I'd like to see evidence for a lot of these claims that come from reliable sources cause I don't think the majority of them are true.
> - anyone who has claimed election interference on the 2020 election has been threatened with lawsuits, lost jobs, etc
I feel this is an especially interesting claim because the only people i've seen get hit with law suits for this have continually defamed specific companies and not just someone shouting in the street that it was fraudulent.
I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to argue that the Hunter Biden stories weren't suppressed until after the election. Those stories and corresponding evidence were around before the election. They were completely buried wherever possible, and dismissed as conspiracy theories by the mainstream media when they couldn't bury them. It was only after the election that they were forced to admit that the Hunter Biden stories were factual.
They share a bank account, Joe had an “office” at the failed business Hunter tried to start, and in his emails – if true, as at least some of them have been cryptographically verified to be – Hunter claims he sends a percent of all his income to his dad, a credible claim given the eye-witness corroboration of a similar communique between financial partners affirming an equity stake in a Chinese venture of “10% for the big guy” – who an eye witness identifies as none other than the incorruptible Scranton Joe himself.
Everything in my comment except the shared bank account was reported before the election, with much of the specific content being suppressed or outright banned from multiple social media networks as part of coordinated enforcement action. The New York Post, a centuries-old newspaper that broke the story, was suspended from Twitter for multiple weeks due specifically to this reporting. Twitter could be forgiven for acting according to its “hacked materials policy” meant to protect innocent doxing victims like Hunter Biden, except for the fact that just weeks earlier they featured tweets from the New York Times that published illegally obtained private tax documents of the president (who was also later banned from Twitter).
I’m skeptical of the argument that recent vindication of a suppressed story somehow justifies its original suppression.
You clearly didn't read my comment. I specifically pointed out that the bank account story couldn't have been suppressed because it only came out recently.
Does stories about Joe Biden's son relate to Joe Biden? Are you shitting us?
Stories about Trumps children trend for weeks if there's anything negative... they don't get suppressed, questioned or challenged.
Hunter is accused of being a Crack Addict, a pedophile, selling influence, etc... each enough to sit in the media for weeks and it's all swept under the rug.
Trump supposedly says shithole and it's a national emergency... Biden supposedly gets a cut from his son's business dealings in China/Russia/etc and it's nothing.
How does Hunter relate to Joe? are you fucking serious?
> Trump supposedly says shithole and it's a national emergency... Biden supposedly gets a cut from his son's business dealings in China/Russia/etc and it's nothing.
likewise, the laptop story was stopped because "its russian disinformation" even though 1) it never was and 2) those reasons never stop bad stories about Trump and family.
The main point of my post is that rumors sit in the new for months on Trump & crew... but "Journalists" suddenly care about "evidence" when it comes to Biden and Democrats?
"Media" is suppressing bad "rumors" about Biden and running rumors about Trump without issue. THAT is the issue and if you don't see the hypocrisy then you're part of the problem.
Rudy sat there in an interview on TV claiming that he had one of Biden's Macbooks in his physical possession and proudly displayed it to TV cameras.
It was a Windows-based LG machine. I can totally see how a 70 year old grifter wouldn't want to spend the money on the correct prop for the media.
Somehow, I'm supposed to simultaneously believe that a guy with sensitive material on laptops worth literal millions is just going to drop off multiple machines and never pick them up.... and that a Mac repair guy isn't smart enough to identify what is and what is not a Macbook.
Maybe the reason nobody believes Trump or his henchmen is because they lie so much. Stranger things have happened. As it is, all evidence about this entire ordeal points towards Trump's team trying to Benghazi Biden. Biden wanted a corrupt prosecutor out of power for the same reason that virtually every other leader of the western world did: dude was corrupt.
You focus on "grifters" from the right and endorse grifters from the left by ignoring their scandals and the rumors about their grifting.
You don't like Rudy? Okay... now... why are you silent about Hunter? Joe? other stories about their corruption?
Why do you accept at face value rumors about the right - when many of those rumors turn out to be false or their "lies" turn out to be true? and then you'll support "biden wants" despite the fact that he's every bit the corrupt grifter you claim to despise in Rudy?
"all the evidence" This is about rumors and support/suppression of those rumors.
Again... rumors about Trump spend weeks in the news without facts - or against facts... journalists care about "all evidence" with Biden when that evidence has been proven lies time and time again.
If you support the hypocrisy, then you're a hypocrite. You'll push rumors against Trump and hide rumors against Biden because you don't care about truth.
Virtually all news stories in 2020/early 2021 about Trump have been retracted by cnn.com since then.
Almost all sound bytes from the White House and Squad today are the opposite of what they said pre-election, especially about corona - they said they would refuse a vaccine developed under the Trump administration, and that vaccine mandates were not going to happen.
The most striking is that "Trump's Muslim travel ban list" was originally drawn up by the previous Obama administration. (The list was created because there's several countries that have disorganized passport control, so ICE can't verify any of those documents when required, which means they don't know who is trying to enter the US, when that mattered. With Open Borders, those people can now just walk across the Mexico border.)
Which thing? Not the two things he was impeached for. Possibly closer to the circulated idea about impeaching due to having better foreign interests, but I don’t believe any formal impeachment attempt was made on those grounds. All talk.
My hot take: Probably because every politician likely does it. They wouldn’t want to set any ball rolling that could hurt them in the future.
"trump largely cared" and biden gets a cut from his family making millions on his name while he destroys America.. how is he not about "stuffing his pockets"?
* FBI ignores violence across America and instead goes after "domestic terrorists"... aka parents who don't blindly obey the gestapo tactics.
I could go on about the number of scandals, corruption and dumpster fire issues... but the collapsing poll numbers and cries of Lets Go Brandon speak it more than I ever could.
And I didn't say America was destroyed... I said Biden was in the process of destroying - and the above scandals as a starting point... they show an inept or corrupt plan that is in effect destroying America as we speak.
First and foremost, there's a reason why political discussion is not welcomed here, as it gets ugly really fast.
You made a simple point and I wanted to clarify it:
> biden gets a cut from his family making millions on his name
I'm not aware how Biden Sr. is cashing in on his son's "work". Please note that I'm not contesting the fact that his son's role was some degree of corruption, but I haven't seen compelling evidence that the money was flowing back to his dad.
"stay on topic" first it's "I missed America being destroyed" now it's "biden gets a cut?"
Hard to stay on topic with you moving the goal posts...
Can we get an itinerary so I know where the goal posts are going to be? That way we can try to synchronize what "on topic is" since it apparently changes from one post to the next with you...
My take on the Hunter Biden affair -- low level, old school, genteel corruption. Akin to the corruption that political "donations" bring.
Disclaimer, I voted for Biden but am willing to call out his failures at any time.
The reason why I'm ok with "censoring" the Hunter stories at that time is that it was purely whataboutism and a distraction. Just like with the buttery males, it was never about the professed concerns, it was about making them look bad.
If this issue (and others like it) could be discussed in a non partisan way I'd be all for it, but it's not. This hand wringing is insincere at best and should be ignored.
I've yet to see anything that indicates these concerned citizens care about principles rather than tribal politics. Happy to be proven wrong, but not holding my breath.
The whole central claim that started this was the allegations that Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating the company that was paying Hunter for his "services". If it's true that foreign interests were bribing the vice president of the USA though payments to his son in order to change American policy then that is indeed a staggering level of corruption. For comparison the president of South Korea was sentenced to 20 years in prison for a comparable scheme.
Even if there was truth to it (I do think a genteel corruption was in play but not to this extent), these arguments are being made in bad faith. There's no concern for actual corruption as they don't seem to care when it happens in any other context -- it's just "gotcha" politics.
US foreign policy in its very nature is corrupt (it's the lobbying arm of big business). Let's shine a light on it but that light needs to be colorblind to red and blue.
Without recognition of the corruption of the previous administration this dialog is simply partisan pandering. I'd be more than happy to share my criticisms for the administration and its party (including this aforementioned corruption) but if your concern does not cross party lines then it's no concern of mine.
And you will always find news articles telling you not to believe your lying eyes. Sadly most Americans have grown a default assumption that the media is lying to you, which at least in this case is true. Reading the first hand emails gives a very different impression.
"The scope of work should also include organization of a visit of widely recognized and influential current and/or former US policy-makers to Ukraine in November aiming to conduct meetings with and bring positive signal/message and support on Nikolay’s issue to the Ukrainian top officials above with the ultimate purpose to close down for any cases/pursuits against Nikolay [Burisma founder] in Ukraine."
It's very difficult to read that email and not come to the conclusion that Hunter was being paid to ask his dad to shut down the investigation into Burisma. Especially since later emails indicate that Joe Biden ultimately did meet with Burisma execs.
>but if your concern does not cross party lines then it's no concern of mine.
Make no mistakes I would love to see any elected official that engages in corruption -- Republican or Democrat -- dragged to prison.
While there are a large number of who are just using this to play political gotcha, it is going too far to accuse anyone concerned about this scandal.
Not least that everyone wanted Shokin out. And this is before you get to Shokin investigating Burisma re: the years 2010-12; i.e. before Hunter Biden even joined the company. Also Shokin's Burisma probe was in 2014; the international pressure to oust Shokin was in 2016.
It all just falls apart under the barest fact check. C'mon.
Agreed. But Hunter's only qualification for his role was who his dad was. It smells funny to me.
What gets conveniently overlooked by those pushing this story is the fact that the only interest was in the story itself, as an attack angle. To hell with that.
>I'd like to see evidence for a lot of these claims that come from reliable sources cause I don't think the majority of them are true.
This is effectively a disingenuous argument when the evidence clearly suggests that so called "reliable sources" are colluding to suppress content that is inconvenient for their political leanings.
Incidentally it also ensures that all of wikipedia leans left, since any outlets which run counter to leftist politics are rejected as unreliable by definition. It's a dishonest, preemptive dismissal of any alternative perspective and it is absolutely toxic to national discourse. In practice you are relying on a circular argument, wherein the self proclaimed arbiters of truth have also defined themselves, and only themselves, as "reliable sources".
The reason I say reliable is not because I only want sources from one specific side or that say one specific thing. But because there are plenty of sources who are willing to say anything to please a specific party or person which is the exact reason some people are being sued into the ground.
That’s literally what you were just accused of doing. Demanding a source that supports your claim by negating his. The left controls the internet, and has for a while. Hence the right starts new sites where the left doesn’t have control.
The right seems to generally start news sites that peddle in a lot of either half truths or outright falsities. Given this can you blame me for wanting a _reliable_ source.
Yeah but the difference is the mainstream republicans regularly push literal disinformation and false hoods to further the goal of the republican party and themselves. You just need to look at the last administrations attempt to literally subvert the election process and install themselves as president when they lost.
> - anyone who has claimed election interference on the 2020 election has been threatened with lawsuits, lost jobs, etc
I feel this is an especially interesting claim because the only people i've seen get hit with law suits for this have continually defamed specific companies and not just someone shouting in the street that it was fraudulent.