Good news for Bernie Sanders supporters (and people like myself hoping for an economic collapse)

[Dirty_habiT]

I find it awfully suspicious that Obama, who definitely had a hand in this is staying very quiet throughout the whole ordeal.  Maybe he's hoping everyone will forget that he went into the presidency broke as a joke and came out owning multiple multi million dollar estates?  Hmmmm, not saying where that money came from but it didn't come from having a president's salary and "being good with money".

 

I think before this is all said an done we're going to see Obama involved in all of this.  Again, very suspicious to me that he's being so quiet.  Of course someone is going to hop in here and say "he had nothing to do with this biden stuff," but I beg to differ.  It's not like your VP just does shit that you don't know about AND don't agree with.  So what are the other options, you knew about it and you didn't agree with it, or you didn't know about it and you agree with it?  All three are bad IMO and there will be no excuse when this comes to a head.

[Hua Guofang]

38 minutes ago, Mercer said:

This blatant corruption, or "ethics breach"  you're referring to isn't about interpreting a law to see if it's legal or not. You're completely missing the point. It's going to be judged by millions of voters that are tired of choosing the lesser of two evils, meaning they just won't vote. Between this demonstration that he can't be trusted, and the hair sniffing, he's single handedly almost guaranteeing a Trump win regardless if he gets his party's nomination. Again, whether or not what he did was technically "legal" is of practically no consequence here.

 

TLDR, Sanders is looking better and better choice for the democrats, and many of them are starting to admit that.

Your first sentence is wrong - corruption is a breach of law and ethics are guiding principles. You breach one and the courts have the power to fuck you up. You breach the other and without laws to underpin them then you can essentially get away with it. Don't confuse them as being the same thing in the way the system works.

 

The rest is right and spot on, in my opinion. What actually happened doesn't really matter so much anymore (well, even less than it used to). And that's what I was getting to above where I said that all you have to do is make allegations and have them repeated across the media. No evidence has to be provided, no charges have to be brought.

 

My point is, Biden is accused of having the Prosecutor General fired to protect his son's position. There is no evidence  - at all - to say the accusation is true but everyone seems to be believing it  because....., well, I just don't know why. I can only assume it's because of the polarised environment and media conditioning. Evidence doesn't seem to matter anymore and the President can use his office for personal benefit - the exact thing y'all are angry at Biden at but Trump seems to get a pass.

 

So, if Biden's son on Burisma whilst his dad held the Ukraine brief was unethical, how does it work with Trump's kids doing business in China and other countries whilst their dad is renegotiating trade deals with those countries?

 

Also, I'm really going off topic here, regards the original post. Sorry about that.

[Kults]

6 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said:

My point is, Biden is accused of having the Prosecutor General fired to protect his son's position. There is no evidence  - at all - to say the accusation is true but everyone seems to be believing it  because....., well, I just don't know why. I can only assume it's because of the polarised environment and media conditioning.

What about because its blatantly obvious?

 

You make a big deal of pointing out how it isn't illegal yet spin right back around to this

[Hua Guofang]

Obvious but with zero evidence, huh?Sounds like a great definition for bias!
 

 

Well, you’re all so concerned about Biden doing something unethical but you don’t seem concerned when Trump is doing the same thing. Why is that?

[Hua Guofang]

28 minutes ago, Kults said:

What about because its blatantly obvious?

 

You make a big deal of pointing out how it isn't illegal yet spin right back around to this

On second reading, I don't understand what you're saying in the second sentence.

 

Hunter Biden being employed in Burisma isn't illegal, as in there are no laws that have been broken. But it is unethical and I don't think there are actual regulations behind that (not completely sure though)

 

Joe Biden using his position to get the Prosecutor General fired to protect his son would definitely be illegal as it's using his office for personal gain. However there is ZERO evidence that he did that. All the evidence suggests that he did because the Prosecutor General WASN'T prosecuting corruption.

 

All y'all have got are accusations by Rudi Giuliani and Trump and y'all are swallowing it like a daughter at a step-daddy blowbang! Not only is there no evidence to support it but there's heaps of evidence to say it's not true. But y'all just keep on triuckin, because Biden!!!

Edited December 29, 2019 by Hua Guofang

[Dirty_habiT]

52 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said:

Your first sentence is wrong - corruption is a breach of law and ethics are guiding principles.

I hope this isn't like what your definition of misdemeanors was.

