Reply With Quote
Actually, I have made the decision its POSSIBLE Joe was in cahoots with Hunter and am waiting for more info to come out to prove or disprove. I thought I made that clear.
I feel ya. And one of the things I like about CC is that you can go toe to toe with him on this here message board and still enjoy a beer with him after work.
Actually, I have made the decision its POSSIBLE Joe was in cahoots with Hunter and am waiting for more info to come out to prove or disprove. I thought I made that clear.
You mean a president in cahoots with their son is bad?
MAGAtts BenBhazi-ing Hunter Biden, pure BAD FAITH,
to slander Papa Biden and
to deflect from the numerously CRIMINALLY guilty leader TRASH of the Repug "party"
It is if he is a politician selling influence. It's actually one of the specific items listed for impeachment, not that impeachment would be possible even if true.
Boo still beating that dead horse. I think virtually everyone in here agrees Trump is certainly guilty of some of the charges and is unfit to be President.
You haven’t even defined what “in cahoots” means and how it might be illegal. But it’s looking more and more likely that it true. Just waiting on the facts of the case.
See post 3430.
of course you are not aware that this entire “get hunter” is based on orders from trump to his complicit minions
to distract from trumps crimes
of course you think it is legit - this way when trump is held accountable, you will already be programmed to scream, “both trump and biden are criminals”
“why is trump the only one prosecuted?”
just like the autocrat playbook sez
..."Where it gets a little hazy, Mr. Dufresne, is how your beautiful young wife and her willing lover ended up dead by a gun with your fingerprints."
It's possible that Jared Kushner would have gotten $2bn from the Saudis if his father in law wasn't president.
It's possible that Jared Kushner did something that the Saudi's thought was worth 2bn.
Wonder what that was. Wonder why you never seemed to care about that.
Who are you going to vote for in 2024
My guess is that Trash's quid was ignoring Khashoggi's butchering and MBS pro quo was $2B investment for Jared, some of which MUST be available to Trash.
Depends on who is running then. DUH.
do you think your party will ditch Trump for any reason?
RG and his trademark whataboutism. At least Kushner had a real business to invest in. And yeah, being Trumps son in law probably didn't hurt.
I certainly hope so.
Don't hold your breath. If trying to steal the election and 37 criminal indictments haven't done the trick, I doubt anything will.
Just pointing out your selective sense of outrage at presidential relations somehow making money off their connections.
They are both bad. I can admit that, you don't seem to want to, for some reason. I think that reason is you are blind to the level of corruptive rot in the Republican party, which is odd, because you have an IQ over that of a potato, and I assume that anyone with an IQ over that of a potato can see it.
Do you find what Kushner and his wife did a bit skeezy, yes or no?
LMAO @ RG. It's hardly outrage. It is, however current events we were discussing, not your whataboutism. I have clearly and repeatably rejected Trump and his corruption which you continue to ignore in order to reinforce your own bias.
I guess. Really haven't seen any concrete quid pro quo in this one. A lot of innuendo and unconnected dots. I'd assume anything real would've leaked since red team can't seem to keep a lid on anything for or against them.
Feels like CC and TSA are wishcasting here. CC's incuriousness about Kushner's concretely verifiable $2b middle east deal does stand out -- no whataboutism here, it's directly analogous.
They're focused on laptops with wieners
Archer also testified he did not know anything about the allegations made in an FBI-generated FD-1023 tip sheet that alleged $5 million payments were made by the head of Burisma to both Hunter Biden and Joe Biden in return for them pressuring the Ukrainian government to fire a prosecutor, according to Goldman, Biggs, and a source familiar with the testimony.
well, CC, what did you learn today and what conclusions have you drawn?
one conclusion I've drawn is that Republicans are keeping proceedings BCD as much as possible to avoid being shown up publicly by their own witnesses.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
