leh-nerd skin-erd

If these tapes turn out to exist, and implicate Joe Biden in the type of high level corruption that most Americans consider extremely likely (but only when the other team is in charge), let’s remember the liberal view that anything under $5,000,005 is considered slippage and wrong, but not like wrong wrong.

Thank you for the summary. I get the general gist of it, but I’ll tell you what I think anyways. Barr was clear on the actions undertaken by the opposition and their politically motivated prosecution of Trump. He made a tremendous amount of sense to me, and in his comments I got the feeling he felt the Dems actions seriously eroded the faith people have in our system and was an absolute net negative for faith and truth in governing. It did and it was. On the flip side, it would make sense a guy like Barr detested the chaos that Trump seems to thrive in. It also seems clear he doesn’t like the man personally, but he really, really loves the idea of the United States as a symbol of decency in spite of some clear and obvious flaws in our system. In that regard, push comes to shove, given the choice between the establishment system with all it warts and biases, or chaos associated with the Trump factor, he would hold his nose and turn his head on the type of activity he strongly criticized post-Mueller. That’s the general path of insiders, and in his mind, better a broken system and shenanigans than the system gets torn to shreds. After all, from his perspective, what changed after the dem assault on truth and decency post Mueller? Nothing at all. He described an assault on a presidency yet here we are. So, Barr is a man I’d listen to, consider his perspective, and weigh out carefully what he says. That doesn’t mean I agree with everything he says or that I think he’s right all the time, but I’ll listen. Some people get stronger as the fight rages, you’re getting dumber with each post you share. Read. Comprehend. Consider. React. These are your marching orders, bold font or not. Know that I am praying for you.

You'll be fine, just rub some dirt on it.

Someone should reach out to @Irv, he's got the hot shot to the top and can bag that gig for BillSy.

Bill Barr might be the most sensible, believable person in the country. It’s a shame the Dems wanted him exiled after he spoke sensibly the first time.

Joe Biden maintained control of records dating to his time on the senate, which ended in 2009. He became VP in 2008, which was 15+ years ago. 🤦🏼‍♂️

such intolerance.

Thanks. But…”movers”? The Uhaul guys are to blame, they just chuck boxers wherever, and do so over several job changes, multiple locations and a couple decades? The simplest, most logical explanation is that Biden and his team directed individuals to provide him with top secret and classified documents for his personal safekeeping. It’s not slippage, a delightfully harmless word that makes sense when one document is in the wrong file “Opps! Slippage!!!”, not in a case where documents are spread about like bodies at a mafia construction site upstate. Criminality or the desire to pursue charges from a political or reasonable perspective is a different issue, and I agree with you there. I do agree the complete lack of oversight is part of the problem, and why Trump foolishly exposed his throat to the Biden DOJ. He likely assumed that since no one really seems to give a damn about who takes where documents go or how they are maintained post-presidency, he would be fine. He was wrong. Asked, answered, read. Quick, helpful reminder—Don’t forget to cite the Lindbergh kidnapping case later today in support of your evolving theories. Again, you are welcome.

Classic fixed mindset response. Considered. Anticipated. Expected. I am happy I was able to break your fixation with the Simpson case and your elementary school foray into jury nullification. Baby steps. You are welcome, Kemp.

Easy Perry Mason, and take a break from Wikipedia. If you’re interested in a thread about historical societal trends in the criminal justice system, you should start it. That will give you another outlet for repeatedly asking questions previously answered, and avoiding questions that cause you to question that which you declare to be true. With regard to focus, you’re off on a 30 year old tangent, like Joe Biden wandering around tripping over “sandbags” real and imagined. Answered previously.

I understand what you said, but you mentioned him doing something “shady”. There isn’t a question on how the trove of documents got there, he’s declared what happened—someone else is responsible across the board. The only question is if he’s telling the truth. Since you mentioned “shady”, it sounds as if you think he’s being intentionally deceitful.

This just got interesting to me. Are you speaking hypothetically, or do you think Biden did something “shady” in removing and maintaining top secret classified information over several decades in public service, and has lied about the circumstances up this day? The official line is he’s not responsible for the material being in his possession.

I discount a substantial percentage of what you say in these situations as I see you as an abject partisan, and thus an untrustworthy source of information. That doesn’t change if you say it once or infinity times. I do, however, consider most of what you offer, and that’s unusual where the Biden loyalists are concerned. In this case, I was responding to L’Ron who conceded that Biden was guilty of wrongdoing, but saved the day by rightdoing after all the wrongdoing once Trump’s door was kicked in. If he’s guilty of wrongdoing, by definition, the rules of the game change. Hypothetical discussion for kicks.

So…Biden knowingly removed classified documents over several decades, in violation of laws and guidelines he has bragged about being an expert on, excoriated Trump for having records in his possession, knowing he had hundreds of top secret documents in a variety of places…but “followed protocol” after Trump’s doors were kicked in? Holy crap he’s like one of the hero’s of the Alamo. 😂😂😂

😂 Of course there are Biden loyalists, many post here. Tens of millions in fact, but they prefer to suggest “I only voted for him because….” and the rest of the statement is “because I approve of his agenda!”. Biden’s loyal disciples use terms like “slippage”, or argue that when he claims his son died in Iraq that he really means Bethesda, and that when he copped to fondling women he’s just a man of certain age (the groping age, it would seem), or explain that his shakedown of Ukraine was what everybody wanted though no one had any actual proof of a combined front to fire the prosecutor beyond Biden’s Secretary suggesting it. I sincerely respect you acknowledging his wrongdoing. Good for you.

