It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Whistle blower allegation proves dems, media corruption in Biden Ukraine story

page: 1
61
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+30 more 
posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:31 AM
link   
The Democrats and the media are deeply concerned about new claims that a whistle blower in the intelligence community reportedly filed a concern with the intelligence IG over something troubling he heard Trump say to a foreign leader. Reports are now this was most likely with a foreign leader from the Ukraine, and the troubling comment had something to do with a promise Trump made

If that is true, it is most likely relating to Trump wanting the Ukraine to investigate corruption into a company Joe Biden’s son Hunter was on the board of, and more importantly to investigate possible corruption in the actions of Joe Biden withholding one billion dollars in aid to the Ukraine in 2014 until they fired the prosecutor that was looking into the company his son worked for.

The main point of this thread will be that it is my contention that the real story here is sowing how the media and the Democrats have turned a blind eye to Biden’s (and Obama’s) corruption, and are basically demanding Trump be punished for an almost identical incident of what Biden did, only in a less severe way and with much less evidence.

I will go through the allegations of exactly what Biden did, using both John Solomon from the Hill (a left leaning site though admittedly Solomon has been one of the forefront reporters on the intel agencies corruption) and Politifact (left leaning). The reason I chose Politifact is that this was the article that was shown on a thread as proof Biden did nothing I wrong.

But I will briefly hit on some other points as well.

Intel Agencies Spy on Trump

The most basic thing this whistle blower claim shows is that once more, Trump is correct that the intel agencies spy on him. He was laughed at ridiculed when he made this claim before the election and was proven correct (as we know spies and wiretaps were sent to members of his team) and we see this behavior continues.

Unless there is evidence of an absolute clearcut crime, no intel agent should have the right to report something like this. If its this is the new norm, any intel person can report anything they here that is against their politics. Obama talking about cash to Iran, or improving relations with Chin, etc., all could have been found troubling by intel agents. So if congress gets to hear about conversations one guy disliked from Trump, then they should also get access to all of Obama’s calls, and any other President, on issues that could be politically charged.


Does this make Trump guilty

Keep in mind we have no idea what was actually said during this call. So until we get the exact details, everything is speculation.

I can make this prediction though, whatever was said, the democrats and media will say its damning and grounds for impeachment.

So what could he said that would rise to that threshold?

For me, if he promised Ukraine aid or money, or threatened to withhold it, unless they FOUND Biden or his son guilty, that would be grounds for impeachment. That is because Trump would be placing conditions on the outcome of an investigation, which would destroy the fairness and justice of that investigation.

I would say that the chances of that are extremely low but would be very critical of Trump if that is what he said.

Less egregious would be if he withheld aid unless the Ukraine cooperated with US officials in investigating Biden or his son’s company. Now this is still a little shady, but not unprecedented. The US frequently places conditions on aid such as helping fight terrorists or helping with criminal investigations into corruption.

This is the most likely scenario that could be considered shady in my opinion. I do not think this is grounds for impeachment.

The irony is of course the very people that will think this is grounds for impeachment ignore that this is a very similar to what Biden did, only his case personally affected his family. Biden withheld a billion dollars of aid unless the Ukraine FIRED the prosecutor who happened to be looking into his son’s company.

What did Biden do
So here I will just outline the bare facts that we absolutely know to be true (I’ll provide sources for all of this later in the thread). I’m not going to go to much into exactly what Biden’s son’s company was accused of here, but I will provide sources.


Biden’s son Hunter was on the board of a company Burisma, that was owned by a man from Ukraine connected to the ousted former Ukrainian President and was being investigated by the Ukrainian government and others for corruption. Joe Biden admits that Obama gave him the authority to withhold a billion dollars of aid to the Ukraine unless they fired their head prosecutor, a man named Shokin. Shokin was the prosecutor looking into Bursima, the company Biden’s son was on the board of. After Shokin was fired, a prosecutor, Lutsenko, who was “solid” according to Biden took over, and the billion dollars was sent. The investigation in Burisma were handed off to a different office in the Ukraine, that office failed to file paperwork in time, and the investigation into Burisma was stopped.

