden-ukraine-burisma-china-hunter.html

So Biden "telling the world" was just him acting on orders. He was the MESSENGER.  As VP he had no power to with hold a billion dollars. How does one miss that by "becoming neutral." Could you please just for once at least acknowledge that you HEARD this. Then I can judge whether you just don't know or do and are CHOOSING not to acknowledge, as you repeat disinformation.

You have EXTORTION when a US president withholds Congressional aid to Ukraine and then calls Zelensky and says he needs an announcement that  Ukraine is opening an investigation into the candidate who will be running against said US president.  I have links on that one too, if you are interested in extortion.

Poor Bels is explaining this to you as if you never heard--and dodged--this before. Here was number 4, I believe.  #16307-26-2023, 09:27 PM
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Whistleblower-s-from-IRS-sworn-testimony-on-Biden-Investigation?pid=1372798&highlight=IMF#pid1372798

Until Hannity admits the prosecutor was fired for NOT prosecuting Burisma, and that if Joe had not been there, someone else would have delivered the message, I think you will not admit this.

[grampahol]

Great magistrate in this case.. "Do not break anymore US laws or you'll be remanded into custody.. " 
He's got a couple of Kmart lawyers trying to muddy the waters and the judge and prosecutors aren't playing along with the "court of public opinion"..That shit don't fly in a real courtroom..
This ain't gonna play out like the OJ Simpson trial..

[Luvnit2]

(08-03-2023, 07:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Doing so under the orders of the POTUS and the agreement of the international community because the prosecutor was corrupt.

BS, IT WAS NEVER INVESTIGATED BY THE F.B.I. THE TIMELINE OF BIDEN'S RECEIVING MONEY (GOP FOUND MONEY TRAIL), A DINNER AND BIDEN ON PHONE CALLS APPEARS TO CONTRADICT YOUR ARGUMENT. AGAIN, I ASK WHAT OTHER TIME WAS THE US SO CONCERNED ABOUT A FOREIGN PROSECUTOR THEY HELD UP AIDE AND GOT HIM FIRED? I WILL HELP YOU, NEVER UNTIL BIDEN FIRED THE PROSECUTOR GOING AFTER BURISMA.

One of the reasons I pay zero attention to the stuff being spouted is because it is wrapped up with so many things that have been proven to be non-issues.

PLEASE SHOW US THE PROOF. WORDS ARE NOT PROOF. WE KNOW OBAMA LIED ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS AND JOE LIED ABOUT THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN

When you keep repeating them after we know they amount to nothing, then anything to try to wrap them around also appears inconsequential. If you keep having to dig up the old hits then there must not be anything new that is actually problematic. It really is a Chicken Little situation.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME ANYONE INVESTIGATED THE PROSECUTOR BEING FIRED, SO NOT OLD NEWS, JUST NEW INFORMATION.

What amazes me is how incapable you seem to be in seeing how similar your infatuation with Biden and his family is to the obsession that existed with Trump during his presidency. It really is amazing how blind partisanship can make people, causing them to lose any common sense.

LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

The evidence coming in almost daily is overwhelming. Why did Goldman lie after the Archer hearing? We have the transcript and it was Goldman who floated the illusion concept. it was Archer who disagreed with Goldman and said Joe Biden was the brand being peddled.

[Luvnit2]

(08-03-2023, 10:08 PM)grampahol Wrote: Great magistrate in this case.. "Do not break anymore US laws or you'll be remanded into custody.. " 
He's got a couple of Kmart lawyers trying to muddy the waters and the judge and prosecutors aren't playing along with the "court of public opinion"..That shit don't fly in a real courtroom..
This ain't gonna play out like the OJ Simpson trial..

Judge is a Democratic friend of Hunter Biden, no fair trial coming in her court room.

A guess Trump should address her also b her last name and not judge. 

The good news is Trump is getting stronger while Biden is tanking in the polls.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-03-2023, 05:16 PM)pally Wrote: The only reason that Biden will be the candidate in 2024 is because no one wants to risk a primary fight that could divide the party and potentially leave the door open for Trump.  The 2 leading candidates as a successor to Joe would be a black woman Kamala Harris or a gay man Pete Buttigieg.  Sadly, there are still too many bigots out there who would never vote for either person because of their sex, ethnicity, or sexual orientation.  And with democracy at risk with Trump, now is not the time to have that fight

Pretty sure we had a two term black president, and a woman who won the popular vote.

