Trump charged

[c.d.]

That last line was a pretty cheap shot. Even bad people require lawyers, no? Unless you're of the opinion only nice cuddly folk wrongly accused are deserving of legal representation?

Hello Jason,

In no way was my comment intended to be a cheap shot aimed at Dershowitz. I was simply stating a fact. Sorry if you took it otherwise.

And yes, you are absolutely correct. Every defendant is presumed to be innocent and entitled to legal representation under the law.

c.d.

[Fiver]

That last line was a pretty cheap shot.

How is mentioning that Dershowitz was part of a successful defense team in a highly publicized case a cheap shot against anyone?

[jason_c]

https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1690762888724500481

Yet we had every MSM outlet shout from the rooftops for 4 years about the unsubstantiated Russia dossier. Their silence is deafening on Biden corruption. The era of All the President's Men have descended into All the President's Mice.

[Svensson]

https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/statu...62888724500481

Yet we had every MSM outlet shout from the rooftops for 4 years about the unsubstantiated Russia dossier. Their silence is deafening on Biden corruption. The era of All the President's Men have descended into All the President's Mice.

Dude, the "Russia Dossier" was very much substantiated by historical events in the fall of 2016. Remember that the thrust of the dossier was that

1. Russia was actively interfereing in the 2016 election on behalf of Trump
=> Substantiated.

2. Russia was carrying out cyber-operatins to steal intellectual property from DNC (emails, recipies, other internal docs) with the intent to release this information in aid of goal 1.
=> Substantiated.

3. That Trump was actively collaborating with the russians on goal 1 and 2.
=> Only the fact that Trump and his team were dying to coordinate with the russians was demonstrated by Mueller, not that the collaboratin actulally took place apart from Manafort sharing internal polling data with people considered Russian intelligence officers in aid of goal 1.

4. That Russia had "kompramat" on Trump.
=> Unsubstantiated. But I should add that I think that "kompramat" only works if the target can be shamed into carrying out the requested tasks, i.e. via a pee-tape. Since DJT clearly has no shame, the pee-tape would be worthless to the russians if it existed.

The first paragraph at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steele...ic_allegations pretty much sums it up IMO. If you want exact details, the Wikipedia page is quite detailed but a lot to get through......

Now, moving on to the so-called "Biden scandal", I have been away for a couple of weeks and I might not be fully up to date. Has Comer and his team been able to demostrate now that President Joe Biden has received payments from foreign sources in exchange for corrupt actions in return?

What I would be looking for for example is "Give me something that benefits me personally in exchange for something I can give you due to my position in government" Like announcing a prosecution into my political rival in exchange for military aid that has already been approved by congress.

Or, how about "saving MBS's ass" in exchange for 2 Billion Investments for Jared Kushner and then ANOTHER 1.6 Bliion licensing deal with Trump from the Saudis ? https://www.salon.com/2022/11/17/exp...aunch_partner/

This is the kind of "i'm using my government power in exchange for money" that I would be looking for. Has this been demostrated by Comer? If not, then you have your explanation why no one is talking about this. Heck, the corruption HAS been demotrated in the Trump cases, and people are STILL not talking about it.

DNC press office!! Hello!! Anybody there?

[jason_c]

Trump quoting the judge in his case below. Trump knows what we all truly know: judges are people too, they're as susceptible to bias as your average person. They would be especially biased when trying to stop someone labelled as fascist, racist or a threat to American democracy for the past 8 years.

[jason_c]

Dude, the "Russia Dossier" was very much substantiated by historical events in the fall of 2016. Remember that the thrust of the dossier was that

1. Russia was actively interfereing in the 2016 election on behalf of Trump
=> Substantiated.

2. Russia was carrying out cyber-operatins to steal intellectual property from DNC (emails, recipies, other internal docs) with the intent to release this information in aid of goal 1.
=> Substantiated.

3. That Trump was actively collaborating with the russians on goal 1 and 2.
=> Only the fact that Trump and his team were dying to coordinate with the russians was demonstrated by Mueller, not that the collaboratin actulally took place apart from Manafort sharing internal polling data with people considered Russian intelligence officers in aid of goal 1.

4. That Russia had "kompramat" on Trump.
=> Unsubstantiated. But I should add that I think that "kompramat" only works if the target can be shamed into carrying out the requested tasks, i.e. via a pee-tape. Since DJT clearly has no shame, the pee-tape would be worthless to the russians if it existed.

The first paragraph at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steele_dossier#Veracity_and_corroboration_status_o f_specific_allegations pretty much sums it up IMO. If you want exact details, the Wikipedia page is quite detailed but a lot to get through......

Now, moving on to the so-called "Biden scandal", I have been away for a couple of weeks and I might not be fully up to date. Has Comer and his team been able to demostrate now that President Joe Biden has received payments from foreign sources in exchange for corrupt actions in return?

What I would be looking for for example is "Give me something that benefits me personally in exchange for something I can give you due to my position in government" Like announcing a prosecution into my political rival in exchange for military aid that has already been approved by congress.

Or, how about "saving MBS's ass" in exchange for 2 Billion Investments for Jared Kushner and then ANOTHER 1.6 Bliion licensing deal with Trump from the Saudis ? https://www.salon.com/2022/11/17/exp...aunch_partner/

This is the kind of "i'm using my government power in exchange for money" that I would be looking for. Has this been demostrated by Comer? If not, then you have your explanation why no one is talking about this. Heck, the corruption HAS been demotrated in the Trump cases, and people are STILL not talking about it.

DNC press office!! Hello!! Anybody there?

Svensson, as far as I know none of your 4 points are substantiated. They are oft repeated allegations but nothing close to definitive evidence.

As for Biden's corruption. Earlier in this thread you seemingly admitted that Washington ran on access and influence, not all deals are texted or spoken in stark terms of 'if you do this, I'll pay you that'. It's invariably more subtle than that. Numerous members of the Biden family seem to have received money(offshore accounts, shell companies etc) from firms in Ukraine and China, it goes beyond simply Biden's son and brother. However, because the money is NOT going straight into Joe chequing account then there is not corruption. We do have a text from Hunter that he is paying for many of Joe's living expenses. I'd also like to know who the 'big guy' is if it's not Joe Biden?

[Fantomas]

No US president - as a serf knight of the Crown - can be imprisoned, just like the beknighted in the UK, no?

[Svensson]

Svensson, as far as I know none of your 4 points are substantiated.

This is the consensus of various intelligence assesments in the US and abroad. Multiple Russian nationals have been convicted in absentia for thier involvement in that is the intelligence consensus. All of these are pretty high bars. Certainly an awful lot higher that "'the big guy' simply has to be Joe Biden"

They are oft repeated allegations but nothing close to definitive evidence.

Your definition of "definitive evidence" is on a desert island.

As for Biden's corruption. Earlier in this thread you seemingly admitted that Washington ran on access and influence, not all deals are texted or spoken in stark terms of 'if you do this, I'll pay you that'. It's invariably more subtle than that.

Correct. But this does not mean it's criminal according to the law. There has been no evidence of Joe Biden engaging in criminal conduct (there is plenty of evidence that Donald Trump has been engaged in criminal conduct which is why he now needs to defend his actions in a court house).

Numerous members of the Biden family seem to have received money(offshore accounts, shell companies etc) from firms in Ukraine and China, it goes beyond simply Biden's son and brother.

For what purpose did they receive the money? Receiving money on it's own is not criminal, no matter where it's from. What is the Quid pro quo here?

We do have a text from Hunter that he is paying for many of Joe's living expenses.

If true, and that is a big IF, is it a crime for someone to pay for the living expenses of another family member? Millions of americans are doing just that. And why would Joe Biden need his son to pay his living expenses? Accoring to James Comer, Joe Biden has been getting millions and millions from China. Comer needs to make up his mind what his story really is and THEN decide on which part of it is actually illegal.

So, instead of fretting about dick-picks I would be a lot more concerned that with all the Billions (that's with a B), that the Saudi terrorist regime (yes, the one that organised planes flying into the twin towers and are some of the globe's premier religious fanatics) already have Trump in their pocket. And that trump is running again.

Polite enquirey, with all these billions making thier way from Ryadh to Mar-a-Lago, should trump have to register as a Saudi Agent? I mean, he is already on record to influence congress specifically to protect Saudi Royals, right?

[Pcdunn]

Oh, they *could* be imprisioned. Supposedly, "no one is above the law."

Yet, the requirements for serving as President do not include "never convicted of a crime" (that was an oversight!)

Interestedly, discussion has been sparked here by an article in a law review journal stating that the Civil War era prohibition against anyone who was previously sworn into office, then committed treason or insurrection to revolt against the Federal government is *barred* from serving again in a governmental office *could* be applied to Trump, depending upon his indictments and judgments.

[Svensson]

Trump quoting the judge in his case below. Trump knows what we all truly know: judges are people too, they're as susceptible to bias as your average person. They would be especially biased when trying to stop someone labelled as fascist, racist or a threat to American democracy for the past 8 years.

which part of her statement is incorrect in your opinion?

[jason_c]

This is the consensus of various intelligence assesments in the US and abroad. Multiple Russian nationals have been convicted in absentia for thier involvement in that is the intelligence consensus. All of these are pretty high bars. Certainly an awful lot higher that "'the big guy' simply has to be Joe Biden"



Your definition of "definitive evidence" is on a desert island.