Same with claims of stolen elections. Same with concerns about the executive office shaking down Ukraine. Same with spreading vax fears and hesitancy. Same with inappropriate behavior with women. In fairness though I have to give @L Ron Burgundy props for suggesting what Biden did was “wrong”. Maybe not “wrong wrong”, “real wrong”, or “wtf were you thinking wrong”, but compared the other Bilderbergs for Biden loyalists, it’s something.

But you continue to argue that Biden took and maintained the classified documents knowingly, that is, revealed them only when politically necessary. That’s a different level of commitment to beat the system than “How could I ever know what’s in my garage??”. And btw, Goose and others actually argue that Biden didn’t do anything wrong. The Gooser even came up with the gem that @Doc probably couldn’t say with certainty how many screwdrivers or lawn & leaf bags he had in his garage. That’s right up there with Chicago is being attacked because it’s not the murder capital of the country, it’s only top 5. Your argument, btw, is why people are rallying to the conclusion that Trump is being targeted—-because you know what he did was wrong, they know what he did was wrong, but you think his version of wrongdoing is Presidential, while Trump’s is Alcatraz worthy. This is time #26 Trump haters reveal their hypocrisy.

Societally speaking, justice was served. From the perspective of family and friends of the victims, it was not. Sadly, that happens everyday. Absent recognition that it’s an imperfect system and bias, emotion, theatrics, interpretation of law and occasional animus factor into it all, you end up with Kempian logic, where one-sided dialogue rules, you’re worried about nazi’s hidden behind the mail box and the thinking the only case with a poor outcome involved as former Rb for the SF 49ers.

Why are you asking questions I’ve answered twice in great detail? Your OJ question is quite astute, too. Is it your contention that every case in the country, is free from bias, hostile prosecution, evidence tampering, police misconduct and political bias? Other than the OJ case though, the one Kemp outlier. Is that your claim here? You should read more, Kemp. To answer your question—because that’s what I do, unlike some here—I believe OJ murdered Nicole and Goldman. I think you stumbled onto a good analogy here though, in that the jury apparently saw and considered a flawed and broken justice system, considered evidence presented about the bias of the LAPD and its detectives and rejected the claims made. I also think a fair percentage of posters here, you included, would side with the jury today.

Here you go, Codger. I changed the font for emphasis. As of today, Trump is not guilty of any crimes. As of today, the same holds true for Joe Biden. That situation may change in the future. Thereafter, it may change again depending on the trajectory of the court system. That you don’t like the answer is your problem, not mine. I have no idea if he’s guilty as charged. I know that when a prosecutor brings a case before a Grand Jury, it is a lob-sided, indeed one-sided affair where evidence is presented to a group on individuals to make a decision on taking it to the next level. It’s the prosecution’s time to make their case, the cards are dealt in their favor, and it’s very rare that an indictment is not returned. I didn’t fact check this article, nor did I consider federal v state v local. I looked into this when I sat on a grand jury panel 7 or 8 years ago, and these numbers seem right. The system is designed to get cases to court, or affect plea deals, have defendants tap out, or be punished. These are facts. https://news.yahoo.com/ferguson-federal-grand-jury-indictment-statistics-history-134942645.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9kdWNrZHVja2dvLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFXDIl4gudszY7kzLXwtxRP0ZxMp5omNMdVGkcZ4u2y3s4Y3E9G2wtD06p5asy_IIUDJvg2jiBqpgjkmBwped0pwzIQ9v-51ZSdi7t6wDHxxzKT96earQ0C9aWyBSuESMK14fkMaggVEDXt8DPOZljSorPoBDS-OBVa4y9oskVkO In the more than 162,500 cases prosecuted by U.S. attorneys from 2009 to 2010, grand juries voted not to return an indictment in only 11, according to data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics — equivalent to one in 14,759 cases, or 0.0068 percent. That ship has sailed, and he is going to be tried for these charges. If I suspend cynicism and my belief that this is a politically motivated event, I can see a set of circumstances where he should be charged. Those circumstances include trading in national security secrets with foreign adversaries. I think the chances that happened are infinitesimal. Assuming that isn’t the case—-Big picture, given what we know about the complete clusterf$ckery of safeguards and classified documents, and that it seems to be the exception where safeguards are followed, and that decisions that “…no reasonable prosecutor…” would prosecute otherwise criminal acts, I think the actions of the SC are extremely, exceptionally, and almost unbelievably bad for the nation. Let’s also take this time to acknowledge that after I responded to your questions, you refused to answer mine. That’s weird. 🤫

We’re talking about people, not luxury vinyl flooring, Boomer.

And a woman’s right to choose, personal empowerment, and liberation from the patriarchy.

These photos actually support his premise, but if you feel compelled to reinterpret that’s ok, too.

I recall this from the last time we interacted a year or two ago. You posture, ask questions you seem to think are unassailable, and when answered, you put your head back into your shell like a frightened tortoise. You should not ask questions if you’re not prepared to deal with the answers that follow.