The Biden Presidency

But life's easier when you have plenty of help, isn't it? So your only response to my (and millions of others) concerns about this complete lack of mainstream media coverage of Hunter Biden as opposed to Trump's children, is that he didn't go on hundreds of foreign trips with his father during his vice presidency, that it was only a few dozen, and therefore there was NO WAY anything suspicious could have happened? At least he didn't make public any pictures of his children like the sinister Ivanka Trump, he'd a been in trouble then!It's why liberals can't do well in successful debate shows, talk shows, their arguments just don't hold up. The way they double down, when confronted with obvious media bias, with the drastic changes in the Democrat party over just a few decades is both amusing and sad. I'll leave y'all alone for awhile now, so you can continue with your un-opposed love fests.

The response is that YOU lied (or just didn't bother to find the truth), so it's hard to take YOUR suspicions seriously. Well, nobody can be expected to back up every argument in real time on a "debate show". But note that YOUR argument was the one that didn't stand up. As I have pointed out before, the roughest rides I get are from people who are "on my side". Everything I post I expect to be corrected by the smart people. They are skeptical of everything, especially their own "side".

Let us consider this alleged “gallop”First, my invention was solely to examine your source, introducing no additional claims or arguments beyond that. That is hardly comparable to a Gish Gallop which is a barrage of assertions without investigating the evidence. The “gallop” seems to be more on your part.Second, you asserted that (Message 181)My intervention did not make it any harder for you to muster actual proof. So unless you mean that you can’t get away with falsely claiming to have evidence this is hardly relevant.Also about not conceding points…You raised the assertion that (Message 161)And at that time you only had two people responding to you. Not much of a gang.Even after it was pointed out that it was highly implausible you carried on with it, instead of dropping it to focus on stronger points.In Message 171 you tried to support the claim with a video from Fox News claiming “hundreds of flights”In Message 190 you tried to support your claim with this absurd argument: Now I don’t doubt that children - as children - get driven on many short trips. However adult children do not, and short trips are hardly comparable to even a domestic flight. Unless you think that Joe Biden regularly too Hunter to church- for instance - on AirForce 2 it really doesn’t make a lick of sense.
Again, if the claim is unimportant and you feel overwhelmed it would make far more sense to drop it than to waste time with obvious nonsense.To pile absurdity on absurdity in Message 193 you accused Pressi of not having read it, as if that would make the argument any less absurd.In Message 203 - the message I replied to - you introduced the assertion that Judicial Watch supported the claim. In reality the article referred only to 411 trips - without specifying that they were either air trips or saying Joe Biden was present. (Indeed the only number for air trips it gave was 23).In Message 205 you went on and claimed that the Fox video got the information on the number fo flights from Judicial Watch. When in fact the information on Judicial Watch contradicted it.Again it seems a poor use of time to make two posts trying to back up a supposedly minor point - without even determining that the supposed evidence actually supported the point. It seems a rather clear example of the inability to drop even a hopelsssly implausible point.And none of this is the fault of the “gang”. Your bad choices are all on you. You didn’t have to make the claim in the first place. You didn’t have to keep on trying and failing to support it. You didn’t have to grossly misrepresent Judicial Watch. And you did all those things before my post went through.The problem isn’t the “gang”. The problem is you. Maybe you should try to fix it instead of blaming other people for your faults. That’s what it means to take personal responsibility.

Come on, marc9000, haven’t you got another lie you can disgust us with? Something about Hunter grabbing Pelosi by the pussy with video that the mainstream media won’t show because we live in a vast liberal conspiracy of Hunter denialism?Just like the typical creationist always has another stupidity to fart out I am certain your Reich-wing anti-American handlers have more shit for you to throw at us in trying to destabilize our society. They keep a personnel file on you at GlavSet, don’t they, or are they not anti-American enough for you either?

A couple of questions for you before I depart. And your only reason for doing that was because you thought Percy might not be capable of doing it, or wouldn't think of doing it. Then when he said "I was gonna say that!!" you and him can then have a slap-on-the-back fest. Fun for you I guess, but doesn't appeal to me much personally. I don't see how a "barrage of assertions" is a problem for a barrage of posters, a barrage of anger etc. But you're probably right, not comparable. (but the reverse of your opinion of which is more severe) One of my several opponents (let's see....it was Percy) made a big deal of the number of trips Hunter took. From Message 183 -what I said there, to a message he didn't respond to.

quote:

---

You're making a big deal of the number of times. That's actually a very minor detail. I don't care if it was only 5 times, if ONE of them involved Hunter's using his father's influence to enhance his own multi-million dollar business deals involving international energy usage, and therefore politics, and our news media covers it up, it's a serious problem that could involve U.S. economics at best, or U.S. national security at worst.