[GMDino]

(08-04-2023, 09:20 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: The evidence coming in almost daily is overwhelming. Why did Goldman lie after the Archer hearing? We have the transcript and it was Goldman who floated the illusion concept. it was Archer who disagreed with Goldman and said Joe Biden was the brand being peddled.

[Dill]

(08-03-2023, 07:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Doing so under the orders of the POTUS and the agreement of the international community because the prosecutor was corrupt.

He has heard that before, maybe six times now from me.  Plus links from 2019-20.

But it is still "evidence coming in daily" to Luvnit. He doesn't seem able to deduce from information provided
no "investigation" is going to reveal Biden had the power to with hold aid to Ukraine on his own say so
any more than one would reveal the VP is actually the Commander-in-chief or that Biden controls the IMF.

Last night on Hannity's show, H was still asking Tucker-style questions, 
like "When was the last time a vice president was able to leverage a billion dollars
against another country to help his son?"  

Hannity has to know perfectly well that no VP CAN, on his own say so, leverage a billion, etc.
And he has to know that the EU and IMF wanted Slokin gone, etc.  And yet . . . .

This resonates with Hannity's behavior regarding Trump's election fraud--admitting privately behind
the scenes it was BS, but whipping up his audiences to a frenzy of anger at how "they"
always get away with it. 

For many of the MAGA faithful, their understanding of these cases is directly tied to this sort of news commentary.
They are not critically examining the evidence independently of that, or seeking to expand information about
it beyond Fox and the New York Post.

[Dill]

(08-04-2023, 09:39 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Pretty sure we had a two term black president, and a woman who won the popular vote.

 I just checked Mike. 

You are right about the bolded. 

But the woman who won the popular vote also lost the election. 

Kamala being both black and a woman, and not nearly so inspiring as that black president guy,

could not be counted on to keep an angry borderline psychopath out of the WH.

[Dill]

(08-04-2023, 09:20 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: The evidence coming in almost daily is overwhelming. Why did Goldman lie after the Archer hearing? We have the transcript and it was Goldman who floated the illusion concept. it was Archer who disagreed with Goldman and said Joe Biden was the brand being peddled.

Wait, who's lying here? 

I was told last week that Archer testimony was going to (quoting Hannity) "blow the doors off" the Biden Crime Family case. 

Once we got that, we'd have direct proof Biden KNEW all about Hunter's business dealings and was DIRECTLY involved in them.

Hunter Biden "peddling" his father still does not put Joe in business with him. Joe having dinner with people Hunter may or may
not have been dealing with doesn't prove Joe "knew" anything about the business.

You only get there by claiming he MUST have known--the same kind of evidence you discount from the Russia investigation, though 
it was much stronger there. 

That's your "overwhelming" evidence. It's only that to people who want to be overwhelmed, and to elevate hearsay over the legal
protocols for establishing evidence, as MAGA supporters did with Trump's election fraud claims.

[GMDino]

(08-04-2023, 09:39 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Pretty sure we had a two term black president, and a woman who won the popular vote.

There was an interesting podcast a few years back about a female Australian PM.  Basically saying she was the first and people were happy that that barrier had been overcame, but then there was never another one because, well, they already broke that barrier.

I'd say that applies to the POTUS too.  We *might* still see a female in our lifetime win the office, but we are more likely to continue to see a string of white, male, probably protestant...definitely Christian, presidents.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-04-2023, 11:54 AM)Dill Wrote:  I just checked Mike. 

You are right about the bolded. 

But the woman who won the popular vote also lost the election. 

Kamala being both black and a woman, and not nearly so inspiring as that black president guy,

could not be counted on to keep an angry borderline psychopath out of the WH.

Read her post, and get back to me on the woman.

[GMDino]

(08-04-2023, 09:23 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Judge is a Democratic friend of Hunter Biden, no fair trial coming in her court room.

A guess Trump should address her also b her last name and not judge. 

The good news is Trump is getting stronger while Biden is tanking in the polls.

This judge?

The hypocrisy of the GOP is on display with Judge Chutkan: senators who voted to confirm her unanimously are now criticizing her as biased. She was confirmed UNANIMOUSLY by the Senate. Every GOP senator in office at that time--like Lindsey Graham--voted for her confirmation. pic.twitter.com/fHxJOQFX9u

— Victoria Brownworth (@VABVOX) August 3, 2023

 

[Luvnit2]

(08-03-2023, 09:20 PM)Dill Wrote: Jeezus, how many billionaires has Trump had dinner with who had business dealings with his children? You don't hear Dems screaming about that because it is legal and doesn't mean anything. There is no Dem Hannity whipping up nonsense connections every night. 