To the best of my knowledge, none of these facts are in dispute.

I would argue that these alone are enough to show terrible corruption by Biden (and Obama), or at least warrant concern and investigation by the same media and Democrats that are concerned with this whistleblower story, but I digress.

(continued below)
edit on 20-9-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



+2 more 
posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Change the Name Biden to Trump

The media and democrats have known about this story since 2015. Yet there was no big fuss raised, no calls for impeachment.
Now when the story is being rehashed thanks to this whistleblower complaint, these same groups are defending their non-interest in the story saying its not a big deal.

So lets do an experiment.

Try to take off your partisan hat for a moment, and be as objective as possible.

Replace the words Joe Biden with Donald Trump, and Hunter Biden with Don Jr., and my summary from above.
Do you think for one minute that the same Democrats and media who say this isn’t a big story would say the same?

This would be the biggest story in the world for months. Trump would be impeached immediately. “Wait you mean Trump threatened to withhold a billion dollars unless they fired the prosecutor looking into his son’s company!? Dictator! Impeach now!”

I am 100% positive this would be the reaction. How do I know?

Well look at their reaction to this whistleblower story. We have no idea exactly what Trump said, and yet the mere prospect of him offering some promise to the Ukraine for some perceived personal benefit is causing the media and the democrats to suggest its impeachable.

Heck lets even go further. The media and democrats have for three years trying to get Trump tax returns or anything else to show he has business dealings in Russia. Then they will claim Trump has gone easy on Russia (he hasn’t he has been much harder with them than Obama) because of these business deals.

Now they haven’t even been able to prove these deals exist, and they have no proof whatsoever that his policies on Russia have anything to do with these hypothetical businesses, and yet they still have nonstop gone after this story for three years.

Meanwhile we know that while Joe Biden was making deals with Ukraine (and China). His son had businesses under shady circumstances in both of those places. Yet the media didn’t care at all. And what’s worse, Biden actually withheld a billion dollars until a prosecutor looking into one of those businesses was fired!

There is no doubt had Trump done what Biden did he would have been attacked nonstop by the press and democrats and would have been impeached. Yet these hypocrites have known Biden (with the blessing of Obama according to Biden) did this for 4 years and didn’t have a problem with it.

(continued below)
edit on 20-9-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:34 AM
link   
The article that says Biden did no wrong
So lets get to the articles that outline the specific facts of this incident.

I’ll start with this Politifact article. This article has many similar ones, most from mainstream outlets that have a record for hating Trump and quite frankly being nothing more than mouth pieces for the establishment democrats and the intel community.

I admit my bias as to what I think about them.

However, I will try my hardest to not dismiss their articles because of their bias.

Most of these articles have the same facts, but may offer other individuals who show the prosecutor, Shokin, was terrible. My points here should cover all of that, but if someone has a specific article they find that better explains why Biden did nothing wrong, Ill be happy to read it.

Politifact seeks to fact check this claim.


Is it true, as the image suggests, that Hunter Biden was serving as "a director to Ukraine’s largest private gas producer" when the elder Biden "threatened to withhold $1 BILLION in U.S. aid to Ukraine if they didn’t fire a prosecutor looking into" the gas company?


www.politifact.com...

No clearly I wont paste the whole article, but I will go through much of it.

Here are there key takeaways.


Hunter Biden did hold a directorship for a Ukrainian gas company while his father was vice president. Experts agree that Hunter Biden's acceptance of the position created a conflict of interest for his father.

• Vice President Joe Biden did urge Ukraine to fire its top prosecutor, with the threat of withholding U.S. aid. But that was the position of the wider U.S. government, as well as other international institutions.

• We found no evidence to support the idea that Joe Biden advocated with his son's interests in mind, as the message suggests. It's not even clear that the company was actively under investigation or that a change in prosecutors benefited it.


Based on this, they rate the statement half truth. First off, this is often a tactic these fact checkers do. They take a statement, then give their opinion on what is implied by that statement, disagree with the implication and say its not true.

