Jump to content

Joe Biden's art selling for $500,000 to "Anonymous" buyers... WTF?!?!


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

i'm asking you

No it wouldn't be right and Hunter Biden selling his "influence" again is skeevy, and not all that surprising from him, but there really isn't anything to this yet until it's actually connected to Joe.

Edited by Warcodered
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:

 

I’d rather he did that than raise taxes like he is likely to do. 

I mean technically the implications of this is you'd rather have a less funded inefficient government than a better funded more efficient one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BillStime said:


I dunno - how much of our tax dollars has Joe spent at his golf courses and hotels?

 

But this is the paragraph of Ioffe’s report that went viral on Friday, that I found so triggering. In this example, and a few others, Ioffe, as she admits, lets some reporters stay off the record:

“Democrats in general have a much thinner skin,” observed the prominent White House reporter. “This is not unique to Trump but Republicans never expect a fair shake, so if you cover them fairly, you can have a good working relationship with them. Democrats de facto expect you to be on their side and are horrified when you hold them to account as you would any other administration. It goes back to the Obama years. [Obama staffers would be] like, ‘Don’t you realize that being a woman is no longer a pre-existing condition?!’ And I would be like, ‘Yes, but I’m writing about why your website keeps crashing.’”

 

They will never cover your administration with any type of integrity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aristocrat said:

 

But this is the paragraph of Ioffe’s report that went viral on Friday, that I found so triggering. In this example, and a few others, Ioffe, as she admits, lets some reporters stay off the record:

“Democrats in general have a much thinner skin,” observed the prominent White House reporter. “This is not unique to Trump but Republicans never expect a fair shake, so if you cover them fairly, you can have a good working relationship with them. Democrats de facto expect you to be on their side and are horrified when you hold them to account as you would any other administration. It goes back to the Obama years. [Obama staffers would be] like, ‘Don’t you realize that being a woman is no longer a pre-existing condition?!’ And I would be like, ‘Yes, but I’m writing about why your website keeps crashing.’”

 

They will never cover your administration with any type of integrity. 

 

 

Country is truly gone

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

I mean technically the implications of this is you'd rather have a less funded inefficient government than a better funded more efficient one.


So to you more money for government equals a more efficient government. Boy have they pulled the wool over your eyes.  
 

In business more efficient typically means less waste. Something the government just doesn’t understand.  And you know why?  They are never ever held accountable. 

 

Let me ask you. Now much of the $1.2 trillion of our tax dollars for the infrastructure bill is going towards a more efficient government?
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chef Jim said:


So to you more money for government equals a more efficient government. Boy have they pulled the wool over your eyes.  
 

In business more efficient typically means less waste. Something the government just doesn’t understand.  And you know why?  They are never ever held accountable. 

 

Let me ask you. Now much of the $1.2 trillion of our tax dollars for the infrastructure bill is going towards a more efficient government?
 

 

No to me paying the President and the various people required so he can play golf is inefficient. Your statement before basically breaks down to you'd rather the government waste money on the President playing a bunch of golf than us funding it more but we don't waste as much money on golf. I mean I doubt that's specifically what you meant but that's vaguely what's implied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Warcodered said:

No to me paying the President and the various people required so he can play golf is inefficient. Your statement before basically breaks down to you'd rather the government waste money on the President playing a bunch of golf than us funding it more but we don't waste as much money on golf. I mean I doubt that's specifically what you meant but that's vaguely what's implied.


No. The amount we as taxpayers spend on a President’s leisure is a pittance compared to the incredible waste found in all levels of government left/right/center.  
 

Money spent on a President’s leisure (any President) is not a waste.  Money spent to line politicians’, and their “posse’s” pockets or for pet projects is obviously a waste. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Prospector said:

And the far left DOJ, FBI, now Prez, and over the top extortions can't bring him in?! what's wrong? you might just have to accept that it was all make believe. 

So then Biden isn’t corrupt. By your own standard, right? 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am the egg man said:

5bd095c81f0000ce03259941.jpeg?cache=hjob

Hunters 1st portrait of his babysitter, soon to be stepmom.....priceless!

The fun part is they're working very hard to keep the identities of the buyers secret.  Big money for garbage "art".  I wonder why?  I suppose this is the Biden's version of the Clinton's pay off vehicle disguised as a charitable trust.  I'm sure Jenny P. will render some good excuse at the WHPC.   She's such a good liar its embarrassing.  But her answer, no matter how preposterous will certainly go unquestioned by the obedient press corps.  Which shows the only thing more despicable than the Biden administration is the corporate media.

 

How enjoyable it will be to watch it all blow up in their faces before all is said and done.

 

I know the counter-argument of my friends on the left.  Trump did this, Trump did that.  Maybe he did and maybe he didn't.  Somehow that allegation is supposed to make all the corruption of our current President's family okay.

