U.S. Politics

[Richard Smith]

what discussion would that be?

Whenever you get stuck in an ongoing discussion you ignore it and change the subject with more BS

What has "The Biden Express heading to the US across the open border." to do with your idiotic allegation that Joe Biden took bribes and used shell companies to launder money?

There can be more than one news story relating to US politics.  A flood of illegal aliens crossing a wide-open border in historic numbers with the complicity of the Biden clown show is just one such example.  The Biden express is coming to a town near everyone!  But if you want to deflect from that disaster to Biden, Inc., do you think it is not suspicious for a family to receive millions from various foreign sources including Romania, Ukraine, China and Russia and then launder that money through numerous shell companies?  You believe setting up shell companies to funnel money from corrupt foreign source to various members of the VP's family is something that would happen if the participants believed that their conduct was legal?  LOL.  And that the son of the VP would be paid in diamonds by the Chinese to avoid tracing the cash.  Or that he would be given a $140K Porsche from a Kazakh businessman right after arranging for him to dine with his father.   Nothing to see there!  HA HA HA.   I know you want to play the endless contrarian but even you must know this is corruption.  The kind of thing that goes in corrupt third-world countries. 

[Martin Weidmann]

There can be more than one news story relating to US politics.  A flood of illegal aliens crossing a wide-open border in historic numbers with the complicity of the Biden clown show is just one such example.  The Biden express is coming to a town near everyone!  But if you want to deflect from that disaster to Biden, Inc., do you think it is not suspicious for a family to receive millions from various foreign sources including Romania, Ukraine, China and Russia and then launder that money through numerous shell companies?  You believe setting up shell companies to funnel money from corrupt foreign source to various members of the VP's family is something that would happen if the participants believed that their conduct was legal?  LOL.  And that the son of the VP would be paid in diamonds by the Chinese to avoid tracing the cash.  Or that he would be given a $140K Porsche from a Kazakh businessman right after arranging for him to dine with his father.   Nothing to see there!  HA HA HA.   I know you want to play the endless contrarian but even you must know this is corruption.  The kind of thing that goes in corrupt third-world countries.

do you think it is not suspicious for a family to receive millions from various foreign sources including Romania, Ukraine, China and Russia

You mean like; isn't it suspicious that several companies linked to Donald Trump and his daughter Ilana received a large number of trademarks from China, when both of them were in the White House, or how a Saudi Investment Company gave $2 billion dollar to Jared Kushner.... that kind of "suspicious"?

I don't do suspicious. If you want to make an allegation, you'd better provide conclusive evidence or just shut up!

and then launder that money through numerous shell companies?

Do you have evidence for money laundering? If so, take it to the IRS. Comer doesn't do it, because he hasn't got it.

You believe setting up shell companies to funnel money from corrupt foreign source to various members of the VP's family is something that would happen if the participants believed that their conduct was legal?  LOL

Do you have any idea just how many shell companies are being set up for legit purposes every day? Shell companies are frequently used by all sorts of companies. Their use doesn't make illegal what they do.

And that the son of the VP would be paid in diamonds by the Chinese to avoid tracing the cash.  Or that he would be given a $140K Porsche from a Kazakh businessman right after arranging for him to dine with his father.   Nothing to see there!  HA HA HA.

Indeed, there's nothing to see unless, of course, you can produce evidence for both claims, but I seriously doubt you can't even prove that either thing ever happened, never mind for what purpose.

I know you want to play the endless contrarian but even you must know this is corruption.

If Joe Biden is corrupt then so is Donald Trump, or do the same rules not apply to Trump?

[Richard Smith]

Trump is hitting an all time high for a republican candidate with minority voters according to the Wash Post.  They are abandoning Old Joe like everyone else.  The only question now is how long before he announces that he not running in 2024.

[Richard Smith]

do you think it is not suspicious for a family to receive millions from various foreign sources including Romania, Ukraine, China and Russia

You mean like; isn't it suspicious that several companies linked to Donald Trump and his daughter Ilana received a large number of trademarks from China, when both of them were in the White House, or how a Saudi Investment Company gave $2 billion dollar to Jared Kushner.... that kind of "suspicious"?

I don't do suspicious. If you want to make an allegation, you'd better provide conclusive evidence or just shut up!

and then launder that money through numerous shell companies?

Do you have evidence for money laundering? If so, take it to the IRS. Comer doesn't do it, because he hasn't got it.

You believe setting up shell companies to funnel money from corrupt foreign source to various members of the VP's family is something that would happen if the participants believed that their conduct was legal?  LOL

Do you have any idea just how many shell companies are being set up for legit purposes every day? Shell companies are frequently used by all sorts of companies. Their use doesn't make illegal what they do.

And that the son of the VP would be paid in diamonds by the Chinese to avoid tracing the cash.  Or that he would be given a $140K Porsche from a Kazakh businessman right after arranging for him to dine with his father.   Nothing to see there!  HA HA HA.

Indeed, there's nothing to see unless, of course, you can produce evidence for both claims, but I seriously doubt you can't even proof that either thing ever happened, never mind for what purpose.

I know you want to play the endless contrarian but even you must know this is corruption.

If Joe Biden is corrupt then so is Donald Trump, or do the same rules not apply to Trump?

The comparison to Trump is laughable.  Of course, Trump and his family have been in business their entire lives.  He has actual businesses around the world long before entering politics.  That is how he made billions during his lifetime.  It is not a crime to have a legitimate business that provides goods and services and to make money.  In contrast, Old Joe is a lifelong politician.  He has no business or service to provide except his influence as a high ranking member of the government.   His son also had no business except selling access to his "pop."  And even if your false premise were true that Trump engaged in some unlawful conduct, that would in no way exonerate Old Joe and Dirty Hunter from breaking the law.  Moral equivalency is not a defense.  In terms of evidence of shell companies, the House report includes a detailed account of the millions sent to Dirty Hunter and the shell companies he used to funnel that money to himself and his family including the "big guy."  Do you think that is a lawful way to conduct business?  Do you think receiving diamonds from China is a normal form of payment fpr legal services?  How many people do you know are gifted a $140K Porsche from a foreign businessman after meeting with his dad?  Nothing to see there!

[Martin Weidmann]

The comparison to Trump is laughable.  Of course, Trump and his family have been in business their entire lives.  He has actual businesses around the world long before entering politics.  That is how he made billions during his lifetime.  It is not a crime to have a legitimate business that provides goods and services and to make money.  In contrast, Old Joe is a lifelong politician.  He has no business or service to provide except his influence as a high ranking member of the government.   His son also had no business except selling access to his "pop."  And even if your false premise were true that Trump engaged in some unlawful conduct, that would in no way exonerate Old Joe and Dirty Hunter from breaking the law.  Moral equivalency is not a defense.  In terms of evidence of shell companies, the House report includes a detailed account of the millions sent to Dirty Hunter and the shell companies he used to funnel that money to himself and his family including the "big guy."  Do you think that is a lawful way to conduct business?  Do you think receiving diamonds from China is a normal form of payment fpr legal services?  How many people do you know are gifted a $140K Porsche from a foreign businessman after meeting with his dad?  Nothing to see there!

The comparison to Trump is laughable.  Of course, Trump and his family have been in business their entire lives.  He has actual businesses around the world long before entering politics.

True, but he continued with those businesses after entering the White House and obviously used his position to make deals for himself as well as his family. Do you really think Ilana would have received those trademarks if daddy wasn't in the White House?

It is not a crime to have a legitimate business that provides goods and services and to make money.

What goods and services did Ilana Trump deliver for those trademarks and what did service did Jared Kushner provide for the $2 billion dollars he received from Saudi Arabia?

In contrast, Old Joe is a lifelong politician.  He has no business.........

Indeed.... and you can't prove that he ever had any kind of business.

His son also had no business except selling access to his "pop."

What Hunter had or not had is of no consequence for his father. As a lawyer Hunter doesn't need a business of his own to make money.

And even if your false premise were true that Trump engaged in some unlawful conduct, that would in no way exonerate Old Joe and Dirty Hunter from breaking the law.  Moral equivalency is not a defense.

True. But your problem is that you can't prove that Joe Biden engaged in any unlawful conduct. You can argue he did, but you are doing so without a shred of conclusive evidence.

In terms of evidence of shell companies, the House report includes a detailed account of the millions sent to Dirty Hunter and the shell companies he used to funnel that money to himself and his family including the "big guy."

The House report is full of unsubstantiated allegations based on hearsay and inconclusive documents.

But let's say, for argument's sake, that Hunter Biden did use shell companies and received millions. And let's even say that he did pay out some of that money to members of the family. In this scenario it would be Hunter Biden who may be doing something illegal, but nobody else. But there is no way that any sane person can argue that if Hunter gives money to his family members that those family members must somehow be involved in what ever Hunter was doing.

All your arguments and claims are allegations without solid evidence. It's the kind of stuff a drunk in a bar would say.

[Richard Smith]

The comparison to Trump is laughable.  Of course, Trump and his family have been in business their entire lives.  He has actual businesses around the world long before entering politics.