Correct. But this does not mean it's criminal according to the law. There has been no evidence of Joe Biden engaging in criminal conduct (there is plenty of evidence that Donald Trump has been engaged in criminal conduct which is why he now needs to defend his actions in a court house).


For what purpose did they receive the money? Receiving money on it's own is not criminal, no matter where it's from. What is the Quid pro quo here?



If true, and that is a big IF, is it a crime for someone to pay for the living expenses of another family member? Millions of americans are doing just that. And why would Joe Biden need his son to pay his living expenses? Accoring to James Comer, Joe Biden has been getting millions and millions from China. Comer needs to make up his mind what his story really is and THEN decide on which part of it is actually illegal.

So, instead of fretting about dick-picks I would be a lot more concerned that with all the Billions (that's with a B), that the Saudi terrorist regime (yes, the one that organised planes flying into the twin towers and are some of the globe's premier religious fanatics) already have Trump in their pocket. And that trump is running again.

Polite enquirey, with all these billions making thier way from Ryadh to Mar-a-Lago, should trump have to register as a Saudi Agent? I mean, he is already on record to influence congress specifically to protect Saudi Royals, right?

Re Saudi Arabia; almost the entire US body politic voted to supply Saudi Arabia with military weapons recently. Im going to take claims that it's galling Trump does business with the Saudis with the contempt imo it deserves.

I'm gonna take the views of the intelligence agencies with a pinch of salt. They may be correct, they may be incorrect, but I do not hold them in any particularly high esteem. The US intelligence agencies have shown themselves time and again to be all too error prone.

Sure, millions of Americans pay the family expenses of family members. However, not many of these kept family members will be earning $300,000+ per year (plus expenses & perks you and I could only dream of). Joe's main private home is a 7,000sq ft lakefront property. Again, not many Americans in these circumstances are living off their sons goodwill.

We have went from 'I(Joe Biden) never met my sons business partners nor talked to Hunter about his business dealings' to 'there is no proven money from Burisma going directly to me' very quickly. This should be Joe's election slogan next year: 'no foreign business money went directly into my personal chequing account'.

[jason_c]

which part of her statement is incorrect in your opinion?

I have made no issue over the accuracy(or lack thereof) of her comments. I said she was biased.

[jason_c]

Svensson, more from the wonderful Aaron Mate in regards to your earlier post about the Russian dossier(more accurately described as the Dem/Clinton dossier) and collusion:

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/questions-mueller-russiagate/

The Mueller report did not state that the Kremlin was behind the social media campaign; it only disingenuously suggested it. Mueller also goes to great lengths to paint it as a sophisticated operation that “had the ability to reach millions of U.S. persons.” Yet, as we already know, most of the Russian social media content was juvenile clickbait that had nothing to do with the election (only 7 percent of IRA’s Facebook posts mentioned either Trump or Clinton). There is also no evidence that the political content reached a mass audience, and to the extent it reached anyone, most of it occurred after the election.

In the report, Mueller goes to great lengths to insinuate—without directly asserting—that two key figures in the Trump-Russia affair, Konstanin Kilimnik and Joseph Mifsud, acted as Kremlin agents or intermediaries. In the process, he omits or minimizes extensive evidence that casts doubt on their supposed Russia connections or makes clear their far more extensive Western ties. Mueller ignores the fact that the State Department described Kilimnik as a “sensitive source” who was regularly supplying inside information on Ukrainian politics. And Mueller emphasizes that Mifsud “had connections to Russia” and “maintained various Russian contacts,” but doesn’t ever mention that he has deep connections in Western intelligence and diplomatic circles.

[String]

Svensson, as far as I know none of your 4 points are substantiated. They are oft repeated allegations but nothing close to definitive evidence.

As for Biden's corruption. Earlier in this thread you seemingly admitted that Washington ran on access and influence, not all deals are texted or spoken in stark terms of 'if you do this, I'll pay you that'. It's invariably more subtle than that. Numerous members of the Biden family seem to have received money(offshore accounts, shell companies etc) from firms in Ukraine and China, it goes beyond simply Biden's son and brother. However, because the money is NOT going straight into Joe chequing account then there is not corruption. We do have a text from Hunter that he is paying for many of Joe's living expenses. I'd also like to know who the 'big guy' is if it's not Joe Biden?

Whataboutery again. Always deflecting.

[jason_c]

Whataboutery again. Always deflecting.

You call it whataboutery, I call it maintaining any reputation the US justice system has of good practice and impartiality. A justice system cannot survive if half the public have no confidence in it.