---

What evidence did I falsely claim to have? Do you, like the others, believe that the number of trips and their destination were a big part of my argument? You, like all of them, missed my earlier paragraph that I re-quoted above? You, like the others, believe that I KNEW that not all of those 411 trips were with his father, that I thought if they were within the U.S. or without his father that they were irrelevant? So I lied and covered that up? You made good points, I made a small mistake by saying they were all on Air Force 2, but it would have been a much bigger mistake if trips within the U.S., or trips without his father, automatically are always without suspicion, but they're not. Does the fact that they weren't all trips with his father make you believe, like the rest of gang, that it's now clear that the mainstream media is entirely balanced in how they treat all presidential children? Here's a hint, much / most of the attacks against Trump's children were for when they were not with him, and were due to their activities that were confined within the U.S. border. Two people responding yes, but how many more reading, and gathering up rage for future posts? Hard to keep count of such things when dealing with gang gallop. It was the strongest point my opponents were making! They don't? My elderly dad rode with me over a hundred times in the last 8 years of his life, mainly because his eyesight was failing too badly for him to be able to drive. It makes sense if they were involved in business deals in China and the Ukraine, with "big guy" Joe's political clout being involved. Judicial Watch supported the "hundreds of trips" claim, that's all I was referring to. Unless, like the gang, you believe that domestic trips / trips without his father are of NO INTEREST to the general public, whether they concerned his experiences in lobbying, his law experiences, or maybe just a supply run for some more crack cocaine. Unimportant, if you're the mainstream media, or Hollywood's late-night clowns. "411 trips" - Judicial Watch. "traveled with his father, AND got secret service protection on hundreds of trips" - the Fox News chic. Where's the contradiction? The Fox news chic didn't lie, though she was being tricky. She's a commentator, not a reporter. Do you believe that Trump haters who masquerade as reporters, like Jim Acosta and Johathan Karl (to name only 2 of hundreds) don't get just a little tricky in some of their reporting? You're probably right, I guess I tend to do that because most of the points I make go un-responded to, by ANY gang member. See Message 183, and Message 204 as two examples. All I'd like to do, is get to a point where we can agree to disagree. So before I go, so I'm clear, you agree with the others that since I made a mistake about the destinations of Hunter's trips, that I LIED, and because of that, my entire point is void, and that's proof that the mainstream media is perfectly balanced in how they cover / covered Trumps children versus how they treat Hunter Biden?

Well, marc9000, I usually don't reply to you because I don't see much point in piling on. And I assum that (piling on) is what you mean by "gang gallop". I'm usually satisfied with the replies that others make. I'm not gathering up any rage. Maybe I am laughing at you. But you aren't worth getting angry. I would be okay with that. But it would help if you didn't always come across as angry and on the attack.

I think I’ll take a different tack than nwr. I’m going to gather some more rage. In fact I’m going to get incensed ... well, as much as I can muster these days.I will not agree to disagree. Not with marc9000. Not on this.You see, I have a problem. I have lots and lots of loads of problems with life, the universe and everything and that includes problems with political motivations.One such problem I am having is understanding what would motivate a person to spread, no matter how laid-back and pleasantly, half-truths so politically slanted with what appears to be malicious intent knowing they’re going to be called out. The lies are bad enough but the twisting of data and use of emotion-laden words to manufacture corruption from nothing, in this case, looks like political payback.The alt-Reich Trumpsters appear to be pissed that the Trump brood got caught with their hands and both feet, neck deep in every manner of contractor’s and vendor’s cookie jars red handed. Authorities will take years to figure out all the backroom deals (especially covid stuff in New York). Corruption on a level not seen since Harding and Coolidge combined.So that’s what we seem to have here. A mouthpiece from the Trumpette-iverse spouting trash, spreading fake news, manufacturing corruption from innuendo and vapor, trying to destroy an American President because he isn’t Trump. How wonderfully patriotic. God Bless America.No, I will not agree to disagree involving such subterfuge and the sabotage of our social fabric at so basic a level. Why? Because history has shown us what comes next with 'these people'. The reich-wing must be stopped at every turn. Especially in a venue such as EvC where reality must be prized.

The odd think about this, is that they claim to be Christians. Yet what they are doing is thoroughly unchristian. At best, they are fake Christians.

quote:

---

And your only reason for doing that was because you thought Percy might not be capable of doing it, or wouldn't think of doing it. Then when he said "I was gonna say that!!" you and him can then have a slap-on-the-back fest. Fun for you I guess, but doesn't appeal to me much personally.

---

My reason for doing it is that I checked your “evidence” and found it to contradict your assertions. Your invention has no basis in fact. Indeed the check is quite easy - you could have done it. And certainly Percy could.

quote:

---

I don't see how a "barrage of assertions" is a problem for a barrage of posters, a barrage of anger etc. But you're probably right, not comparable. (but the reverse of your opinion of which is more severe)

---

It is interesting that you see a victory for falsehood as the preferable state. But entirely consistent with your behaviour.

quote:

---

One of my several opponents (let's see....it was Percy) made a big deal of the number of trips Hunter took. From Message 183 -what I said there, to a message he didn't respond to.

---

Yet you didn’t follow up by dropping the claim. Indeed the real point was that you were insufficiently sceptical of an implausible claim. A point you have gone on to prove.

quote:

---

What evidence did I falsely claim to have?

---

The Judicial Watch report of course.

quote:

---

Do you, like the others, believe that the number of trips and their destination were a big part of my argument?

---

Nobody seems to think that, although you’ve certainly given it more attention than you say it deserves.

quote:

---

You, like all of them, missed my earlier paragraph that I re-quoted above? You, like the others, believe that I KNEW that not all of those 411 trips were with his father, that I thought if they were within the U.S. or without his father that they were irrelevant?

---

Apparently you missed the place in my post where I point out that you repeatedly returned to the claim. And indeed it is hardly likely that all of those trips are relevant at all. And if you knew that the 411 trips were mostly within the US and if you knew that there was no information on whether his father was with him or not would you really have written Message 203 or Message 205 ?

quote:

---

You made good points, I made a small mistake by saying they were all on Air Force 2, but it would have been a much bigger mistake if trips within the U.S., or trips without his father, automatically are always without suspicion, but they're not.

---

The idea that all trips should automatically be considered “suspicious” is far worse. And that’s what you’re pushing.

quote:

---

Does the fact that they weren't all trips with his father make you believe, like the rest of gang, that it's now clear that the mainstream media is entirely balanced in how they treat all presidential children? Here's a hint, much / most of the attacks against Trump's children were for when they were not with him, and were due to their activities that were confined within the U.S. border.

---

I think that Trump’s open nepotism goes far beyond anything that has been shown for Biden - and that is a relevant factor. Hunter Biden has not been given a cabinet position, for instance. And that is a relevant factor.

quote:

---

Two people responding yes, but how many more reading, and gathering up rage for future posts? Hard to keep count of such things when dealing with gang gallop.

---

And yet another ridiculous attempt to blame others. You weren’t “dealing with a gang gallop”. And you don’t have to deal with readers who aren’t responding. If you’re worried about “rage” maybe you could ease up on the nastiness, the dishonesty and the false accusations.

quote:

---

It was the strongest point my opponents were making!

---

If that was true it only makes your behaviour even more foolish. Why not drop a weak point if you have better ones? Why draw attention to it by writing two posts claiming to have the evidence - when you haven’t even looked at the supposed evidence ?

quote:

---

They don't? My elderly dad rode with me over a hundred times in the last 8 years of his life, mainly because his eyesight was failing too badly for him to be able to drive.

---

Again, hardly a comparable situation. And likely these, too, would have been mostly local trips.

quote:

---

It makes sense if they were involved in business deals in China and the Ukraine, with "big guy" Joe's political clout being involved.

---

No, the comparison still does not make sense. Nor does it make sense that the Vice President would make hundreds of trips to those two countries without it attracting wide attention.

quote:

---

Judicial Watch supported the "hundreds of trips" claim, that's all I was referring to

---

“Hunter Biden made hundreds of trips” is hardly a damning claim worth supporting. Further in Message 203 you were answering the assertion: That Hunter Biden made “hundreds of trips” which were not even “flying to foreign countries” is not an answer to that point at all.And in Message 205 you were expressly defending the Fox claim of hundreds of flights. I hardly think that you meant to indicate that Fox News were incompetents who seriously misrepresented Judicial Watch.So no, this is just another dishonest excuse. You were claiming hundreds of flights, not just hundreds of trips.

quote:

---

"411 trips" - Judicial Watch. "traveled with his father, AND got secret service protection on hundreds of trips" - the Fox News chic. Where's the contradiction? The Fox news chic didn't lie, though she was being tricky. She's a commentator, not a reporter. Do you believe that Trump haters who masquerade as reporters, like Jim Acosta and Johathan Karl (to name only 2 of hundreds) don't get just a little tricky in some of their reporting?

