What's new

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

The key here is that there is overwhelming evidence of what Trump has done.
There is also overwhelming evidence that the Bidens have engaged in tax evasion, and have assets they simply cannot explain. Joe's tax forms do to match his transparency filings, and it isn't close. Joe Biden's most recent transparency filing was $5.2 millions dollars off from his tax return from the same year. For me personally, I don't take issue with the bribery or whatever as much as I do the interference the Biden DOJ is exerting on the IRS. We have evidence of the DOJ telling the IRS that they are not allowed to investigate the Bidens. The corruption of the DOJ is a much bigger deal to me than any payoffs to the Bidens.
 
There is also overwhelming evidence that the Bidens have engaged in tax evasion, and have assets they simply cannot explain. Joe's tax forms do to match his transparency filings, and it isn't close. Joe Biden's most recent transparency filing was $5.2 millions dollars off from his tax return from the same year. For me personally, I don't take issue with the bribery or whatever as much as I do the interference the Biden DOJ is exerting on the IRS. We have evidence of the DOJ telling the IRS that they are not allowed to investigate the Bidens. The corruption of the DOJ is a much bigger deal to me than any payoffs to the Bidens.
Yep and I bet if biden was all over the place bragging about his tax evasion and corruption and there was a ton of audio evidence and people close to him flipping on him and if he was getting subpeona's and laughing them off etc etc etc then he would probably be in more trouble. Again. huge differences between the two individuals in question. Hence the difference in how the law is being applied.
This is simple stuff to see. Its weird that you cant see the difference
 
Yep and I bet if biden was all over the place bragging about his tax evasion and corruption and there was a ton of audio evidence and people close to him flipping on him and if he was getting subpeona's and laughing them off etc etc etc then he would probably be in more trouble. Again. huge differences between the two individuals in question. Hence the difference in how the law is being applied.
This is simple stuff to see. Its weird that you cant see the difference
#1 - The evidence is just as pervasive even if it isn't audio but in the form of messages, photographs, and documents.
#2 - The law isn't supposed to care about the individuals in question. The symbol is literally a chick in a blindfold.
#3 - That someone else may be worse isn't a defense.

Stop excusing corruption. It is your government too.
 
#1 - The evidence is just as pervasive even if it isn't audio but in the form of messages, photographs, and documents.
No doubt you'll link to some of this evidence eventually. So far, you've got "whistle-blowers" without direct knowledge of the facts, claims of discrepancies you haven't produced evidence for, and texts whose authors deny your interpretation of.

#2 - The law isn't supposed to care about the individuals in question. The symbol is literally a chick in a blindfold.
I agree. Unfortunately, that's not how the world works.

#3 - That someone else may be worse isn't a defense.
I also agree.

Stop excusing corruption. It is your government too.
Perhaps you should send all this evidence to Comer, he seems to be having trouble getting his hands on anything reliable.
 
Perhaps you should send all this evidence to Comer, he seems to be having trouble getting his hands on anything reliable.
The evidence is not hard to find. It is getting the DOJ and FBI to pursue it that is the challenge.

 
#1 - The evidence is just as pervasive even if it isn't audio but in the form of messages, photographs, and documents.
#2 - The law isn't supposed to care about the individuals in question. The symbol is literally a chick in a blindfold.
#3 - That someone else may be worse isn't a defense.

Stop excusing corruption. It is your government too.
You think the law shouldn't care about obstructing justice? Weird. You think the law shouldn't care about the defendent confessing his crimes? Also weird. You think there is audio, messages, photographs and documents of Joe Biden committing crimes? Show em.
 
The evidence is not hard to find. It is getting the DOJ and FBI to pursue it that is the challenge.

I hope Hunter gets prosecuted for getting a picture of himself taken while looking smug outside of Joe Bidens house. If in fact that is some new strange law that exists.
 
If I refuse to pay back my student loans cuz my religious beliefs, think the SC will uphold my case without me paying off Thomas or Alito?

It’s interesting to me that all of these “religious rights” cases never involve widespread religious beliefs. Like, have you ever heard of a cake designer refusing service to a thrice married client who cheats on his wives and pays off porn stars? What about a website designer refusing service to a client who never reads scripture? Never prays? Never attends church? Always lies; never tells the truth? Aren’t those important too?

Obviously, the issue here is people refusing to admit that the LGBT community exists and has rights and bigots using “religious beliefs” to masquerade their bigotry.
 
The evidence is not hard to find. It is getting the DOJ and FBI to pursue it that is the challenge.
Then bring it to Comer. So far, he's coming up empty, and many Republicans are itching for any plausible reason to impeach Biden.

The *day*? How about narrowing that down the the hour for a reasonable inference?
 
