- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Let’s ask it this way libs...
Posted on 9/26/19 at 3:50 pm to BeefDawg
Posted on 9/26/19 at 3:50 pm to BeefDawg
quote:
Good grief, have you not even seen this?
Biden admitting to extorting Ukraine to fire Shokin.
Okay so you think he broke US law already. So why is trump telling ukraine to investigate the bidens? What does that do?
2
Posted on 9/26/19 at 3:53 pm to BeefDawg
quote:
Yes, he is. LINK
That investigation wasn't started to look into Joe Biden or Hunter Biden. I mean, I'm sure it could come up, but that is not the purpose of the investigation.
Posted on 9/26/19 at 3:54 pm to cahoots
quote:
Okay so you think he broke US law already. So why is trump telling ukraine to investigate the bidens? What does that do?
Can you elaborate on what's going through your mind when you question the purpose of an investigation into Biden? The alternative being Trump should just throw him in jail and call it a day?
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:00 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:The money paid to Hunter appears like very VERY obvious payoff by Burisma in return for Biden getting the investigation quashed.
I'm not arguing either side of this so nobody freak out on me, but I believe the issue there would be proving he requested or gained something of value in return. I know all the discussion of the money his son made, but whether that money was earned illegally or corruptly is a big debate.
Because Hunter Biden had no business being hired to the board of directors of a multi-billion dollar oil and gas company when he has absolutely no experience in the business what so ever.
Think, man. What company hires and pays someone $3 million, plus $83,000 per month, who's a known cocaine fiend (kicked out of Navy for cocaine use and busted multiple times for cocaine possession), and has zero experience in oil and gas, and has virtually no corporate business experience in general?
And around the same time this is taking place, an investigation into that same company gets shut down, and the us VP goes to a CoFR summit and openly brags on video that he threatened to withhold a billion in loans to Ukraine unless they fire the prosecutor who investigated that company.
Good lord it's so obnoxiously obvious what happened. You have to be willfully in denial to not see it.
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:01 pm to GRTiger
quote:
Can you elaborate on what's going through your mind when you question the purpose of an investigation into Biden? The alternative being Trump should just throw him in jail and call it a day?
What?
My question is that if Biden broke US law, then we already have the evidence and he could be prosecuted. So why is the President calling for Ukraine to investigate the Bidens? What purpose does that serve?
This post was edited on 9/26/19 at 4:02 pm
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:02 pm to cahoots
quote:No, but it has been expanded now to incorporate Biden. Because again, Rudy has passed along the evidence Ukraine supplied from Shokin's investigation to Durham.
That investigation wasn't started to look into Joe Biden or Hunter Biden. I mean, I'm sure it could come up, but that is not the purpose of the investigation.
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:04 pm to BeefDawg
quote:
Think, man. What company hires and pays someone $3 million, plus $83,000 per month, who's a known cocaine fiend (kicked out of Navy for cocaine use and busted multiple times for cocaine possession), and has zero experience in oil and gas, and has virtually no corporate business experience in general?
Then why isn't Joe Biden being prosecuted right now? The $3 million you keep talking about is moot. Hunter already got paid. That isn't in debate. Why is it not happening NOW or a year ago?
Why do the Ukrainians need to be involved all of a sudden?
This post was edited on 9/26/19 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:05 pm to cahoots
quote:
My question is that if Biden broke US law, then we already have the evidence and he could be prosecuted. So why is the President calling for Ukraine to investigate the Bidens? What purpose does that serve?
His activities related to the alleged crime involve Ukraine. Are you suggesting we should just send the FBI into a foreign country unilaterally to conduct an investigation that involves Ukrainian officials? Trump was asking for cooperation and assistance from the country that is deeply rooted to the alleged crimes.
Everything I just said is extremely obvious, so I am unclear if I understand what is confusing you about that.
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:10 pm to BeefDawg
quote:
The money paid to Hunter appears like very VERY obvious payoff by Burisma in return for Biden getting the investigation quashed.
Because Hunter Biden had no business being hired to the board of directors of a multi-billion dollar oil and gas company when he has absolutely no experience in the business what so ever.
I got this from VOX, so take that for what its worth but this explains how Hunter got connected to Burisma to begin with:
quote:
Hunter Biden joined the board of a Ukrainian natural gas company named Burisma Holdings, shortly after his business partner in an investment and consulting firm, Devon Archer, came aboard. Although Biden had no apparent expertise in the field, he had helped Burisma previously as a consultant with expertise in dealing with multinational regulations, and he was employed at a law firm retained by Burisma’s owner, former Ukrainian government official Mykola Zlochevsky.
And from articles I've read, many countries and officials wanted that prosecutor gone because he actually wasn't doing his job and that after he was removed, the investigation into Burisma continued for almost another year under the new prosecutor.
Again, that's just what I read which is why the whole thing isn't quite as clear. I'm not saying I think all that is true, I don't know what really happened.
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:11 pm to cahoots
quote:You're conflating two different things.
Okay so you think he broke US law already. So why is trump telling ukraine to investigate the bidens? What does that do?
The evidence that was passed along to Guiliani was from Shokin's investigation into Burisma, that supposedly incriminates Hunter Biden.