---

So your defence of Fox News is that you badly misrepresented their claim. Because in Message 205 you indicate that Fox asserted 400 international flights. Not 400 trips of which only a small proportion (~15%) were international flights.

quote:

---

You're probably right, I guess I tend to do that because most of the points I make go un-responded to, by ANY gang member. See Message 183, and Message 204 as two examples.

---

I rather doubt that. Why waste time on a weak point - and embarrass yourself badly doing it - when you have stronger points? Indeed the number of responses is due to it being rather obviously implausible and the up fact that you made it despite that (and your uncritical acceptance of the Fox News claim - which you now say that didn’t even make!)

quote:

---

All I'd like to do, is get to a point where we can agree to disagree. So before I go, so I'm clear, you agree with the others that since I made a mistake about the destinations of Hunter's trips, that I LIED

---

I wouldn’t use that as an example of you lying. However it is certainly true that you made a false claim, tried to prop it up with a ridiculous analogy and when you claimed to have the evidence the actual evidence refuted the claim.

quote:

---

and because of that, my entire point is void, and that's proof that the mainstream media is perfectly balanced in how they cover / covered Trumps children versus how they treat Hunter Biden?

---

It is certainly a reason not to trust your unsupported assertions. As if we need another one. There have been rather a lot of examples.

“…. before you depart?”You come here, shit on the carpet, then wish us good day?You're not interested in intelligent debate or establishing facts, you just want to spread your faeces around as far and wide as you can then run off laughing.What is it that you think you are doing marc?

Oh, they are Christians, real Christians.All of the Goats were real Christians.Interestingly for hundreds of years after Christ the Goats were not seen as non-Christians and in the iconography they were overseen by an angel; often a Blue, Angelic, Beautiful angel.The concepts of the Fallen Angels and of Hell were far more the creation of artists and poets than of theologists. It was only during the dumification of Christianity to sell it to the illiterate that things were reduced to the modern product mostly through the then medium of Morality Plays.

If traveling with a Secret Service detail with your father is "suspicious" then this from The Trump family is taking 12x more protected trips than the Obama family is interesting:

quote:

---

Last fiscal year, the Trump family took more trips that required Secret Service protection than the Obama family took in seven, according to a budget document released by the Treasury Department. On average, Obama’s family took 133.3 protected trips per year, while the Trump family has taken an average of 1,625 annually.

---

If Marc were anti-Trump instead of pro then he would use this article to argue that Don Jr. took hundreds of trips with his father where they hashed out nefarious plans, some of which we know explicitly about, such as Trump Sr.'s instructions to Don Jr. about what to say about the meeting in Trump Tower with the Russians.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Typo.

Pointing out news that those of you on the far left don't get, because you rely only on the mainstream media. I take no pleasure in making everyone so angry that most of their posts don't specifically address anything I say, therefore making them violate forum rule #10.Though none of the gang will admit it, they learn from some of the things I say, because what I say represents what roughly half of the U.S. population thinks. Now before you and the gang sputter with rage at this post, remember, people don't get angry when lies are told about them, they get angry when the truth is told about them.

Of course we know explicitly about them, because the mainstream media is always frantically on top of it. Your quote mentioned the Trump family and the Obama family. This is the BIDEN thread. (forum rule #2)Your link did mention that during Biden's vice presidency that even he and his 2 living children didn't take as many trips as the wicked Trump family. Biden also has a daughter, that undoubtedly comes as a shock to many fans of the mainstream media, who never get anywhere near what Biden's children have ever been up to. Who knows, Biden's daughter might not even be on crack cocaine like Hunter. We'll probably never know, even Fox news has better things to do than spy on the Biden family with any means similar to the mainstream media's obsession with the Trump family.Taa taa for now, if this thread shrivels and dies over the next 6 months in spite of everything Bidan and AOC are sure to screw up over that time period, I might check back in if I'm not banned. (being on offense concerning a presidential administration is much easier than being on defense, wouldn't you agree?

There mostly isn't a "far left", just a more left central position and the extreme right, which is what you are.