Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is this the end of Democrat front runner Joe Biden?

Options
1…1516182021…56

Comments

  • Options
    #512
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,692 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    He's being impeached for doing what just about every president has done... without the threat of being impeached?

    Sorry What?

    How many Presidents tried to black mail a country into announcing an investigation into a rival for personal political gain?

    Personally I wouldn't have used Rudy and his Goons, but then again we are dealing with quite the dotard here, aren't we?


  • Options
    #513
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    Sorry What?

    How many Presidents tried to black mail a country into announcing an investigation into a rival for personal political gain?

    Personally I wouldn't have used Rudy and his Goons, but then again we are dealing with quite the dotard here, aren't we?
    He temporarily withheld money because of a fear of corruption. Was an investigation launched? Was the money delivered? If your contention was Trump's main goal why didn't it come up in the first phone call and then only as an aside later in the second call? Stop drinking the kool-aid, man.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #514
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,073 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    notobtuse wrote: »
    In 2012 he left the Democratic party and became a Republican.

    Not quite (per wikipedia): In September 2009, Trump changed his party affiliation back to the Republican Party. In December 2011, Trump changed to "no party affiliation" (independent).In April 2012, Trump again returned to the Republican Party.[3]

    Think about it. You believe he was A Democrat during all the birther lying he ginned up starting in 2008? Srsly?


  • Options
    #515
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,073 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    notobtuse wrote: »
    He temporarily withheld money because of a fear of corruption. Was an investigation launched? Was the money delivered? If your contention was Trump's main goal why didn't it come up in the first phone call and then only as an aside later in the second call? Stop drinking the kool-aid, man.

    Ehh. Lev Parnas has cleared that up. It was all done to get an announcement of an investigation, which didn't happen thanks to the whistleblower.

    And, please already. Threatening to commit murder is a crime, even if the murder doesn't happen. Threatening to withhold aid then not following through on the threat, in order to extort a political favor, is a high crime if you're President. We've been over this on this thread. A lot.


  • Options
    #516
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Igotadose wrote: »
    Ehh. Lev Parnas has cleared that up. It was all done to get an announcement of an investigation, which didn't happen thanks to the whistleblower.

    And, please already. Threatening to commit murder is a crime, even if the murder doesn't happen. Threatening to withhold aid then not following through on the threat, in order to extort a political favor, is a high crime if you're President. We've been over this on this thread. A lot.
    Parnas? The guy who took three different positions to a topic in less than two minutes in the interview with the MSLSD moron?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #517
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Igotadose wrote: »
    Ehh. Lev Parnas has cleared that up. It was all done to get an announcement of an investigation, which didn't happen thanks to the whistleblower.

    And, please already. Threatening to commit murder is a crime, even if the murder doesn't happen. Threatening to withhold aid then not following through on the threat, in order to extort a political favor, is a high crime if you're President. We've been over this on this thread. A lot.

    Now we're equating Trump withholding money in order to insure it wasn't being wasted on corruption... to murder? Trump Derangement Syndrome seemingly has no bounds.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #518
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,073 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Now we're equating Trump withholding money in order to insure it wasn't being wasted on corruption... to murder? Trump Derangement Syndrome seemingly has no bounds.

    No, not at all. Crimes can be 'attempted'. "Attempted" extortion is as much as a crime as 'actual' extortion. Basically, that refutes your tired 'they got the money anyway!' defense. Doesn't matter if they eventually did.


  • Options
    #519
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Igotadose wrote: »
    No, not at all. Crimes can be 'attempted'. "Attempted" extortion is as much as a crime as 'actual' extortion. Basically, that refutes your tired 'they got the money anyway!' defense. Doesn't matter if they eventually did.
    I’m curious, just to see if you’re no hypocrite… Evidence exists that Obama had the FBI spy on an official they pretended to believe was working inside the 2016 Trump presidential campaign on behalf of the Russian government, which therefore allowed them to spy on most everyone in the Trump campaign. And because the FBI had no hard evidence they lied to the FISA court to obtain warrants. Do you think an investigation should have taken place and Obama should have been impeached for it?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #520
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Igotadose wrote: »
    It was all done to get an announcement of an investigation, which didn't happen thanks to the whistleblower.

    He also said that the only motivation for getting rid of Yovanovitch was because she was in the way of Ukraine getting that announcement, but yet had previously stated:

    image.png
    image.png

    So quite clearly then man tells porkie pies. Do the left really want to hang their hopes on yet another liar trying to save his skin? Didn't work the last time.
    Threatening to withhold aid then not following through on the threat, in order to extort a political favor, is a high crime if you're President. We've been over this on this thread. A lot.

    lol "We've been over this" ?? :P Haha, yes, we have been over it, multiple times, and each time you folks talk a load of nonsense. Is it that more of you agree than more of us, that has you thinking you've win the debate on the issue? It must be that, as I can't see any other reason why you would think you're right, but remember this, there were 50 times more of you lot saying Trump conspired with Russia too, and that was some faceplant in the end and so the numbers are no barometer of the truth, that's for sure.

