VakAttack

All info us that 74 kg is a tough cut for Dake at this point. He usually looks off early but is fine later in the day. Hopefully he's ready to put an end to Cinderelpolous.

It was on this day we became a true descendant of themat.com.

Again, you're just making things up. I didn't say the opinions were false, I said they were just opinions without any presented factual underpinning. The Republicans are the ones holding the hearings, they have access to all this information, it's their job to prove their assertions. I didn't imply anything, I very directly stated that no actual evidence of their allegations has been presented. They present a benign fact (for example, Hunter Biden flew on Air Force 2) and tie it into innuendo but don't present any evidence for the innuendo. You think you're being intelligent, but you're just saying things, calling them facts, and then proceeding as if you've proved them. No. Circumstantial evidence would require some cause/effect. For example, if my fingerprints are found at a house, and John Doe is found murdered at that house, my fingerprints could be presented as circumstantial evidence at a trial for that murder. In this case you would have to show whatever benefit that business partner of Hunter's received from Joe.

You saying something is true doesn't make it true. Archer's testimony doesn't refute what you're saying it does. Hunter making money in China, Joe being wrong about that doesn't mean he's lying, just wrong. As to the second paragraph, I never said the investigation had to stop. If they want to utilize their resources this way, have at it. Again, you're making suppositions

I didn't say it can't be true. This is false. I said no evidence of these allegations has actually be presented, just benign facts included with innuendo to make them seem more substantive than they are.

Truly incredible to watch the same people see Trump charged with actual crimes multiple times with tons of evidence presented cover there eyes and stick their fingers in their ears but also insist that Joe Biden is a participant in crimes with no evidence presented and no charges

Ok. Vice President's son traveled with him. Everything else is just supposition. That's not how proving something works. Just because the House Oversight Committee says something happened or insinuates it doesn't make it true. They actually need to produce evidence to prove something. For instance, if my parents buy plane tickets for my whole family to go to Colorado, and I happen to buy drugs in Colorado, my parents aren't involved in my business or in the crime.

LOL. Just completely outside of reality, man. It's going to be Biden vs. Trump unless one of them dies. And, once again, most Is are going to choose Biden over Trump. I do love your characterization of "fair-minded" which seems to be "people that agree with you". Also, the people who feel he "appears to be part of an influence peddling scheme" are Republicans. Nobody else cares about this stuff.

A truly incredible shift from "we have all this damning evidence" to "just believe us" from the right win of American politics on this issue. "Look, he committed this crime. Can we prove it? No. Do we have any actual evidence? Also no. But trust us." Y'all's insistence that Joe HAS to have known something that his drug addict son was doing 1. Belies reality. 2. Ignores the way drug addicts typically behave.

You're making assumptions and treating them as facts. Also talk to a father with an addiction for a son.

So you and this Committee keep claiming, without providing any proof.

I have no doubt that Hunter has been actively trading on his father's name. It's an American failson tradition. HBO just finished showing one of the greatest shows of all time on the topic.

The associate didn't say that Joe Biden talked business for one. Like, very explicitly said he did not talk business.

Hunter is definitely going to have to drop out now.

Truly a devastating blow to Hunter Biden's presidential aspirations.

What correction?

Most logos are lame. Except for MatScouts, of course.

Not really. A pro‐Obama PAC made an unfair ad and the ad was reported on, all of the mainstream articles I can find provide full context to the claims and seem to at least insinuate the unfairness of the ad. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/priorities-ad-ties-mitt-romney-to-cancer-death/2012/08/07/d723d8c0-e084-11e1-8fc5-a7dcf1fc161d_blog.html https://www.factcheck.org/2012/08/is-romney-to-blame-for-cancer-death/ https://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/08/woman-mentioned-in-priorities-ad-died-in-06-131332

There were many claims made by various attorneys. As to the initial insinuation that this potential evidentiary violation lead to his early release, that part is simply not true. As to this new direct question regarding video not being disclosed, that appears to be in reference to two 10 second clips. I don't obviously have access to either sides actual file, but all I know is the federal prosecutors say that one of the clips had been previously disclosed but one seems to have been disclosed well after Chansley's conviction. That could be considered a discovery violation but is unlikely to have any affect on a conviction, especially since he took a plea deal which typically waives most of your rights to appeal. Sources: "Albert Watkins, the attorney who handled Chansley’s plea and sentencing, tells TIME that the new footage did not play any role in his former client’s release. “Absolutely no,” he says. “I have seen no indication of any filings related to the new footage. There are no docket entries indicating the same.” He notes that the plea agreement and sentencing imposed by the court permitted reduced time if Chansley undertook certain programs and behaved well while confined. The early release, he says, is most likely “based on a host of factors routinely taken into consideration by the U.S. Bureau of Prisons.” https://time.com/6267335/jan-6-qanon-shaman-jacob-chansley-released-early-prison/ "Prosecutors say that apart from 10 seconds that “implicated an evacuation route,” the rest of the video played by Carlson was released to Pezzola and Chansley by September 24, 2021, and the additional 10 seconds were released to all January 6 defendants on January 23, 2023." https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/03/12/politics/jacob-chansley-footage-tucker-carlson/index.html

A defense attorney.

The problem here is that you've made a claim and just assumed it's true for the purpose of making your argument. Not every death is a huge news story, tragic though it is to the deceased person's family and friends. A certain segment is trying to weaponize this tragedy with no evidence other than they were employed by the Obamas. It's the Seth Rich tragedy all over again.

Not really, no.

Truly incredible how many people will keep playing the same hits, over and over.

Any day now that will become actual value.

https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics/factcheck_3fae078e-8724-4c28-9340-2c154688af43 https://www.rferl.org/a/why-was-ukraine-top-prosecutor-fired-viktor-shokin/30181445.html This is just not accurate.