Joe Biden gets into testy exchange with man over gun rights

[M14 Shooter]

The amendment was there to protect us from foreign armies, namely the British at the time.
Since it was written we've had a Civil War, 2 world wars, the Korean War, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, just to mention the big military adventures we've embarked on.

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home

 

[M14 Shooter]

Biden wasn't wrong. And the dude was trying to troll Biden.

Asking a candidate about his position on the fundamental right specifically protected by the constitution isn't trolling.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

"You are actively trying to end our Second Amendment right and take away our guns," the worker told Biden.

Biden replied: "You're full of sh**."

"I support the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment — just like right now, if you yelled 'fire,' that's not free speech," Biden continued. "And from the very beginning — I have a shotgun, I have a 20-gauge, a 12-gauge. My sons hunt. Guess what? You're not allowed to own any weapon. I'm not taking your gun away at all."

...

(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...

Biden was 100% right. That guy was full of shit. The AR-15 and AK-47 should be banned. These weapons are designed for military use. They can be loaded and unloaded quickly. You can't have a mortar so why should you have military designed rifles.

You and Ukraine joe are both wrong. That's not surprising though.

You are wrong. Given you are a alt-right person, that is not surprising.

Once again, you're wrong.

 

[protectionist]

brothers and sisters: President Obama handed Biden big things to do: to oversee the Recovery Act, budget negotiations with Cocaine Mitch, and diplomatic relations with Iraq, and Obama never looked over his shoulder.

Biden did his job well and kept Obama's trust for years.

Biden's quid pro quo threat to the Ukrainians was not exactly a job well done.

...getting a corrupt prosecutor fired who was lining his pockets by squashing corruption cases against the rich in Ukraine IS NOT job well done? Since when??

IMF, DoS, EU and Ukrainian corruption watch groups and even prosecutor's own deputy all thought it was job well done...but hey, what the hell do they know.

Prosecutors don't squash corruption cases. Defense attorneys do that.

Prosecutor PROSECUTES the case. If prosecutor does not prosecute there is no PROSECUTION....mmk dumbass?

Shokin idled Burisma case for two years before Joe exerted pressure on Ukrainian parlament to get his do-nothing ass out.

Doesn't really matter what Shokin was doing. Important thing is Biden threatened to withhold a Billion $ in aid to Ukraine for something he wanted, not what the US wanted.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Biden was 100% right. That guy was full of shit. The AR-15 and AK-47 should be banned.

You cannot demonstrate the necessity for, or efficacy of,m banning these rifles.

These weapons are designed for military use

You cannot demonstrate this to be true.

You can't have a mortar so why should you have military designed rifles.

Mortars are not in common use for traditionally legal purposes - AK/ARs are, and thus the right of the people to own and use them for those purposes is protected by the constitution.

 

[Faun]

Biden wasn't wrong. And the dude was trying to troll Biden.

Asking a candidate about his position on the fundamental right specifically protected by the constitution isn't trolling.

He lied to Biden's face and Biden was right to say he was full of shit. He falsely claimed Biden wants to end the Second Amendment.

 

[Faun]

brothers and sisters: President Obama handed Biden big things to do: to oversee the Recovery Act, budget negotiations with Cocaine Mitch, and diplomatic relations with Iraq, and Obama never looked over his shoulder.

Biden did his job well and kept Obama's trust for years.

Biden's quid pro quo threat to the Ukrainians was not exactly a job well done.

...getting a corrupt prosecutor fired who was lining his pockets by squashing corruption cases against the rich in Ukraine IS NOT job well done? Since when??

IMF, DoS, EU and Ukrainian corruption watch groups and even prosecutor's own deputy all thought it was job well done...but hey, what the hell do they know.

Prosecutors don't squash corruption cases. Defense attorneys do that.

Prosecutor PROSECUTES the case. If prosecutor does not prosecute there is no PROSECUTION....mmk dumbass?

Shokin idled Burisma case for two years before Joe exerted pressure on Ukrainian parlament to get his do-nothing ass out.

Doesn't really matter what Shokin was doing. Important thing is Biden threatened to withhold a Billion $ in aid to Ukraine for something he wanted, not what the US wanted.

What did Biden want?

 

[the other mike]

The amendment was there to protect us from foreign armies, namely the British at the time.
Since it was written we've had a Civil War, 2 world wars, the Korean War, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, just to mention the big military adventures we've embarked on.

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home

I agree, but it's still open to different interpretations, considering the way it was worded in 1789.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

[M14 Shooter]

The amendment was there to protect us from foreign armies, namely the British at the time.
Since it was written we've had a Civil War, 2 world wars, the Korean War, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, just to mention the big military adventures we've embarked on.