As their own key facts prove, the statement they are looking at is 100% true. Hunter Biden was director of that company, Biden did threaten (and succeeded) to withhold a billion dollars from Ukraine until the prosecutor looking into that company was fired.

So the statement is true, Politifact just doesn’t think this is a big deal, because they do see proof the reason wanted this guy fired was because they were looking into his son’s company.

Again, do you think that’s what they would say if this was Trump and Don Jr.?

Here is what they say about Hunter being on the board


(Hunter) Biden’s Burisma directorship attracted attention because Burisma was owned by Mykola Zlochevsky, a minister under Russia-friendly President Viktor F. Yanukovych who subsequently went into exile after a popular revolution. After Yanukovych was ousted, Zlochevsky faced a variety of corruption-related investigations involving his business.


So while Joe Biden is working with the Ukraine to root out corruption, his son is a director of a company owner by one of the most corrupt oligarchs.

How was that alone not a huge story?

But the article admits Hunter worked for this man being heavily looked into for corruption guys company.

Did Biden know his son worked for this guy?

Obviously, but he pulled the old I read it in the paper line from Obama.


The Biden campaign told PolitiFact that the vice president learned about his son's role on the board through media reports and never discussed anything related to this company with his son.


Not only is that not believable (Trump would never get a pass for this) the media had publicly discussed Hunter working for this company. So Biden knew.


Here is how we know that Biden withheld themoney unless the prosecutor was fired? He bragged about it at the Council on Foreign Relations in 2018


I remember going over (to Ukraine), convincing our team … that we should be providing for loan guarantees. … And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from (then Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko) and from (then-Prime Minister Arseniy) Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor (Shokin). And they didn’t. ...

"They were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, ... we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, ‘You have no authority. You’re not the president.’ … I said, call him. I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. ... I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."


Ok so just as I said in my summary. Unlike with the Trump situation where everyone is guessing what he may have said, we absolutely know what Biden said. And notice he shows Obama was on board with this.

So here is where we are. They admit Hunter worked for this guys company, they admit his dad Joe Biden threatened to withhold a billion dollars unless the prosecutor looking into the company was fired.

(continued below)
edit on 20-9-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Now comes the crucial part; their defense of Biden for these actions.

The defense is basically two fold.

First that a bunch of people wanted Shokin out because he sucked at his job and was maybe corrupt.

Here is a small example for the article.


Steven Pifer is a career foreign service officer who was ambassador to Ukraine under President Bill Clinton and deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs under President George W. Bush. Pifer told PolitiFact that "virtually everyone" he knew in the U.S. government and virtually all non-governmental experts on Ukraine "felt that Shokin was not doing his job and should be fired. As far as I can recall, they all concurred with the vice president telling Poroshenko that the U.S. government would not extend the $1 billion loan guarantee to Ukraine until Shokin was removed from office."

I do not think this claim stands up to scrutiny.

Again, lets use the switch the names test.

Say trump comes out and refuses to give aid to a country, say France or the UK or the Ukraine, wherever, until they fire a prosecutor that’s looking into one of his businesses. He the produces a bunch of people that say “Oh yeah that prosecutor sucks for so many reasons! Here are a bunch of examples of why they suck”

Do you think the democrats and the media would say “Oh ok, no problem here. Clearly there were other reasons to fire that prosecutor?”

Of course not! This claim is ridiculous, and gets more ridiculous once I get to the next article that shows actually, once this prosecutor was removed, the investigations into Hunter Bidens companies corruption were surprisingly dropped!

The second defense is that Shokin was never even looking at Hunter Biden’s company. Here the article says its unclear what is true.


In an interview with the Ukrainian website Strana.ua this month, Shokin said the cases were indeed active.

However, Vitaliy Kasko, who had been Shokin’s deputy overseeing international cooperation before resigning in February 2016 citing corruption in the office, produced documents to Bloomberg that under Shokin, the investigation into Burisma had been dormant.

"There was no pressure from anyone from the U.S. to close cases against Zlochevsky," Kasko told Bloomberg. "It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015."


Again, if this was trump, and the fired prosecutor said yes I was looking into his sons company, would the democrats and the media go “well some others say this prosecutor wasn’t, so no big deal”?

