You really are full of yourself...and sorely lacking a sense of humor. Speaking of Clinton's sincere belief was just a play on the MAGA's claiming if Trump believed he won then he is cleared. I made no claim of relevance...that is your hubris talking and inferring something not implied.

Later...you are dismissed.

I'm pretty sure you missed the point...as your humorless self often does.

I guess if Hilary sincerely believed that the 33,000 emails she erased were of a personal nature and not work related...then she is cleared.

Only the work related emails were actually subpoenaed, despite Trump's claims that the 33K had been subpoenaed before she erased them.

Of course this means we have to trust her...and I trust her just as much as I trust Trump.

Well, it does whine a lot!

That is true. Your new lover is repetitive to the extreme.

This could be an indication of limited vocabularic and phraseology capacities.

...

They need to do more than just kiss...

I tend to think he knew in November and knows now that he lost legitimately. But he had started the "big lie" well before the general election and his grossly inflated narcissistic ego will not allow him to publicly acknowledge such.

They likely have numerous witnesses who were present in private meetings who can validate that he knew he lost legitimately. Besides the few already quoted in various news sources, there are probably more witnesses of Trump speaking of having lost and who will surface and testify during the trial.

A couple of months ago, on either CNN or Fox, one of his former White House aides spoke of a conversation where Trump was talking directly to her. I can only paraphrase the quote she relayed, but Trump told her {that "we" can't admit we lost..."that would be embarrassing"...we have to do everything we can to fix this.}

I don't know who she was speaking to...may have been a journalistic interview...may have been a deposition type thing. The background was too simple for it to have been any type of hearing. I would imagine that Smith had already interviewed her or did so shortly after this aired.

Perhaps Joe was just trying to explain how weather works...you know, a meteorology lesson as it were.

That could explain why it took at least twenty innocent phone calls to cover all that turf!


Or, even if they did not directly talk business details...perhaps Joe took twenty meetings with them to sell "the Biden brand." At best offering the illusion of buying influence...at worst, consciously creating the image of influence being available under the table (influence peddling.)

Why would any POTUS or VPOTUS take his valuable time and spend it on at least twenty meetings with his son's shady business partners?

The weather story is cloudy and foggy at best.

I guess I am not fully informed. How do we know Joe has amassed millions?

Financial disclosures...bank account records...anything tangible...

I have heard the stories about shell companies, and $10mm paid to Joe and Hunter from China, etc...but to my knowledge, those are hearsay, conjecture, and assumption thus far. Some may be true and if so I certainly hope the truth outs.

Thanks

As I understand, he was not under oath. But what he said still matters. Its not anywhere near as compelling as testimony under oath. But, it was testimony before a congressional investigative hearing. Lying to Congress, I believe, carries legal consequences.

If he changed his stories if or when called to testify in a Biden trial, he would be in serious legal jeopardy.

When Archer was leaving the hearing, or whatever it was, CNN gave pretty rational, unbiased coverage for at least 1/2 an hour. They covered Joe's changing rationalizations pretty straight up. Joe's claims that he never met Hunter's business associates have been contradicted by White House visitor logs, and now Archer said he knew of and was present in at least 20 meetings, in person and telephone, where Joe was glad-handing Hunter's and Devon's associates.

CNN stressed that Joe has moved from "I never met any of my son's partners" to "I met them but it was limited to casual conversations about the weather and such." (why would POTUS take 20 casual meetings to talk about the weather with shady business partners?)

From "I have never talked to Hunter about his business" to "I have never been in business with Hunter."

I was almost shocked at how little spin CNN put on what had happened...even if it was only for 30 or so minutes

Granted, Archer was not under oath, but it does contribute to the growing evidence stream. There is plenty of conjecture and assumptions, but the smoke smoldering around the Bidens is growing and the smell of dead fish is getting stronger.

Again, I was surprised CNN's initial reporting did not spin in Biden's favor. They admitted the Biden's are digging themselves in deeper.

I would not be surprised if the producers reprimanded the two covering journalists for not towing the CNN line to only give the Bidens favorable coverage.

Well don't forget about Frank...

He is as much of a caricature as they are!

"They received millions of dollars from Russia"

I thought it was China...no Ukraine...have you heard about their South American dealings? Maybe every country in the world is paying them under the table...I heard it is true and all the bank records are available!



The Bidens may be corrupt...but so far it is just conjecture and allegations.