All_Pro_Bills

Not to make light of it, but 1,000,000 to 1 odds you put a BLM logo on the roof and the city inspectors are good with it.

My guess is the good citizens don't pay much attention to the positions of the people they elect. Urban politicians have learned just yelling racism and equity is enough to get the voters to fall in line and cast their vote for chaos.

This story is a clear case of continuously moving the goal posts. The original contention from the Biden camp was Joe had no discussions about or knowledge of his son's business dealings. But now that talking with and meeting them has been exposed the story changed to he's not involved in his son's business dealings. Now Devon Archer will testify to the specifics of their business dealings which is expected to include testimony that will implicate Joe Biden in both knowledge and participation in his son's business dealings. So what's left might be an elderly gentleman "cannot recall the specifics of those discussions" defense. Yes they are worried. But not for Joe. The professional Washington insiders are all worried about themselves and the potential to expose their role in covering up and enabling the racket. And potentially expose other rackets.

What technologies do we have currently that can replace the energy output currently generated by fossil fuels? I would say nuclear but that requires a 15 to 20 year lead time and there's not a lot urgency being demonstrated to deploy that technology. Fusion? Maybe 50+ years, if ever. If we can indeed address "climate change" (and fossil fuel depletion) without eliminating billions of people I'd like to see the plan and the details. Produced by engineers and scientists rather than politicians and environmentalists. I also just don't think there's enough discussion is public settings about the topics. Most of it is just believe what our "experts" are telling you and anyone that disagrees with their conclusions and ideas is a denier or misinformed. That's complete nonsense. Discussion and debate, diversity of ideas, and constructive criticism generally leads to better ideas and solutions.

Maybe one of our resident history buffs can give us an overview of Ukrainian collaboration with Hitler's SS during WW2? And how history, like they claim shapes race and ethnic relations today in the USA, is also the guiding force currently in Ukraine.

They're getting paid quite handsomely to censor whomever their told to censor. Most of what these platforms claim is "advertising" revenue is coming from the US government in the form of well laundered payments for censorship services. Don't believe for a minute these folks are acting out of some set of ideological beliefs. Its all about the money.

Generally, few object to applying due process to Hillary. However, there's an understanding that she's exempt from due process since the Washington insiders cult, where party affiliation is not a requirement for membership, protects her from consequences. Legal and other types of consequences. Consequences from what you might ask? Well, disregarding Department of State rules for e-mail and document handling, which exposed confidential and secret government documents to hackers through the use of an unauthorized, and hence illegal e-mail server set up, destroying evidence covered under a court order to preserve evidence, evidence in the form of electronic records and physical devices. None of which were charged or pursued. The thought behind her use of the home server is doing so protected her correspondence from freedom of information inquires which might cover DOS servers and records. How much worse were Trump's transgressions considering the unique rules of Presidential authority? In his case its unclear to unknowable that foreign enemies got hold of anything while we know Hillary's servers were hacked and its almost certain Chinese and Russian intelligence got hold of classified information because of her negligence, willful negligence I would emphasize. Add to it the shady dealings of the Clinton Foundation, which suddenly saw a flood of donations from foreign actors drop to a trickle when Bill and Hillary were both out of official government positions and you've got the model for the payoff operation the Biden's are running. The difference being the Clinton's were a lot smarter about it along with not having a drug addicted child fronting for the family business. So call it a "hoax". That's your thing. All that proves is you're blind to reality.

I'm in the mood today to tell it like it is. Because liberals are unreliable, lazy, constantly droning on about some "injustice" along with demanding narcissists craving constant attention so somebody has to do the work. It should be mandatory for them to wear tee shirts saying "I need attention" I might add 95% of the world's population struggling for survival could give a rat's ass about their "first world" pity party problems.

So what this articulate and educated woman would prefer is to be treated like a raging douche bag and she'll be extatic?