And regardless of how the case was progressing, we do know that the case was opened and that was public knowledge, and the fact this was the prosecutor was also public knowledge. That alone could be enough to convince Bidne to want the guy removed, regardless of how fast the case was progressing.

And again, the next article will dispute this claim.

The rest of the article just sites experts saying Hunter Biden working for this company was a huge conflict of interest. Despite this, the article concludes Joe Biden did nothing wrong.

That’s it. I have no idea how anyone objective could read this article and think “Yep this shows Biden did nothing wrong”

It admits his son was a director for a company in the Ukraine under investigation for corruption, admits Biden threatened to withhold a billion dollars until the prosecutor looking into it was fired, admits this was a huge conflict of interest. It just says well we don’t have 100% proof Biden wanted the guy fired for looking into his son’s company.

Not having 100% proof is no reason to not investigate if you’re a real journalist. This is the same crap that they always do. Couldn’t look into Weinstein of Epstein because there wasn’t 100% proof. Of course if its trump or people connected to him, any outlandish rumor is investigated to the highest degree. There is also more than enough evidence in this article for a congressional investigation.

(continued below)
edit on 20-9-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   
The article that shows more to the story

This article is from The Hill.
It agrees with much of the first article, so I will try not to focus on those parts.

Lets start here.


But Ukrainian officials tell me there was one crucial piece of information that Biden must have known but didn’t mention to his audience: The prosecutor he got fired was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into the natural gas firm Burisma Holdings that employed Biden’s younger son, Hunter, as a board member.

U.S. banking records show Hunter Biden’s American-based firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, received regular transfers into one of its accounts — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Vice President Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine and its tense relations with Russia.

The general prosecutor’s official file for the Burisma probe — shared with me by senior Ukrainian officials — shows prosecutors identified Hunter Biden, business partner Devon Archer and their firm, Rosemont Seneca, as potential recipients of money.

thehill.com...

So Biden left out the fact they were looking at his son, and according to the prosecutors file, they were in fact looking into Biden’s son.

Here is what the fired prosecutor says.


Shokin told me in written answers to questions that, before he was fired as general prosecutor, he had made “specific plans” for the investigation that “included interrogations and other crime-investigation procedures into all members of the executive board, including Hunter Biden.”


Now stop right here. If this was Trump and he demanded the firing of this prosecutor, and that prosecutor came out and said he was looking at Trump’s son, do you think the democrats and the media would say well this prosecutor was terrible anyways so who cares? Of course not.

As to the claim maybe Biden didn’t know his son was being looked at.


Although Biden made no mention of his son in his 2018 speech, U.S. and Ukrainian authorities both told me Biden and his office clearly had to know about the general prosecutor's probe of Burisma and his son's role. They noted that:

Hunter Biden's appointment to the board was widely reported in American media;
The U.S. Embassy in Kiev that coordinated Biden's work in the country repeatedly and publicly discussed the general prosecutor's case against Burisma;
Great Britain took very public action against Burisma while Joe Biden was working with that government on Ukraine issues;
Biden's office was quoted, on the record, acknowledging Hunter Biden's role in Burisma in a New York Times article about the general prosecutor's Burisma case that appeared four months before Biden forced the firing of Shokin. The vice president's office suggested in that article that Hunter Biden was a lawyer free to pursue his own private business deals.


Clearly he knew as Biden’s office admitted 4 months before Biden would make his threat that Hunter worked for Burisma and it was under investigation.

Now remember, Biden and all of those people cited in the previous article thought Shokin had to go because he was letting corruption go unprosecuted. So surely once he was out of the way, the corruption would be investigated, right?


Most of the general prosecutor’s investigative work on Burisma focused on three separate cases, and most stopped abruptly once Shokin was fired. The most prominent of the Burisma cases was transferred to a different Ukrainian agency, closely aligned with the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, known as the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), according to the case file and current General Prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko.

NABU closed that case, and a second case involving alleged improper money transfers in London was dropped when Ukrainian officials failed to file the necessary documents by the required deadline. The general prosecutor’s office successfully secured a multimillion-dollar judgment in a tax evasion case, Lutsenko said. He did not say who was the actual defendant in that case.

As a result, the Biden family appeared to have escaped the potential for an embarrassing inquiry overseas in the final days of the Obama administration and during an election in which Democrat Hillary Clinton was running for president in 2016.


Just a coincidence that as soon as Biden forced the firing of the prosecutor looking in to his son’s company, the case was suddenly dropped. This defies belief that people don’t see a problem with this.

Now above where I showed the fired prosecutor Shokin saying he was investigating Hunter; the argument defenders of Biden are making is that guy is corrupt and we can’t believe him.

Ok fine. Remember, Shokin was replaced by a guy who Biden called solid. Lets see what he has to say.


But then, as Biden’s 2020 campaign ramped up over the past year, Lutsenko — the Ukrainian prosecutor that Biden once hailed as a “solid” replacement for Shokin — began looking into what happened with the Burisma case that had been shut down.

Lutsenko told me that, while reviewing the Burisma investigative files, he discovered “members of the Board obtained funds as well as another U.S.-based legal entity, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, for consulting services.”

Lutsenko said some of the evidence he knows about in the Burisma case may interest U.S. authorities and he’d like to present that information to new U.S. Attorney General William Barr, particularly the vice president’s intervention.

“Unfortunately, Mr. Biden had correlated and connected this aid with some of the HR (personnel) issues and changes in the prosecutor’s office,” Lutsenko said.


Did you get that? The new guy finally starting looking into this recently, and discovered board members (Hunter being one) and the company Rosemont (Hunter’s lawfirm) actually received payments that should be investigated, and he would be sharing information with AG Barr.
Now of course Biden and his mouthpieces in the media and democratic party will say this guy cant be trusted either. Even though Biden said he was solid, now they will throw him under the bus. So we are supposed to ignore both prosecutors that were looking in to Bidens son. How could the media ignore this?

(continued below)
edit on 20-9-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Here is more from a top person in Lustsenko, the “solid” replacement’s office.


Nazar Kholodnytskyi, the lead anti-corruption prosecutor in Lutsenko’s office, confirmed to me in an interview that part of the Burisma investigation was reopened in 2018, after Joe Biden made his remarks. “We were able to start this case again,” Kholodnytskyi said.

But he said the separate Ukrainian police agency that investigates corruption has dragged its feet in gathering evidence. “We don’t see any result from this case one year after the reopening because of some external influence,” he said, declining to be more specific.


Once Biden started to publicly brag he forced this prosecutor to be fired, the new “solid” prosecutor relooked at the case. They found payments to Hunter worth investigating, and found that the people who the case was handed off to didn’t do their job because of “external pressure” which is probably Obama and Bidens pressure they admitted to.

Ironically, this is the very thing Biden claimed to be fighting with the demand to fire the first prosecutor; him being corrupt and dragging his feet to not prosecute corruption. This is also why all of those people from the other article said Shokin needed to go; so surely they would also have a problem with the people the case was handed off to doing the same thing. Surely Biden and the rest will demand his son’s company be investigated more thoroughly. Oh wait…

Now as I said, people will say the new (“solid” in Bidens words) prosecutor Lutsenko cant be trusted now that he is investigating this.

But even still, it tuirns out US investigators found tht Hunter was receiving money from this company that should be investigated in a separate investigation.


But what makes Lutsenko’s account compelling is that federal authorities in America, in an entirely different case, uncovered financial records showing just how much Hunter Biden’s and Archer’s company received from Burisma while Joe Biden acted as Obama’s point man on Ukraine.

Between April 2014 and October 2015, more than $3 million was paid out of Burisma accounts to an account linked to Biden’s and Archer’s Rosemont Seneca firm, according to the financial records placed in a federal court file in Manhattan in an unrelated case against Archer.

The bank records show that, on most months when Burisma money flowed, two wire transfers of $83,333.33 each were sent to the Rosemont Seneca–connected account on the same day. The same Rosemont Seneca–linked account typically then would pay Hunter Biden one or more payments ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 each. Prosecutors reviewed internal company documents and wanted to interview Hunter Biden and Archer about why they had received such payments, according to interviews.
Lutsenko said Ukrainian company board members legally can pay themselves for work they do if it benefits the company’s bottom line, but prosecutors never got to determine the merits of the payments to Rosemont because of the way the investigation was shut down.


This lends credibility to Lutsenkos account that this investigation was shut down and never resolved.

Finally, Lutsenko expresses a willingness to discuss Joe Biden getting his predecessor fired.


As for Joe Biden’s intervention in getting Lutsenko’s predecessor fired in the midst of the Burisma investigation, Lutsenko suggested that was a matter to discuss with Attorney General Barr: “Of course, I would be happy to have a conversation with him about this issue.”


No wonder a whistleblower may want to get out in front of this.

(continued below)
edit on 20-9-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Conclusions

Biden’s son was a director for a company being investigated for corruption. Biden forced the prosecutor looking into it to be fired by threatening to withhold a billion dollars. As soon as that prosecutor was fired, the case was basically dropped.

The guy that replaced the fired prosecutor was called solid by Biden. He has reexamined the case and think there is much more to investigate. His office says that “external pressure” was applied to stop the case from moving forward.

The only defense of Biden’s actions are

1. The prosecutor Biden got fired was not looking at the case anyways.

That is denied by the prosecutor himself, and the official files that show Hunter was a target.

This is a very flimsy excuse that would never fly if it was Trump instead of Biden who got the prosecutor looking at his son fired.

2. The prosecutor was fired for other reasons than he was looking into Biden’s son.

Again this excuse wouldn’t fly for trump. He demanded the firing of the guy investigating his son’s company. Then the investigation coincidentally ended once this prosecutor was out. Biden nor any of the others saying this guy should have been fired for other reasons have clamored for the new group handling the corruption case to be scrapped for immediately dropping the case against Biden’s son’s company.



The media and the democrats are corrupt. They would rather focus on Trump maybe possibly promising something to the Ukraine for maybe possibly personal reasons, and say that’s impeachable, then look at the confirmed case of Biden threatening to hold a billion dollars to get the guy looking in to prosecuting his son’s company fired, and actually succeeding.

Any objective person can see the double standard and corruption.

Hopefully this whistle blower case will back fire by forcing congress to have investigations into this situation with Obama and Biden’s administration.




Finished!
edit on 20-9-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Honestly, I hope at least Biden burns. Despite the fact that the DNC push him as their front runner, he's probably their worst shot at beating Trump.

Fingers crossed this also leads to the DNC getting burned. It may give Trump another four years (although that's almost guaranteed) but then we'll see the Bernie Bros fill the void.

AOC 2024!



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:43 AM
link   
I truly, genuinely hope you're right and this leads to Joe Bidens downfall. I can't think of a bigger win for the left than a controversy that forces Biden to drop out.

He's the only Democrat candidate I don't want to vote for. And I feel confident in saying that goes for most other people on the left as well. I can't think of a more uninspiring, bland candidate.

So here's to hoping Joe gets ran out of town and we can pick between Bernie or Warren.




posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

It's just the dems turn to divert attention with a "bombshell" story...

Now back to the fbi operatives whom leaked classified materials to specific Media outlets



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
I truly, genuinely hope you're right and this leads to Joe Bidens downfall. I can't think of a bigger win for the left than a controversy that forces Biden to drop out.

He's the only Democrat candidate I don't want to vote for. And I feel confident in saying that goes for most other people on the left as well. I can't think of a more uninspiring, bland candidate.

So here's to hoping Joe gets ran out of town and we can pick between Bernie or Warren.



Might have missed the part where this impugnes Obama and the Dems and media as well



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks
I truly, genuinely hope you're right and this leads to Joe Bidens downfall. I can't think of a bigger win for the left than a controversy that forces Biden to drop out.

He's the only Democrat candidate I don't want to vote for. And I feel confident in saying that goes for most other people on the left as well. I can't think of a more uninspiring, bland candidate.

So here's to hoping Joe gets ran out of town and we can pick between Bernie or Warren.



