American election.

[Immanuel Can]

But do you believe that?

Should I assume guilt before the investigation results are made public?

No. You should assume investigation is warranted, to show what the truth is. And you should want to have the results made public.

[Immanuel Can]

But never forget that mannie is, by his own admission, completely unbiased, a truly neutral observer with no dog in this fight at all.

Heh.

You just don't get it, do you? You don't have to be pro-Trump to recognize that Biden's senile, or to have reason to suspect he's corrupt, or to know about the laptop. In fact, a person doesn't even have to like Trump to realize that Joe Biden is immeasurably worse. I don't owe it to you to like anybody I don't like, or to pretend JB is a good man just because you don't like his opponent, that's for sure.

So you'll notice I don't bother to praise Trump. That's for others to do. If the man merits praise for what he's done...say in the Middle East, or for scaling down the military, or for improving the economy, or for locating vaccines for the virus, or building the wall, or whatever, that's US business. I don't live in the US or the Middle East, and it's not my military, my health, my borders, my security or my economy he's improved. So what do I owe him by way of praise? Nothing, of course.

But anybody with two eyes can see that Joe Biden is the senile, corrupt patsy of the extreme Left. And that bodes bad things for any nation that has any association with the US.

[Gary Childress]

But do you believe that?

Should I assume guilt before the investigation results are made public?

No. You should assume investigation is warranted, to show what the truth is. And you should want to have the results made public.

Sure. However, I'm skeptical whether anything more is going to come of it than the investigation into Trump's Russia affairs. But we'll see.

[Immanuel Can]

No. You should assume investigation is warranted, to show what the truth is. And you should want to have the results made public.

Sure. However, I'm skeptical whether anything more is going to come of it than the investigation into Trump's Russia affairs. But we'll see.

That's apples and oranges, Gary. The Trump investigation was "trumped up" by Hillary's crew. We know that now; the investigation went through, and we proved that Trump didn't do it.

All I'm suggesting is that we do the same intensity of due diligence in the matter of Biden. We went after Trump, now we go after Biden. And we have the laptop, so there's at least one more piece of key evidence than the anti-trumpets had. I suspect we'd get a very different result; but we can just insist on the investigation, and then we'll see...that is, if we actually wanted to know the truth in the first place.

[Gary Childress]

No. You should assume investigation is warranted, to show what the truth is. And you should want to have the results made public.

Sure. However, I'm skeptical whether anything more is going to come of it than the investigation into Trump's Russia affairs. But we'll see.

That's apples and oranges, Gary. The Trump investigation was "trumped up" by Hillary's crew. We know that now; the investigation went through, and we proved that Trump didn't do it.

All I'm suggesting is that we do the same intensity of due diligence in the matter of Biden. We went after Trump, now we go after Biden. And we have the laptop, so there's at least one more piece of key evidence than the anti-trumpets had. I suspect we'd get a very different result; but we can just insist on the investigation, and then we'll see...that is, if we actually wanted to know the truth in the first place.

So we should just immediately assume guilt in this case?

[Immanuel Can]

So we should just immediately assume guilt in this case?

Are you going to keep saying things I didn't say, as if I did, Gary? Or are you going to respond to what I actually did say? I did not say "assume guilt." I said investigate fully, just as the other side did with Trump, and act on the truth, which that side clearly did not do.

Those are quite different things. Let's stick with what I'm advocating.

[tillingborn]

I have no idea who might be another plausible candidate.

Right. So we'd best make sure it's not the guy we're trying to put in the presidency. Time for a full public investigation. But I suspect it won't happen; because it will be blocked by the Leftist ideologues.

Are you certain you are paranoid enough? Perhaps Rudi Giuliani is a leftist ideologue. What other reason can there be for his obvious attempt to cover Joe Biden's tracks on his trips to Ukraine? Why else would would he fail to discover anything more incriminating than the piece of "real factual gold", deposited by the crack addled Hunter Biden himself? Why else would he deliberately undermine the evidence by holding farcical press conferences? Who but a leftist would stick their hand down their underpants to destroy their credibility? Come to think of it, $2000 dollars is a lot of money to give to people for doing nothing; Trump must be some sort of communist.

Are you aware that treason is a capital offence in the US?

All the more reason we should investigate. Apparently, Americans think it's a serious crime that's being committed. If you don't think so, that would be most surprising.

One thing for sure: a man who commits treason should not be rewarded for it by being made president. That's pretty obvious.

Some Americans clearly agree with you that a serious crime is being committed, and that anything but a full endorsement of that is proof of leftist ideology. From what I gather, you are in a peculiar place where every direction is to the left. Is there any belief or policy that you can describe as to your right?

[Immanuel Can]

Some Americans clearly agree with you that a serious crime is being committed...

Well, they are in no position to say, since they couldn't possibly know so long as they don't want there to be any investigating of that. What we have right now, in the laptop, is probable cause for investigation. Anybody who actually had any actual confidence in Biden should welcome such an investigation, as an opportunity to prove this wonderful man irreproachable.

Except they don't want the investigation, for some reason. Do the math.

[tillingborn]

Some Americans clearly agree with you that a serious crime is being committed...

Well, they are in no position to say, since they couldn't possibly know so long as they don't want there to be any investigating of that. What we have right now, in the laptop, is probable cause for investigation. Anybody who actually had any actual confidence in Biden should welcome such an investigation, as an opportunity to prove this wonderful man irreproachable.

Except they don't want the investigation, for some reason. Do the math.

References to 'the big guy' are not probable cause for anything. Without something more substantial, there is no need for an investigation that people who are already convinced that Biden is guilty would dismiss as a leftist conspiracy, should the court not agree with them. I cannot speak for those who think that Joe Biden is irreproachable, but I imagine they as likely to dismiss a guilty verdict as a rightist conspiracy.

[Gary Childress]

So we should just immediately assume guilt in this case?

Are you going to keep saying things I didn't say, as if I did, Gary? Or are you going to respond to what I actually did say? I did not say "assume guilt." I said investigate fully, just as the other side did with Trump, and act on the truth, which that side clearly did not do.

Those are quite different things. Let's stick with what I'm advocating.

Sure, I agree that we investigate fully. However, at this point, it sounds more like influence peddling to me on the face of it and not treason. You seem to be bringing up "treason" and whatnot. But, sure, investigate (and that seems to be what authorities are indeed doing).

[Gary Childress]

Some Americans clearly agree with you that a serious crime is being committed...

Well, they are in no position to say, since they couldn't possibly know so long as they don't want there to be any investigating of that. What we have right now, in the laptop, is probable cause for investigation. Anybody who actually had any actual confidence in Biden should welcome such an investigation, as an opportunity to prove this wonderful man irreproachable.

Except they don't want the investigation, for some reason. Do the math.

References to 'the big guy' are not probable cause for anything. Without something more substantial, there is no need for an investigation that people who are already convinced that Biden is guilty would dismiss as a leftist conspiracy, should the court not agree with them. I cannot speak for those who think that Joe Biden is irreproachable, but I imagine they as likely to dismiss a guilty verdict as a rightist conspiracy.

It kind of sounds like some of the accusations the Trump law team was making against those counting the votes in Georgia. Someone brought some cases out from under a table or something after all the people overseeing the vote were gone and the assumption was that the people were tampering with the vote. It turned out to be a normal procedure they were doing.

I suppose if the expectation is that there are vast conspiracies against Trump then everything looks like some kind of shady behavior. Of course, when you spend your entire presidency shitting all over about half the country with insults on Twitter and other poor behavior I guess paranoia and distrust of those you've been pissing on set in.

Karma, maybe? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Immanuel Can]

Some Americans clearly agree with you that a serious crime is being committed...

Well, they are in no position to say, since they couldn't possibly know so long as they don't want there to be any investigating of that. What we have right now, in the laptop, is probable cause for investigation. Anybody who actually had any actual confidence in Biden should welcome such an investigation, as an opportunity to prove this wonderful man irreproachable.

Except they don't want the investigation, for some reason. Do the math.

References to 'the big guy' are not probable cause for anything.

They are when they are on the laptop of his son, and no other plausible candidates exist for "the big guy." Then it's really concerning evidence, evidence that cries out for investigation. And why wouldn't that be a great idea? After all, if you have confidence Biden's clean, it could only acquit him, and give even more reason to trust him.

If you don't want an investigation, what are you afraid of?

[Immanuel Can]

Karma, maybe? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Let's find out. Let's have an investigation. After all, Trump was investigated on no evidence at all. Here we have at least strong indicative evidence...certainly plenty to warrant investigating.

What's Biden afraid of?

[Gary Childress]

Karma, maybe? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Let's find out. Let's have an investigation. After all, Trump was investigated on no evidence at all. Here we have at least strong indicative evidence...certainly plenty to warrant investigating.

Sure.

[Lacewing]

One thing for sure: a man who commits treason should not be rewarded for it by being made president. That's pretty obvious.

Politics and fanatically-held religion strangle your intelligence, and replace it with whatever serves you.

Oh? So you think a man who commits treason SHOULD be rewarded for it by being made president?

Are you going to keep saying things I didn't say, as if I did?