5 minutes ago, heybruce said:

If Hunter Biden committed crimes then he should be prosecuted.  Happy?

 

Now show us your evidence that President Biden was involved in those crimes.

and of course let's not even mention kusher and ivanka took in billions right in the open and the FACT that trump has been found likely culpable by 4 different grand juries in four different jurisdictions and charged with 91 felonies all backed by volumes of real hard core evidence with documents, video, audio as well as testimony provided by republicans who were actually there...not to mention the guilty pleas coming from his co conspirators.... but lets talk about hunters laptop and the biden "crime family" without enough evidence to convict a jaywalker......could not agree more...if you have evidence then lay it on the table...if not then go sit in your corner and have another cup of cult kool aide.

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Have you ever driven drunk? Is that why you think it's common? 

 

Have you NEVER made a late payment? If so, you lied on the application. 

 

I've read and heard news about drunk drivers, seen obviously drunk people (a couple of them in police uniforms) get into cars and on motorbikes and drive, and I've seen many, many people on the roads of Thailand who drive like they're drunk.  That's why I think drunk driving is common.

 

This one is so absurd it's funny:  "Have you NEVER made a late payment? If so, you lied on the application."

 

You can not lie about a future event.  Even you must know that.

Edited October 30, 20232 yr by heybruce

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

You are the one that despite overwhelming evidence of influence peddling refuses to accept it. 

Common sense if you had any would tell you that no organization or country would ever give Hunter Biden a dime if not for his father. 

As to evidence you seem to ignore what has already been discovered and testified to.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12356923/Hunter-Bidens-business-partner-Devon-Archer-arrives-bombshell-testimony-Joes-involvement-shady-business-deals-DOJ-accused-trying-jail-talk.html

 

 Now I find Joe Bidens assertion that he never had any knoweldge of his son's business transactions a far greater cime that if Trump overvalued Mar Lar Go.   

Buty like most liberals you are hypocrites willing to let Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Hunter Biden, and Sandy Berger committ crimes and sweep them under the rug.  But go out of your way to use government to use its power to investigate a private citizen when no complaint has been filed.  No

 

And acquaintance with the facts would tell you that Devon Archer in his testimony to the Congressional committee repeatedly told them that Hunter Biden explicitly said he had no pull with his father but misled clients to believe that he did. That may be sleazy. Who knows, it may even be a crime in those countries. But it does not incriminate Joe Biden.

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

As to evidence you seem to ignore what has already been discovered and testified to.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12356923/Hunter-Bidens-business-partner-Devon-Archer-arrives-bombshell-testimony-Joes-involvement-shady-business-deals-DOJ-accused-trying-jail-talk.html

 

 Now I find Joe Bidens assertion that he never had any knoweldge of his son's business transactions a far greater cime that if Trump overvalued Mar Lar Go.    filed.  No

 

Once again, you betray your actual lack of knowledge of what Devon Archer said. Over the space of about 10 years, Hunter Biden received 20 calls from his father at these dinners/meetings. Only pleasantries were exchanged. Absolutely no business matters were discussed. What's more, Archer said that his father called him daily. So, if over the space of 10 years, Hunter Biden received only 20 phone calls at these business dinners/meetings out of the thousands he received from his father,  how does that constitute proof that these phone calls were arranged in advance?

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

All that proves is that they have been clever in concealing their crime.  As said, common sense tells you that Hunter Biden wouldn't receive the time of day for his efforts if he was not influence peddling his father.  

They have already uncovered over $20 million flowing to the Biden family.  

Now you pillary Trump for perhaps overvaluing assets but I see no public outcry against Hunter Biden who filed FALSE TAX RETURNS 

Easy reply. They could find nothing because it was well concealed. Well, at least you acknowledged there is no evidence of a crime committed by Joe Biden.

 

As to Hunter Biden (or anyone else), if he gets punished for tax fraud. Impeach Hunter Biden! 

Edited October 30, 20232 yr by candide

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

 

 

3 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

I wouldn't agree. 

With Biden you have a clear picture of money flowing from the Unkraine and China to Biden family members.  You have testimony from Hunters business parters that Joe Biden knew full well of his sons business dealings and was meeting with those business associates and it was clear that influence peddling was taking place. 

You have Hunter Biden flying on Air Force 2 attending meetings following the flights with Chinese and Ukrainian officials. 

That is totally and completely different than a states attorney general singling out his tax returns, mortgages, or papers submitted to financial institutions without any cause at all. 

 

There was money flowing from companies that were located in Ukraine and China. No evidence that the money came from the governments of these countries.

Did Hunter Biden meet with Chinese or Ukrainian officials on these flights? I've seen no evidence of that.

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Once again, you betray your actual lack of knowledge of what Devon Archer said. Over the space of about 10 years, Hunter Biden received 20 calls from his father at these dinners/meetings. Only pleasantries were exchanged. Absolutely no business matters were discussed. What's more, Archer said that his father called him daily. So, if over the space of 10 years, Hunter Biden received only 20 phone calls at these business dinners/meetings out of the thousands he received from his father,  how does that constitute proof that these phone calls were arranged in advance?

He certainly knows it. It has been notified to him a dozen of times already. However, he only ackowledges the parts of the testimony he likes, and ignores the parts he doesn't like.

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

All that proves is that they have been clever in concealing their crime.  As said, common sense tells you that Hunter Biden wouldn't receive the time of day for his efforts if he was not influence peddling his father.  

It was Donald Rumsfeld who said absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You're taking it one state further and claiming that absence of evidence is evidence. Your understanding of what is and what isn't evidence is worthy of the King in Alice in Wonderland:

 

"Are they in the prisoner's handwriting?' asked another of they jurymen.

`No, they're not,' said the White Rabbit, `and that's the queerest thing about it.'...

`He must have imitated somebody else's hand,' said the King. 

https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rgs/alice-XII.html

12 minutes ago, candide said:

He certainly knows it. It has been notified to him a dozen of times already. However, he only ackowledges the parts of the testimony he likes, and ignores the parts he doesn't like.

Just to clarify something in your quote of me. I should have written "Archer said that Hunter Biden'told him his father called him daily."

42 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I've read and heard news about drunk drivers, seen obviously drunk people (a couple of them in police uniforms) get into cars and on motorbikes and drive, and I've seen many, many people on the roads of Thailand who drive like they're drunk.  That's why I think drunk driving is common.

 

This one is so absurd it's funny:  "Have you NEVER made a late payment? If so, you lied on the application."

 

You can not lie about a future event.  Even you must know that.

Maybe Yellowtail is a time traveler and assumes everyone else is too?

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

They have already uncovered over $20 million flowing to the Biden family.  

No they haven't. Did you actually read the quote you cited in another of your posts? Here it is again:

Do the words "business associates" mean anything to you?

 

45 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I've read and heard news about drunk drivers, seen obviously drunk people (a couple of them in police uniforms) get into cars and on motorbikes and drive, and I've seen many, many people on the roads of Thailand who drive like they're drunk.  That's why I think drunk driving is common.

 

This one is so absurd it's funny:  "Have you NEVER made a late payment? If so, you lied on the application."

 

You can not lie about a future event.  Even you must know that.

You agreed you would pay them back on time and didn't. Liar. 

 

If I told you I promise I'll pick you up at the airport tomorrow at three, and never show, I wasn't lying, because it was a "future event". 

 

Trump promises to get Mexico to pay for the wall, but it was not a lie, because Mexico paying for the wall was a "future event".

 

That's pretty weak even by your lame-a** standards. 

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

No they haven't. Did you actually read the quote you cited in another of your posts? Here it is again:

Do the words "business associates" mean anything to you?

 

Nothing to see here....

 

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

You agreed you would pay them back on time and didn't. Liar. 

 

If I told you I promise I'll pick you up at the airport tomorrow at three, and never show, I wasn't lying, because it was a "future event". 

 

Trump promises to get Mexico to pay for the wall, but it was not a lie, because Mexico paying for the wall was a "future event".

 

That's pretty weak even by your lame-a** standards. 

How clueless can a  comment be? Lying is about intent. If you sign for a loan and x number of years later, you can't make a payment, that has nothing to do with lying unless you intended all those years ago not to make a payment for that installment. 

Here is the definition of lie

"an intentionally false statement."

https://www.google.com/search?q=lie&sca_esv=577798594&sxsrf=AM9HkKmFDf8gY6NLm2zb8PFF729l_4dicw%3A1698668004599&ei=5J0_Ze6eJP3E4-EPqq-6kAc&ved=0ahUKEwjuoIW4352CAxV94jgGHaqXDnIQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=lie&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiA2xpZTIKEAAYigUYsQMYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIHEC4YigUYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIJEAAYigUYChhDMgcQABiKBRhDMgcQLhiKBRhDSKooULkHWKsRcAF4AZABAJgBgAGgAdcCqgEDMC4zuAEDyAEA-AEBwgIKEAAYRxjWBBiwA8ICChAAGIoFGLADGEPCAg4QABjkAhjWBBiwA9gBAcICEBAuGIoFGMgDGLADGEPYAQLCAgcQIxiKBRgnwgINEC4YigUYxwEY0QMYQ8ICCBAuGIAEGLEDwgIKEC4YgAQYFBiHAsICBRAuGIAEwgIEECMYJ-IDBBgAIEGIBgGQBhO6BgYIARABGAm6BgYIAhABGAg&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

12 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Maybe Yellowtail is a time traveler and assumes everyone else is too?

Maybe he is Darth Vader’s long lost son. The force is strong in him, that’s for sure.

3 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

Name 1 just 1 other person or company that the DOJ of New York has even investigated for filing fraudulent financial statements WITH THE BANK NOT FILING A COMPLAINT

 

It is true that banks can not bring fraud charges.  However they go to the regulatory agencies to file complaints.  They did not.  The attorney general SINGLED OUT Trump ignoring all others.  That is weaponizing the government agency to punish a political adversary. 

This same thing was done under Stalin.  The targets were political enemies.  If the AG of NY was truly interested in bank fraud the investigation would be wide spread and cover a significant number of cases of fraud and filing of false financial statements.  IT DID NOT.  IT SOLELY FOCUSED ON TRUMP. 

 

Once again, you fail to answer the direct questions asked, and immediately deflect to  some nonsense about Stalin in the 1930s. Was that a formative part of your youth or something? It's not unheard of for people to weaponize the US government - do you recall the McCarthy Era?

 

But this fantasy you keep rabbiting on about, how nobody has ever investigated anybody for filing fraudulent financial statements with the bank not filing a complaint is clearly nonsense. Here's what the day-to-day work of investigation of white collar crime is as explained by the FBI:

https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/white-collar-crime

This is standard operating procedure and the sort of stuff they investigate all the time. Did you know that these investigations can be triggered by an internal whistleblower? That they could be triggered by another person (for example, Michael Cohen) who is being charged with a crime and who is turning  evidence over in order to get a lower sentence? He testified in court under oath to all sorts of past and ongoing fraud within the Trump business empire, of course that's a basis for investigation. It's been in the news, didn't you hear? There's all sorts of reasons why there might be an investigation into Trump so stop pretending that this is some unprecedented event. Do the crime, do the time as you Conservatives used to say.


 

16 minutes ago, placeholder said:

How clueless can a  comment be? Lying is about intent. If you sign for a loan and x number of years later, you can't make a payment, that has nothing to do with lying unless you intended all those years ago not to make a payment for that installment. 

Here is the definition of lie

"an intentionally false statement."

https://www.google.com/search?q=lie&sca_esv=577798594&sxsrf=AM9HkKmFDf8gY6NLm2zb8PFF729l_4dicw%3A1698668004599&ei=5J0_Ze6eJP3E4-EPqq-6kAc&ved=0ahUKEwjuoIW4352CAxV94jgGHaqXDnIQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=lie&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiA2xpZTIKEAAYigUYsQMYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIHEC4YigUYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIHEAAYigUYQzIJEAAYigUYChhDMgcQABiKBRhDMgcQLhiKBRhDSKooULkHWKsRcAF4AZABAJgBgAGgAdcCqgEDMC4zuAEDyAEA-AEBwgIKEAAYRxjWBBiwA8ICChAAGIoFGLADGEPCAg4QABjkAhjWBBiwA9gBAcICEBAuGIoFGMgDGLADGEPYAQLCAgcQIxiKBRgnwgINEC4YigUYxwEY0QMYQ8ICCBAuGIAEGLEDwgIKEC4YgAQYFBiHAsICBRAuGIAEwgIEECMYJ-IDBBgAIEGIBgGQBhO6BgYIARABGAm6BgYIAhABGAg&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

So as long as Trump believed he could make Mexico pay for the wall, he was not lying, and if he believed his property was worth what he said it was worth, it was not fraud, and if he believed he won the election he should be acquitted. 

