Biden document discovery is proof Dems ‘overplayed their hand’ on Trump

[Catman51]

They just wanted the documents back. Prosecution isn’t a priority.

Or they knew that they don't have a case, other than political.

 

[JoeB131]

He is transparent because the Republicans are going to start their own investigations. Investigation that would have led to "Joe, you signed these documents out 7 years ago but they are nowhere to be found".

Trump had been looking for dirt on Biden for 6 years, Comradesky...
Some GS-10 packed something in the wrong box.
It's just not the same.

Yeah, I think taking classified material is a criminal act. But still even then, you are arguing that Trump and Biden was simply incompetent. Not a better argument.

Nopesky... This is a honest mistake, probably by someone who has a GS-rating who got the task of packing up hundreds of documents, and put some of them in the wrong box.

 

[JoeB131]

With all due respect, Fork? That Trump/Biden election was decided by about 40,000 votes in four states. If the American people were provided the truth about Hunter Biden and Biden families dealings with Ukraine and China that election could very well have gone the other way. It was that close! If social media outlets hadn't censored the truth then it's very likely that Joe Biden would have lost that race.

Everyone heard about Hunter's unflattering selfies. Normal people didn't care.
Trump spent two years peddling these stories. Even got impeached over them. No one took him seriously.
The difference in those states was 250K votes, not 40K.

 

[pknopp]

Trump had been looking for dirt on Biden for 6 years,

Trump is incompetent. No surprise there.

 

[Oldestyle]

I don't deny there was censoring going on. I'm not convinced it was targeting conservatives. Since whatever access was granted was done by Musk who himself has a clear agenda. I always find it interesting that in the first release. It was emphasized what twitter did to sensor conservatives. Naming specific posts that Biden, then a PRIVATE CITIZEN asked to be removed from twittter. All of them dick picks from his son however much you try to deny it. But at the same time admitting the Trump administration led by PRESIDENT Trump did the same without specifying what they asked to be removed.

As to your "simple question" sure. As I've seen former federal prosecutors, active psychologist and dozens of other professions make joint statements. It's not hard to do in a time of whatsapp. I'm sure it was designed to damage Trump. You inferring it was Biden who coordinated it is simply that, an inference. It is equally possible they genuinely didn't like a president that chooses the word of Putin over their own assessments. Who takes the pension away of some of them or a dozen other reasons why Trump wasn't exactly a darling of the intelligence apparatus.

As I said make an effort to distinguish what you know and what you suspect and don't confuse them.

Why exactly aren't you convinced that Twitter and Facebook targeted conservatives for censoring, Fork? It's rather obvious that was what took place.

As for Musk's "agenda"? It appears he supports free speech and feels like Twitter has done things in the past to deny that to one half of the political spectrum. Exposing what Twitter did is hardly an "agenda"! It's cleaning up something that is obviously wrong if you believe in free speech. Trying to make that improper isn't fair to Musk. If he hadn't spent the money to buy Twitter would we ever know how out of control Twitter was when it came to censureship? I doubt it. People on the left would STILL be claiming that was nothing more than a right wing conspiracy theory not worthy of note!

 

[Oldestyle]

I don't deny there was censoring going on. I'm not convinced it was targeting conservatives specifically. Since whatever access was granted was done by Musk who himself has a clear agenda. I always find it interesting that in the first release. It was emphasized what twitter did to sensor conservatives. Naming specific posts that Biden, then a PRIVATE CITIZEN asked to be removed from twittter. All of them dick picks from his son however much you try to deny it. But at the same time admitting the Trump administration led by PRESIDENT Trump did the same without specifying what they asked to be removed.

As to your "simple question" sure. As I've seen former federal prosecutors, active psychologist and dozens of other professions make joint statements, entire unions endorse specific candidates all the time. It's not hard to do in a time of whatsapp and was done without it in the past. I'm sure it was designed to damage Trump. You inferring it was Biden who coordinated it is simply that, an inference. It is equally possible they genuinely didn't like a president that chooses the word of Putin over their own assessments. Who takes the pension away of some of them or a dozen other reasons why Trump wasn't exactly a darling of the intelligence apparatus.

As I said make an effort to distinguish what you know and what you suspect and don't confuse them.

I'm amused by your belief that those 50 former intelligence officials got together to write that letter on "Whatsapp", Fork! I'm more of an Occam's Razor kind of guy and the simplest explanation for that happening is that someone organized it and that person was actively trying to cover up a politically embarrassing story before the election! My question remains...who was that person or persons? 50 people who swore to defend the US from attack both foreign and domestic were somehow convinced to lie to the American people to influence a Presidential election. There should be consequences for that!

 

[forkup]

Why exactly aren't you convinced that Twitter and Facebook targeted conservatives for censoring, Fork? It's rather obvious that was what took place.

