Miscellaneous Trump (12 Viewers)

[Huntn]

Anxiety surges as Donald Trump may be indicted soon: Why 2024 is 'the final battle' and 'the big one'​

Anxiety surges as Donald Trump may be indicted soon: Why 2024 is 'the final battle' and 'the big one'

Donald Trump's many legal problems – and calls for protests – have generated new fears of political violence and anxiety about the 2024 election.

www.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON – It looks like American politics is entering a new age of anxiety, triggered by an unprecedented legal development: The potential indictment of a former president and current presidential candidate.

Donald Trump's many legal problems – and calls for protests by his followers – have generated new fears of political violence and anxiety about the unknowable impact all this will have on the already-tense 2024 presidential election

I’ll reframe this is a more accurate way, Are Presidents above the law? This new age was spurred into existence when home grown dummies elected a corrupt, mentally ill, anti-democratic, would be dictator as President and don’t bother to hold him responsible for his crimes, don’t want to because in the ensuing mayhem and destruction, they think they will be better off. The man is actually advocating violence (not the first time). And btw, screw democracy too. If this feeling spreads, we are In deep shirt.

This goes beyond one treasonous Peice of work and out to all his minions. This is on you or should we be sympathetic to the idea of they can’t help being selfish suckers to the Nation’s detriment? Donald Trump is the single largest individual threat to our democracy and it‘s all going to boil down to will the majority of the GOP return to his embrace and start slinging his excrement to support him?

 

[TampaJoe]

Except, NONE of this is "Biden crime family" crap is TRUE! It is a false narrative that you have been fed and there is ample Congressional testimony to show these "truths" as false. Even the main guy feeding you this junk (Rep James Comer) couldn't even back it up. Hell, you know the thread, read it.

Biden Impeachment Inquiry Hearings

Impeachment Inquiry Hearing

madaboutpolitics.com

So I guess we just keep on keeping on.

 

[TampaJoe]

Yet you only want to discuss Democrats whenever Trump and his grifter family are brought up.

I want to discuss one standard. I spoke out against Trump. I spoke out against Biden. I advocate applying the same set of standards to both. Nobody appears to be willing to commit to that. I wonder why?

 

[Dragon]

I don’t think the GOP should launder money through shell companies anymore than I condone it for Democrats. One standard. We should question it all. Not every unethical activity is illegal. That isn’t the standard nor should it be. Are we saying that unethical conduct and corruption is okay as long as it is legal? Is that the standard now?

So tell me MT. What is the standard? Where do we draw the line? Unethical is okay as long as it isn’t illegal? Or do we need to draw a line at all? Cause that is what we have now. How is that working?

Breaking the law—something the Trump family has been accused of repeatedly—is a matter of legal fact, defined by established statutes and regulations. In contrast, what is considered unethical often depends on personal beliefs, cultural norms, or political ideology.

For example, many people would agree that marrying off a 12-year-old is unethical, yet there are factions within the MAGA Republican movement that have defended or enabled such practices under the guise of "parental rights" or religious freedom. Similarly, views on education vary dramatically: some believe it is unethical to teach children about gender, sexuality, or African American history, while others see the banning of these subjects as deeply unethical and a form of historical erasure or bigotry.

This illustrates a critical distinction: equating clear legal violations—such as using public office for personal financial gain—with subjective moral disagreements is fundamentally flawed. Ethics may be debated, but laws are codified and enforceable. When political leaders blur the line between the two, it serves to justify corruption and undermine the rule of law.

 

[Dragon]

I want to discuss one standard. I spoke out against Trump. I spoke out against Biden. I advocate applying the same set of standards to both. Nobody appears to be willing to commit to that. I wonder why?

Because they are not the same. One is a convicted fellon who keeps breaking the law. The other does not..

 

[Dragon]

So I guess we just keep on keeping on.