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home

I agree, but it's still open to different interpretations, considering the way it was worded in 1789.

True, but the one I provided is current jurisprudence; opinion to the contrary, therefore, are wrong.

 

[protectionist]

Biden's quid pro quo threat to the Ukrainians was not exactly a job well done.

...getting a corrupt prosecutor fired who was lining his pockets by squashing corruption cases against the rich in Ukraine IS NOT job well done? Since when??

IMF, DoS, EU and Ukrainian corruption watch groups and even prosecutor's own deputy all thought it was job well done...but hey, what the hell do they know.

Prosecutors don't squash corruption cases. Defense attorneys do that.

Prosecutor PROSECUTES the case. If prosecutor does not prosecute there is no PROSECUTION....mmk dumbass?

Shokin idled Burisma case for two years before Joe exerted pressure on Ukrainian parlament to get his do-nothing ass out.

Doesn't really matter what Shokin was doing. Important thing is Biden threatened to withhold a Billion $ in aid to Ukraine for something he wanted, not what the US wanted.

What did Biden want?

Doesn't matter.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

]

 

[the other mike]

Doesn't really matter what Shokin was doing. Important thing is Biden threatened to withhold a Billion $ in aid to Ukraine for something he wanted, not what the US wanted.

And if it wasn't for his diarrhea of the mouth - bragging about it in front
of the CFR like he's some big shot, we probably wouldn't know
about it except for Trump and Giuliani.

 

[the other mike]

I agree, but it's still open to different interpretations, considering the way it was worded in 1789.

True, but the one I provided is current jurisprudence; opinion to the contrary, therefore, are wrong.[/QUOTE]
I guess they renewed it in 1992, but no changes that
I'm aware of .

 

[AntonToo]

brothers and sisters: President Obama handed Biden big things to do: to oversee the Recovery Act, budget negotiations with Cocaine Mitch, and diplomatic relations with Iraq, and Obama never looked over his shoulder.

Biden did his job well and kept Obama's trust for years.

Biden's quid pro quo threat to the Ukrainians was not exactly a job well done.

...getting a corrupt prosecutor fired who was lining his pockets by squashing corruption cases against the rich in Ukraine IS NOT job well done? Since when??

IMF, DoS, EU and Ukrainian corruption watch groups and even prosecutor's own deputy all thought it was job well done...but hey, what the hell do they know.

Prosecutors don't squash corruption cases. Defense attorneys do that.

Prosecutor PROSECUTES the case. If prosecutor does not prosecute there is no PROSECUTION....mmk dumbass?

Shokin idled Burisma case for two years before Joe exerted pressure on Ukrainian parlament to get his do-nothing ass out.

Doesn't really matter what Shokin was doing. Important thing is Biden threatened to withhold a Billion $ in aid to Ukraine for something he wanted, not what the US wanted.

No dumbass, it 100% matters - if Shokin was an empediment to Ukraine dealing with it's vast corruption problems then Joe Biden forcing his removal was perfectly consistent with faithful conduct of American foreign policy goals.

It is in our interest to have a strong, well governed Democracies on Russian border, Shokin's corrupt conduct of his office was undermining these goals.

Removal of Shokin was pushed by the DoS, EU, IMF and Ukrainian corruption watch groups, so to say that this was somehow Biden's unique personal interest is pure bs.

 

[the other mike]

No dumbass, it 100% matters - if Shokin was an empediment to Ukraine dealing with it's vast corruption problems then Joe Biden forcing his removal was perfectly consistent with faithful conduct of American foreign policy.

Removal of Shokin was pushed by the DoS, EU, IMF and Ukrainian corruption watch groups, it is 100% bullshit to propose that this was somehow Biden's unique personal interest.

You're the one completely ignoring the facts, while you go around calling names.

 

[Faun]

...getting a corrupt prosecutor fired who was lining his pockets by squashing corruption cases against the rich in Ukraine IS NOT job well done? Since when??

IMF, DoS, EU and Ukrainian corruption watch groups and even prosecutor's own deputy all thought it was job well done...but hey, what the hell do they know.

Prosecutors don't squash corruption cases. Defense attorneys do that.

Prosecutor PROSECUTES the case. If prosecutor does not prosecute there is no PROSECUTION....mmk dumbass?

Shokin idled Burisma case for two years before Joe exerted pressure on Ukrainian parlament to get his do-nothing ass out.

Doesn't really matter what Shokin was doing. Important thing is Biden threatened to withhold a Billion $ in aid to Ukraine for something he wanted, not what the US wanted.

What did Biden want?

Doesn't matter.

I didn't ask for more proof you're senile, gramps.

Of course it matters. If he was doing it for the benefit of the U.S. in order to prevent Ukrainians from stealing that money, it matters. That you think that doesn't matter is more of a reflection on you than it is on Biden.

