What with the House in chaos, there hasn't been much action on the "Biden crime family" front these days. But today the House Oversight Committee released BOMBSHELL evidence that Joe Biden received $200,000 from his brother James in 2018. This came ON THE SAME DAY that James Biden received $200,000 from a hospital company he had partnered with:
🚨 BREAKING 🚨
We have found a $200,000 DIRECT payment to Joe Biden.
@RepJamesComer lays out the money trail. 👇 pic.twitter.com/0vq3lqhRHz— Oversight Committee (@GOPoversight) October 20, 2023
I guess that does it. Shady Joe Biden is part of the crime syndicate after all.
Except.......it turns out that Joe had loaned his brother $200,000 a few weeks earlier. When his brother got the money he needed to repay him, he did. That's, um, about all there is to this. There's no special reason to think that the money James Biden got was illegal, nor any reason to suppose that Joe knew where the money came from anyway. He just helped his brother out and then got repaid six weeks later.
These guys are such clowns.
The Republican Party isn't a governing party. It's a Troll Party.
But remember that Trump tax cut that made the GDP growth rate skyrocket as planned? And how about all those wall sections he built which pretty much shut down immigration from the south? Oh, and Trump ended the nuclear issues with North Korea. He even has the love letters to prove! So much more than trolling.
That put me in mind of a piece from the Economist two months before the 2020 election, talking to construction workers in Ohio. It included these quotes:
“He’s done more for our country than the past 10 Presidents put together. He’s made – who is it, China or Japan? – pay our farmers billions of dollars. He got healthcare done, which the Democrats could never do. He built the wall.”
“He’s done a great job, he’s got everyone back to work. I’m pretty much 100% for him.”
“He shoots his mouth off but at least that shows he’s honest.”
(The guy who said that also told the journalists that he especially liked Trump's commitment to reducing the national debt.)
And it's not just cherry-picked construction workers. I was astounded at how many of the January 6 Committee witnesses (I'm thinking that Cassidy Hutchinson was among them, for example, but I can't find the quote) expressed how saddened they were that the coup attempt had overshadowed all the great things Trump had accomplished.
Why did no one ask for a list of the "great things" donnie was responsible for?
The farm subsidy was because of a failed boycott that donnie did that, well, failed and he authorized the Federal Government to step in and pay the farmers off.
I would vote for anyone who would be willing to legally rescind the last two "tax cuts".
Clowns yes.
But crazy conspiracies exist everywhere, it's just when you live within a bubble it's no longer a conspiracy, it's the truth.
For example what about these "conspiracies":
- Nixon ordered the Watergate break-in
- Reagan made a deal with the Iranians to release the hostages before the election
- Trump was (in some unclear, but definite way) a Russian "operative"
All three seem to have rather less real evidence behind them than, say, Whitewater. But it's basically part of the Democratic creed that you have to believe all three unconditionally.
Not to mention various supposed conspiracies on the left that have been resolved (to everyone except the die-hards) against what was the standard leftist position, including
- Sacco and Vanzetti were innocent
- The Rosenbergs were innocent
- Alger Hiss was innocent
As I keep trying to say, it's less about what side you choose than about how you think. You can be leftist zealot or rightist zealot, and I honestly don't see much difference between them. Or you can at least try to operate at the level of trying to view all the evidence, trying to understand where other people are coming from, accept that the world doesn't consist of black and white, etc etc.
The difference is that the leftist zealots don't comprise 30% of the electorate, so who gives a f what they think.
However I know of few leftist freaks, maybe the squad and their followers. Almost the entire R Congress is nuts.
The squad qualify as centrists. American politics has no left wing.
this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yes!!! Both sides for the win! Bonus points if name99 can find an example of elected Democrats attempting to stage a coup and overthrow an election!
Oh come on! Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Joe Biden all staged coups, by underhandedly getting more (electoral college) votes than the god-annointed Republican incumbents. All three unfairly went around criticizing the incumbents, and hypnotized their audiences into voting for them. They even conspired with media outlets to bribe them into airing their propaganda.