If I refuse to pay back my student loans cuz my religious beliefs, think the SC will uphold my case without me paying off Thomas or Alito?
Foolish take
It’s interesting to me that all of these “religious rights” cases never involve widespread religious beliefs. Like, have you ever heard of a cake designer refusing service to a thrice married client who cheats on his wives and pays off porn stars?
No but his press secretary...

What about a website designer refusing service to a client who never reads scripture? Never prays? Never attends church? Always lies; never tells the truth? Aren’t those important too?
Sure, why not, especially if it's a business that is specific to a religion. Take the mormon church and their garment business. Should we force them to sell to everyone, including Satanism worshipers? According to you they are bigots using "religious beliefs" to masquerade their bigotry if they don't sell to a LGBT person.

Wouldn't you be happy because a businesses could do this?

This restaurant is very inclusive, this is what they had to say “Metzger Bar and Butchery has always prided itself on being an inclusive environment for people to dine in". Not really inclusive, since their beliefs are not aligned with Family Foundations beliefs. So they will only serve parties that agree with their beliefs.

So we should force this business, that has gay waiters, to serve this party, even though this party does not have the same beliefs?
 
Foolish take

No but his press secretary...
They were wrong to refuse service for political reasons.

Sure, why not, especially if it's a business that is specific to a religion. Take the mormon church and their garment business.
That's not a business that pretends to be open to the public.

Wouldn't you be happy because a businesses could do this?
As long as the patrons treat all the staff politely, they have a right to be there as individuals. However, hosting an event for an organization implies at least neutrality towards the goals of the organization hosting the event.

This restaurant is very inclusive, this is what they had to say “Metzger Bar and Butchery has always prided itself on being an inclusive environment for people to dine in". Not really inclusive, since their beliefs are not aligned with Family Foundations beliefs.
Haters get hated on, and then whine about the backwash.

So they will only serve parties that agree with their beliefs.
They will serve individuals and parties of people, but not host the event. I think you can tell the difference. I similarly support the rights of this bar to refuse to host events for American Atheists or the Democratic Party.

So we should force this business, that has gay waiters, to serve this party, even though this party does not have the same beliefs?
The gay waiters should serve all the patrons, as long as the patrons behave themselves. Hosting an event is more than serving patrons.
 
If I refuse to pay back my student loans cuz my religious beliefs, think the SC will uphold my case without me paying off Thomas or Alito?
You mean because usury is specifically prohibited in the Bible? Charging interest is also prohibited in Judaism, Islam, and many schools of Buddhism. (Although with some of those groups, it specifically talks about not charging interest when lending to your own kind of people.)
 
You mean because usury is specifically prohibited in the Bible? Charging interest is also prohibited in Judaism, Islam, and many schools of Buddhism. (Although with some of those groups, it specifically talks about not charging interest when lending to your own kind of people.)
Right? Or can my “judaeo Christian” beliefs only be used to stiff the gays and not the bankers?
 
You mean because usury is specifically prohibited in the Bible? Charging interest is also prohibited in Judaism, Islam, and many schools of Buddhism. (Although with some of those groups, it specifically talks about not charging interest when lending to your own kind of people.)
I’m genuinely curious who paid off Brett’s debt? Was it Crow? Was it the Kochs? DeVos family? Which billionaire who’s currently celebrating sticking it to the plebs today was the one responsible for making Beer dude’s debt go away? And did Brett have any issue with that? I mean, why did he rack up so much debt without any intention of paying it back?

Liberals have gotta get going. Perhaps if Soros started buying off judges we’d see favorable rulings too.
 
At least you guys got your hate towards religion out while preaching tolerance. The lack of common sense here is astounding. This is why us successful people who don't mooch off our wives don't want to pay for your indoctrination/schooling. This is extremely basic to anyone with a high school GED. Educated yet don't even understand how Congress works. No wonder they think buying a car for $10,000 more is a good economy lol. Whats next, needing me to pay your car loans too? Probably...


View: https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1674790244468793344?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1674790244468793344%7Ctwgr%5E0887e7a6091fb2e9293b45624c9acc8dd83e8258%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fpolitics%2Fjustice-roberts-uses-pelosis-words-against-biden-smackdown-student-loan-handout

If you don't want to pay interest, don't sign a loan. This is basic stuff education that you need me to pay for you should've taught instead of your religious bigotry on full display... Not forcing me to pay YOUR bills because you mooch off of your wife has nothing to do with religion. It's called being a grown *** adult. It's called unconstitutional you educated high horses. Your hero and Stock Market insider trader Pelosi told you educated folk this. It's basic ****. Again why should I pay for your schooling when you can't even pass a high school civics class? You guys don't even know how Congress works.........
 
Last edited:
This week the Supreme Court has ruled that segregation and racism is wrong and that grown adults should pay their own bills and the so called educated Confederate party is angry. The educated Confederates that don't even know how Congress works...
 
Last edited:
Top