Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jill Biden's response to Hur in a fund raising email.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/11/jill-biden-special-counsel-report

I'm losing respect for Jill with every day that goes by. She needs to insist Biden step down, but she won't. It's really disgraceful.

She should insist her husband be prosecuted, his memory is fine.

There isn’t evidence to support a prosecution. As has been stated in the report.

There’s plenty of evidence. Willful removal and possession of classified documents going back decades. This is not subject to argument - it is a fact.

The ONLY reason he is not being prosecuted is because he’s mentally unfit to stand trial.

Not at all fact. You are just making shit up. That is NOT AT ALL what the report said. The investigation is done, no evidence of willful misconduct, the report says Biden's testimony was clear and compelling, and THAT is not subject to argument. CASE IS CLOSED. Your personal opinions to the contrary are invalid and irrelevant.

What a load of crap.

The very first paragraph of the report said that he found Biden WILLFULLY took and retained classified material.
And, he did not say his testimony was "clear and compelling." He said what was clear was that Biden had memory issues.

Yes... the case was closed.

So, we have a president who on one hand isn't mentally strong enough to be charged, yet mentally strong enough to be the leader of the free world.

Make it make sense.

So, you only read the first paragraph and not the rest of the document where he was pretty specific in saying no crimes were committed and no charges were warranted.

PP hasn't even read the first paragraph! He's lying about even that! The first paragraph says "We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.1 We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president."

No criminal charges warranted because he has such a bad memory.....

"We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Eiden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

No charges because they have no evidence. It doesn’t matter what Biden would say if they had any real evidence. They didn’t.

The so-called bad memory is about questions like “Who packed this box in your office 15 years ago?” “Where was the box before it was moved to your garage?” “Who moved it to your garage?” “When?” “Why?”
Any sane person being asked those questions by a prosecutor would say “I don’t remember.” Who remembers that kind of trivial shit with certainty.

If a few documents and personal notes sat in a box with a bunch of mundane non classified office clutter for a dozen years, and there is no evidence that anyone ever did anything with any of the documents, then of course a jury would believe it was an innocent mistake with no willful intent. Because they have no evidence of intent but also no evidence of any harm.

All BS.
He accessed the documents and information. He even told his ghostwriter that he found the classified information.
And, the ghostwriter deleted some of his files even when he knew there was an investigation.

Face it... Biden had classified docs and information. Even leading back to his Senate days.
He accessed them when putting together a book. He shared classified information.

The only reason he is not being charged is because his memory is so poor that Hur doesn't think a jury would convict.
Yet, he is sharp enough to be president?
Give me a break.

You’re a liar.

DP. You're making a fool of yourself every time you childishly respond, "You're a liar!" The PP is correct.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The knee-jerk, partisan defense of a man who is CLEARLY diminished is something to behold. "Nothing to see here, he's on top of his game!" Wow.

Did you want us to pretend that an octogenarian forgetting some stuff is breaking news?

People his age have memory issues. Trump has them too.

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jill Biden's response to Hur in a fund raising email.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/11/jill-biden-special-counsel-report

I'm losing respect for Jill with every day that goes by. She needs to insist Biden step down, but she won't. It's really disgraceful.

She should insist her husband be prosecuted, his memory is fine.

There isn’t evidence to support a prosecution. As has been stated in the report.

There’s plenty of evidence. Willful removal and possession of classified documents going back decades. This is not subject to argument - it is a fact.

The ONLY reason he is not being prosecuted is because he’s mentally unfit to stand trial.

Not at all fact. You are just making shit up. That is NOT AT ALL what the report said. The investigation is done, no evidence of willful misconduct, the report says Biden's testimony was clear and compelling, and THAT is not subject to argument. CASE IS CLOSED. Your personal opinions to the contrary are invalid and irrelevant.

What a load of crap.

The very first paragraph of the report said that he found Biden WILLFULLY took and retained classified material.
And, he did not say his testimony was "clear and compelling." He said what was clear was that Biden had memory issues.

Yes... the case was closed.

So, we have a president who on one hand isn't mentally strong enough to be charged, yet mentally strong enough to be the leader of the free world.

Make it make sense.

So, you only read the first paragraph and not the rest of the document where he was pretty specific in saying no crimes were committed and no charges were warranted.

PP hasn't even read the first paragraph! He's lying about even that! The first paragraph says "We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.1 We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president."

No criminal charges warranted because he has such a bad memory.....

"We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Eiden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

No charges because they have no evidence. It doesn’t matter what Biden would say if they had any real evidence. They didn’t.

The so-called bad memory is about questions like “Who packed this box in your office 15 years ago?” “Where was the box before it was moved to your garage?” “Who moved it to your garage?” “When?” “Why?”
Any sane person being asked those questions by a prosecutor would say “I don’t remember.” Who remembers that kind of trivial shit with certainty.

If a few documents and personal notes sat in a box with a bunch of mundane non classified office clutter for a dozen years, and there is no evidence that anyone ever did anything with any of the documents, then of course a jury would believe it was an innocent mistake with no willful intent. Because they have no evidence of intent but also no evidence of any harm.

All BS.
He accessed the documents and information. He even told his ghostwriter that he found the classified information.
And, the ghostwriter deleted some of his files even when he knew there was an investigation.

Face it... Biden had classified docs and information. Even leading back to his Senate days.
He accessed them when putting together a book. He shared classified information.

The only reason he is not being charged is because his memory is so poor that Hur doesn't think a jury would convict.
Yet, he is sharp enough to be president?
Give me a break.

You’re a liar.

Anonymous wrote:The knee-jerk, partisan defense of a man who is CLEARLY diminished is something to behold. "Nothing to see here, he's on top of his game!" Wow.

Anonymous wrote:Criminal defense lawyers will now have another defense - "I don't remember anything doctrine" aka 'Joe Biden defense' for any crimes involving 'willfulness.'.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jill Biden's response to Hur in a fund raising email.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/11/jill-biden-special-counsel-report

I'm losing respect for Jill with every day that goes by. She needs to insist Biden step down, but she won't. It's really disgraceful.

She should insist her husband be prosecuted, his memory is fine.

There isn’t evidence to support a prosecution. As has been stated in the report.

There’s plenty of evidence. Willful removal and possession of classified documents going back decades. This is not subject to argument - it is a fact.

The ONLY reason he is not being prosecuted is because he’s mentally unfit to stand trial.

Not at all fact. You are just making shit up. That is NOT AT ALL what the report said. The investigation is done, no evidence of willful misconduct, the report says Biden's testimony was clear and compelling, and THAT is not subject to argument. CASE IS CLOSED. Your personal opinions to the contrary are invalid and irrelevant.

What a load of crap.

The very first paragraph of the report said that he found Biden WILLFULLY took and retained classified material.
And, he did not say his testimony was "clear and compelling." He said what was clear was that Biden had memory issues.

Yes... the case was closed.

So, we have a president who on one hand isn't mentally strong enough to be charged, yet mentally strong enough to be the leader of the free world.

Make it make sense.

So, you only read the first paragraph and not the rest of the document where he was pretty specific in saying no crimes were committed and no charges were warranted.

PP hasn't even read the first paragraph! He's lying about even that! The first paragraph says "We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.1 We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president."

No criminal charges warranted because he has such a bad memory.....

"We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Eiden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

No charges because they have no evidence. It doesn’t matter what Biden would say if they had any real evidence. They didn’t.

The so-called bad memory is about questions like “Who packed this box in your office 15 years ago?” “Where was the box before it was moved to your garage?” “Who moved it to your garage?” “When?” “Why?”
Any sane person being asked those questions by a prosecutor would say “I don’t remember.” Who remembers that kind of trivial shit with certainty.

If a few documents and personal notes sat in a box with a bunch of mundane non classified office clutter for a dozen years, and there is no evidence that anyone ever did anything with any of the documents, then of course a jury would believe it was an innocent mistake with no willful intent. Because they have no evidence of intent but also no evidence of any harm.

All BS.
He accessed the documents and information. He even told his ghostwriter that he found the classified information.
And, the ghostwriter deleted some of his files even when he knew there was an investigation.

Face it... Biden had classified docs and information. Even leading back to his Senate days.
He accessed them when putting together a book. He shared classified information.

The only reason he is not being charged is because his memory is so poor that Hur doesn't think a jury would convict.
Yet, he is sharp enough to be president?
Give me a break.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Criminal defense lawyers will now have another defense - "I don't remember anything doctrine" aka 'Joe Biden defense' for any crimes involving 'willfulness.'.

JFC. You think Biden is the first person to say “I don’t recall” when asked questions about nitpicking details by a hostile prosecutor? Defense lawyers never thought of that? Your gaslighting is weak.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Criminal defense lawyers will now have another defense - "I don't remember anything doctrine" aka 'Joe Biden defense' for any crimes involving 'willfulness.'.

JFC. You think Biden is the first person to say “I don’t recall” when asked questions about nitpicking details by a hostile prosecutor? Defense lawyers never thought of that? Your gaslighting is weak.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jill Biden's response to Hur in a fund raising email.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/11/jill-biden-special-counsel-report

I'm losing respect for Jill with every day that goes by. She needs to insist Biden step down, but she won't. It's really disgraceful.

She should insist her husband be prosecuted, his memory is fine.

There isn’t evidence to support a prosecution. As has been stated in the report.

There’s plenty of evidence. Willful removal and possession of classified documents going back decades. This is not subject to argument - it is a fact.

The ONLY reason he is not being prosecuted is because he’s mentally unfit to stand trial.

Not at all fact. You are just making shit up. That is NOT AT ALL what the report said. The investigation is done, no evidence of willful misconduct, the report says Biden's testimony was clear and compelling, and THAT is not subject to argument. CASE IS CLOSED. Your personal opinions to the contrary are invalid and irrelevant.

What a load of crap.

