daz28 Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 On 5/24/2024 at 8:52 AM, leh-nerd skin-erd said: while you dismiss issues with the SC. I don't recall ever doing that. When the motions surrounding this are heard in court, then I'll decide. Are you also as critical of everyone who touts every tweet of the hack Julie Kelly as truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 On 5/24/2024 at 3:11 PM, L Ron Burgundy said: Headlines are all that matter. Content not so much. Sources are literally insane. JD tries to pick apart some of my posts. I always provide plenty of support for my arguments. GQP clowns drop LITERALLY THOUSANDS of right-wing nonsense tweets, and not a peep from him about those same tweets, that I usually tear apart with 3 minutes of research. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irv Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 On 5/24/2024 at 3:21 PM, ChiGoose said: You seem to be skipping the part where Biden and Pence cooperated while Trump obstructed the investigation and lied to law enforcement. Tiny detail there… Another lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 On 5/26/2024 at 3:30 AM, Irv said: Another lie. How would you even know at this point? What a mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 (edited) Apologies for the formatting. Literally couldn't fit all of Trump's actions into one picture that met the forum's size requirements and still have it readable. Edited May 27 by ChiGoose 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 8 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Apologies for the formatting. Literally couldn't fit all of Trump's actions into one picture that met the forum's size requirements and still have it readable. If that's all you think Joe did... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 (edited) 1 minute ago, Doc said: If that's all you think Joe did... That’s also all Hur thinks he did. Why do you disagree with Hur? Do you have evidence he got stuff wrong? Edited May 27 by ChiGoose 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: That’s also all Hur thinks he did. Why do you disagree with Hur? Do you have evidence he got stuff wrong? Hur said he had evidence Biden willfully possessed classified material and that he showed some of it to his ghostwriter. Anyone with any intellectual honesty knows the former is wholly believable given where it was stored and that the ghostwriter destroying interviews he did with Biden after Hur started his investigation would have revealed the latter. Yet Hur didn't threaten the ghostwriter with obstruction of justice. So yeah, he got stuff wrong. And the "well, I can recommend charging him because I can't be certain he'll be convicted" is also wrong and dumb. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 37 minutes ago, Doc said: Hur said he had evidence Biden willfully possessed classified material and that he showed some of it to his ghostwriter. Anyone with any intellectual honesty knows the former is wholly believable given where it was stored and that the ghostwriter destroying interviews he did with Biden after Hur started his investigation would have revealed the latter. Yet Hur didn't threaten the ghostwriter with obstruction of justice. So yeah, he got stuff wrong. And the "well, I can recommend charging him because I can't be certain he'll be convicted" is also wrong and dumb. You honestly believe the evidence of obstruction is the same for Biden and Trump, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 (edited) 45 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: You honestly believe the evidence of obstruction is the same for Biden and Trump, don't you? To me the matter is about willfully possessing classified material and what is done with it. I have no doubt Biden knew he had it again, ostensibly so he could remember key facts for his $8M memoir. I'm sure that if the ghostwriter's feet had been held to the fire, he would have corroborated these facts. No threat to national security appears to have occurred. Move on. Trump obviously knew he had it and refused to give it back because he felt he was entitled to it and/or wanted to remember key facts for his memoir (which seems to be the reason most of these people are taking/keeping classified material). The NARA raided his residence and got it back. No threat to national security appears to have occurred. Drop it and tighten up the ship going forward. Edited May 27 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 52 minutes ago, Doc said: To me the matter is about willfully possessing classified material and what is done with it. I have no doubt Biden knew he had it again, ostensibly so he could remember key facts for his $8M memoir. I'm sure that if the ghostwriter's feet had been held to the fire, he would have corroborated these facts. No threat to national security appears to have occurred. Move on. Trump obviously knew he had it and refused to give it back because he felt he was entitled to it and/or wanted to remember key facts for his memoir (which seems to be the reason most of these people are taking/keeping classified material). The NARA raided his residence and got it back. No threat to national security appears to have occurred. Drop it and tighten up the ship going forward. Personally, I think obstruction of justice is bad. But maybe you disagree. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 50 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Personally, I think obstruction of justice is bad. But maybe you disagree. Sure it is. So what happened with the ghostwriter then? You OK with that? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 8 minutes ago, Doc said: Sure it is. So what happened with the ghostwriter then? You OK with that? I would have no problem with Hur charging the ghostwriter. The elements are there. But prosecutors don’t charge every prima facie case they have. They generally only charge if they are convinced they will win. Hur clearly wasn’t convinced. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 (edited) 18 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: I would have no problem with Hur charging the ghostwriter. The elements are there. But prosecutors don’t charge every prima facie case they have. They generally only charge if they are convinced they will win. Hur clearly wasn’t convinced. And if he charged the ghostwriter (and he should have, so huge "mistake" right there) and the ghostwriter admitted and/or provided tapes showing that a) Biden knew he had classified material and b) showed it to him, what then? I mean we all know why the ghostwriter destroyed the tapes after Hur started his investigation, right? Or is that something you need to have proven to you beyond a reasonable doubt? Edited May 27 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted May 30 Author Share Posted May 30 Still crickets from @BillsFanNC - he is the expert on lAwFaRe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 5 hours ago, BillStime said: Still crickets from @BillsFanNC - he is the expert on lAwFaRe. Another point in the column for Hanlon’s Razor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted May 30 Author Share Posted May 30 9 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Another point in the column for Hanlon’s Razor BINGO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHillFan Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 On 12/18/2023 at 4:27 PM, ChiGoose said: Billsy was right that much of the data was not verified to be from Hunter Also, that there was data added *after* Hunter lost possession of the laptop just as shady actors like Rudy were shopping it around to try to claim that Joe Biden was involved (despite lack of any serious evidence) means that the info the laptop should be treated with a heavy dose of skepticism. Originally, I had been concerned that someone might create fake business records regarding Joe, but given what we’ve seen from those leading the impeachment effort, they are probably far too dumb to pull that off. Do you think this will be discussed in court over the next few days? Seems like it could be important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted June 5 Author Share Posted June 5 10 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Do you think this will be discussed in court over the next few days? Seems like it could be important. Will they call Lev? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 24 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Do you think this will be discussed in court over the next few days? Seems like it could be important. I would expect so. And since most of the analysis I'd seen about the data on the laptop were from copies of it and not the actual laptop itself, the Feds should have a better shot at authenticating the data on it than journalists and independent analysts had with the copies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts