BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 May 2, 2017: Joe Biden was a former VP, a private citizen, not a candidate for any office, and as far as we know, planning to be out of government for the rest of his life. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 They just took it even further. Xi.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 minute ago, Tommy Callahan said: They just took it even further. Xi.... So where's the impeachable offense? Everything in this "impeachment inquiry" hinged on the alleged involvement of current VP Biden in international deals, including with Ukraine. That all evaporated when their top witness was revealed to be a lying clown. So now we're investigate private citizen Biden's activities while out of public office? Did Donald Trump and his family engage in any international deal making after he left office? 1 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: May 2, 2017: Joe Biden was a former VP, a private citizen, not a candidate for any office, and as far as we know, planning to be out of government for the rest of his life. They don't like facts - only psyops. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 ⬆️ Like flies on a rib roast... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Here comes the farmers with the MSNBC talking points. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 @Tommy Callahan responded with the usual EYEROLL. So what's the impeachable offense that's being investigated here? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 Stick to being our resident Qanon expert FQ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Just now, BillsFanNC said: Stick to being our resident Qanon expert FQ! It's so predictable. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Like flies to horsesh!t, the performative ignorer gonna performatively ignore. Isn't there a breaker that needs to be cleaned by the senior lab tech? 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Just now, The Frankish Reich said: Like flies to horsesh!t, the performative ignorer gonna performatively ignore. Isn't there a breaker that needs to be cleaned by the senior lab tech? Why would you talk about the j6 group like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 7 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: May 2, 2017: Joe Biden was a former VP, a private citizen, not a candidate for any office, and as far as we know, planning to be out of government for the rest of his life. a payoff for access when he was vp? why is that so difficult to be a possibility? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Just now, Pokebball said: a payoff for access when he was vp? why is that so difficult to be a possibility? Yes, it sure looked like a possibility to me when you had a presumably credible FBI informant saying that's what happened! That's why I thought a Congressional investigation was warranted. But that all went up in smoke, which leaves the Committee with a generalized "Joe Biden did things after he was VP that look pretty sleazy" dog and pony show. Fine. Use that in campaign ads. You're not "investigating" anything, you're just promoting something. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 The dems should just let AOC have all the time from their side of the aisle.. GOP couldn't ask for a greater gift than AOC 2 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: Yes, it sure looked like a possibility to me when you had a presumably credible FBI informant saying that's what happened! That's why I thought a Congressional investigation was warranted. But that all went up in smoke, which leaves the Committee with a generalized "Joe Biden did things after he was VP that look pretty sleazy" dog and pony show. Fine. Use that in campaign ads. You're not "investigating" anything, you're just promoting something. How'd it all go up in smoke? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 Why does anyone bother with these useful idiots? The FBI informant was a friggin FBI witness. The committee knew nothing about him or the FD1023 until their investigation was well under way and mountains of evidence had already been collected. You people are despicable frauds. !@#$ off FQ. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Sorry, but AOC is absolutely correct here. See about 2:15 onward. The Burisma/Hunter/Joe things was why they began this "inquiry," and now they're talking about something completely different since that thing was all blown up by the lying informant. And she's also right: no possible crime has been identified. The witness (a non lawyer, so he should've just said "I'm not a lawyer") blabs about RICO and FARA (foreign agents registration act) without any theory of how Joe would've fit under either. Like I said: it's about using Congress for campaign purposes. [cue the obligatory "but the Dems used the Trump perfect phone call for the same purposes!" That call actually happened while Trump was actually President] 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 ⬆️ Fuk.c off FQ. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 2 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: The FBI informant was a friggin FBI witness. This is why I trust Ray Epps 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 Well that's good news for Trump and all his GA RICO cohorts.... 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Just now, BillsFanNC said: ⬆️ Fuk.c off FQ. Very helpful comments, very colorful language as usual. I love how you've figured out how to defeat the robo-censor. You must be a Ph.D. too. Meanwhile: it seems you've convinced me that Hunter Biden should be prosecuted for something. Which is exactly what is happening. Sorry that you put your trust in another creep telling tall tales about Burisma, but that's on you. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 4 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Sorry, but AOC is absolutely correct here. See about 2:15 onward. The Burisma/Hunter/Joe things was why they began this "inquiry," and now they're talking about something completely different since that thing was all blown up by the lying informant. And she's also right: no possible crime has been identified. The witness (a non lawyer, so he should've just said "I'm not a lawyer") blabs about RICO and FARA (foreign agents registration act) without any theory of how Joe would've fit under either. Like I said: it's about using Congress for campaign purposes. [cue the obligatory "but the Dems used the Trump perfect phone call for the same purposes!" That call actually happened while Trump was actually President] I don't completely agree or disagree with AOC here but she has a point. The committee needs to get down to specifics. And that's following the money. These witnesses are one thing but the alleged crime is taking bribes and payoffs from foreign entities and governments. Not conducting business meetings and doling role call of who was there. Regardless of how elaborate the Biden money laundering operation is the transactions can eventually be traced, documented and explained. That's what the IRS whistle blowers were doing and claimed they had knowledge of when they were pulled off the case. I understand they testified as such. So I'd like to see the forensic evidence linking Biden to the source and distribution of the funds. Lay it out, follow the flow, and show where it lands in Joe's pocket. I think that's reasonable ask. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 minute ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I don't completely agree or disagree with AOC here but she has a point. The committee needs to get down to specifics. And that's following the money. These witnesses are one thing but the alleged crime is taking bribes and payoffs from foreign entities and governments. Not conducting business meetings and doling role call of who was there. Regardless of how elaborate the Biden money laundering operation is the transactions can eventually be traced, documented and explained. That's what the IRS whistle blowers were doing and claimed they had knowledge of when they were pulled off the case. I understand they testified as such. So I'd like to see the forensic evidence linking Biden to the source and distribution of the funds. Lay it out, follow the flow, and show where it lands in Joe's pocket. I think that's reasonable ask. I clicked "agree" because what you set forth would be a reasonable/defensible inquiry. So why aren't they doing that? Two possible reasons: 1. They don't really have anything on that. 2. They have something on that, but it's kind of boring and Joe has plausible deniability on it, so better to use the time to push the more easily digestible "he was making deals with communist China!" 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 2 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I don't completely agree or disagree with AOC here but she has a point. The committee needs to get down to specifics. And that's following the money. These witnesses are one thing but the alleged crime is taking bribes and payoffs from foreign entities and governments. Not conducting business meetings and doling role call of who was there. Regardless of how elaborate the Biden money laundering operation is the transactions can eventually be traced, documented and explained. That's what the IRS whistle blowers were doing and claimed they had knowledge of when they were pulled off the case. I understand they testified as such. So I'd like to see the forensic evidence linking Biden to the source and distribution of the funds. Lay it out, follow the flow, and show where it lands in Joe's pocket. I think that's reasonable ask. Agreed. You're not getting specifics and into the weeds in any of these congressional show hearings. Ever. The point is to point to the smoke. What we have now is a five alarm fire. To useful idiots like FQ they see....nothing. Always. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 5 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: The point is to point to the smoke That one is going straight into my lexicon, Foghorn Leghorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Did we ever get receipts for the discredited stories in the impeachment fiasco? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaCrispy Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 44 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: ⬆️ Like flies on a rib roast... Mmmm, so sweet to the taste… 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 4 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: Old news. Wasn't evidence a few weeks ago and still isn't now. Clown. World. 😂 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 So, if Joe committed crimes AFTER he was VP but BEFORE he was POTUS ... I guess he should be prosecuted as soon as he leaves office. But the Republicans can't say that! That would be conceding that Trump can be prosecuted, even for crimes committed before or after he was POTUS. So we have to have this dog and pony show. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said: So where's the impeachable offense? Everything in this "impeachment inquiry" hinged on the alleged involvement of current VP Biden in international deals, including with Ukraine. That all evaporated when their top witness was revealed to be a lying clown. So now we're investigate private citizen Biden's activities while out of public office? Did Donald Trump and his family engage in any international deal making after he left office? I have to agree that if these deals were made while the big guy was not holding any office it can not be an impeachable offense. If, however, the big guy used his influence while he was VP then that is impeachable. I'm talking about his meddling in Ukraine and Burisma, getting the special prosecutor fired that was investigating Burisma. while threatening to hold back aid. Pretty sure he was VP then. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 So that we're clear Trump can set up some influence peddling around the world right now and pull in millions maybe billions through Don Jr. and Eric and it's all good? He's not POTUS after all. They'd surely pay him.for something, right? Maybe help pay off those lawsuits? Good to know. Yes, Hunter was being paid 80k per month at Burisma while Joe was VP. For all his extensive experience in oil and gas i suppose. Id wager our board paralegal FQ has more experience in oil and gas merely by virtue of the gas it spilled on itself at the pump last week. Joe was also VP when he got the investigation shut down into Burisma corruption by withholding loan guarantees. He even told the Ukranian officials to call Obama if they didn't think he was serious. I'm told that this isn't a big deal. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 Keep in mind while all the useful idiots keep asking you for evidence today while staring into a mountain of it, that these are the very same people who not only fell for the bloodbath hoax, but STILL insisted Trump was saying what he clearly was NOT saying after the hoax had been fully exposed. Why would you ever expect that these same people would look at Biden corruption honestly? It's not that they won't. It's that they CAN'T. They are broken useful idiots. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 (edited) 20 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Keep in mind while all the useful idiots keep asking you for evidence today while staring into a mountain of it, that these are the very same people who not only fell for the bloodbath hoax, but STILL insisted Trump was saying what he clearly was NOT saying after the hoax had been fully exposed. Why would you ever expect that these same people would look at Biden corruption honestly? It's not that they won't. It's that they CAN'T. They are broken useful idiots. There's no denying there's a double standard and the Democrats are so much better at playing that game. They've got home field advantage with the media and most, if not all, other institutions on their side. Blocking or ignoring anything negative to them and magnifying anything negative to the opposition. Add in the ref's in federal law enforcement and justice are always looking the other way and its like trying to beat the Brady's Patriots in Foxboro. It might happen once by some combination of unlikely circumstances but that's it. They'll never apologize or answer the question straight on. "Why did you lie? Because nobody will ask the question for starters and just to be on the safe side they'll avoid anyone that might ask it. Scarborough lied straight out about the "bloodbath" comment and yet he's on his show with that smug pompous look with his partner nodding in agreement, neither bearing shame or guilt, deflecting any mention of lying while changing his story slightly in an attempt to mind-hole the original comment. Tell me what major network carried the story opponents of Trump outright lied about his statement? The fake statement story and the reactions to it got more coverage. The lie, nothing. You're up against the world's most sophisticated and complex propaganda machine. Edited March 20 by All_Pro_Bills 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 2 hours ago, Pokebball said: a payoff for access when he was vp? why is that so difficult to be a possibility? A payoff for access? JFC - how much did Trump make off those buying influence and foreigners at his hotels and properties DURING his term? Freakn hilarious to watch you freaks twist to fit the Russian trash you recycle. Its over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts