placeholder

Trump lawyers met with special counsel ahead of possible indictment out of Jan. 6 probe The federal grand jury is expected to meet at a federal courthouse in Washington Thursday Lawyers for former President Trump met with Special Counsel Jack Smith and his team in Washington D.C. Thursday in anticipation of a possible federal indictment related to the investigation into Jan. 6, Fox News has learned. The meeting took place on the same day that the federal grand jury was expected to meet at a federal courthouse in Washington, spurring speculation an indictment may be imminent. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-lawyers-meet-special-counsel-possible-indictment-jan-6-probe

Hmmm. If your claim that there is no smoke without fire is true, what does that say about Trump's prospects given that he's already been indicted in one case and it doesn't look too good for him in at least one of the others as well?

You mean like the Durham investigation?

You should learn to read more carefully? What does the word "allegation" mean to you?

And Jesus is coming any day now.

In other words? Really? Once again, there is absolutely no incriminating evidence of Joe Bidens being involved in Hunter Biden's business dealings. If you think a phone call like this one is incriminating evidence, then you've got really low standards. Come to think of it, given the ridiculous dialogue you previously provided, you do have low standards.

Shortly before he took office, Trump claimed he had a health insurance plan that was just about ready to go. Apparently it languished in the White House. Maybe Trump packed it in a cardboard box nad took it to Mar a Lago as a souvenir.

In other words, hunter calls his father and tells him that he's with a couple of Ukrainians. Short of hanging up on his son, what could Biden do? It looks like an ambush. Sounds to me like Joe Bidend did what he had to to get out of that phone call as quickly as possible. Nothing in what you cited speaks to Biden involving himself in his son's business. And as Archer allegedly clalms,, most of these conversations were initiated without Biden knowing that he was put on speakerphone. And what does this conversation have in common with the lunacy you posted?

Again, more fiction from you. You got any evidence that Hunter Biden was talking about his business associates when he called his father? Because all that a father and son can talk about is business? And that article you cited quotes Biden as telling his son "I hope you know what you're doing." No evidence that his son shared any information about his business dealings with Burisma.

The thing is, Biden and Trump didn't trade on their occupancy of the office while they were in office. We know this because they released all their income tax returns. Whereas Trump not only didn't release his income tax returns but he lied about the reason why.

No. You've got it wrong. As the article says, Hunter didn't let his father know that anyone was listening in.

Biden knew that his son was on Burisma's board. No evidence that he discussed with his son his dealings with Burisma. There was an article Hunter Biden's business relationship with the NY Times in 2015. https://archive.ph/1Fbr0

Do you think maybe Hunter didn't want his father to know about his business? After all, if Archer's potential testimony is to be believed, Hunter Biden would put his unsuspecting father on speakerphone so his business associates could hear him talking with his son.

The "Bidanos"? Just another variant of the "Biden Crime Family" nonsense. There is no solid evidence at all that Joe Biden has committed any crime. Evaporating witnesses and uncorroborated hearsay do not provide much in the way of support for such allegations.

But there is a limit on how many carbon tax credits there are. What's more, the amount of availabile credits declines over time. "The carbon credit is half of a so-called cap-and-trade program. Companies that pollute are awarded credits that allow them to continue to pollute up to a certain limit, which is reduced periodically. Meanwhile, the company may sell any unneeded credits to another company that needs them. Private companies are thus doubly incentivized to reduce greenhouse emissions. First, they must spend money on extra credits if their emissions exceed the cap. Second, they can make money by reducing their emissions and selling their excess allowances." https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/carbon_credit.asp#:~:text=The carbon credit is half,another company that needs them. The biggest problem with carbon tax credits is that in some regions they are too low priced to make a difference.

Apparently, you believe that name calling is a substitute for providing evidence. Please refute what I've linked to with some counterevidence. Here is the link again: https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/climate-change/energy-subsidies#:~:text=Back to Top-,Size of Fossil Fuel Subsidies,generally larger) continues to climb.

What don't you understand about the issue of externalities? How making other parties pay for the damage your industry causes is what economists call an implicit subsidy.

You clearly didn't understand that a carbon tax would provide businesses an incentive to reduce their carbon emissions.

Actually, if you had read the NY Post Article, it claims Biden only spoke in platitudes and generalities. Nothing in that means Biden and his son discussed the business.

What bank statements would those be?

Funny. I read the NY Post article about the potential Archer testimony. And even if it's true that Biden knowingly spoke via speakerphone with Hunter Biden's associates... VP Biden greeted the Ukrainians but spoke only in vague pleasantries during the short call, and in other such interactions with Hunter’s overseas business partners, Archer is expected to testify. https://nypost.com/2023/07/23/hunter-biden-put-then-vp-dad-joe-on-the-phone-with-business-associates-at-least-2-dozen-times-ex-partner-devon-archer-to-testify/

Right. The justice dept under Jeff Sessions and William Barr just did nothing even though Trump pushed for it. Even thought Rudy Giuliani as Trump's personal lawyer traveled to Ukraine to try and dig up dirt. You've got nothing.

No. The Fed is not a private body of bankers. The 7 member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve are appointed by the President. And where did you come up with the idea that the "U.S. [sic} fought the Revolutionary War to get out from under the oppressive thumb of the Bank of England, and for a few short years this actually succeeded."? In fact, in 1782 The Bank of North America was created to become the defacto central bank to continue financing the war. And the Federal Reserve was created because without a central bank, the US was repeatedly subject to bank runs and financial collapses. In a modern economy there really is no alternative to a central bank. Perhaps the reason that the UK became the first center of the Industrial Revolution was because of the stable financial environment provided by the BoE.

For what it's worth, lots of economists think the Fed in engaging in overkill. It turns out that the U.S. had the lowest inflation rate of all the G7 nations foir June. (Japan being the last of the G& nations to report published its figures and theywere at 3.3% vs. U.S. 3.0%.) Also the way the US measures housing costs is different from most other countries. That part of the index should come down quickly, so core inflation should also follow.

Well, this is a civil suit, not a criminal one. At any rate, it looks like he's going to go with a free speech defense. That might work well against public figures, but these two women were definitely not that. And they have a strong case to make that they suffered because of Giuliani's baseless accusations.