Everything Joe Biden--Gaffes, Miscues, Touching, Songs

[Deranged Rhino]

8 hours ago, Warcodered said:

That's not really correct there are 7 women who stated he touched them in ways that made them feel uncomfortable and they felt was inappropriate and when further questioned after this accusation they didn't give any further allegations.

 

Still I'd rather neither candidate have these kind of accusations but I wouldn't lean towards "Grab them by the *****" Trump as being the less likely predator.

What’s funny is your willingness to ignore countless counts of visual evidence for Joe, while being so outraged over an out of context sound byte between two dudes big talking one another.  
 

It’s kind of like being outraged about someone running for office who once talked about robbing a bank, yet never did — then turning around and voting for Bonnie and Clyde. 

[KRC]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/ocasio-cortez-its-legitimate-to-talk-about-allegations-against-biden/ar-BB12DoFB?ocid=spartanntp

 

Pay particular attention to the Trigger Warning at the top of the page if you are a snowflake.

[B-Man]

 

 

"How on earth do you pretend that Joe Biden’s character is not instantly newsworthy? He’s the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party for president."

 

"He was the vice president of the United States for eight years. He’s been a front-page news figure since the 1980s.

 

Thought experiment: Imagine that an allegation came forward against Ken Starr. We all know that, because Starr was involved in pursuing the Lewinsky story, any whiff of sexual impropriety would instantly be framed as a hypocrisy story even long after Starr has left public service. Biden chaired the Hill-Thomas hearings in 1991; how is that not the same thing?

 

We were constantly told that the Kavanaugh allegations should be judged by a low bar because the hearings were 'a job interview' and he’d be confirmed to a powerful, life-tenured job. Well, presidents have a lot more power than any individual Supreme Court justice, including the power to appoint lots of life-tenured federal judges and justices. Isn’t this Biden’s job interview?"

Writes Dan McLaughlin in "The New York Times Knows Nobody Believes It about Biden, Kavanaugh, and Sexual Assault" (National Review).

In my view, the Christine Blasey Ford and Tara Reade accusations are at just about exactly the same level in seriousness, importance, and credibility.

 

The obvious difference is which political party supports the accused.

 

If you don't treat them the same, you're showing that you're doing partisan politics. It's what we saw in the 90s with Anita Hill and Paula Jones. I know I've treated like cases alike on a principled basis and I have done it for decades. But I don't see too many other people stepping up to that challenge.

 

 

 

 

.

[B-Man]

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

[Warcodered]

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

while being so outraged over an out of context sound byte between two dudes big talking one another.

So your saying when you try and talk big to someone you brag about sexually assaulting women...that's a thought process that seems ok to you?

[Deranged Rhino]

8 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

So your saying when you try and talk big to someone you brag about sexually assaulting women...that's a thought process that seems ok to you?

 

As an adult man, I know the difference between talk and action. 

 

Joe's on tape, assaulting women and children countless times -- on top of Reade's allegation. One is not like the other... unless you're a partisan. 

[Warcodered]

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

One is not like the other... unless you're a partisan.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Warcodered said:

 

3 years later and you're still reading me wrong. 

 

(Just like you still likely think the Russia narrative was real)

[Warcodered]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

3 years later and you're still reading me wrong. 

 

(Just like you still likely think the Russia narrative was real)

And we're still waiting for Trump to take down your elaborate conspiracy...any month now, I'm not really sure what soon means anymore.

[B-Man]

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Warcodered said:

And we're still waiting for Trump to take down your elaborate conspiracy...any month now, I'm not really sure what soon means anymore.

 

Like I said. You're in denial of reality. Everything I've discussed with you about Trump/Russia turned out to be entirely accurate, whereas your position has been shown to be 100% incorrect. Yet, you get mad at me for sharing information rather than whatever sources you rely on to get your information who blatantly lied to you for the past three years. 

 

That's a "you" problem. 

 

Like not being able to discern the difference between an out of context audio clip and actual visual evidence of assault. 

[Warcodered]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Like not being able to discern the difference between an out of context audio clip and actual visual evidence of assault.

Out of context ? What exactly would be in context? Does he have to be actively assaulting someone for it to count?

[Doc]

29 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

So your saying when you try and talk big to someone you brag about sexually assaulting women...that's a thought process that seems ok to you?

 

It was an extreme example, a la his "I can shoot someone on 5th avenue..."

[Deranged Rhino]

16 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

Out of context ? What exactly would be in context? Does he have to be actively assaulting someone for it to count?

 

In context: He can grab them by the *****. 

Out of context (your stance): He does grab them by the *****. 

 

But again, when you're so angry at the truth that you continue to fall back on those who lied to your face for three years about Russia/Trump, you get what you deserve. Which, in this case, is to be woefully under informed and hypocritical. 

[BuffaloHokie13]

17 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

Out of context ? What exactly would be in context? Does he have to be actively assaulting someone for it to count?