As for Musk's "agenda"? It appears he supports free speech and feels like Twitter has done things in the past to deny that to one half of the political spectrum. Exposing what Twitter did is hardly an "agenda"! It's cleaning up something that is obviously wrong if you believe in free speech. Trying to make that improper isn't fair to Musk. If he hadn't spent the money to buy Twitter would we ever know how out of control Twitter was when it came to censureship? I doubt it. People on the left would STILL be claiming that was nothing more than a right wing conspiracy theory not worthy of note!

Twitter by way of those released reports adhered to requests by Republicans to have certain posts removed. I'm sure the same applies to Facebook. If you are "targeting" a specific political party, you target them EXCLUSIVELY that's what targeting means.

In order to make a convincing case of it, you don't just require proof that certain posts are removed. You require that those post were removed unfairly. Either by ONLY removing their posts and not similar post by the other side or restrict access altogether based on political affiliation and not for instance the nature of the posts themselves.

I'll give an example. During the pandemic a lot of anti-vaxers were subject to types of censorship. Being it, warning lables, suspension, shadow banning, or whatever. So now the question is? Are they being banned because the majority is conservative, or are they banned because the content they are posting is considered a public health threat by the owners of the platforms, who are by the way, owners of private companies who are free to make those kinds of decision on their own.

Whatever the reason, undoubtably you would consider it being "targeted." However, I consider it a company taking social responsibility. But what it is not, is being banned over political affiliation. They are being banned over their content. Context matters.

 

[forkup]

I'm amused by your belief that those 50 former intelligence officials got together to write that letter on "Whatsapp", Fork! I'm more of an Occam's Razor kind of guy and the simplest explanation for that happening is that someone organized it and that person was actively trying to cover up a politically embarrassing story before the election! My question remains...who was that person or persons? 50 people who swore to defend the US from attack both foreign and domestic were somehow convinced to lie to the American people to influence a Presidential election. There should be consequences for that!

It is not the simplest explanation. The simplest explanation is that 50 former colleagues didn't like Trump didn't want him to be president and choose to try to accomplish that goal. I'm an Occam's Razor type of guy too. I prefer the explanation that don't require conspiracies.

 

[berg80]

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said Democrats “overplayed their hand”

What he didn't say is anything about the disparate circumstances surrounding the document discovery. The parallels begin and end with the fact docs were found. Trump knew he had possession of classified material.....Biden didn't (they were discovered when he was having his former office space vacated). Trump hid those docs from the NARA and FBI......Biden didn't. Trump initially refused to return the docs......Biden didn't. Trump lied about having returned all the docs......Biden didn't. The FBI got so concerned about Trump not having returned the docs a judge authorized a search of MAL.......Biden returned everything that was found, called for an investigation, and now a SP has been assigned.

If you can't see massive differences in these two story lines you are blind.

 

[forkup]

I'm amused by your belief that those 50 former intelligence officials got together to write that letter on "Whatsapp", Fork! I'm more of an Occam's Razor kind of guy and the simplest explanation for that happening is that someone organized it and that person was actively trying to cover up a politically embarrassing story before the election! My question remains...who was that person or persons? 50 people who swore to defend the US from attack both foreign and domestic were somehow convinced to lie to the American people to influence a Presidential election. There should be consequences for that!

Oh, And by the way it's only a belief in the sense that I think it the most likely explanation. I might very well be wrong.

In the absence of compelling evidence, I do not feel qualified to make actual assertions, just opinions. It is what I'm trying to explain to you. And what I feel you don't actually truly understand. It is something that is hard to understand to begin with, since in my experience most people confuse their opinions with facts all the time.

 

[Oldestyle]

Twitter by way of those released reports adhered to requests by Republicans to have certain posts removed. I'm sure the same applies to Facebook. If you are "targeting" a specific political party, you target them EXCLUSIVELY that's what targeting means.

In order to make a convincing case of it, you don't just require proof that certain posts are removed. You require that those post were removed unfairly. Either by ONLY removing their posts and not similar post by the other side or restrict access altogether based on political affiliation and not for instance the nature of the posts themselves.

I'll give an example. During the pandemic a lot of anti-vaxers were subject to types of censorship. Being it, warning lables, suspension, shadow banning, or whatever. So now the question is? Are they being banned because the majority is conservative, or are they banned because the content they are posting is considered a public health threat by the owners of the platforms, who are by the way private companies who are free to make those kinds of decision on their own.

Whatever the reason, undoubtably you would consider it being "targeted." However, I consider it a company taking social responsibility. But what it is not, is being banned over political affiliation. They are being banned over their content. Context matters.

With all due respect, Fork? What are you talking about when you claim that Twitter was even handed in handling what posts they removed? That's obviously not what happened and the emails that Musk has made public makes that quite clear.

As for the vax censorship? The ones that had their posts taken down from Twitter were people who questioned the vaccines and the policies of people like Fauci and Weingartner. If you DID question those policies you were labeled as someone spreading "misinformation" even if you were a respected medical doctor or researcher!