You mean the fake emails where the Maga republicans had played with cut and paste? That was debunked on the spot. Likewise the theory of Bidens brother where bank records clearly showed both the loan and the repayment. Those lies were debunked immediately the same day

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

So I guess we just keep on keeping on.

You need to pull your head from the sand and understand that this whole "both sides" mantra that you continue spiel is based on the lies you have been fed. There is only one side that has been actively tearing down the guardrails that curb corruption.

The GOP has...

• Fired IG's. They are responsible for identifying and routing out fraud, waste & abuse.
• Shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The agency's purpose is to prevent fraud and ensure fair practices in the financial industry.
• Directed the FBI to ignore "white collar Crimes".
• Currently engaged in market manipulation, "BUY NOW!"
• etc...

 

[Sendai]

I did not change the subject. Hunter Biden is and has never been a public employee. If he uses his fathers name well - while it is not morally right, he is still not breaking any laws as long as it does not lead to any actions by his father. The republicans never provided any evidence of that and they were turning every stone and even fabricating fake evidence in their attempts.

If there is evidence that an employee in the widest sense (included elected officials) is taking bribes or giving special treatment or abusing inside information, to enrich themselves or to attain unfair advantages, then I want them fully procecuted.

Jared is one very clear example of the later - as is Ivanka who got a large amount of chinese trademarks when she was part of Trumps official delegation when he visited China. Trademarks that had previously been denied.

Hunter worked at the Commerce Department from 1998 to 2001.

 

[Dragon]

Hunter worked at the Commerce Department from 1998 to 2001.

Which was +10 YEARS before working for Burisma. You know better than using an argument like that! So your claim is that anyone who has ever worked in a public office should be suspect if they take a job in a private company more than 10 years later ?

To put things in perspective

Hunters Jobs between 2001

2001–2008:​

• Co-founder of Oldaker, Biden & Belair LLP
  A Washington, D.C.–based lobbying and law firm. Hunter Biden was a partner, and the firm specialized in legal and lobbying services.
• Lobbyist
  During this period, Biden was involved in lobbying, but left the company due to concerns about conflicts of interest, before his father became Vice President in 2009.

2006–2009:

• Appointed by President George W. Bush to the Board of Amtrak (2006)
  • Served on the board of directors of Amtrak.
  • Became Vice Chairman in 2006.
  • Resigned in 2009, shortly after his father became Vice President.

2008–2009:​

• Seneca Global Advisors
  • Founded this consulting firm in 2008.
  • The company helped organizations expand into global markets.

2009–2012:

• Rosemont Seneca Partners
  • Co-founded this investment and advisory firm in 2009.
  • This firm became a vehicle for several of Hunter’s international business dealings, including those involving Ukraine and China.

So basically Hunter moved to work in the international market rather than in the US in order to avoid conflict of interest with his fathers job.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I want to discuss one standard. I spoke out against Trump. I spoke out against Biden. I advocate applying the same set of standards to both. Nobody appears to be willing to commit to that. I wonder why?

Everyone here is committed to it, just as you seem to be committed to intentionally conflating two vastly different situations. I would ask you for proof of what you say, but I already know that facts and evidence don't factor into what you believe.

 

[Booker]

Didn't Bill Barr, Trumps AG at the time, say they looked into the Biden allegations and there was nothing there?

 

[TampaJoe]

Breaking the law—something the Trump family has been accused of repeatedly—is a matter of legal fact, defined by established statutes and regulations. In contrast, what is considered unethical often depends on personal beliefs, cultural norms, or political ideology.

For example, many people would agree that marrying off a 12-year-old is unethical, yet there are factions within the MAGA Republican movement that have defended or enabled such practices under the guise of "parental rights" or religious freedom. Similarly, views on education vary dramatically: some believe it is unethical to teach children about gender, sexuality, or African American history, while others see the banning of these subjects as deeply unethical and a form of historical erasure or bigotry.

This illustrates a critical distinction: equating clear legal violations—such as using public office for personal financial gain—with subjective moral disagreements is fundamentally flawed. Ethics may be debated, but laws are codified and enforceable. When political leaders blur the line between the two, it serves to justify corruption and undermine the rule of law.

