1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 05, 2023, 08:20:13 PM »

We appear to be at the point where you guys are claiming that multiple Biden family members were being bribed by foreign country entities to trick Joe Biden into influencing policy decisions, but Joe Biden didn't know about it.

No one is suggesting this.
Also, please point to policies that the VP of America enacted on behalf of foriegn governments through Hunter. >_>

So far, they might have Hunter Biden on selling his father's position for his own gain.  But they haven't linked anything illegal to Joe Biden.

Ok. So you admit that Hunter Biden was selling access to his father's power (through tricking his father into influencing or doing things). How can you maintain that congress doesn't need to investigate that?

If I tell you that Bill Gates is my best friend and I can totally put in a good word for you, does that mean Bill Gates is doing what I say?

Please stop putting words in my mouth.  One can sell a relationship for gain without actually doing anything.  Hunter doesn't need to even communicate to his father to use his father's position to his advantage.  Networking is literally the most effective way to get a job and what better way than to namedrop your famous dad? 

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 05, 2023, 08:32:40 AM »

Is trying to profit off the presidency and informally sell access to power illegal or not? You can't say that it's not a big deal when Trump and his family do it and then flip out when a couple of Biden's relatives (not even Biden himself, just his relatives) try to do something similar.

And democrats claimed Trump had russian influence for 2.

Don't let conservatives rewrite history on this. There is ample evidence that Russia wanted Trump elected and interfered with the 2016 election to achieve that goal. Now, is there any proof that Trump only won because of that interference? No. Does this mean that the 2016 election was somehow invalid or illegitimate? No. And is acknowledging this interference in any way "equivalent" to Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election? No, absolutely not. But it happened, no matter how much conservatives wish that it didn't.

You misunderstand.  I meant that Trump was being directly influenced/bribed/blackmailed by Russia, not that Russia wanted him in power.  Thats a given.

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 04, 2023, 11:22:43 PM »

They do claim to have evidence for the Biden's pay-for-play schemes - https://oversight.house.gov/landing/biden-family-investigation/

They've had the same claim for what.... 4 years? 
Trump has claimed election fraud for 8.
And democrats claimed Trump had russian influence for 2.

None of them produced any usable evidence so you'll excuse me if I don't trust a press release.

It's not the same four year old claims. They have been posting new evidence and new claims to the link I gave all year. They most recently added something today December 4th -

https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-releases-direct-monthly-payments-to-joe-biden-from-hunter-bidens-business-entity%ef%bf%bc/

"WASHINGTON—Today, House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) released subpoenaed bank records revealing Hunter Biden’s business entity, Owasco PC, made direct monthly payments to Joe Biden. "

What years?  That would seem to be important.  And how much?  Because if its like $1,000 a month for the political campaign, it would make sense.  Hell, every politician gets money from businesses, sad as it is.

Hunter Biden is currently under an investigation by the Department of Justice for using the Owasco PC corporate account for tax evasion and other serious crimes.

I look forward to seeing how that goes or if charges are ever brought.

Following subpoenas to obtain Biden family associates’ bank records, Chairman Comer issued subpoenas for Hunter and James Biden’s personal and business bank records. The House Oversight Committee has identified over 20 shell companies and uncovered how the Bidens and their associates raked in over $24 million dollars between 2015 and 2019 by selling Joe Biden as “the brand.” Financial records obtained show Hunter Biden’s business account, Owasco PC, received payments from Chinese-state linked companies and other foreign nationals and companies."

And?  Selling famous people as a brand is a time honored tradition.  Tho wasn't Trump president during half of that time, not Biden?  Sounds like we need a better breakdown of the time period.  If biden was sold as "the brand" when he wasn't VP, wouldn't help your case.  Hell, him being VP and being sold as a brand isn't really all that unusual. 
I mean, Trump himself made $24 in 2018 alone.  You know, when he was president.

And Chinese-state linked companies needs clarification because that means nothing.  Tik-Tok is a chinese state linked company and if you get ad money from tik-tok... you get money from a chinese-state linked company! He could also own stocks in these companies, which would earn him income from the stocks and the company itself.  They should have released more information like which companies, how much, and what the payments were for.