    Now: Trump primarily withheld aid because he felt other countries weren't doing enough for Ukraine but that aside, even if he did withhold aid until such time as he felt the new Ukraine president (Zelensky) showed enough signs to convince him that he was unlike those at the helm of previous corrupt Ukrainian administrations, so what? That's his prerogative.

    Ukrainian members of parliament went to great lengths to try and see that Trump was not elected in 2016 and were also sources on the Steele Dossier. That alone was enough to warrant him saying what he did on the call when it comes to him asking Zelensky to "find out what happened ... get to the bottom of it .. if that's possible" (all of which are terms and expressions synonymous with getting to the "truth" - not fabricating "dirt" - as Mr Schiff would have us all believe with his scurrilous parody).

    Trump for sure is mistaken on the server aspect of it all, but that's immaterial, all that matters is that there were actions taken by Ukrainians in 2016/2017 that make it understandable for him to have asked Zelensky what he did and there for sure were.

    As for what he said re the Bidens: it would be absurd for Trump not to have brought up what Joe did given that the video of him bragging about have the Ukraine prosecutor fired had gone viral and also how in the reporting of it questions had been raised about his motives as a result of Hunter's position on the board of Burisma at the time. As Trump said: "there's a lot of talk about" it all and asked him to "look into it" as it sounded "horrible" to him.

    Again, no mention of making stuff up or anything close to it.

    This is the problem with the democrats, they spend so much time lying about Trump and what he says that they eventually start to believe it.


  • Options
    #521
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,692 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    He temporarily withheld money because of a fear of corruption. Was an investigation launched? Was the money delivered? If your contention was Trump's main goal why didn't it come up in the first phone call and then only as an aside later in the second call? Stop drinking the kool-aid, man.

    Trump had no interest in an investigation.

    He wanted an announcement of an investigation.

    Purely for personal political gain over a rival.

    That got him impeached.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #522
    Hande hoche!
    Registered Users Posts: 7,519 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    Rumours are that he is polling fourth in Iowa. Some of the zanier ones are that he is being beaten in some districts by Amy Klobuchar.


  • Options
    #523
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Looks like Biden will finish fourth or fifth in Iowa when and if they can come up with the results. He’s currently number two in New Hampshire but his numbers keep falling. Looks like the beginning of the end for Joe. Time for Bloomberg to step in and rescue the DNC chances?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #524
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,728 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Biden has been centre stage for too long and people I say are getting sick of seeing him. It be a blessing in disguise if he does not get it for the Democrats


  • Options
    #525
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    Igotadose wrote: »
    Ehh. Lev Parnas has cleared that up. It was all done to get an announcement of an investigation, which didn't happen thanks to the whistleblower.

    And, please already. Threatening to commit murder is a crime, even if the murder doesn't happen. Threatening to withhold aid then not following through on the threat, in order to extort a political favor, is a high crime if you're President. We've been over this on this thread. A lot.
    John Bolton also had it confirmed to him through Mike Pompeo. One is Trumps secretary of state, the other was his national security advise, both are died in the wool Republicans, and both were personally hired by Trump.

    Even several senators that voted to acquit him are not trying go defend what he did, and instead have literally moved to the "we maybe he won't do it again" defense.

    I would love tfo see how much this defense is used by criminal defense attorneys with a clearly guilty client going forward, and how many get their clients off the hook because of it.


  • Options
    #526
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    martingriff wrote: »
    Biden has been centre stage for too long and people I say are getting sick of seeing him. It be a blessing in disguise if he does not get it for the Democrats

    His stepping in may prove invaluable though. Some have criticised the crowded democrat field, but others for a while now have been calling it a positive, as it makes it a lot more difficult for Trump and the GOP to manufacture targeted fake news stories about the eventual candidate which has proven to be exactly the case with the entire Biden/Burisma debacle beingball for nothing.

    In the end, Biden was just a terrible candidate who is old, out of touch, cranky, confrontational even with democrat voters, and who flopped in amazing fashion among the very people he was supposed to be "electable" against Trump with, with all three that this "electability" line was pointed at (Buttigieg, Sanders, Warren) finishing above him.

    If Sanders (or Buttigieg, or Warren) pulls ahead in the first few primaries though, just watch the fake news, hacks, etc on whoever it is start rolling out at multiple times the pace we saw in this 2016. The second half of this year is going to be wilder than many of us have ever seen in our lifetimes with regards to politics.