 

[AntonToo]

No dumbass, it 100% matters - if Shokin was an empediment to Ukraine dealing with it's vast corruption problems then Joe Biden forcing his removal was perfectly consistent with faithful conduct of American foreign policy.

Removal of Shokin was pushed by the DoS, EU, IMF and Ukrainian corruption watch groups, it is 100% bullshit to propose that this was somehow Biden's unique personal interest.

You're the one completely ignoring the facts, while you go around calling names.

If you actually listened to her speech (which you DID NOT) Pam Blondie conviniently forgets to talk about what Shokin has been doing with his time in office - which is a crucial component of this matter.

Even Juliani did not try to claim that Shokin was clean, but tried to equate it out by saying that all officials are corrupt in Ukraine.

 

[the other mike]

If you actually listened to her speech (which you DID NOT) Pam Blondie conviniently forgets to talk about what Shokin has been doing with his time in office - which is a crucial component of this matter.

Even Juliani did not try to claim that Shokin was clean, but tried to equate it out by saying that all officials are corrupt in Ulkraine.

If I need a left-wing spin on it,
I'll go find a Raquel Madkow clip.

 

[protectionist]

Biden's quid pro quo threat to the Ukrainians was not exactly a job well done.

...getting a corrupt prosecutor fired who was lining his pockets by squashing corruption cases against the rich in Ukraine IS NOT job well done? Since when??

IMF, DoS, EU and Ukrainian corruption watch groups and even prosecutor's own deputy all thought it was job well done...but hey, what the hell do they know.

Prosecutors don't squash corruption cases. Defense attorneys do that.

Prosecutor PROSECUTES the case. If prosecutor does not prosecute there is no PROSECUTION....mmk dumbass?

Shokin idled Burisma case for two years before Joe exerted pressure on Ukrainian parlament to get his do-nothing ass out.

Doesn't really matter what Shokin was doing. Important thing is Biden threatened to withhold a Billion $ in aid to Ukraine for something he wanted, not what the US wanted.

No dumbass, it 100% matters - if Shokin was an empediment to Ukraine dealing with it's vast corruption problems then Joe Biden forcing his removal was perfectly consistent with faithful conduct of American foreign policy goals.

It is in our interest to have a strong, well governed Democracies on Russian border, Shokin's corrupt conduct of his office was undermining these goals.

Removal of Shokin was pushed by the DoS, EU, IMF and Ukrainian corruption watch groups, so to say that this was somehow Biden's unique personal interest is pure bs.

Not bs at all. Shokin had been a thorn in the side of Burisma. That made him an enemy of Biden, when Biden's son came along and occupied a high position in the company, purely for corrupt leverage, hooked to Joe Biden's positions as US VP and involved with Ukraine.

Biden wanted Shokin out because he was on the opposite side of Burisma and Hunter Biden. Very obvious.

YOU are the dumbass.

 

[AntonToo]

...getting a corrupt prosecutor fired who was lining his pockets by squashing corruption cases against the rich in Ukraine IS NOT job well done? Since when??

IMF, DoS, EU and Ukrainian corruption watch groups and even prosecutor's own deputy all thought it was job well done...but hey, what the hell do they know.

Prosecutors don't squash corruption cases. Defense attorneys do that.

Prosecutor PROSECUTES the case. If prosecutor does not prosecute there is no PROSECUTION....mmk dumbass?

Shokin idled Burisma case for two years before Joe exerted pressure on Ukrainian parlament to get his do-nothing ass out.

Doesn't really matter what Shokin was doing. Important thing is Biden threatened to withhold a Billion $ in aid to Ukraine for something he wanted, not what the US wanted.

No dumbass, it 100% matters - if Shokin was an empediment to Ukraine dealing with it's vast corruption problems then Joe Biden forcing his removal was perfectly consistent with faithful conduct of American foreign policy goals.

It is in our interest to have a strong, well governed Democracies on Russian border, Shokin's corrupt conduct of his office was undermining these goals.

Removal of Shokin was pushed by the DoS, EU, IMF and Ukrainian corruption watch groups, so to say that this was somehow Biden's unique personal interest is pure bs.

Not bs at all. Shokin had been a thorn in the side of Burisma.

Bullshit, he did nothing on this case for two years before getting removed.

“There was no pressure from anyone from the U.S. to close cases against Zlochevsky,” Kasko said in an interview last week. “It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015.”

Further, According to public reports and internal documents from the Ukrainian prosecutor’s office, U.S. officials had expressed concern for more than a year about [Shokin's] failure to assist an international investigation of Zlochevsky.

Ukraine Ex-Official Casts Doubt on Biden Conflict Claim