I can't speak for the younger generations but those of us who were around when Watergate was happening know very well that it wasn't the burglary that got Nixon, it was the attempted cover-up. I don't know anybody my age who believes that Nixon ordered the Watergate break-in.
There were, and are, a lot of suspicions around the Iranian hostage issue, but as you say no definite evidence, and again I don't know anybody who lived through it who thinks otherwise.
Finally, Trump clearly is a Russian sympathizer; it is not proved that he is, or was, a Russian operative, but his actions are certainly suggestive of being, at minimum, a fellow traveller.
"Watergate was happening know very well that it wasn't the burglary that got Nixon, it was the attempted cover-up." This is complete crap. If Nixon had admitted right away that he had ordered the burglary, he wouldn't have finished his first term, and would have served prsion time. And then Spiro Agnew would still have gone to prison, making two consecutive republican presidents impeached and removed from office and sent to prison. So contrary to morons like you, Nixon's coverup, while not perfect, was more successful than not.
Calling people morons does not advance your argument.
I think you miss the point.
There was no proof of a crime, but there was proof of an illegal attempted cover up of something. That something may have just been an embarrassment instead of a crime, but that really doesn't matter once you commit an illegal coverup
There seems to be clear evidence that the wrong person is being called a moron here. Nixon's cover-up was a total failure; the burglars were caught and prosecuted and Nixon and a whole bunch of his senior subordinates were driven from office and some of them did jail time. The only way that the cover-up could be described as having succeeded in the slightest is if you assume that Nixon DID order the break-in, and there's no evidence of that.
"- Nixon ordered the Watergate break-in
- Reagan made a deal with the Iranians to release the hostages before the election
- Trump was (in some unclear, but definite way) a Russian "operative"
All three seem to have rather less real evidence behind them than, say, Whitewater. But it's basically part of the Democratic creed that you have to believe all three unconditionally."
There is more evidence for any and all of those 3 than Whitewhateverburger. It's not part of the "Democratic creed" (few people would even think of the first 2, historically illegal ratfucks though they are). It's just simple truth/probability.
William Casey committed did illegal shit: https://newrepublic.com/article/172324/its-settled-reagan-campaign-delayed-release-iranian-hostages
No direct evidence for Nixon, but the destruction of key tapes on his orders and the circumstantial evidence goes beyond a reasonable doubt: https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/nixon-40th-anniversary-order-the-watergate-break-msna387256
As for Trump, whether he was an "operative" of Russia is immaterial to his repeated collaboration with Russia. Whether intentionally or not, he was doing things Putin's government wanted him to do.
So... ya trollin', bro? Because it sure looks like you are.
Meanwhile, Nixon ordered the Ellsberg break-in and tax records of various "enemies."
Throughout the 90s I asked right-wingers what exactly the Clintons did that was illegal in the Whitewater thing. Not one could ever give an answer. Yet it was an eight-year, open-ended witch hunt.
He got a blow job from someone other than his wife, and then lied about it!
You just have to keep investigating until the truth is revealed.
nane99 is either a diehard "bothsides" guy, or extremely forgetful. I certainly remember the presentation of a cake & Bible (!) to the Iranians, which constituted a violation of US law prohibiting US citizens outside of aithorized federal officials to negotiate anything with a foreign government. But I don't recall any real dispute about the facts that it was a Reagan initiative - or any action taken against him or his campaign.
And Watergate? I think if it as being like certain actions taken by trump supporters, whether in his administration or just mega-fans: what he doesn't endorse officially, he emcourages/instigates as stochastic terrorism.
Sure seems to be diehard "bothsides guy", which in my experience is just somebody who's mad that they can't justify voting for Republicans anymore and are upset that their other option isn't conservative enough.
"So... ya trollin', bro? Because it sure looks like you are."
Please. name99 has a track record here. He's a Republican troll.
Well let's see. I don't recall any testimony that Nixon ordered the Watergate break- in that was itself a small part of the Republican skullduggery during the 72 election. But he certainly was involved in the hush money payments. He also was certainly involved in disrupting LBJ's effort to get out of Vietnam in 1968.
The timing of the Iranian hostage release was certainly suspicious. I never heard of any proof of activity by the Reagan campaign to arrange it. It could of been the Iranian government's own idea. It is a fact though that Reagan's government broke the law by selling weapons to Iran. It is also a fact that Reagan's government broke the law by using the funds from these sales to support counter-revolutionary movements in central America. A bunch of Reagan's people went to jail for that until Bush sprung them.
It is also a fact that Trump's campaign sought help from the Russian government. It is a fact that Trump asked the Russians for help on TV. It is a fact that Trump's campaign manager was sharing detailed polling information from swing states with a man known to have contacts with Russian intelligence in the months just prior to the 2016 election. And, my recollection is that Mueller obtained indictments against 20 odd Russians involved in 2016 election interference in addition to the guilty pleas and convictions obtained against a number of Trump campaign operatives.
I never heard of any real evidence of any criminal activity or malfeasance of any kind concerning either of the Clintons. And I've got to say that I came to kind of despise old Bill as his administration wore on and was kind of hoping they'd find something. They never did.
I'm willing to concede the guilt of the Rosenberg's, and I think I heard that Hiss was guilty as well. S & V are too ancient to be of interest to me. But if you are going to bring up ancient history, let me point out that many members of the House and Senate in the 1930s and early 1940s were acting as agents of Nazi Germany. Most, if not all, of them were Republicans. Traitors then, traitors now.
Shit, I've just spent all this time on a troll haven't I?
Hell, in for a penny...in for a pound. Let's not forget that Bushy Junior's administration knowingly lied to the Congress, the American people, and the World to get us into a totally illegal and unnecessary war in Iraq. A war resulting in the deaths of a couple of hundred thousand people. A war that cost us thousands of dead Americans, tens of thousands of crippled Americans, and trillions of dollars that could have been spent on fighting global warming (for example).
More to the point, the Bushy II government committed vast numbers of war crimes. That the only person to go to jail for torture was some damn National Guard sergeant is itself a crime.
Excellent insight I'd say. I enjoyed your post, so there's that. 😄
Thanks
I agree, SC-Dem has done us a big favor with his accurate memory run...when other people are sprouting nonsense, we need people like SC-Dem to remind us what the truth is.
I lived through all of this and even I had to take a pause, going that isn't right...but SC-Dem put me back on the right track...so thanks to SC-Dem are due. Best Wishes, Traveller
Sacco and Vanzetti did not receive a fair trial but as time has gone on evidence of their guilt has trickled out.
"All three seem to have rather less real evidence behind them than, say, Whitewater. " Actually, the first two have been irrefutably proven to be true. And no serious person ever believed the third. The actual claim was the Trump campaign was colluding with Russian intelligence. And again, irrefutably proven to be true.
None of us lefties think Trump is smart enough for the Russians to have thought he could be an agent. They’re just happy he’s a moron. The stupid stuff he did served their interests well enough.
Hey! This looks like a good place to reiterate my 2016 conspiracy theory:
Back in 2016 polls showed Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were very close in Florida. Clinton and her team decided to campaign in Florida to try to win it. Trump and his team went to places like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania and managed to take those states away from Clinton. Florida, it turned out was not close at all. An easy Trump victory. His team was credited with a genius strategic move based on this.
In 2019 the Mueller report indicated that the Russians had breached Florida’s election computers. Republicans Ron DeSantis and Marco Rubio confirmed this was true and Rubio said they were in a position to change the results, but didn’t.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/us/florida-russia-hacking-election.html
Is there some reason anyone should accept this? Would Republicans accept Nancy Pelosi and Gavin Newsom making such a claim if the tables were turned?