So far, they might have Hunter Biden on selling his father's position for his own gain.  But they haven't linked anything illegal to Joe Biden.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 04, 2023, 07:29:27 AM »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67598948

Are you MAGA lot sick of all the winning yet?

Ironic comment from you since Trump is now winning the polls.

https://www.the-daily-record.com/story/news/politics/elections/2023/11/19/donald-trump-leads-joe-biden-young-voters-2024-poll/71646789007/



https://www.enmnews.com/2023/11/29/tracking-polls-show-trump-at-his-all-time-high-as-a-presidential-candidate/#google_vignette



https://emersoncollegepolling.com/november-2023-national-poll-trump-maintains-lead-over-biden/



https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2023/11/26/biden-trump-2024-election-battleground-polls/71667419007/



https://www.westernjournal.com/uh-oh-nbc-news-drops-new-trump-vs-biden-poll-never-result-like/



https://themessenger.com/politics/poll-trump-continues-to-lead-biden-exclusive-2



https://electionwire.com/surprise-in-the-polls-trump-takes-the-lead/#google_vignette



https://newstarget.com/2023-12-01-joe-biden-performing-poorly-different-opinion-polls.html

Remember that time Clinton was winning all the polls?

Plus, Trump isn't even the party nominee.  Should probably wait for that one.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 04, 2023, 07:27:56 AM »

They do claim to have evidence for the Biden's pay-for-play schemes - https://oversight.house.gov/landing/biden-family-investigation/

They've had the same claim for what.... 4 years? 
Trump has claimed election fraud for 8.
And democrats claimed Trump had russian influence for 2.

None of them produced any usable evidence so you'll excuse me if I don't trust a press release.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 01, 2023, 09:29:50 PM »

Well a deposition regarding potentially illegal activity should probably be done in private. If anything illegal was done then the names Hunter Biden has to mention should probably go to law enforcement or the Congressional Sergeant at Arms rather than speak the names in public and tip off a potential criminal who thought that they were safe or that they wouldn't be pointed out, and cause people to destroy records and documents in a mad panic.

Among its powers, the House performs law enforcement functions and has powers to arrest people who defy their orders. If you are called by the House to testify in a private deposition, you should probably do what they say.

Again, sounds like an excuse.  Especially for a fishing deposition since no illegal activity has yet been found or charges brought.  Republicans have nothing to charge him on and this is purely a ploy to drum up either something they can use in sound bites for the election or a despirate hope that they can get him to admit to something illegal.

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 01, 2023, 06:31:02 AM »

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/hunter-biden-agrees-testify-house-oversight-committee-rcna126962

So "We need transparency" Republicans really really don't want Hunter Biden's testemony to be public.  Wonder why?

Any insights Tom?

If you ever watch a public congressional testimony a good percentage of the responses to the questions are "I can't mention names in public" or "I can't disclose that in this public setting" and that somehow passes for an answer.

It sounds like they want a private deposition and are also open to a public one at a future date as well.

https://twitter.com/GOPoversight/status/1729511683301716088

Since the investigation is about foreign entites outside US jurisdiction, Joe Biden, and Hunter Biden... Not sure what names they could mention that shouldn't be public.  That sounds like an excuse. 

As for the future: is that before or after they release edited, out of context clips?

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: November 30, 2023, 05:24:13 PM »

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/hunter-biden-agrees-testify-house-oversight-committee-rcna126962

So "We need transparency" Republicans really really don't want Hunter Biden's testemony to be public.  Wonder why?

Any insights Tom?

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 27, 2023, 08:33:21 PM »

You are mainly just claiming things like it is possible that someone doesn't scream when they are raped. This possibility does nothing to erase that red flag.

Yes, it is possible that a woman does not scream in a department store when she is raped against her will. However, it is improbable. If you were to go and rape a woman in a store bathroom tomorrow against her will how likely is it that the woman will scream for help? Very likely, obviously.

The series of explanations presented are pure excuse making, which you are explicitly making to explain away and justify a lack of evidence in this case. You pretend that we should be completely on board with believing a series of improbable excuses.

Rates of screaming is minimal.  Its not "improbable" its "typical".  You're thinking like a man.  You're tough and your fight or flight typically turns to fight.  So you'd scream.  You'd claw and bite and do anything to stop it.

But a woman?  A quiet plea.  A silent prayer it'll be over soon.  Because that man CAN and WILL hurt you.  And no one is gonna believe you.

Also, rape is rarely "man pushes woman to the floor suddenly and shoves his dick into her.".
Its usually more subtle.  A pushy makeout session that turns more agressive until you can't stop him.

A knife or a threat of violence.

An unwanted touch that doesn't stop from someone you know will be trusted more than you.  Who would believe Donald Trump, a man who can have any woman, would do this to you?  No one.  "And if you scream, I'll ruin your life." And you know those aren't empty words.

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 18, 2023, 07:54:41 AM »

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/colorado-judge-rules-trump-gop-primary-election-ballot/story?id=104994897

Big takeaway:
The judge ruled Trump did engage in insurrection but also ruled that the 14th amendment doesn't apply to presidents.

This is an unfortunate blow to future cases.

11

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 14, 2023, 10:59:24 PM »

Perhaps you have a different definition of evidence than the court system.

You know damn well he does.

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 14, 2023, 07:07:29 PM »

Trump *was* Very rich.
And he got away with it because they were bluecollar crimes that could be paid away.  But then he went into politics and too many eyes are on him now.

But hey, we have Tom's prediction.  I look forward to seeing how it pans out but I suspect he won't go to jail.  It would be too easy for him to make it politically motivated and cause a riot or three.  Maybe.  Depends on how his supporters feel about missing work.


Anyway, now we know that if you wanna do crime, run for office first.  Then its a witch hunt if you're caught!

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 14, 2023, 01:21:42 PM »

Look guys.
Tom is gonna say 'i told you so' if Powell has nothing.
If Powell has damning testemony, he'll dismiss it as fake or lies or whatever.

Actually, what Tom and the Maganoids don't understand is that Kraken Lady ALREADY testified on video. If she changes her testimony on the stand at this point, the video of her proffer will still be shown in evidence and she will be facing all the original felonies.

https://abc7chicago.com/jenna-ellis-sydney-powell-donald-trump-2020-election/14054154/

As traitors go, Ellis is very different than Kraken Lady in that she seems genuinely remorseful and understands what a dumbass she was for believing anything from the Trump people.

Yes but we haven't seen that video so its irrelevant.
I'm also not talking about changing the story.

14

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 14, 2023, 12:30:52 PM »

Look guys.
Tom is gonna say 'i told you so' if Powell has nothing.
If Powell has damning testemony, he'll dismiss it as fake or lies or whatever.

15

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 07, 2023, 04:36:16 PM »

"Do you guys gain an ounce of humility when all this hard evidence against Trump, which you always assume to exist in abundance before you have the facts, turns out to be garbage? This is all obviously just a fantasy wish of yours to 'get trump' more than anything. How could you possibly know that Trump has committed all of these criminal acts you have alleged over the years if you were not there? You do not know, which is why this is a fantasy."
The most hypocritical paragraph Tom has ever written.

Have ya seen that data proving the election was stolen yet, Tom?



But yeah, your analysis is flawed.  If sydney Powell doesn't attack the prosecution, she risks being attacked by Trumpers (like you).  She's milking what she can before her testemony comes out.

16

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 03, 2023, 07:26:23 AM »

Maybe she is intending to testify. I still don't see anything substantial suggesting that she has flipped on Trump, however. The agreement is for her to testify truthfully. There could be a number of reasons that agreement was given. Maybe they initially overcharged her and gave her this standard truth agreement as a hail mary. Sidney Powell is certainly not acting like she flipped on Trump, judging by her continuous attacks on the prosecutors after this agreement -

https://www.businessinsider.com/sidney-powell-doubt-election-results-attack-prosecutors-after-guilty-plea-2023-10

"Sidney Powell pushes claims that 2020 election was rigged and prosecutors 'extorted' her after she pleaded guilty to election interference"

...

"On her social-media accounts, Powell has continued to push claims that the 2020 election was rigged and that prosecutors in Georgia who brought the criminal case against her were politically motivated."

...

"Powell's newsletter promoted a claim that Willis 'extorted' her guilty plea"

...

"Since her guilty plea, the newsletters have urged her followers to "hold fast." They told supporters to read and share articles and YouTube videos that argue her guilty plea was 'extorted' and amounted to a blow to Willis, the Fulton County district attorney."

...

"Powell's followers were directed to the same Federalist article again in her Monday newsletter. It also cited an Epoch Times article quoting Trump's attorney Steve Sadow, who said Powell pleaded guilty only because of 'pressure' from Willis."

...

"Ronald Carlson, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law, told Insider that Powell's comments were unusual for a cooperating witness who was likely to be asked to testify on behalf of the prosecution at a trial.

'Usually, after a guilty plea, the defendants do not want to rock the boat,' Carlson said."

So what you're saying is that you will only believe her testemony if it is positive for Trump.  Got it.

17

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 02, 2023, 11:29:05 PM »

Sydney Powell signed a deal to testify truthfully. That is all. Secret behind-the-scenes deals that she flipped on Trump is purely in your imagination based on what you are assuming happened between Powell and the prosecutor. A close associate of Sydney Powell insists that she has not "flipped":

https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/10/26/read-sidney-powell-didnt-flip-on-trump-or-maga/

Yes.  She agreed TO TESTIFY.  So no sneakily taking the 5th and not testifying truthfully.  Not answering is not testifying truthfully, after all.  Now here's a question: Will you believe her testemony?

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: October 31, 2023, 10:40:28 AM »

Nobody here claimed that prosecutors directly represent the victims of crimes.

People did argue here that we should just assume what a prosecutor is and what a prosecutor does based on "common sense".

Ha! I really stuck in your craw, huh?

For the record, though, no I didn't, but it's so sweet that you went off on a wild, irrelevant (and long-winded, you really put thought into it) tangent based on a misunderstanding of something I wrote, and I've barely even contributed to this particular discussion!!

Well, what else is he gonna do?  Talk about how Trump is gonna release all that election data and get the results overturned in court?

19

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: October 31, 2023, 05:10:54 AM »

Nobody here claimed that prosecutors directly represent the victims of crimes.

People did argue here that we should just assume what a prosecutor is and what a prosecutor does based on "common sense".

In the example given it shows that everyone is wrong about who a prosecutor represents:

"If you stop a person on the street and ask who brings charges against defendants in victim related cases, almost everyone will say the victim."

"Prosecutors represent the State of Indiana, and only they can bring charges, not victims. In all reality, once a crime has been reported, the victim loses any control over whether or not charges get brought or not and if they get dismissed. People are often shocked by this fact."

If most people are so shocked and surprised at who prosecutors really represent and how they function, how is it a valid argument to tell me that you are right about prosecutors based on (your) common sense and that all references which oppose your narrative are wrong, including statements by lawyers, attorneys associations, and academic papers?

Yes and?
Also notable distinction is this doesn't apply to civil matters.  Civil matters don't involve the state prosecutor's office.

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: October 28, 2023, 04:16:02 AM »

We have an adversarial legal system, and the prosecution is absolutely, 100% in opposition to the defendant in any given criminal trial. That's not a creation of movies, it's the reality, and whatever lofty platitudes you can find online about how the ultimate duty of prosecutors lies with abstract concepts like justice do not change the facts about how prosecutors go about their business every day. Lawyers do not call witnesses to the stand or question them because they themselves are looking for more information about the case. They already know what information the witness asks. They already know the answer to the questions they ask. It's their job to know these things. The witnesses they call and the questions they ask are designed to convince the jury of a specific narrative - that the defendant is guilty, in the prosecution's case, or that the defendant is not guilty, in the defense's case.

I believe Tom is only using the word "prosecutor" in the context of "Federal Prosecutor" and not a more general "the prosecution lawyer".

So in that case, their job is to create and present a case against a defendant who has been accused by a federal agency of a crime.

They are also the ones who ultimately decide to prosecute or not based on collected evidence.