Trump asked the Ukrainian President to help look into Joe Biden's forcing them to fire Shokin.
Obviously, the details of Shokin being fired would be in Ukraine, not here in the US. All we have here in the US is Joe on video bragging about the extortion. But who he spoke to and who did the firing and when and why is all in the Ukraine.
Duh.
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:13 pm to GRTiger
quote:
His activities related to the alleged crime involve Ukraine. Are you suggesting we should just send the FBI into a foreign country unilaterally to conduct an investigation that involves Ukrainian officials? Trump was asking for cooperation and assistance from the country that is deeply rooted to the alleged crimes.
Trump went rogue on the call, did he not? I don't think think this was some coordinated effort to obtain more intel.
The DOJ was already probing Ukraine btw for other reasons. So yes, we don't need their permission.
This post was edited on 9/26/19 at 4:17 pm
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:14 pm to BeefDawg
quote:
The evidence that was passed along to Guiliani was from Shokin's investigation into Burisma, that supposedly incriminates Hunter Biden.
So Shokin gave Guiliani classified info from his time as prosecutor?
This post was edited on 9/26/19 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:22 pm to GRTiger
quote:
Everything I just said is extremely obvious, so I am unclear if I understand what is confusing you about that.
What's confusing is that you guys are presenting Biden as an obvious bad actor and you are pointing to tons of evidence that is public and not disputed. So it would seem that there would be sufficient evidence to move forward. Even if Obama could turn a blind eye, certainly Trump's appointees wouldn't.
And yet, here the president is trying to cajole Ukraine into "looking into it."
It's like you're saying "case closed" but also "we're missing critical information" at the same time
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:30 pm to cahoots
quote:
Trump went rogue on the call, did he not? I don't think think this was some coordinated effort to obtain more intel.
The DOJ was already probing Ukraine btw for other reasons. So yes, we don't need their permission.
Went rogue? He called the president elect of the country to get a temperature on if he planned to cooperate in ongoing affairs that had a direct impact on his job and country. How many transcripts of calls between leaders have you read to even know what standard and rogue mean in that context?
If you think there is enough evidence to indict the Bidens, I applaud your forward thinking. No need to be obtuse if the executive branch wants a little more evidence.
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:41 pm to GRTiger
quote:
If you think there is enough evidence to indict the Bidens, I applaud your forward thinking. No need to be obtuse if the executive branch wants a little more evidence.
So you think that's a call that should be made by the executive branch? Whether or not there is enough evidence to proceed with prosecuting a political rival?
Pretty authoritarian. You don't see a problem with that?
Have a good one dude
This post was edited on 9/26/19 at 4:43 pm
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:44 pm to cahoots
Well that is exactly what was done/started by the prior executive branch, right?
This post was edited on 9/26/19 at 4:45 pm
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:44 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:Yeah, this looks like Leftwing VOX trying to propagate cover for Biden.
I got this from VOX, so take that for what its worth but this explains how Hunter got connected to Burisma to begin with:
Hunter Biden had no "multinational regulations" experience either. Dude worked for MBNA for a few years, Amtrak for a few years, and got a cushy appointment to the Commerce Dept. by Bush. And then conveniently as soon as his dad became VP, he and his best pal Archer became "venture capitalists" and started getting paid big millions from the Chinese to "invest".
Dude had no investment experience either at that time, but for some reason, he was handed over $1.5 billion over a couple years to manage in investments for some Chinese.
In 2013 he joined the Navy Reserve, and had to get a special waiver for his prior cocaine possession convictions. But a year later, he tested positive for cocaine use again and they kicked him out.
A goddamn month later, he's appointed to the BoD of Burisma getting paid a small fortune. Right about the same time Joe is named by Obama to be the point-man on helping Ukraine get their shite together after Crimea was annexed by Russia just the previous month.
Hunter Biden had zero business working for a freaking oil and gas company in Ukraine. And certainly not getting paid near as much as he was getting. And the timing of him and Archer getting those jobs at virtually the same moment Joe Biden begins "diplomacy" in Ukraine is obnoxiously convenient.
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:47 pm to cahoots
quote:
Pretty authoritarian. You don't see a problem with that?
Holy shite.. you have been propping up Biden this entire thread for what he did... and now THIS????
Do you folks have a single second’s worth of attention span?
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:50 pm to davyjones
quote:
Well that is exactly what was done/started by the prior executive branch, right?
You tell me. Are you okay with it?
Posted on 9/26/19 at 4:52 pm to cahoots
quote:I don't know who gave what to him.
So Shokin gave Guiliani classified info from his time as prosecutor?
Good grief, you just can't help but pull shite out your arse.
All we know is the equivalent of the Ukrainian Justice Department tried to hand over Shokin's evidence a while ago. They started with the Obama appointed US Ambassador to Ukraine, but she apparently did nothing with the evidence/swept it under the rug. Then they tried to to get visas to come to the US to physically hand the evidence to our DOJ, but that same Ambassador denied the visas. Then they contacted some folks in our State Department, but they too rebuffed their efforts and told them they weren't interested.
Then recently, they apparently tried again to contact folks in our State Dept. who then went directly to Rudy Guiliani and asked him to personally intervene and help them acquire whatever it was the Ukrainians were trying to get to our DOJ. And he did.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News