Okay. Fair enough. So if there are allegations you can prove in court, then charge the man. Now if nothing he has done is illegal but merely unethical, I guess he gets a pass.

I have lived professionally under a clear code of ethics. It isn’t that complicated. It just requires clear standards and must be applied equally without fear or favor.

Maybe one day government will get there. Until then, we are where we are.

 

[MT15]

Okay. Fair enough. So if there are allegations you can prove in court, then charge the man. Now if nothing he has done is illegal but merely unethical, I guess he gets a pass.

I have lived professionally under a clear code of ethics. It isn’t that complicated. It just requires clear standards and must be applied equally without fear or favor.

Maybe one day government will get there. Until then, we are where we are.

As has been repeated ad nauseam, nobody has any issue with a clear code of ethics. What we are taking issue with is the issue you have of trying to push false equivalencies. You are looking at Hunter using his name to get gainful employment and Trump’s multitude of illegal and unethical business dealings, which have been found to be factual by courts time and time again, to the level of the recent felony convictions and saying - these are the same. Nobody who lives in reality is going to respect that type of false equivalency.

Oh, and Comer, who famously made up stuff about Biden and his family and made a huge deal of some alleged “shell corporations” uses them in his own business dealings. The hypocrisy demanded by Trump and eagerly put forth by the GOP is sickening.

So we are all pretty skeptical of the crap you are trying to push about Biden. Because the House GOP famously lied over and over about what they found.

Per some reporting at the time, Joe Biden wasn’t thrilled that Hunter took the job with Burisma, but Hunter did it anyway. Per Hunter’s business partners sworn testimony, Hunter wanted to give the impression of access to Joe, but was very careful to not cross the line into impropriety. It wasn’t very ethical of Hunter to do that, but there was no legal line crossed.

Trump has been doing white collar crime his entire life. He famously cheats employees, business partners, vendors, banks, insurance companies and the IRS. Found by courts to have committed fraud with his children’s charity fund, found by courts to have committed fraud with his “university”. Found by courts to have illegally discriminated against minority renters repeatedly. He cheated some undocumented workers he hired to do some work so egregiously that they eventually sued him, putting their legal status at risk. He swore to NYC that he wouldn’t destroy a historic facade on a building if they would approve the project he wanted, and once the permits were granted he destroyed it anyway.

And we haven’t even touched on the sexual assaults he committed throughout the years, nor the times he walked into the dressing room of teen aged beauty contestants while they were dressing and then bragged about doing so, because he owned the pageant. We haven’t talked about sworn testimony of his wife about a rage rape where he ripped chunks of her hair out. Sworn testimony of a woman that he received oral sex from her when she was 12-14 during his days of being pals with Epstein, and that he slapped her face when she didn’t perform to his specifications.

Joe Biden has his faults, for sure. He has too big of an ego, he’s not decisive enough sometimes, he’s way too stubborn, I’m sure there’s more. But he is no Trump. He’s not a monster. Not a sociopath.

Calling them the same just exposes your own biases and willingness to turn a blind eye to what Trump actually is.

 

[Sendai]

Which was +10 YEARS before working for Burisma. You know better than using an argument like that! So your claim is that anyone who has ever worked in a public office should be suspect if they take a job in a private company more than 10 years later ?

To put things in perspective

Hunters Jobs between 2001

2001–2008:​

• Co-founder of Oldaker, Biden & Belair LLP
  A Washington, D.C.–based lobbying and law firm. Hunter Biden was a partner, and the firm specialized in legal and lobbying services.
• Lobbyist
  During this period, Biden was involved in lobbying, but left the company due to concerns about conflicts of interest, before his father became Vice President in 2009.

2006–2009:

• Appointed by President George W. Bush to the Board of Amtrak (2006)
  • Served on the board of directors of Amtrak.
  • Became Vice Chairman in 2006.
  • Resigned in 2009, shortly after his father became Vice President.

