|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On April 26 2019 18:25 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2019 17:20 Biff The Understudy wrote:On April 26 2019 10:53 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 06:11 Mohdoo wrote:
By being disliked by every single other candidates followings, everyone is laser focused on stomping Biden.
What do Beto/Yang/Bernie/Warren fans all agree on? No Biden.
Trump was the same. Interested to see polls after his announcement, he’s shot past Bernie i’m guessing. Trump got the biggest free media coverage in history because some big media thought he was entertaining. He was entertaining.I still go back and watch the Jeb Bush/Trump debate clips for a laugh. I don’t think Biden will be as entertaining, unless his scandals manage to bring him down.Let’s see how this Ukraine deal plays out.I hear Ukraine elected a comedian as leader so who knows? Things seem to be getting crazier.
Isn't it weird that one party has the possibility of scandals taking their guy down?
Must be something to do with the voters.
|
Northern Ireland22770 Posts
Judging by my entire political Facebook feed basically exploding with anti-Biden articles when he announced he was running I don’t see this going too well for him
Of course it’s not necessarily representative of wider opinion, it really is noticeable in comparison to other candidates though, outright hostility vs reservations or lack of enthusiasm
|
On April 26 2019 09:52 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2019 09:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I really don't even like Biden's announcement video. To beat Trump, this election cannot be about "Don't vote for Trump because he's a bad guy and you're a bad person if you vote for him... so vote for me instead". It has to be about promoting liberal and progressive platforms that are supported by everyone, and it has to be about substance. This is not the way to announce a presidential run, and although Biden is currently polling high because of his familiarity and centrism, I'm really worried about the Democrats' chances for a victory against Trump if Biden wins the primary. Yes, it seems brave to try the Hillary strategy when you are supposed to the man to win back the white working class. Maybe this is just primary fodder. Stay in the lead, win, then try and talk all folksy to the people in rural Pennsylvania. Recall he is the most popular candidate with black voters by a mile. That might also have something to do with it. I instead suspect he will really be running on "I'm a return to the comfortable Obama presidency" platform in the primary.
I agree with you that his central platform is likely to be taking us back to a pre-Trump era, rather than a post-Trump era. And I think that message will resonate with many centrists, especially older moderate Democrats.
It seems that both Biden and Bernie have quite a bit of black support at the moment, although who knows what will happen over the next year!
"Three weeks after launching his presidential campaign, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is leading all other announced candidates in support from black voters, a new poll finds. The only potential candidate who polled better with African-Americans than Sanders, according to the poll by Morning Consult, is former Vice President Joe Biden, who has not announced a campaign.
Despite a persistent notion that his supporters are disproportionately white male “bros,” the new survey suggests that Sanders is actually slightly more popular among black Democratic voters than white ones, indicating that the narrative that developed during the 2016 campaign may no longer hold, if it ever did.
Sanders’s support among black voters, at 28 percent, puts him in second place among that demographic, behind Biden, at 32 percent. He trailed Biden 31-25 among whites." https://portside.org/2019-03-07/bernie-sanders-and-black-democratic-primary-voters?fbclid=IwAR0TB9Sfa6m2BsYMIw-84NAHf80SgYnGfCaoe_spkWowImIGguf6jf4auHQ
On April 26 2019 09:32 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2019 09:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I really don't even like Biden's announcement video. To beat Trump, this election cannot be about "Don't vote for Trump because he's a bad guy and you're a bad person if you vote for him... so vote for me instead". It has to be about promoting liberal and progressive platforms that are supported by everyone, and it has to be about substance. This is not the way to announce a presidential run, and although Biden is currently polling high because of his familiarity and centrism, I'm really worried about the Democrats' chances for a victory against Trump if Biden wins the primary. He didn't even make it through the news cycle before they moved on to Buttigieg so I don't think it's going to take long for his numbers to tank.
That would be nice, although I'm a bit skeptical that such an established Democrat will become naturally irrelevant so effortlessly. I think he'll have to make a few major gaffs, and I think that's quite possible.
|
On April 26 2019 18:27 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2019 18:25 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 17:20 Biff The Understudy wrote:On April 26 2019 10:53 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 06:11 Mohdoo wrote:
By being disliked by every single other candidates followings, everyone is laser focused on stomping Biden.
What do Beto/Yang/Bernie/Warren fans all agree on? No Biden.
Trump was the same. Interested to see polls after his announcement, he’s shot past Bernie i’m guessing. Trump got the biggest free media coverage in history because some big media thought he was entertaining. He was entertaining.I still go back and watch the Jeb Bush/Trump debate clips for a laugh. I don’t think Biden will be as entertaining, unless his scandals manage to bring him down.Let’s see how this Ukraine deal plays out.I hear Ukraine elected a comedian as leader so who knows? Things seem to be getting crazier. Isn't it weird that one party has the possibility of scandals taking their guy down? Must be something to do with the voters.
Trump Russia collusion investigation : 2 years, tens of millions.No collusion.
Biden Ukraine : Biden on record at a CFR event saying he threatened to pull 1 billion in aid if they did not fire a prosecutor.The same prosecutor that was investigating the company Bidens son was on the board of for fraud.
It’s all documented.The Hill did a good article.Anyone clinging to the idea Trump will be removed from office now is totally delusional.The shoe is on the other foot now, Dems shady deals will be exposed.
|
John Delaney is a joke of a presidential candidate but I do respect his accepting of his baldness rather than having a ridiculous hairstyle or toupee
|
@Nettles
And which Strawman are you debating that is defending Biden?
Btw: Trump Russia collusion investigation: Several people in Jail or on their way. Trump not exconerated by anyone but the yes men he planted himself. Also all documented.
|
On April 26 2019 20:17 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2019 18:27 Jockmcplop wrote:On April 26 2019 18:25 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 17:20 Biff The Understudy wrote:On April 26 2019 10:53 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 06:11 Mohdoo wrote:
By being disliked by every single other candidates followings, everyone is laser focused on stomping Biden.
What do Beto/Yang/Bernie/Warren fans all agree on? No Biden.
Trump was the same. Interested to see polls after his announcement, he’s shot past Bernie i’m guessing. Trump got the biggest free media coverage in history because some big media thought he was entertaining. He was entertaining.I still go back and watch the Jeb Bush/Trump debate clips for a laugh. I don’t think Biden will be as entertaining, unless his scandals manage to bring him down.Let’s see how this Ukraine deal plays out.I hear Ukraine elected a comedian as leader so who knows? Things seem to be getting crazier. Isn't it weird that one party has the possibility of scandals taking their guy down? Must be something to do with the voters. Trump Russia collusion investigation : 2 years, tens of millions.No collusion. Biden Ukraine : Biden on record at a CFR event saying he threatened to pull 1 billion in aid if they did not fire a prosecutor.The same prosecutor that was investigating the company Bidens son was on the board of for fraud. It’s all documented.The Hill did a good article.Anyone clinging to the idea Trump will be removed from office now is totally delusional.The shoe is on the other foot now, Dems shady deals will be exposed.
I wasn't referring to the collusion. I was referring to the sexual assault, the cheating on his wife with a stripper and having her paid off, the countless examples of blatantly lying to the public, refusing to release his tax returns, you know: all the stuff that if a dem did it you would be calling for them to be jailed.
Then there's the stuff about ignoring advice and shutting people down so he can give security passes to people who pose a massive, documented national security risk.
I'm sure there's an absolute shitload of stuff I haven't mentioned too. Don't pretend Trump's conduct can be summarized with an investigation into whether he colluded with Russia.
There is no scandal heinous enough to take down Trump, we all know that.
It’s all documented.The Hill did a good article.Anyone clinging to the idea Trump will be removed from office now is totally delusional.The shoe is on the other foot now, Dems shady deals will be exposed
lol.
This just goes to show everything we need to know about your discussion style. Fuck the other guys, right?
|
|
|
On April 26 2019 18:25 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2019 17:20 Biff The Understudy wrote:On April 26 2019 10:53 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 06:11 Mohdoo wrote:
By being disliked by every single other candidates followings, everyone is laser focused on stomping Biden.
What do Beto/Yang/Bernie/Warren fans all agree on? No Biden.
Trump was the same. Interested to see polls after his announcement, he’s shot past Bernie i’m guessing. Trump got the biggest free media coverage in history because some big media thought he was entertaining. He was entertaining.I still go back and watch the Jeb Bush/Trump debate clips for a laugh. I don’t think Biden will be as entertaining, unless his scandals manage to bring him down.Let’s see how this Ukraine deal plays out.I hear Ukraine elected a comedian as leader so who knows? Things seem to be getting crazier.
Well, I don’t think we can go much further in terms of absurdity. The only leader of a western nation in recent time I can compare Trump with is Berlusconi, but then again it’s Italy and doing that can of goofy shit is part of their cultural identity.
|
On April 26 2019 10:46 Doodsmack wrote:Biden actually has what appears to be a credible corruption case against him, at least if you believe the news reports. I mean, he actually said it with his own words, and really, this should be game set match against him. He engaged in corruption, you can pretty much infer it from what you read. Show nested quote +Two years after leaving office, Joe Biden couldn’t resist the temptation last year to brag to an audience of foreign policy specialists about the time as vice president that he strong-armed Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor.
In his own words, with video cameras rolling, Biden described how he threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin. thehill.comBiden admitted to the act of forcing Ukraine to fire its prosecutor. At the time this happened, Biden's son was on the board of a company being investigated by the Ukraine prosecutor's office. Here is what the NYT reported back in 2015: Show nested quote +When Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. traveled to Kiev , Ukraine, on Sunday for a series of meetings with the country’s leaders, one of the issues on his agenda was to encourage a more aggressive fight against Ukraine’s rampant corruption and stronger efforts to rein in the power of its oligarchs.
But the credibility of the vice president’s anticorruption message may have been undermined by the association of his son, Hunter Biden, with one of Ukraine’s largest natural gas companies, Burisma Holdings, and with its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, who was Ukraine’s ecology minister under former President Viktor F. Yanukovych before he was forced into exile.
Hunter Biden, 45, a former Washington lobbyist, joined the Burisma board in April 2014. That month, as part of an investigation into money laundering, British officials froze London bank accounts containing $23 million that allegedly belonged to Mr. Zlochevsky.
Britain’s Serious Fraud Office, an independent government agency, specifically forbade Mr. Zlochevksy, as well as Burisma Holdings, the company’s chief legal officer and another company owned by Mr. Zlochevsky, to have any access to the accounts.
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September. Notice the bolded report. John Solomon of The Hill now reports, with apparently credible, named sources, that the Obama administration placed not-so-subtle pressure on Ukraine, in late 2015 and early 2016, to (1) drop the investigation of Burisma and let the FBI handle it, and (2) investigate alleged illegal payments made to Paul Manafort by Ukrainian oligarchs. That 2nd part raises some interesting questions (interestingly, Manafort was investigated by the FBI back in 2014 for these payments but he wasn't charged at that time). The 1st part, though, combined with the other stuff, pretty much tells us that Biden is corrupt. Show nested quote +
As Donald Trump began his meteoric rise to the presidency, the Obama White House summoned Ukrainian authorities to Washington to coordinate ongoing anti-corruption efforts inside Russia’s most critical neighbor.
The January 2016 gathering, confirmed by multiple participants and contemporaneous memos, brought some of Ukraine’s top corruption prosecutors and investigators face to face with members of President Obama’s National Security Council (NSC), the FBI, State Department and Department of Justice (DOJ).
The agenda suggested the purpose was training and coordination. But Ukrainian participants said it didn’t take long — during the meetings and afterwards — to realize the Americans’ objectives included two politically hot investigations: one that touched Vice President Joe Biden’s family, and one that involved a lobbying firm linked closely to then-candidate Trump.
Telizhenko, who no longer works for the Ukraine embassy, said U.S. officials volunteered during the meetings — one of which was held in the White House’s Old Executive Office Building — that they had an interest in reviving a closed investigation into payments to U.S. figures from Ukraine’s Russia-backed Party of Regions.
That 2014 investigation was led by the FBI and focused heavily on GOP lobbyist Paul Manafort, whose firm long had been tied to Trump through his partner and Trump pal, Roger Stone.
...
Kulyk said Ukrainian authorities had evidence that other Western figures, such as former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig, also received money from Yanukovich’s party. But the Americans weren’t interested: “They just discussed Manafort. This was all and only what they wanted. Nobody else.”
...
The other case raised at the January 2016 meeting, he said, involved Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company under investigation in Ukraine for improper foreign transfers of money. At the time, Burisma allegedly was paying Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, as both a board member and a consultant. More than $3 million flowed from Ukraine to an American firm tied to Hunter Biden in 2014-15, bank records show.
Telizhenko said U.S. officials told the Ukrainians they would prefer that Kiev drop the Burisma probe and allow the FBI to take it over. The Ukrainians did not agree. But then Joe Biden pressured Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to fire Ukraine’s chief prosecutor in March 2016, as I previously reported. The Burisma case was transferred to NABU, then shut down.
thehill.com
I don't understand how this isn't disqualifying. Why does he say he wanted the guy fired? Does he have some other reason he was saying the prosecutor should be fired? This seems like a huge deal.
|
On April 26 2019 18:27 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2019 18:25 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 17:20 Biff The Understudy wrote:On April 26 2019 10:53 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 06:11 Mohdoo wrote:
By being disliked by every single other candidates followings, everyone is laser focused on stomping Biden.
What do Beto/Yang/Bernie/Warren fans all agree on? No Biden.
Trump was the same. Interested to see polls after his announcement, he’s shot past Bernie i’m guessing. Trump got the biggest free media coverage in history because some big media thought he was entertaining. He was entertaining.I still go back and watch the Jeb Bush/Trump debate clips for a laugh. I don’t think Biden will be as entertaining, unless his scandals manage to bring him down.Let’s see how this Ukraine deal plays out.I hear Ukraine elected a comedian as leader so who knows? Things seem to be getting crazier. Isn't it weird that one party has the possibility of scandals taking their guy down? Must be something to do with the voters.
I think the difference is that Trump made enough of a clown of himself with minor things that the people who support him see him as entertaining but harmless.
Manchilds aren't very scary unless they press the big red button, and we all know the one on his table is a mockup.
|
On April 27 2019 00:22 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2019 10:46 Doodsmack wrote:Biden actually has what appears to be a credible corruption case against him, at least if you believe the news reports. I mean, he actually said it with his own words, and really, this should be game set match against him. He engaged in corruption, you can pretty much infer it from what you read. Two years after leaving office, Joe Biden couldn’t resist the temptation last year to brag to an audience of foreign policy specialists about the time as vice president that he strong-armed Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor.
In his own words, with video cameras rolling, Biden described how he threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin. thehill.comBiden admitted to the act of forcing Ukraine to fire its prosecutor. At the time this happened, Biden's son was on the board of a company being investigated by the Ukraine prosecutor's office. Here is what the NYT reported back in 2015: When Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. traveled to Kiev , Ukraine, on Sunday for a series of meetings with the country’s leaders, one of the issues on his agenda was to encourage a more aggressive fight against Ukraine’s rampant corruption and stronger efforts to rein in the power of its oligarchs.
But the credibility of the vice president’s anticorruption message may have been undermined by the association of his son, Hunter Biden, with one of Ukraine’s largest natural gas companies, Burisma Holdings, and with its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, who was Ukraine’s ecology minister under former President Viktor F. Yanukovych before he was forced into exile.
Hunter Biden, 45, a former Washington lobbyist, joined the Burisma board in April 2014. That month, as part of an investigation into money laundering, British officials froze London bank accounts containing $23 million that allegedly belonged to Mr. Zlochevsky.
Britain’s Serious Fraud Office, an independent government agency, specifically forbade Mr. Zlochevksy, as well as Burisma Holdings, the company’s chief legal officer and another company owned by Mr. Zlochevsky, to have any access to the accounts.
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September. Notice the bolded report. John Solomon of The Hill now reports, with apparently credible, named sources, that the Obama administration placed not-so-subtle pressure on Ukraine, in late 2015 and early 2016, to (1) drop the investigation of Burisma and let the FBI handle it, and (2) investigate alleged illegal payments made to Paul Manafort by Ukrainian oligarchs. That 2nd part raises some interesting questions (interestingly, Manafort was investigated by the FBI back in 2014 for these payments but he wasn't charged at that time). The 1st part, though, combined with the other stuff, pretty much tells us that Biden is corrupt.
As Donald Trump began his meteoric rise to the presidency, the Obama White House summoned Ukrainian authorities to Washington to coordinate ongoing anti-corruption efforts inside Russia’s most critical neighbor.
The January 2016 gathering, confirmed by multiple participants and contemporaneous memos, brought some of Ukraine’s top corruption prosecutors and investigators face to face with members of President Obama’s National Security Council (NSC), the FBI, State Department and Department of Justice (DOJ).
The agenda suggested the purpose was training and coordination. But Ukrainian participants said it didn’t take long — during the meetings and afterwards — to realize the Americans’ objectives included two politically hot investigations: one that touched Vice President Joe Biden’s family, and one that involved a lobbying firm linked closely to then-candidate Trump.
Telizhenko, who no longer works for the Ukraine embassy, said U.S. officials volunteered during the meetings — one of which was held in the White House’s Old Executive Office Building — that they had an interest in reviving a closed investigation into payments to U.S. figures from Ukraine’s Russia-backed Party of Regions.
That 2014 investigation was led by the FBI and focused heavily on GOP lobbyist Paul Manafort, whose firm long had been tied to Trump through his partner and Trump pal, Roger Stone.
...
Kulyk said Ukrainian authorities had evidence that other Western figures, such as former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig, also received money from Yanukovich’s party. But the Americans weren’t interested: “They just discussed Manafort. This was all and only what they wanted. Nobody else.”
...
The other case raised at the January 2016 meeting, he said, involved Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company under investigation in Ukraine for improper foreign transfers of money. At the time, Burisma allegedly was paying Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, as both a board member and a consultant. More than $3 million flowed from Ukraine to an American firm tied to Hunter Biden in 2014-15, bank records show.
Telizhenko said U.S. officials told the Ukrainians they would prefer that Kiev drop the Burisma probe and allow the FBI to take it over. The Ukrainians did not agree. But then Joe Biden pressured Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to fire Ukraine’s chief prosecutor in March 2016, as I previously reported. The Burisma case was transferred to NABU, then shut down.
thehill.com I don't understand how this isn't disqualifying. Why does he say he wanted the guy fired? Does he have some other reason he was saying the prosecutor should be fired? This seems like a huge deal.
If I remember correctly the other (probably made up) reason was that the guy wasn't dealing with corruption in the country fast enough and the US wanted someone more effective in his place.
|
On April 27 2019 00:33 Sent. wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2019 00:22 Mohdoo wrote:On April 26 2019 10:46 Doodsmack wrote:Biden actually has what appears to be a credible corruption case against him, at least if you believe the news reports. I mean, he actually said it with his own words, and really, this should be game set match against him. He engaged in corruption, you can pretty much infer it from what you read. Two years after leaving office, Joe Biden couldn’t resist the temptation last year to brag to an audience of foreign policy specialists about the time as vice president that he strong-armed Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor.
In his own words, with video cameras rolling, Biden described how he threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin. thehill.comBiden admitted to the act of forcing Ukraine to fire its prosecutor. At the time this happened, Biden's son was on the board of a company being investigated by the Ukraine prosecutor's office. Here is what the NYT reported back in 2015: When Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. traveled to Kiev , Ukraine, on Sunday for a series of meetings with the country’s leaders, one of the issues on his agenda was to encourage a more aggressive fight against Ukraine’s rampant corruption and stronger efforts to rein in the power of its oligarchs.
But the credibility of the vice president’s anticorruption message may have been undermined by the association of his son, Hunter Biden, with one of Ukraine’s largest natural gas companies, Burisma Holdings, and with its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, who was Ukraine’s ecology minister under former President Viktor F. Yanukovych before he was forced into exile.
Hunter Biden, 45, a former Washington lobbyist, joined the Burisma board in April 2014. That month, as part of an investigation into money laundering, British officials froze London bank accounts containing $23 million that allegedly belonged to Mr. Zlochevsky.
Britain’s Serious Fraud Office, an independent government agency, specifically forbade Mr. Zlochevksy, as well as Burisma Holdings, the company’s chief legal officer and another company owned by Mr. Zlochevsky, to have any access to the accounts.
But after Ukrainian prosecutors refused to provide documents needed in the investigation, a British court in January ordered the Serious Fraud Office to unfreeze the assets. The refusal by the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office to cooperate was the target of a stinging attack by the American ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, who called out Burisma’s owner by name in a speech in September. Notice the bolded report. John Solomon of The Hill now reports, with apparently credible, named sources, that the Obama administration placed not-so-subtle pressure on Ukraine, in late 2015 and early 2016, to (1) drop the investigation of Burisma and let the FBI handle it, and (2) investigate alleged illegal payments made to Paul Manafort by Ukrainian oligarchs. That 2nd part raises some interesting questions (interestingly, Manafort was investigated by the FBI back in 2014 for these payments but he wasn't charged at that time). The 1st part, though, combined with the other stuff, pretty much tells us that Biden is corrupt.
