Bootstrap wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 11:31 am
Almost everyone in this thread is drawing comparisons between Trump and Biden. Even the first post in this thread does that.
No it doesn't. The first post is about how the DOJ handled the legal cases involving these men.
To be more precise, almost everyone in this thread is drawing comparisons between the processes involved in investigating Trump and Hunter Biden. Repeatedly. Including you. And offering opinions about what is fair or right or outrageous.
Whatever is fair and right and good, I would expect it to apply to both. Any fear of someone getting away with something should apply to both. Any fear of witch hunts should apply to both. Any fear of politicization should apply to both. Any fear of this getting tangled up in election campaigning should apply to both. Any fear of political passions taking over should apply to both. Precisely the same issues apply.
All those fears are very real. For both. Any good process needs to take that seriously.
That's how I see it, at any rate. Anyone else is welcome to speak for themselves, if they wish.
2 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 11:31 am
Almost everyone in this thread is drawing comparisons between Trump and Biden. Even the first post in this thread does that.
No it doesn't. The first post is about how the DOJ handled the legal cases involving these men.
To be more precise, almost everyone in this thread is drawing comparisons between the processes involved in investigating Trump and Hunter Biden. Repeatedly. Including you. And offering opinions about what is fair or right or outrageous.
I glanced through the thread and I couldn't find where I was repeatedly drawing comparisons between the processes involved in investigating Trump and Hunter Biden. I have repeatedly asked for facts when assertions were made about the two processes but other than stating a few times that the politics of both sides are so hypocritical, I couldn't find what you assert. If you can show me an example of where I did, Ill be happy to look at it.
And nowhere that I could see, did I offer my opinion about what is fair or right or outrageous. Show me an example of where I did that and I will be happy to take a look.
Now, the OP does mention the two legal cases and how the DOJ handled them. The very first response to my original question I thought was a good possible answer. No politics involved in the answer or my response.
Szdfan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 1:10 pm
Was Hunter just being investigated for taxes and the gun, or was he being investigated for other issues as well?
The investigation into Trump seems rather straight-forward -- Trump refused to turn over classified documents that the National Archives asked to get back. To me that seems rather cut and dry.
If the DOJ was investigating Hunter's overseas business deals, that could be a lot more complicated and take longer.
That makes sense as a possible reason.
I wonder if whether or not Hunter was being investigated for overseas business dealings will be made public?
Now compare that with your first response to my question and how you immediately turned it into a partisan issue. And notice the very unnecessary assumptions in the last paragraph. There was not one mention in the OP about unfairness to Trump or outrage or right-wing media. And yet you responded as though there was. This is what I've been trying to get across to you.
GaryK wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 12:52 pm
How can the relatively minor case take years to conclude and the other one be so speedy?
More relevant: who was the special prosecutor, and who chose him? Did he face any political interference?
The special prosecutor was chosen by the Trump Administration. Merrick Garland says he gave him full authority. Normally, the special prosecutor is required to make a statement that says he was able to operate without interference and had the resources he needed to do the investigation, or to identify limitations he faced. You can read this in any of the recent investigations done by special prosecutors.
So I think the Trump Administration's special prosecutor was allowed to see what evidence he could develop on Hunter Biden:
Weiss, the top prosecutor in the state, is one of just two U.S. attorneys who stayed on the job at the end of the Trump years, to continue to oversee the Hunter Biden probe. Republicans in Congress had pressed the Justice Department to name a special prosecutor in the case, but federal authorities resisted that idea, arguing that Weiss and his team had been working smoothly and free from political interference.
Attorney General Merrick Garland has told Congress that Weiss had "full authority" to make decisions in the probe.
If Weiss comes out and says there was interference, then we have a story and a real issue. Until that happens, I don't think we do.
There may be other charges later. But is right-wing media really outraged that the special prosecutor that the Trump Administrator chose was not able to find evidence for their claims about Hunter Biden and charge him with more serious crimes? And that is somehow unfair to Donald Trump?
Gary, I can see that you graded my paper and gave me an F. I disagree, but you are welcome to your own opinion. I could be wrong, but I think you are grading your own paper and giving yourself an A in this thread. If you aren't grading your own paper, please clarify, I could be getting this wrong. I don't feel any need to grade your paper at all. I don't see any value in telling you how I would grade my own paper, either. That whole cycle leads further and further away from any discussion of the actual topic. Sometimes it gets quite heated. And it never ends. It really feels like it keeps pulling back in the direction of who is the better person or the better thinker or the better Christian or has the right views, and I would really rather have a conversation of the subject where we can learn from each other's perspectives.
This reminds me of something I have realized about marriages. In a good marriage, a couple discusses what they want for dinner and go about doing that. In a bad marriage, a couple spends all kinds of time and energy explaining why whatever the other person said is wrong, and they never manage to actually discuss and agree on what they want for dinner. The one thing they can agree on: it's the other person's fault. And they never manage to make dinner. If the energy is going toward justifying ourselves or blaming the other, we are doing the wrong thing. Perhaps we can avoid posts that do these things?
So please try to avoid grading me and grading yourself, and I will try to do the same. If I do not actually make claims about people's motives or attitudes, please don't read tea leaves and insist that I did. I will also ask people to help me resist the urge to do these same things if a post seems to pull me in that direction.
Instead, perhaps you can show me what you think an A+ paper would look like for the questions I have raised. What are the right policies? How can it be done in a way that people with a variety of opinions are likely to have confidence in the process? For both Trump and Biden? What are good ways for us, as Christians, to avoid being sucked in by emotional partisan media and by the campaigns of politicians? When should we simply disengage, when should we look for facts, and how should we go about doing that?
1 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
GaryK wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 4:31 pm
Now compare that with your first response to my question and how you immediately turned it into a partisan issue. And notice the very unnecessary assumptions in the last paragraph. There was not one mention in the OP about unfairness to Trump or outrage or right-wing media. And yet you responded as though there was. This is what I've been trying to get across to you.
Here's the paragraph:
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 1:48 pm
There may be other charges later. But is right-wing media really outraged that the special prosecutor that the Trump Administrator chose was not able to find evidence for their claims about Hunter Biden and charge him with more serious crimes? And that is somehow unfair to Donald Trump?
I said right-wing media seems to be outraged about this in a way that seems unreasonable. I think I have seen other people criticize media in this thread too, and throughout MN. In fact, I think it's important to be able to do that.
Do you believe that right-wing media is treating both Hunter Biden and Donald Trump fairly, using more or less the same criteria? Do you believe that right-wing media is focusing on the rational, providing good, verifiable evidence, and avoiding partisan outrage? I don't. And I think it's important to be able to point that out. I think the media we consume often shape the kinds of conversations we have. And I don't think MN is completely isolated from that.
Critical thinking skills require thinking about the media we are soaking in. Without that, we tend to swim in whatever they want us to think and feel. It's not just right wing propaganda versus left wing propaganda. Some media really do seem to be trying to focus on evidence and trying to use similar standards for both men. And of course, the source documents for many things are available.
Again, feel free to disagree with me. Tell me what you think and why. I'm not trying to characterize you. That's your job.
2 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 5:13 pm
Gary, I can see that you graded my paper and gave me an F. I disagree, but you are welcome to your own opinion. I could be wrong, but I think you are grading your own paper and giving yourself an A in this thread. If you aren't grading your own paper, please clarify, I could be getting this wrong. I don't feel any need to grade your paper at all. I don't see any value in telling you how I would grade my own paper, either. That whole cycle leads further and further away from any discussion of the actual topic. Sometimes it gets quite heated. And it never ends. It really feels like it keeps pulling back in the direction of who is the better person or the better thinker or the better Christian or has the right views, and I would really rather have a conversation of the subject where we can learn from each other's perspectives.
This reminds me of something I have realized about marriages. In a good marriage, a couple discusses what they want for dinner and go about doing that. In a bad marriage, a couple spends all kinds of time and energy explaining why whatever the other person said is wrong, and they never manage to actually discuss and agree on what they want for dinner. The one thing they can agree on: it's the other person's fault. And they never manage to make dinner. If the energy is going toward justifying ourselves or blaming the other, we are doing the wrong thing. Perhaps we can avoid posts that do these things?
So please try to avoid grading me and grading yourself, and I will try to do the same. If I do not actually make claims about people's motives or attitudes, please don't read tea leaves and insist that I did. I will also ask people to help me resist the urge to do these same things if a post seems to pull me in that direction.
Instead, perhaps you can show me what you think an A+ paper would look like for the questions I have raised. What are the right policies? How can it be done in a way that people with a variety of opinions are likely to have confidence in the process? For both Trump and Biden? What are good ways for us, as Christians, to avoid being sucked in by emotional partisan media and by the campaigns of politicians? When should we simply disengage, when should we look for facts, and how should we go about doing that?
Boot, this is my thread and I know why I started it. The question of fairness you keep harping on and want answers to has nothing to do with the question I raised in the OP, as is clear in my response to Szdfan. His response was exactly what I was looking for. No politics or assumptions at all in his response and it made sense to me as to why the DOJ might have taken so long in investigating Hunter Biden.
The truth is that you were the one who made this into a partisan issue and I kept trying to keep it from going deeper and deeper in that direction by continually trying to keep it to the facts. And here we are 55 pages later you still asking the same question of fairness in the process after I made it very clear to you yesterday that that is not the point of this thread. It really does seem that you still believe your original assumptions about this thread are true. If you want the questions of fairness of the legal processes answered, then please start your own thread on them.
If you want a passing grade, the first step is to look carefully at the questions that are given and then answer the actual questions rather than the questions you assume the question is about.
And also, stop with saying I did something in my thread like repeatedly draw comparisons between the two processes and then not back it up. If there is an unwillingness to give examples of what you assert, in order to see if it's true, then of course the grade will be F.
GaryK wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 4:31 pm
Now compare that with your first response to my question and how you immediately turned it into a partisan issue. And notice the very unnecessary assumptions in the last paragraph. There was not one mention in the OP about unfairness to Trump or outrage or right-wing media. And yet you responded as though there was. This is what I've been trying to get across to you.
Here's the paragraph:
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 1:48 pm
There may be other charges later. But is right-wing media really outraged that the special prosecutor that the Trump Administrator chose was not able to find evidence for their claims about Hunter Biden and charge him with more serious crimes? And that is somehow unfair to Donald Trump?
I said right-wing media seems to be outraged about this in a way that seems unreasonable. I think I have seen other people criticize media in this thread too, and throughout MN. In fact, I think it's important to be able to do that.
Do you believe that right-wing media is treating both Hunter Biden and Donald Trump fairly, using more or less the same criteria? Do you believe that right-wing media is focusing on the rational, providing good, verifiable evidence, and avoiding partisan outrage? I don't. And I think it's important to be able to point that out. I think the media we consume often shape the kinds of conversations we have. And I don't think MN is completely isolated from that.
Critical thinking skills require thinking about the media we are soaking in. Without that, we tend to swim in whatever they want us to think and feel. It's not just right wing propaganda versus left wing propaganda. Some media really do seem to be trying to focus on evidence and trying to use similar standards for both men. And of course, the source documents for many things are available.
Again, feel free to disagree with me. Tell me what you think and why. I'm not trying to characterize you. That's your job.
You made it very clear yesterday what your assumptions were about this thread and those assumptions were most certainly not about media but rather what you assumed I was asking. I refuse to play your games in this post. Start your own thread about whether or not right-wing media is treating both Hunter Biden and Donald Trump fairly.
GaryK wrote: ↑Thu Dec 14, 2023 7:15 pmThe truth is that you were the one who made this into a partisan issue and I kept trying to keep it from going deeper and deeper in that direction by continually trying to keep it to the facts. And here we are 55 pages later ...
Is there a set of rules you can apply equally to everyone, not just to me? I don't think anyone else in this thread is discussing precisely the subject of the OP as narrowly as you want me to. Not even you. I think many people here would be surprised if you insist that they do. This seems to have become the general thread where people discuss the process of investigating and trying Hunter Biden, comparing that to Donald Trump all along.
I have a different opinion about what the truth is. You might be able to persuade me with a different approach, but you probably can't beat me into agreeing with you. You might have to drop the prosecuting attorney approach if you want to convince me.
What facts are we discussing, Gary? On what subject? In the last I don't know how many pages, what have you been doing to keep it from going deeper and deeper in other directions? How can we work together to make this an actual conversation about some set of facts on some actual subject? You may believe that you are sticking to the facts in order to stop this thread from going deeper and deeper, but that really hasn't been my experience. Just look at your recent posts to see what I mean.
1 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Don Jr. sat through many hours in a closed door deposition about Jan. 6, and he had no reason to trust any of the investigators either, yet he did it anyway. And the information discussed was not classified.
But Hunter Biden is being coddled and protected by his father's DOJ and expects to be treated differently. If he is charged with contempt pf congress, we will see if he gets treated like Peter Navarro.
Also the Democrats and the likes of Adam Schiff paraded around for the media and promised to get the former president with the fake Russian dossier and also the Trump Russian collusion lie. Again the Biden family wants to be treated differently. We hear Biden saying the rich should pay their fair share of taxes, yet his family attempted to get away with not paying taxes, until they were ratted out. Then HB had others pay his back taxes.
Last edited by Grace on Mon Dec 18, 2023 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ken wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 1:18 pm
No, this is inaccurate.
Don Jr. spoke to the committee for only 2 hours via videoconference. The subject they wanted to discuss was his reported efforts to pressure his father through Mark Meadows to quell the mob storming the Capitol on 1/6. Don Jr. was not a suspect in any way and apparently one of the good guys on that day. The committee spoke to him as a witness to get a better picture of the events within the White House on that day. Apparently it was a uneventful interview. Here are actual news reports about it: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald ... -rcna27381
Donald Junior was also the only person present in the infamous Trump Tower meeting who did talk to investigators in the Russia probe. I don't know whether that involved his status as the president's son, but it wouldn't surprise me. While Donald Trump was telling us they had no contact with Russia, his children were trying to seal deals with Russia during the election, according to the Mueller Report. I don't think any of his children had to testify about that, did they? See the section "Communications with I.C. Expert Investment Company and Giorgi Rtskhiladze (Summer and Fall 2015)".
If they find evidence that Joe Biden is trying to use the DOJ to protect Hunter, they should produce it. That would be an abuse of presidential power. The DOJ is not the president's lawyer. The DOJ is not supposed to persecute the president's enemies and coddle him and his friends.
But remember that Donald Trump openly said that he had the right to do exactly this when he was president. "Where's my Roy Cohn?" - he wanted the Attorney General to be his fixer. So if you agree that a president should not do that, I think that's equally true for Trump and Biden. So far, we have evidence on Trump. So far, Trump has rarely had to testify about anything. Ditto for his children.
1 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Joe Biden: Zero indictments and zero credible accusations of any wrongdoing.
Since the inauguration of Joe Biden, on Jan. 20, 2021 Biden has cost millions of people so much, here in this nation and abroad. His actions/policies, has brutally cost lives, emboldened dictators and empowered terrorists. His decisions has cost the lives of 13 brave service people in Afghanistan. His border policies have emboldened the cartel rapists of women and girls at the border. It has enriched the cartels and deliverers of deadly fentanyl. All that goes way beyond 91 felony indictments. How many people were brutally killed because foreign bully's see Biden as weak, a president whose policies are of such that evil dictators know they can take full advantage of them? Now how many brutal wars were emboldened or empowered by those 91 indictments ? How many wars were started between 2016 and 2021? How many women and children were raped and killed by evil people who are funded by a nation Biden empowered?
Yes there are no indictments, but there is plenty of blood on Biden's hands.
