The DOJ case against Hunter Biden (tax evasion and possession of a weapon by
drug user) have been slow tracked for five or so years now.
Nobody knows. The DOJ doesn't like to prosecute a sitting president, I wonder
Hunter is covered by that too. I don't know.
I see where Joe mentions the Biden family. You are the one that brought up Hillary.
Hillary is long off my radar.
llegalYes he was. That was what they wanted. That was a success.
Quid pro quo, which is considred wrong if others try it.
Quid pro quo is not always a bad thing, unless you are doing something
heThe Government of the USA wanted that prosecutor fired, and he was fired.
That administration got him fired by threatening to withhold money which,
others do it, is considered wrong.
Why is it the "Government of the USA's" business who is a prosecutor in another country?
I don't remember now. It was long ago. It wasn't just the USA that wanted the osecutor fired.
This is not something he should have done and he should be held to account.
It is what the US government wanted.
The correct answer is that they don't, yet Biden has admitted (in order to impress upon people that he had power as VP) to threatening to withhold promised funds until the deed was done.
This is not something he should have done and he should be held to account.
It is what the US government wanted.
That does not make it right.
On 06-19-23 09:01, Mike Powell <=-
spoke to Ib Joe about Re: Bringing a knife to a <=-
Either way, I suspect that Ron's approach... don't even bother talking
to him... is probably best. My only worry is that someone will read
his nonsense, assume it is informed, and use it to form opinions.
The president and his vice president work toward the goals of the US gov't,
no?
Either way, I suspect that Ron's approach... don't even bother talking
to him... is probably best. My only worry is that someone will read
his nonsense, assume it is informed, and use it to form opinions.
You are stating an opinion that I formed a long time ago -- probably before he dropped his last name from his postings.
Either way, I suspect that Ron's approach... don't even bother talking to him... is probably best. My only worry is that someone will read
his nonsense, assume it is informed, and use it to form opinions.
You are stating an opinion that I formed a long time ago -- probably
before he dropped his last name from his postings.
On 06-20-23 15:42, Mike Powell <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: Bringing a knife to <=-
Either way, I suspect that Ron's approach... don't even bother talking to him... is probably best. My only worry is that someone will read his nonsense, assume it is informed, and use it to form opinions.
You are stating an opinion that I formed a long time ago -- probably
before he dropped his last name from his postings.
Alan Ianson has not dropped his last name in this echo, although he
has in others.
alkingEither way, I suspect that Ron's approach... don't even bother
to him... is probably best. My only worry is that someone will read his nonsense, assume it is informed, and use it to form opinions.
You are stating an opinion that I formed a long time ago -- probably before he dropped his last name from his postings.
Alan Ianson has not dropped his last name in this echo, although he
has in others.
I was talking about Ron, not Alan.
On 06-21-23 15:48, Mike Powell <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: Bringing a knife to <=-
MP> alkingEither way, I suspect that Ron's approach... don't even bother
to him... is probably best. My only worry is that someone will read his nonsense, assume it is informed, and use it to form opinions.
You are stating an opinion that I formed a long time ago -- probably before he dropped his last name from his postings.
Alan Ianson has not dropped his last name in this echo, although he
has in others.
I was talking about Ron, not Alan.
Why would Ron's approach that is probably best be not talking to
himself?
Alan Ianson has not dropped his last name in this echo, although he
has in others.
I was talking about Ron, not Alan.
Why would Ron's approach that is probably best be not talking to himself?
heAlan Ianson has not dropped his last name in this echo, although
has in others.
I was talking about Ron, not Alan.
Why would Ron's approach that is probably best be not talking to
himself?
I read that as "don't even bother talking to him" meaning talking to
Ron. He rarely responds, and even if he does it is not responsive.
I read that as "don't even bother talking to him" meaning talking to
Ron. He rarely responds, and even if he does it is not responsive.
Mike Powell wrote to DALE SHIPP <=-
I read that as "don't even bother talking to him" meaning talking to
Ron. He rarely responds, and even if he does it is not responsive.
He usually responds to me, even if we don't always agree.
I don't respond to Dale because he has nothing worth reading.
Sysop: | altere |
---|---|
Location: | Houston, TX |
Users: | 60 |
Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
Uptime: | 10:37:43 |
Calls: | 516 |
Files: | 7,043 |
D/L today: |
1 files (12K bytes) |
Messages: | 289,304 |