2 edits
Tell me how Biden was involved in the fake elector scheme cooked up by Eastman and Trump ran with it, screw elections, we will try to screw those voters out of their votes and flip the results in key states like my state of Pa and Michigan and such.I would tell you about Biden, but my time is best spent enjoying what BIDEN WAS INVOLVED in for real, Sonhouse....Are you aware that just about all of your posts are speculation. That is boring. I might tell you what I think about McCarthy, but why would you care what AvJOE 'thinks' about someone.? All you do is tell us what you 'think;', while we conservatives are reveling in the facts of the Biden Crime Family. And the facts are rockin'!!!
Sonhouse.....sadly, you underestimate Donald Trump.
@averagejoe1 saidInstead of glueing your eyeballs to the television you should read the archer transcript. Now we know why Republicans were fighting to prevent its release. Asked point blank if he has knowledge of any wrongdoing by Joe Biden he says "no".
Yeah. Can you wait until Sonhouse goes bonkers when Trump becomes president in 15 months.? Oh the Archer transcript is out, you might want to hear the FOX take on it.
This was the smoking gun witness Joe.
@wildgrass saidBut you see, his opinion, like all of Sonhouse opinions, are useless. We repubs have the facts, though.. Lots of facts. Our results will be based on facts.
Instead of glueing your eyeballs to the television you should read the archer transcript. Now we know why Republicans were fighting to prevent its release. Asked point blank if he has knowledge of any wrongdoing by Joe Biden he says "no".
This was the smoking gun witness Joe.
YOU, on the other hand, are saying we should rely on what Archer says he did not know. What an idiot. You, not Archer.
Funny thing is, waffling liberal, that if Archer had said he DID have knowledge, you would have a different tune to fit your narrative as dictated to you by your collective posters. Collective. Brrrrrrr
@averagejoe1 saidHe was the witness that Republicans hyped and hyped and hyped for a long time as the guy who was in the room when all the shenanigans went down. Now in just a few hours we're all the way back to " yeah but that's just one guys opinion". How many eye witnesses are needed before jim Jordan admits they have no evidence that Joe Biden committed crimes?
But you see, his opinion, like all of Sonhouse opinions, are useless. We repubs have the facts, though.. Lots of facts. Our results will be based on facts.
YOU, on the other hand, are saying we should rely on what Archer says he did not know. What an idiot. You, not Archer.
Funny thing is, waffling liberal, that if Archer had said he DID have knowledge, you ...[text shortened]... ent tune to fit your narrative as dictated to you by your collective posters. Collective. Brrrrrrr
1 edit
@AverageJoe1
So much for you saying Trump is not above the law.
I don't suppose you will EVER actually read the indictment.
It is VERY clear and a jury agreed, it was not Biden, Garland, or Smith who made the grand jury reach their decision.
And OF COURSE we give Trump or anyone else charged to be presumed innocent till proven guilty.
I am talking about available evidence, which is overwhelming.
@wildgrass saidThey were looking more for facts than his opinion. They will rely on the facts which may have of course have been peppered with his opinion as he was speaking.
He was the witness that Republicans hyped and hyped and hyped for a long time as the guy who was in the room when all the shenanigans went down. Now in just a few hours we're all the way back to " yeah but that's just one guys opinion". How many eye witnesses are needed before jim Jordan admits they have no evidence that Joe Biden committed crimes?
You are here, suggesting that they will take his opinions as fact, or rely on his opinions and their arguments. Why do you say that when you know that is not the cash
@averagejoe1 saidBut he didn't give his opinions; he was asked specific questions concerning his knowledge of alleged wrongdoing by Joe Biden, including the much hyped supposed $5 million bribe. In all cases, he denied knowing anything about such wrongdoing by Joe Biden.
But you see, his opinion, like all of Sonhouse opinions, are useless. We repubs have the facts, though.. Lots of facts. Our results will be based on facts.
YOU, on the other hand, are saying we should rely on what Archer says he did not know. What an idiot. You, not Archer.
