Could we put the lies about Biden to bed now?

[colfax_m]

The last arrest was like a century ago. There was a court case about it. Precedent is on my side.

McGrain v. Daugherty - Wikipedia

AND HE GOES FOR THE LIE.

Midland National Bank of Washington Court House is not the Executive branch, lying scumbag. Arresting a bank president is not making war on another branch of the federal government, attempting to use arms against the executive branch is, and an act of treason per article III of the Constitution you have never read.

This coequal branches of government thing REALLY disturbs you.

Since when do members of the executive branch get immunity? Where is that written in the Constitution?

Congress has oversight over the executive. That's written into the Constitution. That's is division of power. Without Congressional oversight, the executive would be supreme over all other branches.

Moving the goal posts?

You've got nothing but hate site talking points.

Slither back to your gutter, you're defeated.

I haven't moved any goal posts.

When pinned down on your lie that congress has arrested members of the executive branch, which you, as expected, tried to cover up by lying about a bank president in the Tea Pot Dome scandal, you throw out a red herring about "Since when do members of the executive branch get immunity? "

That's called "moving the goals posts," sparky.

I never said they arrested members of the executive. I said they have arrested people who didn't comply with subpoenas. As we can both admit, that's obviously true. I see no reason that executive branch employees would be exempt from that authority.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

That's what I've been saying this whole time. If Congress has the power to investigate the executive, that's called oversight. Trump is preventing Congress's ability to investigate which is unconstitutional.

First off, you have never read the Constitution, that is painfully clear.

{

5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

}

That's it, that is the ONLY statement about what the the house may do.

Nothing grants them the power to subpoena members of the executive branch, nor even hints of it.

{
6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

7: Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.}

Obviously this is the very first time you've ever been exposed to the above.

You kept pushing the lie that the Communist party has the power to subpoena members of the executive. There is no such authority. President Trump is correct in telling the Marxists to **** off.

No hint? So you think they have the power to impeach but not to investigate whether someone did something impeachable?

No court would believe that argument. Investigation is a necessary part of impeachment.

It's like saying the cops have the ability to pull you over and ticket you for speeding but no authority to check your speed in any way.

Again stupid, no one said they didn't have the right to investigate.

Stop being so ******* dishonest, it doesn't impress anyone.

 

[colfax_m]

Where is there proof that Biden was attempting to help his son by getting the prosecutor dismissed?

The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Answer the question and it will destroy your pretend ignorance of Biden selling the vice=presidency to Burisma and to China"

Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

It is when your dad is giving the people paying you $1.8 billion in US Foreign aid. Or at least for those subject to the law it is. I get that the Communist democrat part is above the law and immune.

One, Joe Biden doesn't have any authority to give US foreign aid. Two, the foreign aid went to the government of Ukraine, not Burisma. Three, it's still not illegal even if everything you said were true (it's not).

 

[Uncensored2008]

AND HE GOES FOR THE LIE.

Midland National Bank of Washington Court House is not the Executive branch, lying scumbag. Arresting a bank president is not making war on another branch of the federal government, attempting to use arms against the executive branch is, and an act of treason per article III of the Constitution you have never read.

This coequal branches of government thing REALLY disturbs you.

Since when do members of the executive branch get immunity? Where is that written in the Constitution?

Congress has oversight over the executive. That's written into the Constitution. That's is division of power. Without Congressional oversight, the executive would be supreme over all other branches.

Moving the goal posts?

You've got nothing but hate site talking points.

Slither back to your gutter, you're defeated.

I haven't moved any goal posts.

When pinned down on your lie that congress has arrested members of the executive branch, which you, as expected, tried to cover up by lying about a bank president in the Tea Pot Dome scandal, you throw out a red herring about "Since when do members of the executive branch get immunity? "

That's called "moving the goals posts," sparky.

I never said they arrested members of the executive. I said they have arrested people who didn't comply with subpoenas. As we can both admit, that's obviously true. I see no reason that executive branch employees would be exempt from that authority.