While we can debate the reliability of sources, but the actual question is reliability of the information. Does the House Oversight Committee have records of suspicious bank transactions reported to the IRS and cited by the IRS whistle blowers that their investigations identified as suspect transactions involving funds that found their way into accounting belonging to the Biden's or not? https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-probes-hunter-bidens-suspicious-foreign-business-transactions-flagged-by-u-s-banks/

Well, I'd suggest we examine the process of investigating a crime. What is most common is the investigators, detectives, officers, prosecutors, and others don't generally have "proof" that connects a specific suspect to the crime when the investigation is at the beginning. There is suspicion and an effort to gather evidence which will identify a suspect and place them at the scene of the crime. As events go forward the case becomes stronger (or could be dropped) and might reveal enough evidence to result in an arrest and an indictment. I assume your definition of proof is being in the process of presenting testimony and evidence to a court with prosecution, defense, judge, and jury. My expectation is we're getting there. Otherwise, I'm not in personal possession of "proof" as I'm not an investigator looking into the affairs of the Biden family. Or member of Congress or staff that has direct control of evidence. And I wasn't personally involved in any business dealings with Hunter, his business partners, the parties extending payments to him, or a party to any conversations. But I do believe anyone with good critical thinking and reasoning skills and a high level of objective thinking will conclude there's something to this story. I do follow along with the story. I listen to and read the testimony of witnesses, understand the activities of the committee gathering information, evidence, and data like bank transaction records, the identify of shell companies, and other artifacts. I understand the process of payments and transactions that are typically employed in money laundering schemes and how what is said to have been gathered about of transactions related to Biden family are consistent with the laundering process. I also believe I have a good understanding of what is customarily legal and what might be illegal. And following along with the story, events, statements, and activities of the House committee, the whistle blowers that have come forward, and statements from business partners, and foreign officials involved in the alleged payments I conclude its highly likely they're running a bribery and extortion operation. How else to explain a lavish lifestyle absent any employment or income sources that would generate the funds to support it?. Large amounts of income unaccounted for from legitimately understood sources. What else is there but to conclude the Biden's have been receiving income from illegal activities which in this case is an influence peddling and bribery operation. These allegations of receiving millions in payments from foreign officials in exchange for political favors is as real as it gets. What I'm beginning to come around to is the revelation that these kinds of scams and operations are more common than not in Washington.

Why would they put it out there? In the middle of 2023 15 months away from the election. Strategically that makes no sense. You'll get greater impact closer to the 2024 election. Let the Democrats make the first move. Which is decide to run Joe, or not. My guess is not and most likely they'll run Newsome while dressing him up as some moderate rather than a raging leftist aristocrat. Also, Joe and Jill filed 2017 tax return totally over over $9 million of income. Can anyone rationalize what source, or service, or product the Biden's provided to account for that income? About 35 times thier 2026 filing. You're not the least bit suspicious? As the bribe money trail lines up well timing-wise. Are we to believe all these whistle blowers, former business associates, foreign actors, bank transaction records and suspicious activity reports to authorities are involved in some grand conspiracy hatched by Russian intelligence? This theory from the very people that habitually mock believers of such things. But of course, trust them here and ignore the fact that protecting Biden has been demonstrated to be a clear vital interest of these folks. So lying and deception are required. On top of all this, can it get any more obvious the leadership at DOJ and FBI along with the permanent Washington beauracracy are running a massive protection racket? If it was you or me our ass would be in the slammer already. It's counter to your interests as a citizen to support these crooks. What hits me the most here is how people let themselves get hoodwinked by these grifters.

The Comer committee is going to bundle their findings into criminal referrals. Not make any grand public statements. If we use Trump-like criteria to assess "evidence" they'd all have been tried and convicted months ago. What's really missing is any clear understanding of who is the "brains" of their racket. We can cross off Hunter's name and play process of elimination to identify the most likely suspect.

The emergency the "environmentalists" don't discuss is their belief that the human population is too large for the Earth to support, and "we" need to get it down to a couple billion or so in order to manage the climate, address species extinction and habitat destruction along with issues like resource depletion.

Just think of the Russians as transsexual groomers and war crimes turn into Pride month celebration.

What "top secrets"? The Coyote lights the fuse on the rocket and hides behind the rocks waiting for the Roadrunner to run past? None of these clowns have any knowledge of any specifics. That includes all the clowns here too.

Or @SectionC3who never says a discouraging word about government abuse of power or over-reach would take it up the ass like a good obedient subject of the State and say "sir may I have another".

For some reason the DNC establishment and their allies are crapping their knickers over RFK. That reason being he's a "big name" smart and savvy outsider who knows how to play their game without any illusions about what he's up against. What might scare them most is their "this guys an extremist nutjob" label isn't getting the desired impact. Its unlikely he'll fall for the usual name-calling mob rhetoric designed to steer the conversation away from issues of substance. They're going to have to turn the "fear" meter up to 10. His net approval rating under the circumstances is unusual.