Funny thing is, waffling liberal, that if Archer had said he DID have knowledge, you ...[text shortened]... ent tune to fit your narrative as dictated to you by your collective posters. Collective. Brrrrrrr
And that's the "close" to "big post" news you right wingers are salivating about?
@no1marauder saidWell, I don't have time to read 200 pages of it all, so you may have a point that 'in all cases, he denied knowing anything..."
But he didn't give his opinions; he was asked specific questions concerning his knowledge of alleged wrongdoing by Joe Biden, including the much hyped supposed $5 million bribe. In all cases, he denied knowing anything about such wrongdoing by Joe Biden.
And that's the "close" to "big post" news you right wingers are salivating about?
But, this article says he knew a lot. I note that you discount the Biden lies of doing no business, and also, Archer confirms the 20 phone calls. Whew. I aint gonna do details, you and Sonhuse can do that. Here is what I am reading. You prob have an NPR article?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/devon-archer-hunter-used-joe-biden-as-defensive-leverage-to-send-right-signals-to-foreign-biz-partners
@averagejoe1 saidI'll help. On Page 41, Archer says this regarding the phone calls:
Well, I don't have time to read 200 pages of it all, so you may have a point that 'in all cases, he denied knowing anything..."
But, this article says he knew a lot. I note that you discount the Biden lies of doing no business, and also, Archer confirms the 20 phone calls. Whew. I aint gonna do details, you and Sonhuse can do that. Here is what I am reading. Y ...[text shortened]... von-archer-hunter-used-joe-biden-as-defensive-leverage-to-send-right-signals-to-foreign-biz-partners
"But just on -- as far as, like, a blanket for all of them, let's just go with the -- there was not a specific time that I witnessed a, you know, specific business deal or business dealings or, you know, specifics about any kind of financial stuff."
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Devon-Archer-Transcript.pdf
@averagejoe1 saidWhat's their take on this?:
Yeah. Can you wait until Sonhouse goes bonkers when Trump becomes president in 15 months.? Oh the Archer transcript is out, you might want to hear the FOX take on it.
"Mr. Schwartz: It is still true that you are not aware that Hunter Biden ever
discussed policy with his father, discussed business with his father, influenced American policy for purposes of his business or otherwise caused the Vice President or asked the Vice President to do anything improper, right?
Mr. Archer: That's my understanding.
p. 131
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Devon-Archer-Transcript.pdf
@averagejoe1 saidBasically, it’s not quite anything but trailer trash ramblings after too much moonshine.
It will be worth getting Trump, if only for our entertainment, when Trump blows up FBI and DOJ. He will seek justice for all of this injustice. Obama is proven to have weaponized the IRS, for god sake. But he didn't get caught indicted....Biden will not evade so easily!!!!
One must admit, the millions to Bidens, media coverups, the garage documents, WHILE TRUMP IS ...[text shortened]... ow....and you know, if I may speak like a dem...Biden is guilty as hell, if only by association!!!!!
@averagejoe1 saidFirst you say there was an unnamed whistleblower. I believe there were multiple debate threads started about it.
They were looking more for facts than his opinion. They will rely on the facts which may have of course have been peppered with his opinion as he was speaking.
You are here, suggesting that they will take his opinions as fact, or rely on his opinions and their arguments. Why do you say that when you know that is not the cash
Then we learn the whistleblower had tapes. At some point I think the whistleblower died or something, according to some. Finally I think the narrative became that the tapes maybe never existed (or were stolen by reptilian humanoids?)
But the whistleblower, as it turned out, if we're sticking with facts, was a Chinese spy who was spreading false intelligence to rile up the conservative base. It was a fake news psy ops foreign attack on US citizens that worked over gullible folks like yourself.
And you're still falling for it. Now this eye witness testimony that was supposed to be a smoking gun is eye witness testimony that exonerates Joe Biden from the crimes on dozens of threads you have started.
You want to stick to facts while relying on wild speculation that you read on facebook and Neil Cavuto's ramblings?