Typically he would actually have to do it and not just talk about it vaguely, yes. Assuming you're taking about guilt and the American justice system, that is.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Typically he would actually have to do it and not just talk about it vaguely, yes. Assuming you're taking about guilt and the American justice system, that is.

 

Correct. 

 

But he's not interested in accuracy or truth, only having what he WANTS to be true to be validated. Because: feelz are more important than truth.

 

Meanwhile: 

 

 

 

(Ignore the actual evidence -- focus on the manufactured story instead. That's how low information people are controlled)

 

 

[IDBillzFan]

24 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

Out of context ? What exactly would be in context? Does he have to be actively assaulting someone for it to count?

 

Are you making the case that two men talking about wanting to bang some chick is considered sexual assault?

[Deranged Rhino]

3 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

Are you making the case that two men talking about wanting to bang some chick is considered sexual assault?

 

Yes. He is. 

 

That's how poor his argument is when looked at in the context of reality, not partisanship. 

[Warcodered]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Yes. He is. 

 

That's how poor his argument is when looked at in the context of reality, not partisanship. 

Right because I was clarifying what you meant when you brushed aside what Trump said as out of context and it apparently is that unless he's actively assaulting someone while he brags about assaulting someone it doesn't count.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Warcodered said:

Right because I was clarifying what you meant when you brushed aside what Trump said as out of context and it apparently is that unless he's actively assaulting someone while he brags about assaulting someone it doesn't count.

 

Wrong. You are equating talking about sex as being the same as assault -- while ignoring Joe's actual record of assault of not just women, but children. Because you don't want truth. You want to have your feelz validated. 

 

It's a sad way to operate, especially when your own track record of getting stories "right" is so spotty. 

2 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

 

 

You can fix your own stupidity. But it starts by admitting you're wrong, which you never do. 

24 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

In context: He can grab them by the *****. 

Out of context (your stance): He does grab them by the *****. 

 

But again, when you're so angry at the truth that you continue to fall back on those who lied to your face for three years about Russia/Trump, you get what you deserve. Which, in this case, is to be woefully under informed and hypocritical. 

 

[IDBillzFan]

2 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

Right because I was clarifying what you meant when you brushed aside what Trump said as out of context and it apparently is that unless he's actively assaulting someone while he brags about assaulting someone it doesn't count.

 

 

If you believe Trump is guilty of sexual assault for talking about banging a chick to another guy, you must absolutely HATE Biden. I mean, the dude  finger-p[hucked one of his helpers against her will. Surely you are ready to have him arrested, no?

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, IDBillzFan said:

 

If you believe Trump is guilty of sexual assault for talking about banging a chick to another guy, you must absolutely HATE Biden. I mean, the dude  finger-p[hucked one of his helpers against her will. Surely you are ready to have him arrested, no?

 

Of course not. That would require him to have principles. 

[3rdnlng]

37 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

Right because I was clarifying what you meant when you brushed aside what Trump said as out of context and it apparently is that unless he's actively assaulting someone while he brags about assaulting someone it doesn't count.

Quitter!

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[GG]

2 hours ago, Warcodered said:

Right because I was clarifying what you meant when you brushed aside what Trump said as out of context and it apparently is that unless he's actively assaulting someone while he brags about assaulting someone it doesn't count.

The comments were certainly crass.

 

But the right context was him bragging of what he could do, now that he was a MEDIA CELEBRITY.  He was amazed that if he wanted to, he could get away with a hell of a lot more by being a media celebrity, than by being a mere billionaire.

 

That's the context that many media celebrities wanted to ignore and made it out to be that he actually sexually assaulted women.  Of course, two years later, reality caught up to many of those media celebrities.

[Doc]

14 minutes ago, GG said:

The comments were certainly crass.

 

But the right context was him bragging of what he could do, now that he was a MEDIA CELEBRITY.  He was amazed that if he wanted to, he could get away with a hell of a lot more by being a media celebrity, than by being a mere billionaire.

 

That's the context that many media celebrities wanted to ignore and made it out to be that he actually sexually assaulted women.  Of course, two years later, reality caught up to many of those media celebrities.

 

Not to mention who he was running against at the time, or more specifically, the husband of that person and what she did to ignore/cover-up/enable/defend him.

[Buffalo_Gal]

4 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

As an adult man, I know the difference between talk and action. 

 

Joe's on tape, assaulting women and children countless times -- on top of Reade's allegation. One is not like the other... unless you're a partisan. 

I am watching Fox The Five now waiting for the presser to start. Dana Pernio just said that Tara Reade claims she: Filed a Document of Complaint in 1993 with the Senate. There is a FIOA in from the NYT for that document (if it exists).  Soon after she filed the complaint, she was removed from her position, and the interns corroborated that removal (they did not know why she was removed).