  • Options
    #527
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    FreeThePants wrote: »
    His stepping in may prove invaluable though. Some have criticised the crowded democrat field, but others for a while now have been calling it a positive, as it makes it a lot more difficult for Trump and the GOP to manufacture targeted fake news stories about the eventual candidate which has proven to be exactly the case with the entire Biden/Burisma debacle beingball for nothing.

    In the end, Biden was just a terrible candidate who is old, out of touch, cranky, confrontational even with democrat voters, and who flopped in amazing fashion among the very people he was supposed to be "electable" against Trump with, with all three that this "electability" line was pointed at (Buttigieg, Sanders, Warren) finishing above him.

    If Sanders (or Buttigieg, or Warren) pulls ahead in the first few primaries though, just watch the fake news, hacks, etc on whoever it is start rolling out at multiple times the pace we saw in this 2016. The second half of this year is going to be wilder than many of us have ever seen in our lifetimes with regards to politics.
    Thanks, I'll be sure to keep an eye on the fake news that will be pouring out of CNN, MSNBC, The NY Times, and the Washington Post.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #528
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Thanks, I'll be sure to keep an eye on the fake news that will be pouring out of CNN, MSNBC, The NY Times, and the Washington Post.
    Have you got anything to add beyond blatant and pathetic virtue signalling?


  • Options
    #529
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    FreeThePants wrote: »
    Have you got anything to add beyond blatant and pathetic virtue signalling?
    Just keeping it real.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #530
    FreeThePants
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭FreeThePants


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Just keeping it real.

    That would be a no then.


  • Options
    #531
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    FreeThePants wrote: »
    That would be a no then.
    Sure, Jan.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #532
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    What is a “lying, dog-faced pony soldier?”

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #533
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,258 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    notobtuse wrote: »
    What is a “lying, dog-faced pony soldier?”

    its a John Wayne quote.


  • Options
    #534
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    its a John Wayne quote.

    Good guess, but the line as Biden used it never appeared in either of the John Wayne films (“Hondo” or “Pony Soldier”) I think you might be referencing.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #535
    Hande hoche!
    Registered Users Posts: 7,519 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    Fifth place finish in Iowa. Ouch. Will be curious to see how he does in Nevada.
    Seems like his staking it all on South Carolina.


  • Options
    #536
    car_radio19834
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 247 ✭✭car_radio19834


    I hear he's talking about black and brown voters now.

    Its hilarious seeing all the goodwill from hiding behind Obama being lost.


  • Options
    #537
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Stick a fork in him... he's done.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #538
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Poor Joe. He’s apparently pigeonholed himself into putting a black woman for VP ahead of a person best suited for the job. Not that there aren't qualified black women out there, but it seems preposterous not to even consider others who might be more qualified. And now Black Lives Matter is making Biden’s search even more difficult. There has been talks of Biden considering Florida Congresswoman Val Demmings as his running mate. The pick would definitely put Florida more in play in the election. But Black Lives Matter has come out and called Biden an idiot for considering Val Demings. Apparently a 27-year distinguished career in law enforcement is an automatic disqualifier for BLM. Tough job for Joe ahead if he can’t even consider a person who believes in law and order, and when the Left is seemingly eating its own.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #539
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Stick a fork in him... he's done.

    Nope. And he's currently odds-on favourite for the 2020 election


  • Options
    #540
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Nope. And he's currently odds-on favourite for the 2020 election
    Yeah, it is surprising he has made it this far. I don't think he'll win but with the biased mainstream media's help he'll make a good run of it.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #541
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,073 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Poor Joe. He’s apparently pigeonholed himself into putting a black woman for VP ahead of a person best suited for the job. Not that there aren't qualified black women out there, but it seems preposterous not to even consider others who might be more qualified. And now Black Lives Matter is making Biden’s search even more difficult. There has been talks of Biden considering Florida Congresswoman Val Demmings as his running mate. The pick would definitely put Florida more in play in the election. But Black Lives Matter has come out and called Biden an idiot for considering Val Demings. Apparently a 27-year distinguished career in law enforcement is an automatic disqualifier for BLM. Tough job for Joe ahead if he can’t even consider a person who believes in law and order, and when the Left is seemingly eating its own.

    A bit of an over-exaggeration. Someone from the NY chapter of BLM has said Demings is a non-starter, along with Harris. Well, that's not "The Left eating its own" as you are well aware. That's the NY Post (ooh...Murdoch) stirring stuff that Fox picks up and then makes it to Yahoo. If you read the original article, there's plenty of 'she'd be a great pick' from various Democratic operatives as well.

    But hey, it makes for clickbait, eh?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement