placeholder

Yep it's certainly a falsehood. Whether Biden lied about it goes to intent. Unless, of course, you also agree that the following is a lie: : "Wow, there's a shocker. Covering up for the wayward son." Or was this just a falsehood?

What does Hunter Biden's alleged intellect have to do with that fact that he's a Biden family member, and like all other Biden family members, the White House rules specifically said that their visits wouldn't be recorded? In other words there was no exceptional treatment for Hunter Biden. This comment of yours is intellectually vacant. In other words, you've got nothing.

You made claims that for years the media was suppressing information about payments from Chinese companies to Hunter Biden. The earliest report I can find on this is from Fox News and is dated Mar, 16, 2023. Maybe you're confusing that with the claims of Trump and other practitioners of spreading disinformation that Biden received 1.5 billion dollars from China? That column from Jim Geraghty you quote poses only questions, not answers. Do you think that a prosecutor going into court with these questions as evidence would stand the slightest chance of securing a conviction? And once again you try to foist the falsehood that there was a disinformation campaign against the Hunter Biden laptop. Stop making things up. As many have previously noted, every time you are challenged on this falsehood, you evaporate. Finally, there is Joe Biden's claim that his son didn't earn money from doing business with China. He got that wrong but that doesn't mean he was lying. You have proof that he knew otherwise?

Oh no...after years of my denialism I have to confess that this latest piece of information is utterly and conclusively damning. There is no way this special treatment of Hunter Biden can be justified or explained away...well except if you actually read the entire article. Did any of you get to the part where the articles notes that the White House, when it restored transparency to the visitors log, noted that among the exceptions one was for family member whose visits won't be record unless they involve official or political business. In other words, not special treatment for Hunter Biden. I think that bears repeating: Not special treatment for Hunter Biden. At any rate here is are excerpts from the official white house policy. As previously announced, President Biden is reinstating a policy to voluntarily disclose White House visitor logs. These logs will include appointment information for individuals who have been processed to enter the White House complex, including the White House, Eisenhower Executive Office Building, and New Executive Office Building. Naval Observatory records related to White House business will also be released when they are generated... The White House will not release access records related to purely personal guests of the First and Second Families (i.e., visits that do not involve any official or political business). https://www.whitehouse.gov/voluntary-disclosure/

You've tried this silly word game before actually. When Democrats said illegitimate they were referring to the fact that the Russians aided in Trump's election by hacking into the Democrats computers and creating troll farms to foster disinformation. It was not about claiming massive ballot fraud. A handful of democratic representatives in the house voted against confirming Trump's victory. Whereas about 2/3 of Republican representatives in the house voted against confirming Biden's. No Democratic senators voted against Trump's confirmation. I think it was eight or nine Republican senators voted against Biden's confirmation. The Obama administration did not attempt to overturn the election results. The unconstitutional attempts of the Trump administration have been thoroughly chronicled. There was certainly no massive progressive media campaign attempting to debunk the validity of the vote tally. Whereas lunacy and mendacity was a consistent feature of right-wing media for the four years following that election. We see how well that worked out for Fox.

And you can produce no one who meets your criteria of supporting abortion rights and strict controls on the border. Anyway, as someone else pointed out, this border wall is a distractions. If the Republicans were really serious about stopping unauthorized immigrants they would support a law that would punish employers who hire undocumented immigrants with sentences that include prison.

Really? Would that be Desantis, whom you mentioned as "interesting"? As for RFK jr. he may fulfill that requirement, but given his anti vaccine stance and his enthusiastic support for the right view of the 2nd Amendment, what chance has he got? Really, what Republican is there who could fulfill that requirement? And how could a democrat gain the nomination taking a harsh stance on immigration? Tell me who this potential condidate is? Or is this person going to appear by magic? You've got nothing.

You could just have told me I got it wrong. Which I did. That you were actually criticizing the same comment that I was.

Actually, it was the Trump administration that negotiated abandoning Afghanistan. Biden actually get a few months extension on the deal. Most Western economies suffered from inflation. Actually the US is doing a lot better than most of them. Inflation is down sharply. And unemployment is very very low. As for the rest, thanks for the partisan nonsense.

Still focused on the person and not the issues. What are stances of RFK or Desantis that you think make them worth voting for?

Actually, Oscar Pistorius had both is legs amputated. You can't even get that right.

It was an investment firm headed by an incompetent investor who was a government official, and as an official advocated for the Saudi government. The Saudis invested 2 billion with him despite advisors concluding that the deal should be nixed. Now it's "fans who moved heaven and earth to deny it happened" Can you tell us exactly what constititutes moving heaven and earth? More importantly, where in the media was it denied that Hunter Biden received payments? What's more, where is the evidence that these payments were criminal? Are his fans moving heaven and earth to hide the evidence? You've got nothing.

And replace him with who? You seem to believe that issues are secondary to persons.

Really? So why are so many of your comments so silly?

When did "the left" deny that Hunter Biden received payments? You keep on trying that one on even though when challenged on it you simply evaporate. As for comparing Hunter Biden's payment's to Jared Kushner's, like Kushner's, nothing illegal has been established about. Unlike Kushner, Hunter Biden was never a government official. What's even worse is that Kushner's special purview was the middle east where he developed close relationships with the rulers there. And despite the fact that his experience in investing has been disastrous, so disastrous that the Qatari government helped bail his familoy out with a sweetheart deal that made no financial sense, and despite the fact that advisors to the Saudi investment agency opposed investing with Kusher, he was given 2 entrusted with 2 billion dollars. That's twice as much as the Saudis entrusted to Steven Mnuchin, a savvy investor with a long list of successes behind him. That 2 billion dollar may be legal, but it clearly stinks.

What people outside the United States would those be? What information are they getting that Americans aren't? I'm not expecting you to supply any confirmable facts.

They're not mercenaries if they enlist in the Ukraine armed forces and are subject to the same rules as are Ukrainian soldiers. There are also ex soldiers working in the Ukraine on a volunteer basis. If they're not getting paid, then they're not mercenaries.

Generally what right wingers refer to as hearing Biden speak are compilations of his gaffes. Biden has a well known propensity for making gaffes throughout his career. Yet know, because he's old, right wingers try to turn it into evidence of senility.

From listening to the audio, it seems he showed the document to the woman who was interviewing him. So, it seems likely that would undercut his case that it was newspaper clippings. Especially given how he described the report as running to pages and pages.

I think you imagine you are a qualified gerontologist.

Nonsense. They just had to believe that Joe Biden was involved.

You know somebody's got nothing when they use hypothetical questions to make an argument. On the other hand we do know for a fact that Republicans overwhelmingly support an ignoramus and full-blown loo for President.

There are millions of people who subscribe to the beliefs of the Qanon creed. There are tens of millions who believe that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. I guess that proves that Hillary Clinton drinks the blood of children and that Donald Trump is really still the President of the United States.

Clearly, you are not aware that this is the same judge whose previous rulings in the Mar-A-Lago case were overturned and sternly rebuked by a panel of 3 judges 2 of whom we're very conservative and appointed by Donald Trump.

No crazed partisan? Maybe not crazed but very, very partisan. He thought judge Cannon made the right call when she appointed a special master. He thought John Durham made two very strong cases. He is extremely partisan.