placeholder

I bet you're so fearful of having to reply to me that you won't be able to sleep a wink.

Where did I ever claim to offer absolute proof that no contrary evidence would be forthcoming? Stop making things up. It's just that the evidence I offered is very strong, and so far we have seen nothing but very week evidence from the Republicans which falls far short of what they contended that they have. Past form counts.

Of course it addresses what you wrote. It tells us you believe Biden is guilty but offers no evidence that Biden is actually feeling what you contend he's feeling. It's only based on your belief that he is guilty. Which tells us something about you but nothing about Biden.

I'm not your researcher. When someone makes a claim, it's incumbent upon them to provide evidence to back it up.. Cite my words and the post or posts I've replied to.

"It's what can best be characterized as Rorschach speculation. It tells us something about you but nothing about the facts of the case."

What sort of evidence could there be that disproves absolutely that there won't be? But the evidence against the Republican committee's assertions is very strong, and the evidence they have provided, such as it is, is very weak despite repeated claims that they were about to produce evidence that was very strong. And every tiime they have produced their evidence, it's fizzled. Past form counts. Even Hannity was sceptical of Comer's claims.

What does that mean that :"your gang certainly behaves like you do". What is the behavior that indicates I believe or other believe that we wish to shut those who disagree with us down? I think along with "They want the discussion halted. ???? Scared of something..." this belongs with your penchant for alleging motives. In other words, making it personal. Because motives may not be able to be proved in this venue, but they can't be disproved either.

It's what can best be characterized as Rorschach speculation. It tells us something about you but nothing about the facts of the case.

The Republicans are already lowering the bar on their previous claims. You think the GOP is pushing this because they have a strong case?

I guess when you haven't got fact, go to motives. That's the convenient thing about alleging motives. The allegation can't be proven but it can't be disproven either. It's just a cheap way of making it personal.

I have shown extremely strong evidence that strongly undercuts the claims Joe Biden did anything criminal in the case of Burisma. What have the Republicans shown? An FD 1023. Which is a hearsay report. Not something witnessed by the person who made the report. And now they're claiming that they don't actually have to show evidence at all that Biden accepted bribes from Burisma

Straw man much?

I wasn't aware that I had the power to silence posters on this website. I promise to use it sparingly.

The pointlessness lies in the fact that it can't be proven or disproven. . Not whether or not it's a bet for cash.

Devon Archer testified that Hunter Biden confesssed to him that he had no hand in it. Other members of Biden's company told Archer it was bad news because Zlochevsky had Shokin under control. And irrefutable evidence is that Biden was carrying out U.S. govt policy when he threatened to cut off funding if Shokin wasn't dismissed. The EU applauded the move. You've got less than nothing.

Actually, the problem seems to be that right wingers are pretending it is. I have repeatedly addressed this issue with specific evidence.. I have yet to see one fact based rebuttal of of the points I've raised. Instead I see evidence-free generalizations like yours. You've got nothing.

Since that's a bet that can't be won or lost, it's pointless.

House Oversight chair admits GOP can’t back up Biden bribery accusations Devon Archer said the opposite of what Republicans claimed It is true, Archer said, that in December 2015, Zlochevsky and Burisma were under a lot of pressure. But Shokin was not a cause of that pressure, he testified — Shokin was an asset. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/03/devon-archer-transcript-biden/ Democrats release evidence they claim contradicts Biden bribery allegations - including Burisma head insisting 'no one' at his company had contact with Joe while Hunter was on the board The transcripts came from a 2019 interview with Mykola Zlochevsky, the head of Burisma In the interview, Zlochevsky told an associate of Rudy Giuliani: 'No one from Burisma ever had any contacts with VP Biden or people working for him https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12248315/Burisma-head-insisted-no-one-company-contact-Joe-Biden-Hunter-board.html Ex-Hunter Biden associate Devon Archer testifies President Biden didn't discuss 'commercial business': Archer testified that Joe Biden's interactions with Hunter Biden's associates were "not related to commercial business," that Joe Biden had no involvement with Burisma, the Ukrainian oil conglomerate on whose board both Archer and Hunter Biden served; that the elder Biden never took any actions to benefit Burisma or Hunter Biden; and that Hunter Biden never asked his father to take any actions that would help his clients, according to the fully transcribed interview with the committee. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-committee-releases-devon-archer-transcript/story?id=101986082#:~:text=Archer testified that Joe Biden's,actions to benefit Burisma or House Oversight chair admits GOP can’t back up Biden bribery accusations The chairman of the House Oversight Committee on Monday said he and his colleagues still lack evidence proving that President Joe Biden took bribes while he was vice president during the Obama administration, despite months of investigation into his son, Hunter Biden. Representative James Comer made the embarrassing admission during an appearance on Fox News host Sean Hannity’s eponymous nightly programme alongside Representative Jim Jordan, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/james-comer-biden-bribe-accusation-fox-news-b2386040.html

Sure. A prosecutor with whom a shred of scandal has ever been associated with, suddenly decides to go corrupt. You should be working for that house committee. Your standards of evidence are as low as theirs.

You mean like their claims for the 1023 form? That Joe Biden accepted a bribe from the head of burisma? Or Comers repeated claims of having a smoking gun? Only to have those claims dissolved when he produces the alleged evidence? Even Fox commentators were questioning his bona fides. And now their disclaimer that they don't need a smoking gun? And they falsely misapply a law that they claim justifies it? That doesn't sound to you like a retreat? Really?

Please share with us what your crystal ball is telling you.

Nonsense. First off, you did claim to know what he meant by your unhedged interpretation of his remark. Which was further confirmed by your claim that Chomper Higgott agreed with you. And if his comment has been made out of the blue you might possibly have a point. But it was made in reply to someone else. So the content was clear to anyone who didn't willfully ignore it.

Obviously, I couldn't care less what you think of me. And where have I reveled in the death of this person? Stop making things up.

Like calling someone a pimp who has no history of selling sexual services.

If someone is elderly and making death threats, and/or is demented, he shouldn't be in possession of weapons. Maybe his family should stop blaming the Feds and look at themselves to assign culpability.