The very first paragraph of the report said that he found Biden WILLFULLY took and retained classified material.
And, he did not say his testimony was "clear and compelling." He said what was clear was that Biden had memory issues.

Yes... the case was closed.

So, we have a president who on one hand isn't mentally strong enough to be charged, yet mentally strong enough to be the leader of the free world.

Make it make sense.

So, you only read the first paragraph and not the rest of the document where he was pretty specific in saying no crimes were committed and no charges were warranted.

PP hasn't even read the first paragraph! He's lying about even that! The first paragraph says "We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.1 We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president."

No criminal charges warranted because he has such a bad memory.....

"We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Eiden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

No charges because they have no evidence. It doesn’t matter what Biden would say if they had any real evidence. They didn’t.

The so-called bad memory is about questions like “Who packed this box in your office 15 years ago?” “Where was the box before it was moved to your garage?” “Who moved it to your garage?” “When?” “Why?”
Any sane person being asked those questions by a prosecutor would say “I don’t remember.” Who remembers that kind of trivial shit with certainty.

If a few documents and personal notes sat in a box with a bunch of mundane non classified office clutter for a dozen years, and there is no evidence that anyone ever did anything with any of the documents, then of course a jury would believe it was an innocent mistake with no willful intent. Because they have no evidence of intent but also no evidence of any harm.

Anonymous wrote:I will take the word of the guy in the room

Bob Bauer who was present during the interviews President Biden had with Special Counsel Robert Hur says President Biden was very aware, understood what was going on, but the questions by Robert Hur were bad.

Does President Biden have memory problems? Bob Bauer "I was in the room and the President does not."

Bob Bauer says the questions by Robert Hur weren't precise.

Bob Bauer also says the final report by Robert Hur is being mischaracterized and the attacks are not what prosecutors do

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Pretty amazing that he couldn’t remember when Beau died, considering that he mentions Beau EVERY TIME HE MEETS SOMEONE WHO HAS HAD A LOVED ONE DIE.

And, it's pretty rich that in Jill Biden's statement WRT the report, she said, "I can't imagine someone would try to use our son's death to score political points."
Especially since this is what Joe does all. the. time.

THIS. I actually cringe every time he's talking to people who have lost loved ones and EVERY TIME has to bring up the death of his son. Way to make it all about you.
DP

Especially when a Military member died overseas and Biden starts in on his son dying. I am sure his son’s death was tragic and terrible, but he died in a hospital. Joe and his family could say their goodbyes and make sure Beau was cared for and treated with pain relief, etc. Military personnel who die from being blown up or any hostile action don’t have that kind of death. Two different things, both awful, but not the same.

This is a childish, pathetic pissing match about who suffered more. Gross. The point is that Trump’s family is completely out of touch with the military and mocks them. Biden family can relate and respects them.

No, Military members who die in action in war are separate from people who doe from cancer. Both are tragic. But Beau Biden didn’t die in war. It’s not childish to point out the difference.

My God but you are stupid. There really should be an IQ minimum to post on DCUM or, at minimum, knowledge of what you are talking about!

I have a service connected cancer. It was caused by my exposure to toxic substances during my service in Southeast Asia.

I don’t think you have anything of substance or significance to add to this topic. You are aggressively awful. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Anonymous wrote:Criminal defense lawyers will now have another defense - "I don't remember anything doctrine" aka 'Joe Biden defense' for any crimes involving 'willfulness.'.

Anonymous wrote:Criminal defense lawyers will now have another defense - "I don't remember anything doctrine" aka 'Joe Biden defense' for any crimes involving 'willfulness.'.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jill Biden's response to Hur in a fund raising email.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/11/jill-biden-special-counsel-report

I'm losing respect for Jill with every day that goes by. She needs to insist Biden step down, but she won't. It's really disgraceful.

She should insist her husband be prosecuted, his memory is fine.

There isn’t evidence to support a prosecution. As has been stated in the report.

There’s plenty of evidence. Willful removal and possession of classified documents going back decades. This is not subject to argument - it is a fact.

The ONLY reason he is not being prosecuted is because he’s mentally unfit to stand trial.

Not at all fact. You are just making shit up. That is NOT AT ALL what the report said. The investigation is done, no evidence of willful misconduct, the report says Biden's testimony was clear and compelling, and THAT is not subject to argument. CASE IS CLOSED. Your personal opinions to the contrary are invalid and irrelevant.

What a load of crap.

The very first paragraph of the report said that he found Biden WILLFULLY took and retained classified material.
And, he did not say his testimony was "clear and compelling." He said what was clear was that Biden had memory issues.

Yes... the case was closed.

So, we have a president who on one hand isn't mentally strong enough to be charged, yet mentally strong enough to be the leader of the free world.

Make it make sense.

So, you only read the first paragraph and not the rest of the document where he was pretty specific in saying no crimes were committed and no charges were warranted.

PP hasn't even read the first paragraph! He's lying about even that! The first paragraph says "We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.1 We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president."

No criminal charges warranted because he has such a bad memory.....

"We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Eiden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."