As Donald Trump began his meteoric rise to the presidency, the Obama White House summoned Ukrainian authorities to Washington to coordinate ongoing anti-corruption efforts inside Russia’s most critical neighbor.
The January 2016 gathering, confirmed by multiple participants and contemporaneous memos, brought some of Ukraine’s top corruption prosecutors and investigators face to face with members of President Obama’s National Security Council (NSC), the FBI, State Department and Department of Justice (DOJ).
The agenda suggested the purpose was training and coordination. But Ukrainian participants said it didn’t take long — during the meetings and afterwards — to realize the Americans’ objectives included two politically hot investigations: one that touched Vice President Joe Biden’s family, and one that involved a lobbying firm linked closely to then-candidate Trump.
Telizhenko, who no longer works for the Ukraine embassy, said U.S. officials volunteered during the meetings — one of which was held in the White House’s Old Executive Office Building — that they had an interest in reviving a closed investigation into payments to U.S. figures from Ukraine’s Russia-backed Party of Regions.
That 2014 investigation was led by the FBI and focused heavily on GOP lobbyist Paul Manafort, whose firm long had been tied to Trump through his partner and Trump pal, Roger Stone.
...
Kulyk said Ukrainian authorities had evidence that other Western figures, such as former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig, also received money from Yanukovich’s party. But the Americans weren’t interested: “They just discussed Manafort. This was all and only what they wanted. Nobody else.”
...
The other case raised at the January 2016 meeting, he said, involved Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company under investigation in Ukraine for improper foreign transfers of money. At the time, Burisma allegedly was paying Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, as both a board member and a consultant. More than $3 million flowed from Ukraine to an American firm tied to Hunter Biden in 2014-15, bank records show.
Telizhenko said U.S. officials told the Ukrainians they would prefer that Kiev drop the Burisma probe and allow the FBI to take it over. The Ukrainians did not agree. But then Joe Biden pressured Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to fire Ukraine’s chief prosecutor in March 2016, as I previously reported. The Burisma case was transferred to NABU, then shut down.
thehill.com I don't understand how this isn't disqualifying. Why does he say he wanted the guy fired? Does he have some other reason he was saying the prosecutor should be fired? This seems like a huge deal. If I remember correctly the other (probably made up) reason was that the guy wasn't dealing with corruption in the country fast enough and the US wanted someone more effective in his place.
If it is 100% true that this prosecutor was going after Biden's family, and Biden advocated for his removal, that is lights out for me. It should be disqualifying. It is an interesting situation because I honestly feel like if ANY candidate attacks Biden for this, it would probably be GG.
A couple things could make this not so bad. For example, maybe Biden didn't know he was going after his family. Maybe family members described corruption and stuff, Biden looked into it, confirmed it, then tried to get him removed. But if Biden defended his family from legal trouble, GG. I don't even want him in the primary if he used his power to protect his family.
|
On April 26 2019 20:17 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2019 18:27 Jockmcplop wrote:On April 26 2019 18:25 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 17:20 Biff The Understudy wrote:On April 26 2019 10:53 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On April 26 2019 06:11 Mohdoo wrote:
By being disliked by every single other candidates followings, everyone is laser focused on stomping Biden.
What do Beto/Yang/Bernie/Warren fans all agree on? No Biden.
Trump was the same. Interested to see polls after his announcement, he’s shot past Bernie i’m guessing. Trump got the biggest free media coverage in history because some big media thought he was entertaining. He was entertaining.I still go back and watch the Jeb Bush/Trump debate clips for a laugh. I don’t think Biden will be as entertaining, unless his scandals manage to bring him down.Let’s see how this Ukraine deal plays out.I hear Ukraine elected a comedian as leader so who knows? Things seem to be getting crazier. Isn't it weird that one party has the possibility of scandals taking their guy down? Must be something to do with the voters. Trump Russia collusion investigation : 2 years, tens of millions.No collusion. Biden Ukraine : Biden on record at a CFR event saying he threatened to pull 1 billion in aid if they did not fire a prosecutor.The same prosecutor that was investigating the company Bidens son was on the board of for fraud. It’s all documented.The Hill did a good article.Anyone clinging to the idea Trump will be removed from office now is totally delusional.The shoe is on the other foot now, Dems shady deals will be exposed.
No proof beyond reasonable doubt that he and his campaign conspired with the Russian government. They just used cutouts for plausible deniability. That's a far fuckin' cry from "no collusion". I hate that I have to keep pointing that out to people. If you work with 50 people directly connected to the Kremlin who aren't actually government employees, that's still super fucked up.
|
The problem for Democrats is that they're not going to want to look at the Biden stuff too closely because it will necessarily implicate Obama. But it's all going to come out anyway because it's related to the Spygate stuff, which is why Democrats should start running away from Obama and Biden (not to mention Clinton) as fast as possible. Bernie is the Democrat who is best positioned to deal with this.
As a relevant aside, I did read all of Mueller's report, and I stand by everything that I said about it. It's a piece of political garbage that goes way out of its way to create an appearance of impropriety despite failing to find probable cause of any crime as it pertains to Trump and his campaign and the issues of Russian collusion and obstruction of justice. What's particularly striking is what is not in the report. For example, what is not mentioned in Volume 2 (the obstruction section) is the extent to which Trump's administration cooperated with the investigation(s).
But the really damning omissions are in Volume 1. First, the Mueller report completely fails to corroborate the allegations in the Steele dossier. In fact, the discussion of the Steele dossier and those allegations is minimal. This all but confirms that people who signed off on the Carter Page FISA application are fucked for submitting unverified info to the FISA court. Second, and perhaps more importantly, the Mueller report does not discuss who Mifsud is. Mifsud is the guy who told Papadopoulos that the Russians have Hillary's emails, which forms the basis for the spying on Papadopoulos and the Trump campaign. The official story all along has been that Mifsud is a Russian agent. Mueller not only fails to say this in his report, but he fails to provide any detail on who Mifsud is, which is stunning given 1) the general lack of Russian spies identified in his report, and 2) the fact that Mueller discussed in great detail the background of every other potential Russian agent. Combine these omissions regarding Mifsud with the fact the Mueller interviewed Mifsud and did not arrest him on the spot, and it's pretty obvious that Mifsud was working for the CIA/Western intelligence. The whole thing was a set up.
|
Just a dumb question: if there is nothing damning in there, how did people very close to trump get into very serious legal trouble?
|
|
|
On April 27 2019 02:11 Velr wrote:
Just a dumb question: if there is nothing damning in there, how did people very close to trump get into very serious legal trouble?
Because they did stupid and criminal things wholly unrelated to the claim that were discovered only because of the fraudulent investigation into Trump.
EDIT: I guess I should clarify that this depends upon whom you're talking about. The above certainly applies to Manafort and Cohen.
|
I don’t think the Democrats are going to have any problem finding things to disqualify Biden. There is enough B-roll from the 1990s to turn off most of the young voters the Democrats are trying to attract that they won’t even need to dip into the years he was VP.
I’m sure the Mueller report will be shown to be a total fraud any day now. It is bound to happen at any moment and we will see just how FISA warrant for Carter, I don’t hire attorneys when I represent myself before congress, Page was so very bad.
Edit: On a side note, Carter Page's second Motion to Reconsider the dismissal of his lawsuit against the DNC was denied, with the Judge politely telling Page that he should not file a third motion to Reconsider if he doesn't want to pay the DNC's attorney's fees.
|
On April 27 2019 02:15 JimmiC wrote:
Just to be clear, you think that the Russian thing was entrapment a set up to catch Trump in some illegal action.
If I got you right, it is still pretty bad that they took the bait. Also, all those arrested did deserve and were criminals so that is a benefit. Also, if this was a set up, why wait until after losing the election to make it public. Wouldn't it make sense to drop the bomb ahead of time so you win the election?
What bait? I'm not sure what Papadopoulos could have done much differently. Same for Trump. Once you understand how bogus the allegations of Russian collusion and conspiracy were, Trump's objections and resistance to Comey and Mueller make a lot of sense. This is one of the main reasons why Barr and Rosenstein said that they declined to find chargeable obstruction of justice. If the entire predicate for the investigation is bogus and/or fraudulent, why should someone be charged for resisting it, particularly if such resistance is so marginal anyway?
As for making this stuff public during an election, which election are you referring to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
