Trump’s dominance of GOP field has America bracing for a toxic campaign

[placeholder]

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I never said he was prosecuting Burisma, and the article clearly states that "...there had been an investigation of the company, Shokin's former deputy, Vitaliy Kasko, has said that it was dormant at the time of Joe Biden's intervention..."

He wasn't prosecuting and he wasn't investigating. So no coincidence.

[candide]

14 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I never said he was prosecuting Burisma, and the article clearly states that "...there had been an investigation of the company, Shokin's former deputy, Vitaliy Kasko, has said that it was dormant at the time of Joe Biden's intervention..."

Ok. So he was not really investigating and prosecuting. And the U.S. was complaining about it (before and after Shokin took office, below an example of the U.S. complaining after Shop in took office)

"Sept. 24, 2015 – U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt excoriates officials in the Prosecutor General’s Office for stymying anti-corruption investigations, including those involving Burisma"

https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timeline-trump-giuliani-bidens-and-ukrainegate/

 

Edited July 31, 2023 by candide

[Yellowtail]

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

He wasn't prosecuting and he wasn't investigating. So no coincidence.

The CNN "Fact-Check" said there was an investigation. Is investigating not part of an investigation? 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

The CNN "Fact-Check" said there was an investigation. Is investigating not part of an investigation? 

A defunct investigation.

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

A defunct investigation.

Not true. The CNN "Fact Check" said it was dormant, not defunct.

 

Defunct and dormant have clearly different meanings, yes?

 

If the CNN "Fact Check" is true, and if I understand the terminology correctly, then it was an open, inactive investigation.

 

 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Not true. The CNN "Fact Check" said it was dormant, not defunct.

 

Defunct and dormant have clearly different meanings, yes?

 

If the CNN "Fact Check" is true, and if I understand the terminology correctly, then it was an open, inactive investigation.

 

 

Under Shokin it was going nowhere.

[ozimoron]

Indictment in Georgia imminent.

 

A judge on Monday rejected an attempt by Donald Trump's legal team to block Fulton County District Attorney Fani Wilis from hitting him with indictments concerning interference in the 2020 presidential election, The Atlanta Journal Constitution reported.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/fani-willis-2662650182/

[Jingthing]

An Unhinged Sociopath / Psychopath for president?

 

'Violence, malice and menace': Columnist warns Trump's threats must be taken seriously as walls close in on him - Raw Story - Celebrating 19 Years of Independent Journalism

 

Quote

With two criminal indictments already on the books – one in a federal courtroom in Florida, the other brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg – and two more reportedly imminent, one political analyst suggested people keep an eye on Donald Trump's increasingly violent rhetoric as his legal problems overwhelm him.

 

 

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Not true. The CNN "Fact Check" said it was dormant, not defunct.

 

Defunct and dormant have clearly different meanings, yes?

 

If the CNN "Fact Check" is true, and if I understand the terminology correctly, then it was an open, inactive investigation.

There is an important overlap in the definitions of "dormant" and "defunct".  They both mean that the investigation was not going anywhere.

[Yellowtail]

18 hours ago, placeholder said:

Under Shokin it was going nowhere.

First you claimed it was not being investigated. Then when that shown to be false, you admitted it was being investigated, but claimed the investigation was defunct. Then when that was shown to be false you claim it wasn't going anywhere. 

 

Got it. 

 

[placeholder]

9 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

First you claimed it was not being investigated. Then when that shown to be false, you admitted it was being investigated, but claimed the investigation was defunct. Then when that was shown to be false you claim it wasn't going anywhere. 

 

Got it. 

 

Actually, Shokin inherited the investigation begun under Viktor Pshonka. I claimed that Shokin was not investigating Burisma. No evidence that Shokin pursued the investigation. His staff claimed Shokin was not investigating Burisma. Shokin. And the crucial fact is that Joe Biden did not intervene to fire Shokin to protect Burisma.

In 2012, the Ukrainian prosecutor general Viktor Pshonka began investigating Ukrainian oligarch Mykola Zlochevsky, owner of the natural gas company Burisma Holdings, over allegations of money laundering, tax evasion, and corruption during 2010–2012.^[41][42]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Shokin}

[Yellowtail]

12 hours ago, heybruce said:

There is an important overlap in the definitions of "dormant" and "defunct".  They both mean that the investigation was not going anywhere.

No. Defunct and dormant have clearly different meanings.

The difference is particularly important if the prosecutor is corrupt. A dormant case can be reactivated any time, for any reason, like in the event the company Hunter was on the board of missed one of their payments to the corrupt prosecutor. 

 

Again, I think it is just a coincidence that the prosecutor President Biden bragged about getting fired had been investigating the company Hunter Biden sat on the board of. That the investigation was dormant at the time, and that the Obama-Biden State Department wanted him fired also I think supports that.  

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Actually, Shokin inherited the investigation begun under Viktor Pshonka. I claimed that Shokin was not investigating Burisma. No evidence that Shokin pursued the investigation. His staff claimed Shokin was not investigating Burisma. Shokin. And the crucial fact is that Joe Biden did not intervene to fire Shokin to protect Burisma.

In 2012, the Ukrainian prosecutor general Viktor Pshonka began investigating Ukrainian oligarch Mykola Zlochevsky, owner of the natural gas company Burisma Holdings, over allegations of money laundering, tax evasion, and corruption during 2010–2012.^[41][42]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Shokin}

So Shokin was in charge of a dormant investigation of the company Hunter Biden sat on the board of, correct? 

 

I think it safe to say once Biden got him fired, he would not be pursuing it. 

[heybruce]

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

No. Defunct and dormant have clearly different meanings.

The difference is particularly important if the prosecutor is corrupt. A dormant case can be reactivated any time, for any reason, like in the event the company Hunter was on the board of missed one of their payments to the corrupt prosecutor. 

 

Again, I think it is just a coincidence that the prosecutor President Biden bragged about getting fired had been investigating the company Hunter Biden sat on the board of. That the investigation was dormant at the time, and that the Obama-Biden State Department wanted him fired also I think supports that.  

dormant:  temporarily inactive or inoperative, as in temporarily defunct.  The investigation was dormant under the prosecutor that was fired.

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So Shokin was in charge of a dormant investigation of the company Hunter Biden sat on the board of, correct? 

 

I think it safe to say once Biden got him fired, he would not be pursuing it. 

Calling an investigation dormant is a way of saying nothing was going on with it under Shokin. It's possible that it could have been revived under Shokin but it never was. So once he was out of office it's not unfair or inaccurate to characterize it as defunct given his other actions while he was in office.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

dormant:  temporarily inactive or inoperative, as in temporarily defunct.  The investigation was dormant under the prosecutor that was fired.

What we used to refer to in the public service as the bottom tray.

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, heybruce said:

dormant:  temporarily inactive or inoperative, as in temporarily defunct.  The investigation was dormant under the prosecutor that was fired.

With the keyword being temporarily. 

[Yellowtail]

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Calling an investigation dormant is a way of saying nothing was going on with it under Shokin. It's possible that it could have been revived under Shokin but it never was. So once he was out of office it's not unfair or inaccurate to characterize it as defunct given his other actions while he was in office.

No, calling the investigation defunct is wrong, and doubling down on calling it defunct is deceitful at best.

 

The state of the investigation should have nothing to do with whether or not Shokin is in office. The investigation could dormant, closed or active, we really have no way of knowing. 

 

If Merrick Garland were impeached or died tomorrow, would that change the status of the investigation he is in charge of? 

 

 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

No, calling the investigation defunct is wrong, and doubling down on calling it defunct is deceitful at best.

 

The state of the investigation should have nothing to do with whether or not Shokin is in office. The investigation could dormant, closed or active, we really have no way of knowing. 

 

If Merrick Garland were impeached or died tomorrow, would that change the status of the investigation he is in charge of? 

 

 

Deceitful towards what end?

[rudi49jr]

This is apparently what MAGA / Trumpism has come to:

 

A broadcaster at the rightwing network Right Side Broadcasting Network (RSBN) interrupted the programming ahead of former President Donald Trump’s rally in Erie, Pennsylvania to reject the notion that he wanted to kill liberals, globalists, and insufficiently conservative or Trump-supporting Republicans, known as RINOs (Republicans In Name Only).

Matthew Alvarez said on Saturday that “There is something that is trending on Twitter right now ... I was interviewing people ... they were talking about how great the country is, how great the president is, and I heard something else that was spoken ... what I’m hearing is somebody said, ‘Well let’s kill them all.’ That is not something that I agree with, obviously,” he said, according to RawStory. 

 

 

Read the article and see how ludicrous his excuse and ‘retraction’ are:

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-rally-matthew-alvarez-rsbn-empty-seats-b2384716.html

 

Plenty of videos on Youtube as well, where you can hear that Trump supporter say loud and clear ‘Kill ‘em all’ and this ‘reporter’ saying ‘I agree with you on that’. But now he claims he didn’t hear what that Trump supporter was saying. Yeah, right….

Edited August 5, 2023 by metisdead
Edited as per fair use policy.

[ThailandRyan]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

No. Defunct and dormant have clearly different meanings.

The difference is particularly important if the prosecutor is corrupt. A dormant case can be reactivated any time, for any reason, like in the event the company Hunter was on the board of missed one of their payments to the corrupt prosecutor. 

 

Again, I think it is just a coincidence that the prosecutor President Biden bragged about getting fired had been investigating the company Hunter Biden sat on the board of. That the investigation was dormant at the time, and that the Obama-Biden State Department wanted him fired also I think supports that.  

He wasn't investigating it now was he.  Your clinging to a thread.....

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

No, calling the investigation defunct is wrong, and doubling down on calling it defunct is deceitful at best.

 

The state of the investigation should have nothing to do with whether or not Shokin is in office. The investigation could dormant, closed or active, we really have no way of knowing. 

 

If Merrick Garland were impeached or died tomorrow, would that change the status of the investigation he is in charge of? 

 

 

"and doubling down on calling it defunct is deceitful at best."

 

At best? What is it at worst? Am I looking at serious hard time? Should I get a lawyer? 2 lawyers?

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, ThailandRyan said:

He wasn't investigating it now was he.  Your clinging to a thread.....

I only went by what CNN said it their fact check. There was/in an investigation, and he was in charge of it.

 

Do you think Merrick Garland actually investigates anything?

[Scott]

Inflammatory post removed.  Continue and face a suspension.

 

[heybruce]

10 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

With the keyword being temporarily. 

Any evidence that temporary was not becoming permanent?

[heybruce]

10 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

No, calling the investigation defunct is wrong, and doubling down on calling it defunct is deceitful at best.

 

The state of the investigation should have nothing to do with whether or not Shokin is in office. The investigation could dormant, closed or active, we really have no way of knowing. 

 

If Merrick Garland were impeached or died tomorrow, would that change the status of the investigation he is in charge of? 

 

 

Shokin's job was to investigate corruption.  Are you claiming that not doing his job should have nothing to do with whether or not Shokin should keep his job?

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I only went by what CNN said it their fact check. There was/in an investigation, and he was in charge of it.

 

Do you think Merrick Garland actually investigates anything?

I think Merrick Garland directs people to investigate potential crimes.  For that reason he gets credit or condemnation based on what his people do.

[ThailandRyan]

So much deflection by the MAGA supporters who try to imbue the issue of Hunter Biden with the specter of Joe Biden leading the charge to fire Shokin, when in fact Joe was doing his job as he was told to do unlike Shokin who was a very corrupt man. The deflection continues with the GOP even now with the new Indictment for Jan 6th which is pretty damming in itself.

 

Trump charged in probe of Jan. 6, efforts to overturn 2020 election - The Washington Post

 

The four-count, 45-page indictment accuses Trump, who is again running for president, of three distinct criminal schemes, charging that he conspired to defraud the United States, conspired to obstruct an official proceeding and conspired against people’s rights.

 

“The attack on our nation’s capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy,” special counsel Jack Smith told reporters after the indictment was filed. “It was fueled by lies, lies by the defendant.”

Smith also praised the law enforcement officers who defended the U.S. Capitol, saying that they “did not just defend a building or the people sheltering in it. They put their lives on the line to defend who we are as a country and a people.”

Full Indictment document below

https://washingtonpost.com/documents/8a7503af-fde7-4061-818c-7d7e0ee06036.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_5

Edited August 2, 2023 by ThailandRyan

[Yellowtail]

7 hours ago, heybruce said:

Any evidence that temporary was not becoming permanent?

Do you have any evidence that it was becoming permanent? 

 

In any event, it's not likely it will be reopened now that the last guy in charge of it was fired...

[Yellowtail]

7 hours ago, heybruce said:

Shokin's job was to investigate corruption.  Are you claiming that not doing his job should have nothing to do with whether or not Shokin should keep his job?

No, I have never claimed or implied anything of the sort. Are you deflecting?