[Dirty_habiT]

56 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said:

everyone seems to be believing it  because....., well, I just don't know why.

Have you heard the term, "there are better hills to die on"?  It is fitting here, when "everyone" is believing something and you're not.  Wait wait wait wait..... I think I get it.  You're "woke" and "everyone" else isn't?

[Dirty_habiT]

27 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said:

All y'all have got are accusations by Rudi Giuliani and Trump and y'all are swallowing it like a daughter at a step-daddy blowbang! Not only is there no evidence to support it but there's heaps of evidence to say it's not true. But y'all just keep on triuckin, because Biden!!!

Someone call Hua and Uber please.

[Hua Guofang]

23 minutes ago, Dirty_habiT said:

I hope this isn't like what your definition of misdemeanors was.

Definitely possible!

 

Why don't you have a dig around, find out how the US Govt deals with breaches of ethics and post it up here so we can all work from solid facts?

[Hua Guofang]

20 minutes ago, Dirty_habiT said:

Have you heard the term, "there are better hills to die on"?  It is fitting here, when "everyone" is believing something and you're not.  Wait wait wait wait..... I think I get it.  You're "woke" and "everyone" else isn't?

Nope, I did the leg work, checked on the claims from both sides by gathering as much evidence as I could. The end result was a significant amount of evidence saying that there was no active investigation into Burisma for Biden to try and stop and there was zero evidence to say that Hunter Biden was under investigation and that Biden used his power to stop it.

 

I support neither Trump nor Biden, I have the luxury of deciding my position based on evidence. You don't have that luxury because you're all in on Trump and working off impartial evidence is hard for you because you might have to admit that you were wrong.

[Hua Guofang]

19 minutes ago, Dirty_habiT said:

Someone call Hua and Uber please.

Yeah, naybe you could point out how I'm wrong by citing some evidence instead?

 

Oh that's right, you don't have any!

[Hua Guofang]

Just read a great quote that some here might agree with:

 

"Once, political parties represented ordinary voters to the state. Now, parties represent the state to ordinary voters".

 

 

@MercerI have a question based on the title of this thread: what does the economic collapse of the US look like, what would the immediate consequences be - as in would the national guard be brought out to ensure order or would there be absolute anarchy with no higher authority than the personal use of force - and why do you want it to happen?

[Hua Guofang]

Had no idea where else to post this but thought that it followed a trend of the original post.

 

I know people who work for the org that did the research and it's not as crazy right wing as the name of it sounds - they do legit work. I know y'all in here think I'm left because I'm not a Trump supporter and am not allergic to anything that looks like socialism, but that's your bias, not mine. I've worked with these people in the past and support what they do. This is scary reading to me:

 

 

More than a third of millennials polled approve of communism

 

Published: Nov 2, 2019 11:07 a.m. ET

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/for-millennials-socialism-and-communism-are-hot-capitalism-is-not-2019-10-28?mod=newsviewer_click&link=sfmw_tw

ShawnLanglois

Social-media editor

 

Somewhere, Bernie Sanders is smiling.

 

A new survey released by the Washington, D.C., nonprofit Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation reflects that, if the younger generation gets out and votes in 2020, those running for office on the far left have reason to be hopeful.

 

‘The historical amnesia about the dangers of communism and socialism is on full display in this year’s report.’ Marion Smith, executive director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation

 

 

According to YouGov, which conducted the poll, capitalism, amid a widening divide between the haves and have-nots, has plunged in popularity from a year ago, with one out of every two millennials — ages 23 to 38 — supporting it.

 

 

Meanwhile, 36% of millennials polled say that they approve of communism, which is up significantly from 28% in 2018.

 

 

 

Socialism, a dirty word to the president and many of his supporters, has shown a decrease in favorability in all age groups except the Silent Generation (age 74+) and millennials, of which 70% say they’d be likely to vote for a socialist candidate.

 

 

Marion Smith, executive director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, says he’s troubled by the findings of the poll.

 

 

“The historical amnesia about the dangers of communism and socialism is on full display in this year’s report,” Smith said in a statement on Monday. “When we don’t educate our youngest generations about the historical truth of 100 million victims murdered at the hands of communist regimes over the past century, we shouldn’t be surprised at their willingness to embrace Marxist ideas.”

 

 

Other nuggets from the report include that 22% of millennials believe “society would be better if all private property was abolished,” and that 45% of Generation Z members and millennials believe that “all higher education should be free.”

 

 

 

As for the biggest threat to world peace, 27% across every generation pointed a finger at President Trump, while 22% named North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un and 15% picked Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

 

 

[Mercer]

7 hours ago, Hua Guofang said:

Your first sentence is wrong - corruption is a breach of law and ethics are guiding principles. You breach one and the courts have the power to fuck you up. You breach the other and without laws to underpin them then you can essentially get away with it. Don't confuse them as being the same thing in the way the system works.

Oh Contrair, the illogically organized laws we have on the books can be, and often are twisted by enforcement and the judiciary to charge people when they want to bad enough. Granted this is mostly done to poor people, or people without political clout but it can, and does happen very often, even if that means setting a harmful legal precedent.

 

All it takes is one loose definition on the books here, a previous ruling there, and a sympathetic judge/jury and boom, they can make it happen. Neither of us are lawyers, or steeped enough in U.S. legal matters to be able to spell out exactly how this could, or could not ever happen but make no mistake, there's enough to play with here. I'm not saying this will happen, again this will play out with the voters.

 

7 hours ago, Hua Guofang said:

My point is, Biden is accused of having the Prosecutor General fired to protect his son's position. There is no evidence  - at all - to say the accusation is true but everyone seems to be believing it  because....., well, I just don't know why.

It's because the motive is so obvious, it's right there in your face. This is like law enforcement stopping to question why a burglar broke into a home uninvited, "maybe he was just trying to help the homeowner" . Again, please present your theory as to why Obama/Biden withheld that loan guarantee until Shokin was fired? If it had nothing to do with covering up his son's multimillion dollar position on the board, then what was it? I'm open to dropping my position that Biden is a traitor piece of shit that put his family's personal gains ahead of his country if there's a feasible motive for this action.

[Hua Guofang]

@MercerMotive doesn't mean guilt. I mean, we all have a financial motive to deal drugs, doesn't mean we do though.

 

Here is why the US and a number of other countries were pressuring Ukraine and withholding funding (wasn't only the US/Biden) to have Shokin fired:

 

Did Biden withhold funding to Ukraine in order to get Shokin fired?

Yes, here he is talking about it at a CFR event: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/09/27/flashback_2018_joe_biden_brags_at_cfr_meeting_about_withholding_aid_to_ukraine_to_force_firing_of_prosecutor.html

Biden's claim and as he puts it in that video is that he wanted Shokin fired because he was not doing enough to stop corruption in the country and that this was part of a wider push by a number of organisations and countries for reform in the Prosecutor General's office to deal with corruption.

 

Is there evidence to support that claim of Biden being part of a wider effort?

Yes.

Letter from Republican Senators in Feb 2016 calling for tougher measures on corruption and reform in the Prosecutor General's office:   https://www.portman.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/portman-durbin-shaheen-and-senate-ukraine-caucus-reaffirm-commitment-help

Story in 2016 on EU wanting removal of Shokin because of his own corruption and for not properly carrying out investigations into high-level corruption (the article also indicates that the US is not the only country withholding funds until he was sacked): https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/eu-hails-sacking-of-ukraine-s-prosecutor-viktor-shokin-1.2591190

2017 EU Parliament briefing paper discusses Western donors condemning Shokin for not carrying out investigations into corruption: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/608632/EPRS_BRI(2017)608632_EN.pdf

2016 Carnegie report that discusses the corruption within the Prosecutor General's office, the resignation of Shokin's deputies because of the way he ran the department and the dissatisfaction within Western countries at the lack of investigation into corruption: https://carnegieeurope.eu/2016/04/18/fighting-culture-of-corruption-in-ukraine-pub-63364

Feb 2016, Shokin's deputy resigns calling Shokin corrupt and saying that Shokin is blocking investigations and blocking reform of the office: https://www.occrp.org/en/daily/4929-ukraine-deputy-prosecutor-general-resigns-citing-corruption

 

US Ambassador to Ukraine complaining that Shokin is not investigating Mykola Zlochevsky , the owner of Burisma: https://www.rferl.org/a/us-ambassador-upbraids-ukraine-over-corruption-efforts/27271294.html

US Ambassador giving a speech in 2015 complaining that Shokin was blocking corruption investigations: https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Remarks-by-US-Ambassador-Geoffrey-Pyatt-at-the-Odesa-Financial-Forum-on-September-24-2015-ukraine.pdf

 

Financial Times has an article from this year citing EU diplomats and a bunch of other insiders that back Biden's story up, although almost all of them are anonymous sources: https://www.ft.com/content/e1454ace-e61b-11e9-9743-db5a370481bc

 

The FT article also quotes people backing up what the US Ambassador to Ukraine complained about in that Shokin was not carrying out his duty to investigate Shokin (and that the investigations started before Hunter was on the board, so it could not have been related to anything he had done himself) and that by 2014/15 the investigations had stopped because Shokin had blocked them.

 

It is hard to see why, with the evidence of the US Ambassador complaining that the investigation into Burisma was not proceeding why Biden would then need to pressure Shokin to stop the investigation. All the available evidence suggests that there was no active investigation to stop.

 

Does this prove that Biden is innocent?

No. It only adds support to his claim of innocence.

 

Is there any evidence to support the Trump/Giuliani accusations?

Yes.

Shokin complained that he was fired because Biden withheld the funds because he was investigating Burisma. He made those claims here: https://strana.ua/articles/interview/199721-viktor-shokin-lutsenko-na-kolenjakh-prosil-poroshenko-naznachit-eho-henprokurorom-a-teper-spasaet-sebja.html

But as @Dirty_habiTkindly (yet likely unwittingly) pointed out that this news outlet is a front for pro-Russian views, which seems to be headquartered in the Donbass region, which Russia invaded in 2014: https://bit.ly/35T4BLj (fucking huge link)

 

Could Shokin be telling the truth?

Yes. However, he has provided no evidence for this (voice recordings, emails, witnesses, etc.).

Does Shokin have reason to lie?

Yes. Biden was definitely pushing for him to be fired, he has a motive to take revenge by damaging Biden's reputation and restoring his own by saying he was fired for doing his job.

 

Recent Prosecutor General for Ukraine says that he had found no evidence that Hunter had broken any laws, that Giuliani wanted him to open an investigation. the PG Told Giuliani that if he had any evidence of crimes that he should launch something in a US court, give them to the DoJ or FBI and then he could do something. However, with no court proceedings or DoJ initiated proceedings or FBI investigations it seems reasonable to believe that Giuliana has no evidence to offer. Interview with the PG here: https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-09-29/former-ukraine-prosecutor-says-no-wrongdoing-biden

 

 

So, after all that digging, I came to the conclusion that there is little to no evidence to say that he is guilty but there is evidence to say he might be innocent. No smoking gun either way but only evidence to suggest he didn't do it to benefit himself.

 

I also note that there is evidence that Trump and Giuliani use a strategy of making unsupported accusations and then working to get them repeated throughout the media until people lose confidence in the person they are attacking. Can show evidence.

 

 

[Mercer]

Well, props to you. I'll have to look into it these but it appears there were legit ulterior motives for this and I stand corrected. At the very least this means there's legitimate plausible deniability.

 

The reality of the matter is this doesn't change much. It's still too complex for most potential Trump voters to wrap their heads around.

[Hua Guofang]

Agreed, likely won't change much. And not just too esoteric and complex for Trump voters, I'd say it's the majority of the electorate in most democracies. People are too busy to dig like this. I do it because it's relevant to my career.

[Dirty_habiT]

So now all Trump voters are too stupid to keep up?  Checks out.  @Mercer- I'd check out his URLs, he's already posted dem fax from untrustworthy sources in this thread (and in others).  Kinda crazy, considering it's "his job".  It'd be like if I were right about computer shit I worked on about 10% of the time when I got lucky enough to land on the right answer in a sea of wrong ones.

 

He also thinks "evidence" is URL links to online news stories.  Literally, this is like trying to argue with a fake news bro that's on the payroll.

[Hua Guofang]

5 hours ago, Dirty_habiT said:

So now all Trump voters are too stupid to keep up?  Checks out.  @Mercer- I'd check out his URLs, he's already posted dem fax from untrustworthy sources in this thread (and in others).  Kinda crazy, considering it's "his job".  It'd be like if I were right about computer shit I worked on about 10% of the time when I got lucky enough to land on the right answer in a sea of wrong ones.

 

He also thinks "evidence" is URL links to online news stories.  Literally, this is like trying to argue with a fake news bro that's on the payroll.

If you are referring to my post in your first sentence, I’d suggest you read it again. 
 

 

[Dirty_habiT]

9 hours ago, Hua Guofang said:

too esoteric and complex for Trump voters

You mean this part from the sentence you started with "And"?