 

[Oldestyle]

It is not the simplest explanation. The simplest explanation is that 50 former colleagues didn't like Trump didn't want him to be president and choose to try to accomplish that goal. I'm an Occam's Razor type of guy too. I prefer the explanation that don't require conspiracies.

So I ask again. How did those 50 individuals get together to sign a letter like that right before the election? Who set that up, Fork? Was it the Biden campaign? If it was...do you have a problem with that?

 

[forkup]

What he didn't say is anything about the disparate circumstances surrounding the document discovery. The parallels begin and end with the fact docs were found. Trump knew he had possession of classified material.....Biden didn't (they were discovered when he was having his former office space vacated). Trump hid those docs from the NARA and FBI......Biden didn't. Trump initially refused to return the docs......Biden didn't. Trump lied about having returned all the docs......Biden didn't. The FBI got so concerned about Trump not having returned the docs a judge authorized a search of MAL.......Biden returned everything that was found, called for an investigation, and now a SP has been assigned.

If you can't see massive differences in these two story lines you are blind.

Something I said that would happen at 7 this morning by the way.

 

[Oldestyle]

Oh, And by the way it's only a belief in the sense that I think it the most likely explanation. I might very well be wrong.

In the absence of compelling evidence, I do not feel qualified to make actual assertions, just opinions. It is what I'm trying to explain to you. And what I feel you don't actually truly understand. It is something that is hard to understand to begin with, since in my experience most people confuse their opinions with facts all the time.

The absence of compelling evidence is what concerns me, Fork? Why DON'T we know who put together that letter? Why hasn't that been investigated? Why haven't those 50 people been subpoenaed to testify?

 

[Oldestyle]

I find it almost impossible to believe that 50 seasoned intelligence officers were all wrong about something this big...that they all believed it was the Russians and that the lap top wasn't real evidence of wrong doing by the Biden family! My belief is that they knew the lap top was real but they disliked Trump so much that they decided the end justified the means and lied to the American public.

 

[forkup]

With all due respect, Fork? What are you talking about when you claim that Twitter was even handed in handling what posts they removed? That's obviously not what happened and the emails that Musk has made public makes that quite clear.

As for the vax censorship? The ones that had their posts taken down from Twitter were people who questioned the vaccines and the policies of people like Fauci and Weingartner. If you DID question those policies you were labeled as someone spreading "misinformation" even if you were a respected medical doctor or researcher!

No, they don't. Musk has a POLITICAL agenda. And it is skewed towards conservatives. This is not an accusation but a statement of fact. Not only does he choose the reporters who have access. He also chooses to what they have access too. And even then, they admit TRUMP asked certain posts to be removed and Twitter COMPLIED. Also, a statement of fact. Yet you are certain enough to assert that ONLY conservatives were censored. I'm sorry but you can't thread that needle.

And I think you are missing my point. Not that I agree with your "respected scientists" but that's irrelevant. My point is that political affiliation didn't influence the decision to put those labels on their posts. It was the CONTENT of their post. It could have been Bernie Sanders questioning vaccine policies and he would have met the same faith.

You are trying to assert banning on the basis of political leaning. You cannot state that without making an inference not supported by facts.

 

[pknopp]

As I said early this morning.

Biden's classified records bumbling is a gift for Trump, and some high-profile figures say it closes the door on an indictment for the former president​

Biden's classified records bumbling is a gift for Trump, and some high-profile figures say it closes the door on an indictment for the former president

 

[forkup]

The absence of compelling evidence is what concerns me, Fork? Why DON'T we know who put together that letter? Why hasn't that been investigated? Why haven't those 50 people been subpoenaed to testify?

For what? For stating their opinion. I thought you were for free speech? Nothing in that letter was classified. It was the opinion of former intelligence people, that's it. Opinions are like a holes, yadda, yadda, yadda, remember?

 

[Oldestyle]

No, they don't. Musk has a POLITICAL agenda. And it is skewed towards conservatives. This is not an accusation but a statement of fact. Not only does he choose the reporters who have access. He also chooses to what they have access too. And even then, they admit TRUMP asked certain posts to be removed and Twitter COMPLIED. Also, a statement of fact. Yet you are certain enough to assert that ONLY conservatives were censored. I'm sorry but you can't thread that needle.

And I think you are missing my point. Not that I agree with your "respected scientists" but that's irrelevant. My point is that political affiliation didn't influence the decision to put those labels on their posts. It was the CONTENT of their post. It could have been Bernie Sanders questioning vaccine policies and he would have met the same faith.

You are trying to assert banning on the basis of political leaning. You cannot state that without making an inference not supported by facts.

LOL...with all due respect, Fork? Twitter BANNED Trump! That kind of shoots a HUGE hole in your claim that they were even handed! They weren't and I think deep down...you know it!

 

[BS Filter]

A normally intelligent person would learn, but they're cultic pawns. They just smile and move on to the next shit sandwich to be washed down with the Kool aid.