 

[RoyBatty is alive]

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I am watching Fox The Five now waiting for the presser to start. Dana Pernio just said that Tara Reade claims she: Filed a Document of Complaint in 1993 with the Senate. There is a FIOA in from the NYT for that document (if it exists).  Soon after she filed the complaint, she was removed from her position, and the interns corroborated that removal (they did not know why she was removed).


 

Not trying to dump on Biden but a LOT of  these congresswoman and senators are the biggest lying hypocrites  of all time, they essentially pay hush money and their sex assault problems, some real, some not disappear...zero accountability...and zero dollars out of the politicians politics, tax payers pay for it.  And this is for both Republicans and Democrats.  It would be amazing to see all the claims after all such as in the hysteria about Supreme court nominees.

[B-Man]

Even more tone-deaf: Joe Biden compliments frost queen Nancy Pelosi on her great taste in ice cream

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

6 hours ago, Warcodered said:

Out of context ? What exactly would be in context? Does he have to be actively assaulting someone for it to count?

Well, when the contact is consensual, as he suggested in the clip, it wouldn’t be assault...it would be consensual. 
 

But yes, I can see how Joe Biden, a politician with decades of experience plagiarizing material, lying about his experiences, and who  acknowledged wrongdoing riiiiiiiiight about the time he wanted to president, certainly could have misjudged a lady struggling to get free from the clutches of an extremely powerful and creepy man as wanting to have him assault her on a sidewalk.  

 

 

 

[Teddy KGB]

8 hours ago, Warcodered said:

So your saying when you try and talk big to someone you brag about sexually assaulting women...that's a thought process that seems ok to you?

you can’t be this dumb can you ?   
 

have you ever hung out with other men before ? 

[Tiberius]

Joe Biden: Trump is worst possible leader to deal with coronavirus outbreak

President has blithely tweeted that 'it will all work out well.' Yet the steps he has taken have only weakened our capacity to respond.

Joe Biden

Opinion contributor

 

 

The possibility of a pandemic is a challenge Donald Trump is unqualified to handle as president. I remember how Trump sought to stoke fear and stigma during the 2014 Ebola epidemic. He called President Barack Obama a “dope” and “incompetent” and railed against the evidence-based response our administration put in place — which quelled the crisis and saved hundreds of thousands of lives — in favor of reactionary travel bans that would only have made things worse. He advocated abandoning exposed and infected American citizens rather than bringing them home for treatment.

Trump’s demonstrated failures of judgment and his repeated rejection of science make him the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health challenge.

The outbreak of a new coronavirus, which has already infected more than 2,700 people and killed over 80 in China, will get worse before it gets better. Cases have been confirmed in a dozen countries, with at least five in the United States. There will likely be more.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/01/27/coronavirus-donald-trump-made-us-less-prepared-joe-biden-column/4581710002/

[Doc]

Go back in your bunker, Joe.

[B-Man]

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

21 hours ago, Warcodered said:

Right because I was clarifying what you meant when you brushed aside what Trump said as out of context and it apparently is that unless he's actively assaulting someone while he brags about assaulting someone it doesn't count.

Ironic that the pencil drawing represents the very type of person your boy Joe gropes, or worse. 

[RochesterRob]

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Joe Biden: Trump is worst possible leader to deal with coronavirus outbreak

President has blithely tweeted that 'it will all work out well.' Yet the steps he has taken have only weakened our capacity to respond.

Joe Biden

Opinion contributor

 

 

The possibility of a pandemic is a challenge Donald Trump is unqualified to handle as president. I remember how Trump sought to stoke fear and stigma during the 2014 Ebola epidemic. He called President Barack Obama a “dope” and “incompetent” and railed against the evidence-based response our administration put in place — which quelled the crisis and saved hundreds of thousands of lives — in favor of reactionary travel bans that would only have made things worse. He advocated abandoning exposed and infected American citizens rather than bringing them home for treatment.

Trump’s demonstrated failures of judgment and his repeated rejection of science make him the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health challenge.

The outbreak of a new coronavirus, which has already infected more than 2,700 people and killed over 80 in China, will get worse before it gets better. Cases have been confirmed in a dozen countries, with at least five in the United States. There will likely be more.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/01/27/coronavirus-donald-trump-made-us-less-prepared-joe-biden-column/4581710002/

  Regardless of the slant who ACTUALLY wrote that for Joe?  Xi?

[B-Man]

[Bockeye]

If you can’t see that CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, etc handling of this situation is an obvious indictment that they are pure propaganda machines - you’re a lemming. Just sayin’

[3rdnlng]

59 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  Regardless of the slant who ACTUALLY wrote that for Joe?  Xi?

Look at the date of that. It was an op-ed on 1-27-2020 from Joe. He was obviously quoting Trump when the WHO hadn't even admitted that the virus could pass between humans. Tiberius's posting an op-ed from Joe Biden is like Dumb meets Dumber.