Might have missed the part where this impugnes Obama and the Dems and media as well


I don't care what happens to Obama or anyone in the media in the least. Tar and feather them and run them out of town if they did something wrong. Believe it or not, the party loyalty you right wingers have doesn't extend to everyone else.

Party before all is mostly a right wing thing. I say prosecute and investigate everyone regardless of the letter next to their name. It's only you guys who feel obligated to protect the criminals in your party.

ETA: I seriously have my fingers crossed that this brings Joe Biden down. I was considering not voting if he was the chosen candidate. I finally have a glimmer of hope.


edit on 20-9-2019 by underwerks because: (no reason given)


+7 more 
posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

EXCELLENT OP. S&F

You forgot Hunter Biden's two "business partners"...John Kerry's Stepson...and Whitey Bulger's Nephew.
freebeacon.com...
----------------------------


+1 more 
posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks
I truly, genuinely hope you're right and this leads to Joe Bidens downfall. I can't think of a bigger win for the left than a controversy that forces Biden to drop out.

He's the only Democrat candidate I don't want to vote for. And I feel confident in saying that goes for most other people on the left as well. I can't think of a more uninspiring, bland candidate.

So here's to hoping Joe gets ran out of town and we can pick between Bernie or Warren.



Might have missed the part where this impugnes Obama and the Dems and media as well


I don't care what happens to Obama or anyone in the media in the least. Tar and feather them and run them out of town if they did something wrong. Believe it or not, the party loyalty you right wingers have doesn't extend to everyone else.

Party before all is mostly a right wing thing. I say prosecute and investigate everyone regardless of the letter next to their name. It's only you guys who feel obligated to protect the criminals in your party.


Hahahaha!

Your take in this was you hope it takes down Biden so Warren or Bernie can win

Not “wow look at the corruption of the Dems and the media! I hope they get charged”

Now you lecture me in party loyalty and partisans?

Please

Boty Biden and Warren are aware of this corruption by the way and say nothing

So if this story gets bigger and they continue to defend the Dems of the last admin and Biden, will you still put the country over party and reject them?



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Cool. Burn it all down.



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks
I truly, genuinely hope you're right and this leads to Joe Bidens downfall. I can't think of a bigger win for the left than a controversy that forces Biden to drop out.

He's the only Democrat candidate I don't want to vote for. And I feel confident in saying that goes for most other people on the left as well. I can't think of a more uninspiring, bland candidate.

So here's to hoping Joe gets ran out of town and we can pick between Bernie or Warren.



Might have missed the part where this impugnes Obama and the Dems and media as well


I don't care what happens to Obama or anyone in the media in the least. Tar and feather them and run them out of town if they did something wrong. Believe it or not, the party loyalty you right wingers have doesn't extend to everyone else.

Party before all is mostly a right wing thing. I say prosecute and investigate everyone regardless of the letter next to their name. It's only you guys who feel obligated to protect the criminals in your party.


Hahahaha!

Your take in this was you hope it takes down Biden so Warren or Bernie can win

Not “wow look at the corruption of the Dems and the media! I hope they get charged”

Now you lecture me in party loyalty and partisans?

Please

Boty Biden and Warren are aware of this corruption by the way and say nothing

So if this story gets bigger and they continue to defend the Dems of the last admin and Biden, will you still put the country over party and reject them?


They're all just politicians to me. I'll reject any of them that traffic in obvious criminality.

Strange concept to you guys, I know.




posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Seems like you, and most on this site, forget that Bernie isn't actually a Dem.


+2 more 
posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 12:11 PM
link   
The MSM had this story buried... deeply.

This latest "whistleblower" from the Deep State left, has only succeeded in one thing...

Exhuming the corpse, of a dead and buried Biden scandal.



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Grambler

Seems like you, and most on this site, forget that Bernie isn't actually a Dem.


Shhhh! It's better if they believe everyone else is wrapped up in the same kind of cult of personality they are.




posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Does that mean President Trump is not a Republican? or a Conservative?


second line



new topics

top topics



 
61
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join