Trump vs Biden 2020, Ultimate battle for the fate of our universe (pt 3)Read OP 01/11

Quin_Dub

stefanovich wrote: »

The prosecutor who was investigating Burisma is fired because Biden threatened to withhold 1 billion dollars unless it happened?

And round and round and round we go with the same made up story from the right wing fever dream.

The Guy that was fired was not investigating Burisma at all , EVER.

He was fired for being corrupt and not doing his job.

His firing was requested and supported by the entire US Political system and the EU.

The Decision to fire him was not made by Joe Biden , the decision to withhold the money was not one solely in the control of Joe Biden (if at all in fact).

Joe Biden was to all intents and purposes merely the spokesperson for US and EU foreign policy at the time.

How many times do simple facts have to be explained?

Kermit.de.frog

How can you can you not support this man when his closest and highest aides had such high opinions of him?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsLaAbzVb9E

There is no one remotely competent left who would destroy their own careers to serve in his administration if he were re-elected. All that's left is mindless unqualified sycophants.

Tippex

stefanovich wrote: »

The prevailing argument in favour of the Bidens appears to be the assertion that Trump is also corrupt rather than a defense of the Biden's behaviour.

we seem to be having some back and forth today .

Genuine question but can you name me a single US politician (never mind globally) that has not used their position or influence to help a friend/family member in some way or other?

Politics is a dirty game everyone knows it and there is nobody involved in politics that does it purely for the love of the country etc

namloc1980

Quin_Dub wrote: »

And round and round and round we go with the same made up story from the right wing fever dream.

The Guy that was fired was not investigating Burisma at all , EVER.

He was fired for being corrupt and not doing his job.

His firing was requested and supported by the entire US Political system and the EU.

The Decision to fire him was not made by Joe Biden , the decision to withhold the money was not one solely in the control of Joe Biden (if at all in fact).

Joe Biden was to all intents and purposes merely the spokesperson for US and EU foreign policy at the time.

How many times do simple facts have to be explained?

Facts have zero value when it comes to Trumpists. They have no interest in facts at all.

ohnonotgmail

schmittel wrote: »

Corruption - trading on her father's influence - would seem to be the most logical explanation to me.

And if it is OK for Hunter I guess it has to be OK for Ivanka?

do you have any proof of corruption on the part of biden?

Pa ElGrande

American Gothic Horror

I have a theory about Joe Biden: He didn’t want to run for president. Not one eensy-weensy bit. He wanted a nice, quiet retirement with his fat government pension plus sundry millions that had somehow found its way into his bank account over the years. He had a fabulous $16-million gentleman’s estate to gambol upon with his beloved grandchildren. The developing brain-fog was actually a comfort, allowing him to forget the rigors of public service and all the tedious gathering of… honoraria, shall we say. But then they came for him…!

source

Why is Biden actually running? It is an interesting question that has been put out several people mostly along the lines of what forced him to run given he was retired.

hometruths

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Not at all - I don't believe that the Bidens are corrupt.

Did Hunter Biden get doors opened for him because of his name?

Quite possibly , that's how the world works - The whole "It's not what you know it's who you know" angle.

Was there a quid-pro-quo carried out when those doors were opened (which would be the corruption bit)?

I have yet to see any convincing evidence to support that there was.

Sure, but there is also no evidence to suggest that Hunter Biden has ever had a job that did not depend on his father's influence.

Carfacemandog

Phoebas wrote: »

Every time Trump says something stupid or lies its either 'out of context', 'he was being sarcastic', 'it's the media', 'he was joking', 'he was being optimistic' while some of his followers continue to defend what he said as accurate and correct.

There was a time way back when we expected a President to take responsibility for his own words.

Sorry, thought your post needed an amendment, we've seen multiple examples of this in this very thread and the old one.

hometruths

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

do you have any proof of corruption on the part of biden?

No, the original question I asked was has Hunter Biden ever had a job that did not depend on his fathers influence?

I got dragged into a corruption discussion because a number of posters replied to accusing Trumps children of such deeds instead of answering the question.

But we still have no examples of a job that this Yale educated lawyer and fund manager appears to have got off his own bat.

swampgas

schmittel wrote: »

Sure, but there is also no evidence to suggest that Hunter Biden has ever had a job that did not depend on his father's influence.

Yeah, you're like a dog with a bone. Just banging away endlessly about Hunter Biden, hand-waving away obvious extreme corruption and malfeasance from Trump and family, and trying to somehow make out that "they're both the same".

It's a crock and everyone can see it.

It's clear you are not arguing honestly here. But then you're defending Trump (which is what all this whataboutery amounts to) so I'm not exactly surprised.

stefanovich

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The Guy that was fired was not investigating Burisma at all , EVER.

Shokin himself alleged that he was investigating Burisma. Was that just a lie?

Where did you source your information?