I've answered the bolded a number of times before. Here was the first time (#154),(07-25-2023, 08:50 AM)
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Whistleblower-s-from-IRS-sworn-testimony-on-Biden-Investigation?pid=1372576&highlight=IMF#pid1372576
 with requisite links supporting it. Your first post in response (#156) was a Russian collusion whattabout. Your second(#159) was a deflection to Benghazi and Susan Rice. You still have not acknowledged that Biden could only have been a messenger here, acting on behave of the U.S. and other international institutisons. 

Biden did not "extort" Ukraine. Obama, the U.S. State Department, the EU, and IMF wanted the Prosecutor fired because he was NOT prosecuting Burisma.  Get it--NOT because Shokin was "after Hunter." 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/03/what-really-happened-when-biden-forced-out-ukraines-top-prosecutor/3785620002/
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/10/trump-revives-false-narrative-on-biden-and-ukraine/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/29/business/media/fact-check-biden-ukraine-burisma-china-hunter.html

So Biden "telling the world" was just him acting on orders. He was the MESSENGER.  As VP he had no power to with hold a billion dollars. How does one miss that by "becoming neutral." Could you please just for once at least acknowledge that you HEARD this. Then I can judge whether you just don't know or do and are CHOOSING not to acknowledge, as you repeat disinformation.

You have EXTORTION when a US president withholds Congressional aid to Ukraine and then calls Zelensky and says he needs an announcement that  Ukraine is opening an investigation into the candidate who will be running against said US president.  I have links on that one too, if you are interested in extortion.

Poor Bels is explaining this to you as if you never heard--and dodged--this before. Here was number 4, I believe.  #16307-26-2023, 09:27 PM
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Whistleblower-s-from-IRS-sworn-testimony-on-Biden-Investigation?pid=1372798&highlight=IMF#pid1372798

Until Hannity admits the prosecutor was fired for NOT prosecuting Burisma, and that if Joe had not been there, someone else would have delivered the message, I think you will not admit this.

Again, I see a lot of liberal rags supporting Biden corruption, yet have yet to see one thorough investigation by any of these rags providing proof by being gret journalists. What are you afraid of with the GOP investigating Joe Biden for bribery? Surely you are not gullible enough to accept Joe Biden's word on his business dealings with his son after he lied about it since 2020.

In time either the investigation will be thorough with the F.B.I. and D.O.J. getting involved or the GOP committees will complete the investigation. They investigated Trump for Russian Collusion for 3 years, GOP has only had 6 months so very early in the 1st time the Biden bribery accusation by an F.B.I. informant has been investigated. Go ahead, cover your eyes and plug your ears, in time the GOP is going to find the money that has and is being laundered by the Biden fmily. Stay tuned, it appears a portion of the money found will be disclosed next week.

BTW, all of those sources you provided, said for 2.5 years Trump colluded with Russia. They were wrong then and will be found wrong again.

[Luvnit2]

I am also still waiting for a VP that held up aide to a foreign country other than Joe Biden. Corruption is everywhere in the world, but Biden threatens aide will be held up unless they fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma, who hired HB 1 year earlier. Same company that an executive had dinner with Joe Biden days before he flew to Ukraine. Same company Archer testified HB called his dad and asked him to intervene. HB was pressured by the Burisma CEO to get the prosecutor fired.

Archer said if the prosector was not fired, Burisma would have gone bankrupt. Archer's words, not mine.

So again, please show me one prosector from any foreign country the VP of the US demanded be fired for any reason. F.Y.I., answer is never and your first clue JB was and is corrupt.

[GMDino]

(08-04-2023, 02:52 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I am also still waiting for a VP that held up aide to a foreign country other than Joe Biden. Corruption is everywhere in the world, but Biden threatens aide will be held up unless they fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma, who hired HB 1 year earlier. Same company that an executive had dinner with Joe Biden days before he flew to Ukraine. Same company Archer testified HB called his dad and asked him to intervene. HB was pressured by the Burisma CEO to get the prosecutor fired.

Archer said if the prosector was not fired, Burisma would have gone bankrupt. Archer's words, not mine.

So again, please show me one prosector from any foreign country the VP of the US demanded be fired for any reason. F.Y.I., answer is never and your first clue JB was and is corrupt.

This is either deliberate trolling by ignoring everything that has been shown to you or you need an intervention.