2008–2009:​

• Seneca Global Advisors
  • Founded this consulting firm in 2008.
  • The company helped organizations expand into global markets.

2009–2012:

• Rosemont Seneca Partners
  • Co-founded this investment and advisory firm in 2009.
  • This firm became a vehicle for several of Hunter’s international business dealings, including those involving Ukraine and China.

So basically Hunter moved to work in the international market rather than in the US in order to avoid conflict of interest with his father’s job.

Simply correcting this statement “Hunter Biden is and has never been a public employee.” Nothing more.

 

[DaveXA]

As has been repeated ad nauseam, nobody has any issue with a clear code of ethics. What we are taking issue with is the issue you have of trying to push false equivalencies. You are looking at Hunter using his name to get gainful employment and Trump’s multitude of illegal and unethical business dealings, which have been found to be factual by courts time and time again, to the level of the recent felony convictions and saying - these are the same. Nobody who lives in reality is going to respect that type of false equivalency.

Oh, and Comer, who famously made up stuff about Biden and his family and made a huge deal of some alleged “shell corporations” uses them in his own business dealings. The hypocrisy demanded by Trump and eagerly put forth by the GOP is sickening.

So we are all pretty skeptical of the crap you are trying to push about Biden. Because the House GOP famously lied over and over about what they found.

Per some reporting at the time, Joe Biden wasn’t thrilled that Hunter took the job with Burisma, but Hunter did it anyway. Per Hunter’s business partners sworn testimony, Hunter wanted to give the impression of access to Joe, but was very careful to not cross the line into impropriety. It wasn’t very ethical of Hunter to do that, but there was no legal line crossed.

Trump has been doing white collar crime his entire life. He famously cheats employees, business partners, vendors, banks, insurance companies and the IRS. Found by courts to have committed fraud with his children’s charity fund, found by courts to have committed fraud with his “university”. Found by courts to have illegally discriminated against minority renters repeatedly. He cheated some undocumented workers he hired to do some work so egregiously that they eventually sued him, putting their legal status at risk. He swore to NYC that he wouldn’t destroy a historic facade on a building if they would approve the project he wanted, and once the permits were granted he destroyed it anyway.

And we haven’t even touched on the sexual assaults he committed throughout the years, nor the times he walked into the dressing room of teen aged beauty contestants while they were dressing and then bragged about doing so, because he owned the pageant. We haven’t talked about sworn testimony of his wife about a rage rape where he ripped chunks of her hair out. Sworn testimony of a woman that he received oral sex from her when she was 12-14 during his days of being pals with Epstein, and that he slapped her face when she didn’t perform to his specifications.

Joe Biden has his faults, for sure. He has too big of an ego, he’s not decisive enough sometimes, he’s way too stubborn, I’m sure there’s more. But he is no Trump. He’s not a monster. Not a sociopath.

Calling them the same just exposes your own biases and willingness to turn a blind eye to what Trump actually is.

Yeah, the "both sides!" nonsense is absurd. He can't call a spade a spade. Gotta do some really twisted reasoning to get to a point where you legitimately think they're two sides of the same coin. Biased guy is biased.

 

[TampaJoe]

As has been repeated ad nauseam, nobody has any issue with a clear code of ethics. What we are taking issue with is the issue you have of trying to push false equivalencies. You are looking at Hunter using his name to get gainful employment and Trump’s multitude of illegal and unethical business dealings, which have been found to be factual by courts time and time again, to the level of the recent felony convictions and saying - these are the same. Nobody who lives in reality is going to respect that type of false equivalency.

Oh, and Comer, who famously made up stuff about Biden and his family and made a huge deal of some alleged “shell corporations” uses them in his own business dealings. The hypocrisy demanded by Trump and eagerly put forth by the GOP is sickening.

So we are all pretty skeptical of the crap you are trying to push about Biden. Because the House GOP famously lied over and over about what they found.