Quin_Dub

timsey tiger wrote: »

RCP are currently showing Trump ahead of where he was in the "top battlegrounds" back in 2016. I think this has prompted some people to think that this means that he is a good bet for 2020.



Looking at Pennsylvania, back in 2016 to see what happened. 14 days out Clinton was on 45.8% and Trump on 40.6%. With Clinton finishing on 47.5% and Trump on 48.2%. Of the vote that came back to the two major parties in the final two weeks, Trump got 82% of that.

Remember that Comey's announcement about reopening the email investigation happened within this 14 day window, so about as positive for Trump as one could expect.



Currently in Pennsylvania, 14 days out Biden is on 48.8% and Trump on 45%, with 6.2% out there. If all of this 6.2% comes back and falls as favourably to Trump as it did in 2016 (a really big if), they'd end up on Biden 49.9% and Trump on 50.1%.

Trump wins, but I wouldn't bet the house (or the spare change in the back of the couch on it).

If the 1.1% who didn't vote for any of the top four last time don't come back, then Trump looses 49.2% to Biden's 49.7%.

I'll admit that this is a bit like those football commentators bigging up the prospects of the second half or a really dull onesided match. :pac:

A very important point to note about 2016 it to look at the Clinton vote.

Across the board in the Swing States , she finished slightly higher than where the polling had her , Trump closed the gap with the "other" voters , not by converting Clinton voters. He's not going to convert any Biden voters this time around either.

Of the 6.2% "in-play" as it were in your example above , at least ~1.5% of that is going to land with 3rd Party votes - Libertarian & Green - I'd reckon maybe ~0.4% for Green and about ~0.7% or so for Libertarian.

So that leaves about 4% realistically available - If it goes as it did last time , Trump picks up about 3.3% , leaving him on ~48.3% and Biden picks up maybe ~0.6% , leaving him on about 49.4%.

Look there's no doubt that things could tighten in the last 14 days , but we're highly unlikely to have a "Comey Letter" moment - equally , people are forgetting that the gap that Clinton had at this same point last time was partly driven by the dip in Trump support following the "Access Hollywood" tapes.

Things were a bit closer in late September before that dropped.

hometruths

Tippex wrote: »

Genuine question but can you name me a single US politician (never mind globally) that has not used their position or influence to help a friend/family member in some way or other?

None.

ohnonotgmail

schmittel wrote: »

No, the original question I asked was has Hunter Biden ever had a job that did not depend on his fathers influence?

I got dragged into a corruption discussion because a number of posters replied to accusing Trumps children of such deeds instead of answering the question.

But we still have no examples of a job that this Yale educated lawyer and fund manager appears to have got off his own bat.

so what?

hometruths

swampgas wrote: »

Yeah, you're like a dog with a bone. Just banging away endlessly about Hunter Biden, hand-waving away obvious extreme corruption and malfeasance from Trump and family, and trying to somehow make out that "they're both the same".

It's a crock and everyone can see it.

It's clear you are not arguing honestly here. But then you're defending Trump (which is what all this whataboutery amounts to) so I'm not exactly surprised.

I'm unclear about what I am being dishonest about. Or how I am defending Trump either. I have just called his children corrupt.

amdublin

Has Trump pulled out of the 3rd debate yet?

ohnonotgmail

amdublin wrote: »

Has Trump pulled out of the 3rd debate yet?

not yet

hometruths

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so what?

Because the first post post on the subject was a reply to this post:

Phoebas wrote: »

What qualified the Yale educated lawyer and fund manager Hunter Biden for a board position!

The answer to the question of what qualified him is that his dad was VP at the time.

The idea the Burisma hired him because he was a Yale educated lawyer or a fund manager is bonkers, and the inability to admit that demonstrates a level of blindness no better than the Trumpists.

Quin_Dub

stefanovich wrote: »

Shokin himself alleged that he was investigating Burisma. Was that just a lie?

Where did you source your information?

Simply put - Yes , it was

Here's an article that discusses the issue

The wild conspiracy theory on which Trump based his assertion – that Joe Biden had Shokin removed to stop him investigating wrongdoing in his son’s gas company – has already been widely debunked.

Put simply, the chronology doesn’t work – the investigation into Burisma, where Hunter worked, was dormant by the time Shokin was pushed out. It would also represent a major historical anomaly. During Shokin’s 13 months in office, not one major figure was convicted. No oligarch. No politician. No ranking bureaucrat. It would appear unlikely he was in the middle of breaking the habit with the Bidens.

The approach of Shokin’s office to the Burisma investigations fell into a well-practiced pattern of corruption, the anonymous prosecutor says. By the time of Biden’s intervention, there were no active investigations to speak of.

“If the idea was to get a result on the Burisma case, Shokin would have put his top people on it,” he says. “That didn’t happen. The aims were different.”

Investigations into Burisma, which only ever covered the period from before Hunter Biden’s involvement in the company, were finally settled in 2016. An audio recording purporting to be of Petro Poroshenko in conversation with another gas tycoon acting as a mediator, offered some clues as to the sequencing. In it, the two men talk about a “global solution” to Burisma’s problems: redirecting cashflows to Poroshenko’s companies.

ohnonotgmail

schmittel wrote: »

Because the first post post on the subject was a reply to this post:



The answer to the question of what qualified him is that his dad was VP at the time.

The idea the Burisma hired him because he was a Yale educated lawyer or a fund manager is bonkers, and the inability to admit that demonstrates a level of blindness no better than the Trumpists.

again, i ask, so what?

MoonUnit75

Quin_Dub wrote: »

And round and round and round we go with the same made up story from the right wing fever dream.

The Guy that was fired was not investigating Burisma at all , EVER.

He was fired for being corrupt and not doing his job.

Not according to this letter to the US Department of State:
"It is my understanding that on February 4, 2016, the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s
Office, under the direction of Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, announced the seizure of
property from Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings’ founder, Mykola Zlochevksy.
The seizure occurred pursuant to a raid on Mr. Zlochevsky’s home 011 February 2, 2016.
It is also my understanding that on February 4, 2016, Hunter Biden began “following”
then-Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken, a longtime adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, on
Twitter, indicating that the two may have initiated conversations regarding Prosecutor General
Shokin’s investigation into Burisma. At that time, Hunter Biden was serving as a board member
for Burisma."

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ukraine-clearinghouse-2019.11.21-lg-to-mp-re-biden-and-ukraine.pdf

His firing was requested and supported by the entire US Political system and the EU.

I've not seen any reports on the EU support on this, but I would be interested in reading more about it.

The Decision to fire him was not made by Joe Biden , the decision to withhold the money was not one solely in the control of Joe Biden (if at all in fact).

Joe Biden was to all intents and purposes merely the spokesperson for US and EU foreign policy at the time.

How many times do simple facts have to be explained?

He is on video saying if Ukraine don't get rid of him they aren't getting $1 Billion in loan guarantees.

mcmoustache

stefanovich wrote: »

The prosecutor who was investigating Burisma is fired because Biden threatened to withhold 1 billion dollars unless it happened?

Whenever I see this, it's a tell that someone is either lying or has been grossly misinformed. The reasons for pushing for the prosecutor's dismissal were made clear at the time by Republicans and international institutions. It wasn't even that long ago so the details are all still online. Anyone genuinely believing that bit in bold at this point in time is willingly consuming false information and repeating it and probably doesn't even know how to figure out the truth of something anyway.

Kermit.de.frog

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

again, i ask, so what?

This is not exactly unusual. But this is the depth the Trump campaign has to stoop to because they have nothing on Biden.

ohnonotgmail

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Not according to this letter to the US Department of State:
"It is my understanding that on February 4, 2016, the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s
Office, under the direction of Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, announced the seizure of
property from Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings’ founder, Mykola Zlochevksy.
The seizure occurred pursuant to a raid on Mr. Zlochevsky’s home 011 February 2, 2016.
It is also my understanding that on February 4, 2016, Hunter Biden began “following”
then-Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken, a longtime adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, on
Twitter, indicating that the two may have initiated cemersations regarding Prosecutor General
Shokin’s investigation into Burisma. At that time, Hunter Biden was serving as a board member
for Burisma."

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ukraine-clearinghouse-2019.11.21-lg-to-mp-re-biden-and-ukraine.pdf




I've not seen any reports on the EU support on this, but I would be interested in reading more about it.



He is on video saying if Ukraine don't get rid of him they aren't getting $1 Billion in loan guarantees.

shokin was fired in march 2016. remind me who was president at that time?

MoonUnit75

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

shokin was fired in march 2016. remind me who was president at that time?

Obama, Hunter's dad, Joe Biden was Vice President.

Carfacemandog

stefanovich wrote: »

The prosecutor who was investigating Burisma is fired because Biden threatened to withhold 1 billion dollars unless it happened?

Funny, as I remember it, it was Trump who was illegally withholding foreign aid unless Ukraine made up investigations knto Biden. He even got impeached for it.

Biden meanwhile as :oVP pushed for the removal of disgraced Ukrainian prosecutor Shokin for not investigating thoroughly enough (and slow walking) his investigation into Burisma. Shokin has since claimed to have advocates he was acting on behalf of - the problem is these include child porn enthusiast Rudi Giuliani as well as Lev Parnas and Dmitry Farnash, both of whom are currently in jail for trying to illegally influence and bribe foreign politicians, as well as having attempted to have the iskra Ian ambassador removed from her post.

Quin_Dub

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Not according to this letter to the US Department of State:
"It is my understanding that on February 4, 2016, the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s
Office, under the direction of Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, announced the seizure of
property from Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings’ founder, Mykola Zlochevksy.
The seizure occurred pursuant to a raid on Mr. Zlochevsky’s home 011 February 2, 2016.
It is also my understanding that on February 4, 2016, Hunter Biden began “following”
then-Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken, a longtime adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, on
Twitter, indicating that the two may have initiated conversations regarding Prosecutor General
Shokin’s investigation into Burisma. At that time, Hunter Biden was serving as a board member
for Burisma."

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ukraine-clearinghouse-2019.11.21-lg-to-mp-re-biden-and-ukraine.pdf

A letter from Lynsey Graham to Mike Pompeo isn't really "evidence" now is it , A previous post of mine gives a detailed timeline of what happened when in relation to Shokin and Burisma.

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

I've not seen any reports on the EU support on this, but I would be interested in reading more about it.

EU Support - Article here

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

He is on video saying if Ukraine don't get rid of him they aren't getting $1 Billion in loan guarantees.

Correct - Acting in his role as de-facto "spokesman" for the Internationally supported push to have Shokin removed.

Like I said , it wasn't Joe Biden on his own making this decision , it wasn't even his idea - He was just the person who implemented the policy decision.

mcmoustache

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Not according to this letter to the US Department of State:
"It is my understanding that on February 4, 2016, the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s
Office, under the direction of Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, announced the seizure of
property from Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings’ founder, Mykola Zlochevksy.
The seizure occurred pursuant to a raid on Mr. Zlochevsky’s home 011 February 2, 2016.
It is also my understanding that on February 4, 2016, Hunter Biden began “following”
then-Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken, a longtime adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, on
Twitter, indicating that the two may have initiated conversations regarding Prosecutor General
Shokin’s investigation into Burisma. At that time, Hunter Biden was serving as a board member
for Burisma."

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ukraine-clearinghouse-2019.11.21-lg-to-mp-re-biden-and-ukraine.pdf

That's a letter from Lindsay Graham to Pompeo. If you want to know how things went down, you need to look at reports and documentation from the time and not at letters from Trump loyalists.

MoonUnit75

mcmoustache wrote: »

That's a letter from Lindsay Graham to Pompeo. If you want to know how things went down, you need to look at reports and documentation from the time and not at letters from Trump loyalists.

https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/322395.html


17:51 04.02.2016
Court seizes property of ex-minister Zlochevsky in Ukraine

Court seizes property of ex-minister Zlochevsky in Ukraine
The movable and immovable property of former Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources of Ukraine Mykola Zlochevsky in Ukraine has been seized, according to the press service of the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine (PGO).

"The PGO filed a petition to court to arrest the property of the ex-Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources of Ukraine, the Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine, Mykola Zlochevsky, from which arrest was withdrawn, and other property he actually uses, namely housing estate with a total area of 922 square meters, a land plot of 0.24 hectares, a garden house with a total area of 299.8 square meters, a garden house in the territory of Vyshgorod district, a garden house of 2,312 square meters, a land plot of 0.0394 hectares, a Rolls-Royce Phantom car, a Knott 924-5014 trainer," reads the report.

The PGO clarifies that the court satisfied the petition on February 2, 2016.

"Thus, none of the objects of movable and immovable property, which was seized under the previous court ruling, has not been excluded from Zlochevsky's property," the press service said.

Zlochevsky is suspected of committing a criminal offense under Part 3 of Article 368-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (illicit enrichment).

Brian?

timsey tiger wrote: »

RCP are currently showing Trump ahead of where he was in the "top battlegrounds" back in 2016. I think this has prompted some people to think that this means that he is a good bet for 2020.



Looking at Pennsylvania, back in 2016 to see what happened. 14 days out Clinton was on 45.8% and Trump on 40.6%. With Clinton finishing on 47.5% and Trump on 48.2%. Of the vote that came back to the two major parties in the final two weeks, Trump got 82% of that.

Remember that Comey's announcement about reopening the email investigation happened within this 14 day window, so about as positive for Trump as one could expect.




Currently in Pennsylvania, 14 days out Biden is on 48.8% and Trump on 45%, with 6.2% out there. If all of this 6.2% comes back and falls as favourably to Trump as it did in 2016 (a really big if), they'd end up on Biden 49.9% and Trump on 50.1%.

Trump wins, but I wouldn't bet the house (or the spare change in the back of the couch on it).

If the 1.1% who didn't vote for any of the top four last time don't come back, then Trump looses 49.2% to Biden's 49.7%.

I'll admit that this is a bit like those football commentators bigging up the prospects of the second half or a really dull onesided match. :pac:

The problem with RCP is that no weight is given to any poll. The worst poll with the dodgiest methodology is given the same weight as the best. Which is why fivethirtyeight is far more accurate each time.