 

But the difference is Biden and company are protected by the system of "political privilege".  Trump is persecuted and judged by that very system all the time.  You can post all the pictures and images you want and it won't alter that reality and it won't make the current administrations corrupt and unethical actions legitimate.  That's how it is folks..

Edited by All_Pro_Bills
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

No surprise here.

 

 

Peter Schweizer: Our Copy of Hunter Biden’s Laptop Confirms ‘Joe Biden Was a Direct  Beneficiary’ of His Son’s Deals

by Robert Kraychik

 

Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI), said on Monday that his organization had confirmed that President Joe Biden “was a direct beneficiary” of Hunter Biden’s financial deals with foreign interests. 

 

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/07/12/peter-schweizer-our-copy-of-hunter-bidens-laptop-confirms-joe-biden-was-a-direct-beneficiary-of-his-sons-deals/

 

 

 

  • Shocked 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

No surprise here.

 

 

Peter Schweizer: Our Copy of Hunter Biden’s Laptop Confirms ‘Joe Biden Was a Direct  Beneficiary’ of His Son’s Deals

by Robert Kraychik

 

Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI), said on Monday that his organization had confirmed that President Joe Biden “was a direct beneficiary” of Hunter Biden’s financial deals with foreign interests. 

 

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/07/12/peter-schweizer-our-copy-of-hunter-bidens-laptop-confirms-joe-biden-was-a-direct-beneficiary-of-his-sons-deals/

 

 

 

Crooked POS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

No surprise here.

 

 

Peter Schweizer: Our Copy of Hunter Biden’s Laptop Confirms ‘Joe Biden Was a Direct  Beneficiary’ of His Son’s Deals

by Robert Kraychik

 

Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI), said on Monday that his organization had confirmed that President Joe Biden “was a direct beneficiary” of Hunter Biden’s financial deals with foreign interests. 

 

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/07/12/peter-schweizer-our-copy-of-hunter-bidens-laptop-confirms-joe-biden-was-a-direct-beneficiary-of-his-sons-deals/

 

 

 

What you mean the conservative think tank cofounded by Steve Banon has not nice things to say about a Democrat?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

No surprise here.

 

 

Peter Schweizer: Our Copy of Hunter Biden’s Laptop Confirms ‘Joe Biden Was a Direct  Beneficiary’ of His Son’s Deals

by Robert Kraychik

 

Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI), said on Monday that his organization had confirmed that President Joe Biden “was a direct beneficiary” of Hunter Biden’s financial deals with foreign interests. 

 

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/07/12/peter-schweizer-our-copy-of-hunter-bidens-laptop-confirms-joe-biden-was-a-direct-beneficiary-of-his-sons-deals/

 

 

 

They should release all the e-mails and files into the public domain.  But as the Biden's are protected by what I've labeled "political privilege" the disclosure of corruption and criminal activity will be punished but not the actual corrupt or criminal act.  In this case taking bribes, kickbacks from foreign aid, and other shady play for pay business arrangements. 

How can any rational and thinking person be oblivious to all of this or worse ignore it or worse yet support the very people that partake in it?  Yet they do.  I can understand if you're getting a piece of the action, sure.  But if you're just a rank-and-file ideologist you've got to see what a chump you are at some point here.  Can it get more obvious?  

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Bidens_basement said:

So you approve of this behavior by the left?

Clearly the only options are to swallow the pretty clear bias or to support corruption....there's definitely no middle ground between there.

 

24 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

They should release all the e-mails and files into the public domain.  But as the Biden's are protected by what I've labeled "political privilege" the disclosure of corruption and criminal activity will be punished but not the actual corrupt or criminal act.  In this case taking bribes, kickbacks from foreign aid, and other shady play for pay business arrangements. 

How can any rational and thinking person be oblivious to all of this or worse ignore it or worse yet support the very people that partake in it?  Yet they do.  I can understand if you're getting a piece of the action, sure.  But if you're just a rank-and-file ideologist you've got to see what a chump you are at some point here.  Can it get more obvious?  

But if they did that and it turned out they didn't actually have any damning evidence they wouldn't be able to keep saying they've got damning evidence it's just around the god damned corner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

Clearly the only options are to swallow the pretty clear bias or to support corruption....there's definitely no middle ground between there.

 

But if they did that and it turned out they didn't actually have any damning evidence they wouldn't be able to keep saying they've got damning evidence it's just around the god damned corner.

Then they would have nothing to hide, right? So release them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bidens_basement said:

Don’t you want to know if a sitting president has illegal dealings with china?

Sure, and I'm pretty sure if a conservative think tank had proof of that they'd ***** release it they wouldn't perpetually tease "damning information" that never seems to actually show up.

Edited by Warcodered
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Warcodered said:

Sure, and I'm pretty sure if a conservative think tank had proof of that they'd ***** release it they wouldn't perpetually tease "damning information" that never seems to actually show up.

Whataboutism 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...