True, but he continued with those businesses after entering the White House and that's the problem. He used his position to make deals he never disclosed.

It is not a crime to have a legitimate business that provides goods and services and to make money.

What goods and services did Ilana Trump deliver for those trademarks and what did service did Jared Kushner provide for the $2 billion dollars he received from Saudi Arabia?

In contrast, Old Joe is a lifelong politician.  He has no business.........

Indeed.... and you can't prove that he ever had any kind of business.

His son also had no business except selling access to his "pop."

What Hunter had or not had is of no consequence for his father.

And even if your false premise were true that Trump engaged in some unlawful conduct, that would in no way exonerate Old Joe and Dirty Hunter from breaking the law.  Moral equivalency is not a defense.

True. But your problem is that you can't prove that Joe Biden engaged in any unlawful conduct. You can argue he did, but you are doing so without a shred of conclusive evidence.

In terms of evidence of shell companies, the House report includes a detailed account of the millions sent to Dirty Hunter and the shell companies he used to funnel that money to himself and his family including the "big guy."

Let's say, for argument's sake, that Hunter Biden did use shell companies and received millions. And let's even say that he did pay out some of that money members of the family. In this scenario it would be Hunter Biden who may be doing something illegal by using shell companies to receive millions. But there is no way that any sane person can argue that if Hunter gives money to his family members that those family members are somehow must involved in what ever Hunter was doing.

All your arguments and claims are allegations without solid evidence. It's the kind of stuff a drunk in a bar would say.

There is no law against someone who is elected president to continue to make money from his legitimate business.  Trump placed such businesses in a trust.  He also took no salary as president.  Again, though, Trump's situation has nothing to do with the crimes committed by Old Joe.   Your problem here is that you don't understand the law or accept the facts.  Dirty Hunter confirmed that the money was going to his "pop" but even if you refuse to believe the evidence, it is still a crime to use his influence to benefit his family members.  Imagine if government officials could avoid bribery charges simply by directing the money to their children or spouse and then having those family members send it to them.  LOL.

[Martin Weidmann]

There is no law against someone who is elected president to continue to make money from his legitimate business.  Trump placed such businesses in a trust.  He also took no salary as president.  Again, though, Trump's situation has nothing to do with the crimes committed by Old Joe.   Your problem here is that you don't understand the law or accept the facts.  Dirty Hunter confirmed that the money was going to his "pop" but even if you refuse to believe the evidence, it is still a crime to use his influence to benefit his family members.  Imagine if government officials could avoid bribery charges simply by directing the money to their children or spouse and then having those family members send it to them.  LOL.

There is no law against someone who is elected president to continue to make money from his legitimate business.  Trump placed such businesses in a trust.

Correction; he said he placed them in a trust and then continued running them anyway. You don't think there could be even the slightest conflict of interest for a sitting President to continue running his businesses?

Again, though, Trump's situation has nothing to do with the crimes committed by Old Joe.

What crimes would that be? He hasn't been charged for anything, no evidence has been presented against him..... so what the hell are you talking about?

Your problem here is that you don't understand the law or accept the facts.

Coming from you, that's absolutely hilarious! It only shows that even the biggest fool can believe he is right and actually knows something! Thanks for the laugh.

Dirty Hunter confirmed that the money was going to his "pop" but even if you refuse to believe the evidence, it is still a crime to use his influence to benefit his family members.

Giving money to a family member (if that's what actually happened) isn't a crime. And there is no credible evidence that Joe Biden used his influence to benefit family members. No matter how often you repeat it, it still will be a nothing burger.

Imagine if government officials could avoid bribery charges simply by directing the money to their children or spouse and then having those family members send it to them.  LOL.

When did this happen? Who bribed who? Who directed who to send money to their children and who had family members send money to him? This entire thing is a made up narrative for which there is no evidence whatsoever. If there was evidence we would have seen it by now! It's spin masters at work... that's all.

[Richard Smith]

There is no law against someone who is elected president to continue to make money from his legitimate business.  Trump placed such businesses in a trust.

Correction; he said he placed them in a trust and then continued running them anyway. You don't think there could be even the slightest conflict of interest for a sitting President to continue running his businesses?

This is simply a lie.  Trump did put his business interests in a blind trust.  He complied with the applicable laws and there was governmental oversight of that process.  Apply your standard, though.  Was he charged with a crime for this?   No.   In addition, he took no salary.  If you want to be pedantic, he was required to take one dollar.  Contrast Trump's full compliance with the law and donation of his salary with Biden Inc.'s influence peddling scheme.