******* liar.

Could we put the lies about Biden to bed now?

 

[colfax_m]

[

That's what I've been saying this whole time. If Congress has the power to investigate the executive, that's called oversight. Trump is preventing Congress's ability to investigate which is unconstitutional.

First off, you have never read the Constitution, that is painfully clear.

{

5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

}

That's it, that is the ONLY statement about what the the house may do.

Nothing grants them the power to subpoena members of the executive branch, nor even hints of it.

{
6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

7: Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.}

Obviously this is the very first time you've ever been exposed to the above.

You kept pushing the lie that the Communist party has the power to subpoena members of the executive. There is no such authority. President Trump is correct in telling the Marxists to **** off.

No hint? So you think they have the power to impeach but not to investigate whether someone did something impeachable?

No court would believe that argument. Investigation is a necessary part of impeachment.

It's like saying the cops have the ability to pull you over and ticket you for speeding but no authority to check your speed in any way.

Again stupid, no one said they didn't have the right to investigate.

Stop being so ******* dishonest, it doesn't impress anyone.

That's what oversight means. Investigating. Good lord, what is so difficult about it?

Oh, and you know someone who is claiming they don't have the right to investigate? Trump.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

That's what I've been saying this whole time. If Congress has the power to investigate the executive, that's called oversight. Trump is preventing Congress's ability to investigate which is unconstitutional.

First off, you have never read the Constitution, that is painfully clear.

{

5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

}

That's it, that is the ONLY statement about what the the house may do.

Nothing grants them the power to subpoena members of the executive branch, nor even hints of it.

{
6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

7: Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.}

Obviously this is the very first time you've ever been exposed to the above.

You kept pushing the lie that the Communist party has the power to subpoena members of the executive. There is no such authority. President Trump is correct in telling the Marxists to **** off.

No hint? So you think they have the power to impeach but not to investigate whether someone did something impeachable?

No court would believe that argument. Investigation is a necessary part of impeachment.

It's like saying the cops have the ability to pull you over and ticket you for speeding but no authority to check your speed in any way.

Again stupid, no one said they didn't have the right to investigate.

Stop being so ******* dishonest, it doesn't impress anyone.

That's what oversight means. Investigating. Good lord, what is so difficult about it?

Oh, and you know someone who is claiming they don't have the right to investigate? Trump.

You're floundering moron, you were defeated, slink back under your rock and lick your wounds.

 

[colfax_m]

Since when do members of the executive branch get immunity? Where is that written in the Constitution?

Congress has oversight over the executive. That's written into the Constitution. That's is division of power. Without Congressional oversight, the executive would be supreme over all other branches.

Moving the goal posts?

You've got nothing but hate site talking points.

Slither back to your gutter, you're defeated.

I haven't moved any goal posts.

When pinned down on your lie that congress has arrested members of the executive branch, which you, as expected, tried to cover up by lying about a bank president in the Tea Pot Dome scandal, you throw out a red herring about "Since when do members of the executive branch get immunity? "

That's called "moving the goals posts," sparky.

I never said they arrested members of the executive. I said they have arrested people who didn't comply with subpoenas. As we can both admit, that's obviously true. I see no reason that executive branch employees would be exempt from that authority.

******* liar.

Could we put the lies about Biden to bed now?

Nothing in that post said that Congress has arrested members of the executive. I said they'd be within their rights to. You're going off on some fantasy about a military coup if they had tried. Which is stupid.

 

[colfax_m]

[

That's what I've been saying this whole time. If Congress has the power to investigate the executive, that's called oversight. Trump is preventing Congress's ability to investigate which is unconstitutional.

First off, you have never read the Constitution, that is painfully clear.

{

5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

}

That's it, that is the ONLY statement about what the the house may do.

Nothing grants them the power to subpoena members of the executive branch, nor even hints of it.