Per some reporting at the time, Joe Biden wasn’t thrilled that Hunter took the job with Burisma, but Hunter did it anyway. Per Hunter’s business partners sworn testimony, Hunter wanted to give the impression of access to Joe, but was very careful to not cross the line into impropriety. It wasn’t very ethical of Hunter to do that, but there was no legal line crossed.

Trump has been doing white collar crime his entire life. He famously cheats employees, business partners, vendors, banks, insurance companies and the IRS. Found by courts to have committed fraud with his children’s charity fund, found by courts to have committed fraud with his “university”. Found by courts to have illegally discriminated against minority renters repeatedly. He cheated some undocumented workers he hired to do some work so egregiously that they eventually sued him, putting their legal status at risk. He swore to NYC that he wouldn’t destroy a historic facade on a building if they would approve the project he wanted, and once the permits were granted he destroyed it anyway.

And we haven’t even touched on the sexual assaults he committed throughout the years, nor the times he walked into the dressing room of teen aged beauty contestants while they were dressing and then bragged about doing so, because he owned the pageant. We haven’t talked about sworn testimony of his wife about a rage rape where he ripped chunks of her hair out. Sworn testimony of a woman that he received oral sex from her when she was 12-14 during his days of being pals with Epstein, and that he slapped her face when she didn’t perform to his specifications.

Joe Biden has his faults, for sure. He has too big of an ego, he’s not decisive enough sometimes, he’s way too stubborn, I’m sure there’s more. But he is no Trump. He’s not a monster. Not a sociopath.

Calling them the same just exposes your own biases and willingness to turn a blind eye to what Trump actually is.

And yet I never said they were equal did I. Different cases. Different facts.

I asked you to set a standard. So it appears the standard is that unethical behavior gets a pass as long as it isn’t illegal.

So I said clearly in my last post that if you have clear evidence/proof beyond a reasonable doubt (the criminal standard) that either Trump or Jared or Ivanka have committed a crime other than jaywalking, they should be prosecuted.

Is that clear enough for you?

 

[MT15]

And yet I never said they were equal did I. Different cases. Different facts.

I asked you to set a standard. So it appears the standard is that unethical behavior gets a pass as long as it isn’t illegal.

So I said clearly in my last post that if you have clear evidence/proof beyond a reasonable doubt (the criminal standard) that either Trump or Jared or Ivanka have committed a crime other than jaywalking, they should be prosecuted.

Is that clear enough for you?

Trump has already been convicted of multiple felonies, so acting like we need proof of anything at this point for him is just wrong.

What is fascinating - and you did it again just now in this very post - is that you want the standard to be unethical behavior for Biden and you are willing to believe unproven allegations to condemn him, yet you keep saying if we have criminal proof beyond a reasonable doubt for Trump we should prosecute him. (And he is already a convicted felon, plus all the other court cases I ran through).

And you still think you are treating them the same.

 

[TampaJoe]

Trump has already been convicted of multiple felonies, so acting like we need proof of anything at this point for him is just wrong.

What is fascinating - and you did it again just now in this very post - is that you want the standard to be unethical behavior for Biden and you are willing to believe unproven allegations to condemn him, yet you keep saying if we have criminal proof beyond a reasonable doubt for Trump we should prosecute him. (And he is already a convicted felon, plus all the other court cases I ran through).

And you still think you are treating them the same.

Nah. I asked you to set the standard. Unethical but not illegal gets a pass. So if you have proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he has committed crimes as POTUS, he should be impeached and prosecuted for those crimes.

I think that is a low bar ethically, but if that is the standard that everyone agrees is appropriate, I guess it will just have to do.

 

[superchuck500]

Eh, this has been the case for a while, at least in federal buildings. They all or most already have a pic/portrait of the current President in their buildings. Now beyond federal buildings...I have no idea.

It’s true that the president’s photo is in all federal buildings - no matter who it is.

This, however, is not normal: