LinksUp wrote:
Direct money trail from the CCP to Bidens, plural.
Here's the actual statement from Rep James Comer (R-OK):
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Bank-Records-Memo-3.16.23.pdfFirst of all, I don't trust a word Rep Comer says, but let's, for the moment, assume what he says in that statement is true.
Where exactly is the crime????
China is the 2nd largest economy in the world. Just because a company is Chinese-based doesn't mean it's a puppet for the Chinese government. The vast majority are completely legitimate companies. (Note that while the DailyWire claims the company is "linked to the Chinese Communist Party" ---without providing evidence --- Comer does NOT make that claim in his statement.)
There is no evidence that the payments from Robinson Walker to the Bidens had any connection to the payment from the Chinese company to Robinson Walker. Robinson Walker isn't like that shell company Trump created just to funnel money to Stormy Daniels; Robinson Walker is a real company with many clients and suppliers.
No one named as receiving money was an elected official. It would be perfectly legal for them to work for a company that does business with a company that was located in China. (If "work for a company that does business with a company that was located in China" is the standard, that is a large part of the population of the US).
Except for one small payment to Hunter, all the payments were in 2017, after Joe Biden had left office. So, basically, your theory is that China waited until AFTER Biden was no longer in power, to try to bribe him.
And according to your theory, how exactly is China supposed to be benefitting from bribing Biden?? Is Biden looking the other way while China's ally invades another country?
I've said it many times... Building a website to sell things is simple. Amazon is successful because they've mastered delivery.
Racmanaz wrote:
Lol You are wrong again as usual. This is why you left these are talking about having sex with 17 and 15-year-olds cuz Lefties are perverted.
We're saying having sex with a 15-year-old is wrong. You're saying it's OK. So, which of us is perverted?
Racmanaz wrote:
LOL You are wrong again and at least I have a functional brain that recognizes facts and truth unlike you. I didn't cite any mistakes you made, I cited the LIES you made in all your posts in here.
No. That's the point... You didn't CITE a thing. You just insisted that I was wrong (or lied). You offered ZERO proof of that. Which is my point. You are incapable of telling the difference between PROVING something, and just INSISTING on it, because in your deluded mind, you really wanting to believe something is enough for it to be "reality".
Racmanaz wrote:
Maybe these Lefties are infatuated with 17 year olds? They are speaking in "code" ya know? :)
Three generations of a conservative Republican's family were started with underage sex, and you see that as LEFTIES being infatuated with 17 year olds? It would seem that it's the Righties that are having all the sex with 17 year olds.
We also have this exchange from Boebert:
Quote:
“When I approached him and told him, ‘Tyler, I’m going to be a 36-year-old grandmother,’ he said, ‘Well, didn’t you make Granny a 36-year-old granny?”‘
“I said, ‘Yes, I did.’
“He said, ‘Well then it’s hereditary,'” she recalled as the crowd laughed.
“‘Nice try, buddy,'” she added.
Doing the math, that means Boebert's mother had her when she was 17, meaning she'll soon be a great-grandmother at 54.
Racmanaz wrote:
You need reading comprehension skills that you so desperately need. It’s not about Instagram. It’s about the contact inside it, which was a video of Biden.
No, it's an ALTERED video of Biden --- posted on Instagram as a joke. Get it --- It's JOKE. That's why it's on Instagram. It's *not* NEWS. That would be on a site that's NOT Instagram. (Biden said "If you try anything to raise the price of prescription drugs, I will veto it")
Racmanaz wrote:
Lol no, YOU are wrong on all parts as usual. It’s only lying conspiracy nut jobs that actually believe it was an attempted insurrection, no such action occurred. Only fools believe it to be an actual insurrection. Facts are not in your favor no matter what BS you want to post. Yes, in order to take over the U.S government, you would need a well planned out attack by some sort of armed militia, otherwise you have nothing. Such a dumb argument from you anti-Trumpers.
No, I'm completely correct. You can tell, because you were completely unable to cite even one mistake I made in my posts. You probably didn't notice that -- After years of trying to deal with the contradictions of wanting to believe Trump is a superhero when ALL available evidence shows that he's just a crook and a con-artist, your brain has just shut down, and you're reduced to just parroting back the fantasy you want to believe. Like I said before --- Come back to reality; it'll be much healthier for you.
Racmanaz wrote:
Wrong on all points as you usually are. Yes, you do need to be armed in order to overcome the armed capital police and take over the government. No, the plan wasn’t to hang Mike Pence that came up abruptly, and that has nothing to do with an insurrection attempt. No I was not at the capital building it was not in Washington, but neither were you right?
Wrong on all points, as usual.
Quote:
Yes, you do need to be armed in order to overcome the armed capital police and take over the government.
Ok, actually, that's correct; however, "armed" does not require firearms. Knives, clubs, and pepper spray all qualify, and most everyone there had at least one of those. Plus, there were many handguns found on the rioters as well.
Quote:
No, the plan wasn’t to hang Mike Pence that came up abruptly
They erected a gallows. This means that brought with them the parts to build a gallows. It was clearly pre-planned. Also, Trump tweeted “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done” at 2:24 PM, and at 2:27 PM, the crowd breached the barricades and headed into the Capitol --- the mob clearly deciding that if Pence wouldn't overthrow the government for them, they would have to do it themselves.
Racmanaz wrote:
So dumb, it is YOU that is lying. NO we didn't see hundreds of Trumpers smashing through windows you liar, those were a few people smashing the windows and hundreds illegally entering the Capitol building you pathological LIAR~! LOL stop watching Fox News and try real news??? LOL which news source is that??? CNN and MSNBC BS fake news sources?? Trump himself ordered the metal detectors removed so they could get in with their guns??? ROTFLMFAO That's such a BS LIE!! LOL You are such a pathologically LYING conspiracy cult member, so stupid! You are such a flipping LIAR, many people were NOT found with guns at the Capitol building OMFG LOLOLOL. You are pathetic and such a LYING Lefty cult member. LOL Nobody can take you seriously with the BS you are spewing. LOL I have no narrative in this, you are just repeating what I said about YOU. You refuse to see facts and truth because you don't want to see it. I bet you were or are one of the conspiracy cult members that believed Trump colluded with Russia/Trump collusion BS conspiracy.
So dumb, it is YOU that is lying. NO we didn't see... (
show quote)
DUDE, get a grip.....
Clearly trying to maintain this fantasy world of yours amidst so much proof that the attack was a violent insurrection is beginning to affect your brain, and now you're just ranting in a word salad.
Please, give up the illusion, and come live in the real world. You'll be much healthier here.
Racmanaz wrote:
No it was NOT an insurrection attempt you LIAR! It wasn't going to be anymore than a protest outside of the Capitol building until a few nuts decided to break into the capitol building and what did they do after they entered? They walked around calmly and even talked with the capitol police and got along with them after their rioting. Only a lying Lefty moron would claim that it was an actual insurrection, you have no idea what and insurrection entails. I have never heard of an unarmed insurrection with no guns or firearms to take over the capitol building. You want to believe it was an insurrection because it fits your false narrative. You extreme Lefty bias blinds you from facts and truth.
No it was NOT an insurrection attempt you LIAR! It... (
show quote)
Stop Lying.
We all saw the video of hundred of Trumpers smashing thru windows, storming into the Capitol and attacking cops with knives and clubs and bear spray. And also, stop listening to Fox "News" and try listening to a real news source.. MANY of the insurrectionists were found with guns -- Trump himself ordered the metal detectors removed so they could get in with their guns. And the Proud Boys admitted they had substantial supplies of gun in their hotels rooms, to be ready for the next phrase of the attack.
You've created your own reality distortion field, preventing you from seeing anything that doesn't fit your narrative (because you can't admit you were taken in by a con-artist/tin-pot dictator)
Racmanaz wrote:
That’s was NOT the point of the senate committee investigation. It was about the false narrative that this was an insurrection attempt which is why the anti-Trump anti-MAGA committee members omitted the other important parts of the video recordings. It’s YOU that lacks any “form” of common sense.
It WAS an insurrection attempt. The specific, stated goal of the mob was to interfere with the operation of the government, to prevent the democratically elected leader from taking office, and to install a dictator of their choosing. That is pretty much the very definition of "insurrection".
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/insurrection wrote:
Insurrection
A rising or rebellion of citizens against their government, usually manifested by acts of violence.
Under federal law, it is a crime to incite, assist, or engage in such conduct against the United States.
West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
scooter1 wrote:
Your second paragraph says it. Easy to find two minutes. Don't you think the incredibly biased committee chose what they wanted to show to further their agenda? You have no idea if they being "escorted out". Your opinions are valid only because we the people haven't seen the video's in full. We've only seen what they want us to see on both sides.
You seem to lack any form of common sense. It doesn't matter how much video of non-violence exists. As long as there is video of some violence --- then the attack was violent! And illegal.