{
6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

7: Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.}

Obviously this is the very first time you've ever been exposed to the above.

You kept pushing the lie that the Communist party has the power to subpoena members of the executive. There is no such authority. President Trump is correct in telling the Marxists to **** off.

No hint? So you think they have the power to impeach but not to investigate whether someone did something impeachable?

No court would believe that argument. Investigation is a necessary part of impeachment.

It's like saying the cops have the ability to pull you over and ticket you for speeding but no authority to check your speed in any way.

Again stupid, no one said they didn't have the right to investigate.

Stop being so ******* dishonest, it doesn't impress anyone.

That's what oversight means. Investigating. Good lord, what is so difficult about it?

Oh, and you know someone who is claiming they don't have the right to investigate? Trump.

Your floundering moron, you were defeated, slink back under your rock and lick your wounds.

Bullshit. You failed to read. I've been saying over and over that oversight would include investigation. I've written it multiple time in this thread. If you don't think that's accurate, point out why not. Or you can just piss and moan, declare victory and act like an asshole. What's it gonna be?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's check:





The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Hunter Biden....drug addict, reprobate, no experience in the gas industry...or in Ukraine...

...yet given $83 thousand a month for the sale of the office of the vice-presidency.


And....
Interesting that when Biden was VP, he and his son Hunter went to deal with China, and Hunter came away with $millions.....

But Trump is immune to the bribes.


"The troubling reason why Biden is so soft on China
In 2013, then-Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden flew aboard Air Force Two to China. Less than two weeks later, Hunter Biden’s firm inked a $1 billion private equity deal with a subsidiary of the Chinese government’s Bank of China. The deal was later expanded to $1.5 billion. In short, the Chinese government funded a business that it co-owned along with the son of a sitting vice president."
https://nypost.com/2019/05/11/the-troubling-reason-why-biden-is-so-soft-on-china/


Sounds a lot like the $145 million Putin gave the Clintons.


Research this:

https https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/us/politics/biden-son-ukraine.html://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=lH_sdTC7Anw






PROOF!!!!!


Brutal, huh? Sorry you didn’t run with scissors when you had the chance?

Where is there proof that Biden was attempting to help his son by getting the prosecutor dismissed?

The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Answer the question and it will destroy your pretend ignorance of Biden selling the vice=presidency to Burisma and to China"

Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Where is there proof that Biden was attempting to help his son by getting the prosecutor dismissed?

The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Answer the question and it will destroy your pretend ignorance of Biden selling the vice=presidency to Burisma and to China"

Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

That ain't shoe polish,

I'm just sayin...

 

[colfax_m]

Where is there proof that Biden was attempting to help his son by getting the prosecutor dismissed?

The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Answer the question and it will destroy your pretend ignorance of Biden selling the vice=presidency to Burisma and to China"

Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

If that’s what you think, fine. Don’t pretend that’s proof. It’s not. It’s at best circumstantial.

It also ignore the pile of evidence that Joe Biden was working on behalf of US interests.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Answer the question and it will destroy your pretend ignorance of Biden selling the vice=presidency to Burisma and to China"

Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

If that’s what you think, fine. Don’t pretend that’s proof. It’s not. It’s at best circumstantial.

It also ignore the pile of evidence that Joe Biden was working on behalf of US interests.

Yet you decline to explain the $83k from the gas company and the $1.5 billion from China.


Quid Pro Joe's office is the only thing Hunter Biden had to sell.


But you had this to give away: any integrity.



To repeat lies known to be contrived is an example of what Aquinas called 'ignorantia affectata - a cultivated ignorance'.

"The deniers first deceive themselves that they are sincere in their adherence to falsehoods. Thus they cannot be faulted for acting on genuinely held views. But in truth, they have cultivated an ignorance of the facts, what Thomas Aquinas called ignorantia affectata. An ignorance so useful that one protects it at all costs, in order to continue using it in one’s own self interest. This ignorance is not exculpatory, but inculpatory. Forgive them not, for they know full well what they do.' RICHARD BADALAMENTE

 

[dannyboys]

The entire farrago is to hide the fact that Biden sold the office of the vice-presidency to China and a Ukrainian gas company.
And there is proof...PROOF.....of exactly that.

Don't be a dunce your whole life...take a day off.

proof. PROOF!

no there isn’t. There’s zero evidence. No one has shown anything of the sort.

Let's check:





The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Hunter Biden....drug addict, reprobate, no experience in the gas industry...or in Ukraine...

...yet given $83 thousand a month for the sale of the office of the vice-presidency.


And....
Interesting that when Biden was VP, he and his son Hunter went to deal with China, and Hunter came away with $millions.....

But Trump is immune to the bribes.


"The troubling reason why Biden is so soft on China
In 2013, then-Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden flew aboard Air Force Two to China. Less than two weeks later, Hunter Biden’s firm inked a $1 billion private equity deal with a subsidiary of the Chinese government’s Bank of China. The deal was later expanded to $1.5 billion. In short, the Chinese government funded a business that it co-owned along with the son of a sitting vice president."
https://nypost.com/2019/05/11/the-troubling-reason-why-biden-is-so-soft-on-china/


Sounds a lot like the $145 million Putin gave the Clintons.


Research this:

https https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/us/politics/biden-son-ukraine.html://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=lH_sdTC7Anw






PROOF!!!!!


Brutal, huh? Sorry you didn’t run with scissors when you had the chance?

Where is there proof that Biden was attempting to help his son by getting the prosecutor dismissed?

The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Even Joe's ****-up son Hunter admitted he wouldn't have go the job if he wasn't Joe's ****-up son.
The ****-up admitted he got the job b/c his father was VP.
Hunter Biden defends ethics of foreign ventures l ABC News

 

[colfax_m]

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Answer the question and it will destroy your pretend ignorance of Biden selling the vice=presidency to Burisma and to China"

Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

If that’s what you think, fine. Don’t pretend that’s proof. It’s not. It’s at best circumstantial.

It also ignore the pile of evidence that Joe Biden was working on behalf of US interests.

Yet you decline to explain the $83k from the gas company and the $1.5 billion from China.


Quid Pro Joe's office is the only thing Hunter Biden had to sell.


But you had this to give away: any integrity.



To repeat lies known to be contrived is an example of what Aquinas called 'ignorantia affectata - a cultivated ignorance'.

"The deniers first deceive themselves that they are sincere in their adherence to falsehoods. Thus they cannot be faulted for acting on genuinely held views. But in truth, they have cultivated an ignorance of the facts, what Thomas Aquinas called ignorantia affectata. An ignorance so useful that one protects it at all costs, in order to continue using it in one’s own self interest. This ignorance is not exculpatory, but inculpatory. Forgive them not, for they know full well what they do.' RICHARD BADALAMENTE

I haven’t repeated any lies. I acknowledge that Hunter almost certainly got his job because of his name. But that’s not illegal.

It’s a lie to claim there is proof of illegality without any evidence of a quid pro quo.

 

[colfax_m]

proof. PROOF!

no there isn’t. There’s zero evidence. No one has shown anything of the sort.

Let's check:





The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Hunter Biden....drug addict, reprobate, no experience in the gas industry...or in Ukraine...

...yet given $83 thousand a month for the sale of the office of the vice-presidency.


And....
Interesting that when Biden was VP, he and his son Hunter went to deal with China, and Hunter came away with $millions.....

But Trump is immune to the bribes.


"The troubling reason why Biden is so soft on China
In 2013, then-Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden flew aboard Air Force Two to China. Less than two weeks later, Hunter Biden’s firm inked a $1 billion private equity deal with a subsidiary of the Chinese government’s Bank of China. The deal was later expanded to $1.5 billion. In short, the Chinese government funded a business that it co-owned along with the son of a sitting vice president."
https://nypost.com/2019/05/11/the-troubling-reason-why-biden-is-so-soft-on-china/


Sounds a lot like the $145 million Putin gave the Clintons.


Research this:

https https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/us/politics/biden-son-ukraine.html://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=lH_sdTC7Anw






PROOF!!!!!


Brutal, huh? Sorry you didn’t run with scissors when you had the chance?

Where is there proof that Biden was attempting to help his son by getting the prosecutor dismissed?

The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Even Joe's ****-up son Hunter admitted he wouldn't have go the job if he wasn't Joe's ****-up son.
The ****-up admitted he got the job b/c his father was VP.
Hunter Biden defends ethics of foreign ventures l ABC News

Yeah. I know. So what?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The bribe at 02:15


Biden sidesteps questions about corruption;






Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Answer the question and it will destroy your pretend ignorance of Biden selling the vice=presidency to Burisma and to China"

Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

If that’s what you think, fine. Don’t pretend that’s proof. It’s not. It’s at best circumstantial.

It also ignore the pile of evidence that Joe Biden was working on behalf of US interests.

He learned from a master:

 

[PoliticalChic]

Answer the question and it will destroy your pretend ignorance of Biden selling the vice=presidency to Burisma and to China"

Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

If that’s what you think, fine. Don’t pretend that’s proof. It’s not. It’s at best circumstantial.

It also ignore the pile of evidence that Joe Biden was working on behalf of US interests.

Yet you decline to explain the $83k from the gas company and the $1.5 billion from China.


Quid Pro Joe's office is the only thing Hunter Biden had to sell.


But you had this to give away: any integrity.



To repeat lies known to be contrived is an example of what Aquinas called 'ignorantia affectata - a cultivated ignorance'.

"The deniers first deceive themselves that they are sincere in their adherence to falsehoods. Thus they cannot be faulted for acting on genuinely held views. But in truth, they have cultivated an ignorance of the facts, what Thomas Aquinas called ignorantia affectata. An ignorance so useful that one protects it at all costs, in order to continue using it in one’s own self interest. This ignorance is not exculpatory, but inculpatory. Forgive them not, for they know full well what they do.' RICHARD BADALAMENTE

I haven’t repeated any lies. I acknowledge that Hunter almost certainly got his job because of his name. But that’s not illegal.

It’s a lie to claim there is proof of illegality without any evidence of a quid pro quo.

Of course it is a crime, you dunce.



MISUSE OF POSITION AND GOVERNMENT RESOURCES

Misuse of Position | Use of Official Title | Personal Use of Government Property | Use of Non-Public Information | Use of Official Time | Disclosing Procurement Information | Letters of Recommendation on Official Stationery

An employee may not use his official position, including information learned by virtue of his position, for his personal benefit or for the benefit of others.

Misuse of Position and Government Resources



Can you really be this stupid....or is government school indoctrination this indelible?????


I mean....really.....how many times a day are you having conversations where the other person simply rolls their eyes?????

 

[colfax_m]

Still waiting for the evidence that Biden was acting to help his son. That wasn't in the little video you linked.

Answer the question and it will destroy your pretend ignorance of Biden selling the vice=presidency to Burisma and to China"

Now explain why Hunter was worth $83,000 a month?

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

If that’s what you think, fine. Don’t pretend that’s proof. It’s not. It’s at best circumstantial.

It also ignore the pile of evidence that Joe Biden was working on behalf of US interests.

He learned from a master:

It’s funny because it was bad when Clinton did it.

Here’s how you buy access to Trump:
https://www.maralagoclub.com/membership-opportunities

Low low price of $400k per year.

 

[colfax_m]

Because he's great at cocktail parties. Who cares? It's not illegal to be overpaid. It's illegal to take a bribe, which means there must be a quid pro quo. Where is that?

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

If that’s what you think, fine. Don’t pretend that’s proof. It’s not. It’s at best circumstantial.

It also ignore the pile of evidence that Joe Biden was working on behalf of US interests.

Yet you decline to explain the $83k from the gas company and the $1.5 billion from China.


Quid Pro Joe's office is the only thing Hunter Biden had to sell.


But you had this to give away: any integrity.



To repeat lies known to be contrived is an example of what Aquinas called 'ignorantia affectata - a cultivated ignorance'.

"The deniers first deceive themselves that they are sincere in their adherence to falsehoods. Thus they cannot be faulted for acting on genuinely held views. But in truth, they have cultivated an ignorance of the facts, what Thomas Aquinas called ignorantia affectata. An ignorance so useful that one protects it at all costs, in order to continue using it in one’s own self interest. This ignorance is not exculpatory, but inculpatory. Forgive them not, for they know full well what they do.' RICHARD BADALAMENTE

I haven’t repeated any lies. I acknowledge that Hunter almost certainly got his job because of his name. But that’s not illegal.

It’s a lie to claim there is proof of illegality without any evidence of a quid pro quo.

Of course it is a crime, you dunce.



MISUSE OF POSITION AND GOVERNMENT RESOURCES

Misuse of Position | Use of Official Title | Personal Use of Government Property | Use of Non-Public Information | Use of Official Time | Disclosing Procurement Information | Letters of Recommendation on Official Stationery

An employee may not use his official position, including information learned by virtue of his position, for his personal benefit or for the benefit of others.

Misuse of Position and Government Resources



Can you really be this stupid....or is government school indoctrination this indelible?????


I mean....really.....how many times a day are you having conversations where the other person simply rolls their eyes?????

Great. Now where is the evidence that Biden had Shokin fired to benefit Hunter Biden? I keep asking but no one seems to know.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your dishonesty is more than transparent.

There is only one thing he brings to gas company, or to China.

And everyone knows what that is.


It is the textbook definition of Quid Pro Quo.



Try to get the Democrat shoe polish off your tongue.

If that’s what you think, fine. Don’t pretend that’s proof. It’s not. It’s at best circumstantial.

It also ignore the pile of evidence that Joe Biden was working on behalf of US interests.

Yet you decline to explain the $83k from the gas company and the $1.5 billion from China.


Quid Pro Joe's office is the only thing Hunter Biden had to sell.


But you had this to give away: any integrity.



To repeat lies known to be contrived is an example of what Aquinas called 'ignorantia affectata - a cultivated ignorance'.

"The deniers first deceive themselves that they are sincere in their adherence to falsehoods. Thus they cannot be faulted for acting on genuinely held views. But in truth, they have cultivated an ignorance of the facts, what Thomas Aquinas called ignorantia affectata. An ignorance so useful that one protects it at all costs, in order to continue using it in one’s own self interest. This ignorance is not exculpatory, but inculpatory. Forgive them not, for they know full well what they do.' RICHARD BADALAMENTE

I haven’t repeated any lies. I acknowledge that Hunter almost certainly got his job because of his name. But that’s not illegal.

It’s a lie to claim there is proof of illegality without any evidence of a quid pro quo.

Of course it is a crime, you dunce.



MISUSE OF POSITION AND GOVERNMENT RESOURCES

Misuse of Position | Use of Official Title | Personal Use of Government Property | Use of Non-Public Information | Use of Official Time | Disclosing Procurement Information | Letters of Recommendation on Official Stationery

An employee may not use his official position, including information learned by virtue of his position, for his personal benefit or for the benefit of others.

Misuse of Position and Government Resources



Can you really be this stupid....or is government school indoctrination this indelible?????


I mean....really.....how many times a day are you having conversations where the other person simply rolls their eyes?????

Great. Now where is the evidence that Biden had Shokin fired to benefit Hunter Biden? I keep asking but no one seems to know.

Everyone knows.....and so do you.


It was worth $83000 a month, ongoing.