When Trump lost in 2020 be blamed tampering with election computers. One thing we’ve learned about Republicans is that every accusation is an admission. Since Trump’s “victory” in 2016 may have been via the aid of Russians hacking our election system isn’t it reasonable to think that Trump thinks his defeat was the Democrats doing what he did? Is it possible that the “genius” move of campaigning elsewhere while Clinton spun her wheels on Florida, was because the Trump campaign knew Florida was in the bag? If there was evidence that a foreign country tampered with the election computers in the states Trump lost how would that be reported? How would the insurrection be viewed?
OK, I’m kidding. But I’m kidding on the square.
It's hard to imagine a case having less evidence than Whitewater.
A plausible conversation would be something like:
James: "Hey, Joe, I'm in a short term cash crunch. I've a payment coming in six weeks, but need to borrow some money until then. Do you have a spare $200K lying around?"
I sure wish I could loan my brother $200,000.
I expect it's likely that Joe knew from where and when then money would be coming. Does it matter?
Short answer- no. Assuming he didn’t think his brother was doing anything illegal.
Why would you "expect" that?
Wait wait wait wait wait!
They're saying a hospital funneled money to Biden through a bribe in 2018..
when he wasn't in government at all?
While virtually every entity with interests in the US Executive Branch rented hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars worth of stays at Trump properties, and the Saudis encased his son in law in gold or something.
Right.
Yes. Also note that in 2018, Joe Biden had formally retired from politics. So any prospect of futue executive authority at the highest levels of the Federal government was dead.
How is it that any House Committee is doing any work right now? There's no speaker.
It is not work. It is partisan propaganda.
Talking to a Republican is like contemplating an Oreo cookie made of anise and fried lice and held together with the tallow of an unclaimed corpse, 'Hey, I'm an Oreo, what are you looking at?'
Clowns they surely are, but that doesn't make them any less dangerous. The Republican base are like Pavlov's dogs - all Trump/Jordan/Comer/Fox etc has to do is bray the right words, and they respond with spitting fury. The kind of fury we saw on January 6.
Right now right-wing websites have thousands of comments from readers hysterical with rage that finally Comer has the smoking gun proving the president takes bribes and it's not even a story in the lamestream media!!! This is a movement eager to believe lies, led by recklessly irresponsible fools willing to tell them. It's not going to end well any time soon.
Wait-- $200,000? One time? To repay a loan? Okay, that's a lot for most of us, but haven't these dodoheads been screaming about millions, tens of millions, god alone knows how much, that the "Biden crime family" has supposedly been extorting from god knows how many sources (and all without a single Chinese patent given to them under suspicious circumstances)? And the only thing they can show us is one comparatively piddling loan repayment? At this rate it would take Joe centuries to pile up the kind of money they're talking about. Millennia, even. Something something laboring mightily and bringing forth a mouse. Sheesh.
But, but, but....if you squint just right...
Please put "Biden Crime Family" in scare quotes.
+1
Yes, & I often do that with their party name. It's not as though they're channeling or invoking the name of Lincoln, Eisenhower, or even Rockefeller.
But to the point if their excited announcement: they seem not to understand even basic English, labeling this a "direct" payment. It is impossible to reply to the torrent of lies.
Median wage earning brothers often make and repay $200,000 loans to and from each other in America.
$200K was a month's KFC bill when Orange Il Duce was in the WH.
$200K is just slightly less than the cost of operating Airforce One for 1 hour, so a whole lot of flight hours used to send that Orange fuckhead to NJ or FL practically every weekend.
Didn't Kushner get like $2B from the Saudis a few months after the evil hoard left the WH? Wasn't Kushner like his most senior advisor for everything, including negotiating with the Saudis? I think $2B is bigger than $200K, but can't really do math anymore.
Yes. Kushner, after spending his whole career in real estate, suddenly decided after leaving the Trump Administration that he would start working in private equity. And the Saudi sovereign wealth fund, having literally an entire world of investment opportunities to choose from, chose to invest $2B with this noob.
And yet R's keep insisting the other guys are corrupt.
Dim Jim doesn't know what the word "direct" means.
Everyone knows that the best way to take a bribe is to loan money out and get it right back with no interest and end up right where you started!