Basically, the judge questioned the parameters of the deal which appears to have conflicting public and private versions. The private version between US vs. Hunter Biden which grants immunity of any future prosecution for anything and the public deal which the DOJ states doesn't grant blanket immunity. Which simultaneously takes Hunter off the hook for everything and allows DOJ/FBI to peddle their "ongoing investigation" narrative which provides them the excuse needed to block any Congressional or other efforts to request and subpoena any documents or information about the investigation. That deal, once public, appears DOA.

Either people take the opportunity to paint somebody as evil (rather than attempt to tackle and counter the basis of their argument) or they have difficulty in understanding the difference between the message and the messenger. The context here is an evil person saying you can easily manipulate the population through various propaganda strategies. Even though the speaker is a scumbag the conclusion is valid. And acknowledging the validity of the "quote" isn't equivalent to praising or approving of the speaker. But bundling them together is a convenient way to attack somebody you disagree with without presenting any counter argument or support for your views. Its a cowards and lazy strategy for debating.

Exactly, the story you're peddling is an overly complex and elaborate hoax conjured up in a desperate attempt to avoid the truth. What's troubling is you're smart enough to know that.

That's the wildest and most unbelievable conspiracy theory. The problem with that theory is the e-mails on that machine are not the only copies. Did they also replace the original e-mails on every device and server of every person receiving and sending those e-mails to the Biden's in order for them all to match perfectly? How'd they pull that off? Pure fantasy. And these are the same Russian characters that everyone has concluded don't have the strategic or tactical thinking and planning skills to defeat a lesser foe of Ukraine? But they've got the brain power to pull off some elaborate and incomprehensible hoax? Your cult is desperate to save the Biden's, For whatever reason. Unless some personal form of compensation is at risk I suggest you refrain from making yourself look silly by posting nonsense from nonsense sources.

"The hearing was temporarily derailed when judge Noreika said she didn’t understand what Hunter Biden could still be charged with. She asked questions that exposed a difference of understanding between Justice Department prosecutors and Biden’s lawyer, Chris Clark. “I don’t really understand the scope” of the agreement, Noreika said. She noted that Biden has had numerous foreign business dealings. At one point, she raised a hypothetical as to whether Biden could be charged as acting as an unregistered foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. -Bloomberg She also called the deal federal prosecutors reached with Hunter over his gun possession offense "unusual," and that it contains some "non-standard terms," such as "broad immunity" from other potential charges. "We don't usually make diversion agreements public," she said. Leo Wise, an assistant US attorney representing the government at the hearing, said that Biden could still be charged with a FARA violation. His statement prompted Clark to object to the scope of what Biden could still be charged with. Noreika asked the prosecutors and defense lawyers to resolve their differences about the plea agreement and temporarily adjourned the hearing. When the hearing resumed, Wise and Clark said they were in agreement that the non-prosecution aspects of the deal will be limited to only tax violations, drug offenses and a firearm violation during the years 2014 to 2019. Biden can still be charged for crimes outside the scope of the deal. -Bloomberg Under the original plea agreement, Biden intended to plea guilty to two misdemeanor tax crimes committed in 2017 and 2018, and would avoid prison on the gun possession charge." If I recall the procedure correctly (legal experts here please correct me if necessary), the judge in a case must accept the plea deal made between the prosecutor and the defense. If not the deal is void and the case could proceed to trial.

That sounds like a reasonable approach. But the political climate is beyond the point of reasonable. And its too bad the Democrats didn't heed your advice back in 2020. The knew clearly the votes in the Senate weren't there to convict. They knew the charges were flimsy at best. But they went ahead regardless. As I recall they put on a couple "show" trials in the Senate along with allowing Nancy to glide across the floor of the House Chamber carrying articles of impeachment. All covered quite enthusiastically and euphorically by their friends in the media. It was quite a spectacle. Quite simply, I sense people the Democrats have been pissing all over for 7+ years are excited by the prospects of returning the favor. But I expect the revenge will be outing the corrupt old dirt bag for the lifetime grifter and influence peddler he is here. Personally, I think the Republicans should let Biden's rotting lame duck carcass finish out the term. Let the Democrats figure out what to do with him. Run him again (which I doubt), maybe invoke the 25th amendment and promote VP Harris to the top spot which I expect might cause all sorts of panic, or maybe try to pull a "fast one" and get somebody more favorable to the party leadership into the White House to finish the term and run in 2024.