 

Thanks, I think we're clear now. 

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

So as long as Trump believed he could make Mexico pay for the wall, he was not lying, and if he believed his property was worth what he said it was worth, it was not fraud, and if he believed he won the election he should be acquitted. 

 

Thanks, I think we're clear now. 

Trump also believed he was free to grab women by the pussy, how's that working out?

20 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

Maybe he is Darth Vader’s long lost son. The force is strong in him, that’s for sure.

I thought that was you Jar-Jar...

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So as long as Trump believed he could make Mexico pay for the wall, he was not lying, and if he believed his property was worth what he said it was worth, it was not fraud, and if he believed he won the election he should be acquitted. 

 

Thanks, I think we're clear now. 

The first case would show he was clueless, but not a liar.

As for the rest, in the legal system, alleging belief isn't enough. It has to be believable. Exaggerating the size of your apartment by almost 3 times or claiming property could be developed when development rights had been signed away, and claiming these were sincerely held beliefs, is, well, not believable. As the judge has already ruled.

Edited October 30, 20232 yr by placeholder

25 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

You agreed you would pay them back on time and didn't. Liar. 

 

If I told you I promise I'll pick you up at the airport tomorrow at three, and never show, I wasn't lying, because it was a "future event". 

 

Trump promises to get Mexico to pay for the wall, but it was not a lie, because Mexico paying for the wall was a "future event".

 

That's pretty weak even by your lame-a** standards. 

Lucky for you I used to teach English as a second language.

 

If you promise to do something when you know you won't do it you are lying.  If you promise to do something with every intention to do it but can't for whatever reason, you have failed to keep a commitment.

 

If you fill out a loan application with no intention of making timely payments you are lying.  If you intended to make the payments but fail to do so you have violated the contract, but that is not fraud unless the violation is intentional.

 

Does that clear it up for you?  Can we get back on topic now?

24 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

Maybe he is Darth Vader’s long lost son. The force is strong in him, that’s for sure.

You sure you doh't mean "the farce"?

9 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So as long as Trump believed he could make Mexico pay for the wall, he was not lying, and if he believed his property was worth what he said it was worth, it was not fraud, and if he believed he won the election he should be acquitted. 

 

Thanks, I think we're clear now. 

Do you really think Trump was so stupid as to believe those things? 

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Do you really think Trump was so stupid as to believe those things? 

Well, he believes that failing to make a payment on a loan per se  constitutes lying.

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Lucky for you I used to teach English as a second language.

 

If you promise to do something when you know you won't do it you are lying.  If you promise to do something with every intention to do it but can't for whatever reason, you have failed to keep a commitment.

 

If you fill out a loan application with no intention of making timely payments you are lying.  If you intended to make the payments but fail to do so you have violated the contract, but that is not fraud unless the violation is intentional.

 

Does that clear it up for you?  Can we get back on topic now?

'nuff said, carry on. 

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Do you really think Trump was so stupid as to believe those things? 

According to most on the left, he was the stupidest man on the face of the planet, so why not? 

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

According to most on the left, he was the stupidest man on the face of the planet, so why not? 

Making things up again?

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

According to most on the left, he was the stupidest man on the face of the planet, so why not? 

Not possible, simple logic says his followers would have to be even more stupid.

20 hours ago, heybruce said:

Biden is fighting wild fires around the world while Trump is crying about how unfair he is being treated.  Hopefully playing the poor-little-rich-boy victim won't play to well when we get closer to the election.

Well I hope you are right. But with just about one year to the NOV 2024 Presidential election, and with Trump the presumed Republican nominee barring catastrophe, and with Trump leading Biden head-to-head according to some current mainstream polls, I would hope to have more going toward that end than hope.

14 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

You are the one that despite overwhelming evidence of influence peddling refuses to accept it. 

Common sense if you had any would tell you that no organization or country would ever give Hunter Biden a dime if not for his father. 

As to evidence you seem to ignore what has already been discovered and testified to.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12356923/Hunter-Bidens-business-partner-Devon-Archer-arrives-bombshell-testimony-Joes-involvement-shady-business-deals-DOJ-accused-trying-jail-talk.html

 

Devon Archer's testimony was very different from what this article describes.

 

Ex-Hunter Biden associate Devon Archer testifies President Biden didn't discuss 'commercial business'

Edited October 31, 20232 yr by Danderman123