[Hua Guofang]

39 minutes ago, Dirty_habiT said:

You mean this part from the sentence you started with "And"?

Do you not understand how sentences work?

 

And not just too esoteric and complex for Trump voters, I'd say it's the majority of the electorate in most democracies. People are too busy to dig like this.

 

 

 

[Dirty_habiT]

Let's not get off track from the point.  I don't know why you're bringing up how sentences work, because it's not related to what I was pointing out about you insulting the intelligence of Americans.

 

Do we need to call you an Uber 2 nights in a row now?

[Hua Guofang]

24 minutes ago, Dirty_habiT said:

Let's not get off track from the point.  I don't know why you're bringing up how sentences work, because it's not related to what I was pointing out about you insulting the intelligence of Americans.

 

Do we need to call you an Uber 2 nights in a row now?

Yeah, if that’s all ya got, thanks for playing with the grown ups but I think you’re done. 

[Dirty_habiT]

Focus man (I know it's hard when you're drunk).  The question was.... again.... So now all Trump voters are too stupid to keep up?

 

You can suck my schlong with that playing with the grownups shit you tried to pull.

[Hua Guofang]

Anyone else who doesn’t want this thread to devolve into idiocy want to try explaining it to him? I’m not qualified in special ed. 

[Dirty_habiT]

Nobody else is in this thread because you've bored everyone that would be interested to death with your thick headed ignorance and attempts to assert your biased "expertise" in posting fake news links to "bak up dem fax".

 

Further, you seem too dense to understand that you've basically said that all Trump voters are too stupid to understand what's going on.  Then, you want to say that you're the special ed guy as a joke after failing to focus on the question.

 

I'm just trying to get a simple yes or no out of you in regards to Trump voters being too stupid to keep up.  I'm not surprised you cannot answer because your political leanings are that of the people that cannot ever give a straight answer about anything.  They have to glaze you over with bullshit and book chapter posts full of fake news links.

 

I think your broken sentence (since you want to talk about sentences) of "I'm not qualified in special ed, " is just a cop out for being too drunk to articulate your own opinion.  If you had asked me if elizabeth warren supporters were too stupid to understand, I'd outright tell you, "yes, they're too stupid, as a whole, to understand."  It's called not being a little bitch and being able to say what I think.  You've been asked SEVERAL times to articulate your opinion but all you can do is puke up dem fax from your fake news links as "proof" of .... well.... I dunno what.  Maybe proof that you have too much time on your hands and that you've spent your professional career figuring out how to master bullshitting people into oblivion until they give up on trying to have a discussion with you.

[Kults]

^

 

*Audible OOOF 

 

 

[Hua Guofang]

7 hours ago, Dirty_habiT said:

Nobody else is in this thread because you've bored everyone that would be interested to death with your thick headed ignorance and attempts to assert your biased "expertise" in posting fake news links to "bak up dem fax".

 

Further, you seem too dense to understand that you've basically said that all Trump voters are too stupid to understand what's going on.  Then, you want to say that you're the special ed guy as a joke after failing to focus on the question.

 

I'm just trying to get a simple yes or no out of you in regards to Trump voters being too stupid to keep up.  I'm not surprised you cannot answer because your political leanings are that of the people that cannot ever give a straight answer about anything.  They have to glaze you over with bullshit and book chapter posts full of fake news links.

 

I think your broken sentence (since you want to talk about sentences) of "I'm not qualified in special ed, " is just a cop out for being too drunk to articulate your own opinion.  If you had asked me if elizabeth warren supporters were too stupid to understand, I'd outright tell you, "yes, they're too stupid, as a whole, to understand."  It's called not being a little bitch and being able to say what I think.  You've been asked SEVERAL times to articulate your opinion but all you can do is puke up dem fax from your fake news links as "proof" of .... well.... I dunno what.  Maybe proof that you have too much time on your hands and that you've spent your professional career figuring out how to master bullshitting people into oblivion until they give up on trying to have a discussion with you.

My fav thing about this post is the fact that I didn’t read it. 
 

thanks for the effort anyway!

[misteraven]

Alright you guys need to bro hug it out and play a round of virtual bowling or something.

 

Only so much effort you can out into trying to change the position of others before it becomes the mess we see here.

[Hua Guofang]

The best way forward is if neither of us engage each other on politics. That’s my preferred way to end the silliness.