FrantzHardySwag

It brings up another friction point for me, the interviewer last year contacted Reade and her friend - who both said it wasn't sexual assault - it was an uncomfortable feeling and the fact she felt mistreated by the Biden team. It was explicitly mentioned to the interviewer last year that Biden never tried to "kiss her or go in in for one of those touches". Reade said her story is not a story of sexual misconduct, but of abuse of power. I know a lot of people here don't like the term, she changed her story - but that seems like a change to me. Either we believe last year's Reade who said there was no sexual misconduct, or we believe this years Reade who said there was sexual misconduct - this wasn't an adding of details, we cannot believe both versions.

Yeah not worth it for you at this point, it's been disproven thoroughly, unless you're an earth is flat guy - then you might really enjoy it.

Thank god no one on this board has posted the Plandemic video. A buddy sent it to me and after crapping on it for 2 hours, I think he regretted sending it to me. No wonder Russia was able to so easily influence us via social media, people do no research on their own anymore.

Recruiting is such a different game now days, it's almost impossible to shut down your borders, w/ film and camps, visibility is at an all time high - kids are getting looks from all over the country. Just looking at 2021 alone. Top 2 Kids in Nebraska - Going to Iowa, and Minnesota Top 2 Kids in Minnesota - Going to Wisconsin and Iowa Top 2 Kids in Iowa - Chance that Iowa misses out on both Top Kid in Michigan - Looks like he's SEC bound Top 2 Kids in Missouri - Not Mizzou Bound Top 2 Kids in Colorado - Not Colorado Bound

It was the medias fault!!!!

There isn't a difference in quality of evidence, there is complete lack of evidence from one side of the argument. I'm done with this, there literally is no point to arguing it anymore.

"He's not scared of a Gaffe machine that lies constantly and that is running on the platform of "I'm not Donald Trump" ---Looked back at it, you're right - how can I refute this strong, strong evidence. It shocks me you think someone saying "I think Biden sucks, so Trump isn't scared of him" is the same as "Trump has gone to great lengths, to the point of almost losing his presidency, to try and dig up dirt on Biden, as well as his Super PACs have only targeting one person in their ads to attack (when they're were many people still left in the race), as well as posting multiple articles from multiple platforms stating the same thing". It's not the same thing. I feel like I'm arguing with anti-vaxxer. I have evidence to support my claim.

No I'm using the evidence of Trump's actions to justify my position. Don't you see the difference? Here's some more evidence for you: https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/470775-juan-williams-trumps-ukraine-scandal-rooted-in-fear-of-biden https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trump-gop-get-2020-match-they-clearly-did-not-want-n1179886 https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/01/politics/joe-biden-donald-trump-fire-fighters-union-iaff-tweets/index.html https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/trumps-big-gamble-on-biden/606394/ https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/03/03/msnbcs_nicole_wallace_trump_so_terrified_of_biden_he_soiled_his_reputation_and_the_family_name.html https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/donald-trump-is-terrified-of-facing-joe-biden-stra/ https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/05/donald-trump-joe-biden-fox-news "A pro-Trump super PAC launched anti-Biden advertising ahead of the Nevada caucuses, too. How many other Democratic presidential hopefuls were on the receiving end of GOP attack ads? None. There was an enormous field of potential targets, but Republicans focused entirely on one potential rival. It was as subtle as a sledgehammer: the president's allies didn't want Joe Biden to win the Democratic nomination. To be sure, there's been ample discussion, especially on the left, about whether GOP assumptions about the Delaware Democrat are correct. What's far less debatable, however, is the palpable, months-long fear in Republican circles about who they didn't want to face in the general election. The anxiety was especially acute at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The illegal extortion scheme that led to Donald Trump's impeachment was an extraordinary scandal, but let's not forget that at its core, the president hoped to pressure a foreign country to dig up dirt on Biden -- leaving little doubt that the incumbent president was worried about facing him in a fair fight."

I conceded that you don't think Trump should be scared of Biden, that's fine. But you can't project that onto Trump, he has already proven through his actions, he is indeed scared of Biden.

I edited my post, he did get impeached. You seem to be just repeating your opinion, like it's Trump's and everyone else's. Trump is scared of him - or else he wouldn't risk losing his presidency trying to dig up dirt on him. No one would do that unless they were threatened. Again obviously YOU think he shouldn't be afraid of Biden - but he is.

Did we already forget he got impeached for drumming up dirt on Biden???? You can argue he shouldn't be afraid of Biden - but he most definitely is. You don't become the third president impeached for digging up dirt on "the guy you want to be the nominee".

I mean it's the kind driving people to vote - so when talking about voting, its the best kind.

Enthusiasm is overrated. Bernies best/most enthusiastic voter base actually turned out less than they did in 2016 (compared to the whole)! So apparently enthusiasm is not leading to more people going to the polls. This data + increased numbers in many states, tells me that Biden's base came out in droves.

From the Hill, in reference to enthusiasm. Voter turnout in the Democratic presidential primaries in Michigan, Missouri and Mississippi reached its highest levels in more than a decade on Tuesday. The surge in turnout was largely driven by black voters, moderates and suburbanites, who have come out in force in recent weeks to the benefit of former Vice President Joe Biden. That trend began in South Carolina late last month and has served to lift Biden’s campaign up from the brink of collapse and deliver him a spate of wins in the primary race. In Michigan, Democratic turnout shattered records on Tuesday, with nearly 1.6 million voters casting ballots in the primary — a nearly 33 percent increase over 2016 when just shy of 1.2 million votes were recorded. Biden beat Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in Michigan, dealing a crushing blow to his chief progressive rival, who carried the state over Hillary Clinton four years ago. For Democrats more broadly, the high turnout in Michigan was a promising development at a time when they are looking to recapture parts of the Midwest that they lost to President Trump in 2016. Lavora Barnes, the chairwoman of the Michigan Democratic Party, labeled the surge in her state as a “turnout explosion” ignited by widespread opposition to Trump. “From his attacks on health care and access to clean water to his failure to grow manufacturing jobs in our state, Donald Trump has broken promise after promise to Michigan and yesterday, Democratic voters showed they’re ready to hold him accountable for that fact,” Barnes said in a statement. In Mississippi, turnout swelled by about 19 percent over 2016 levels, according to the most recent vote tallies. In Missouri, the increase in turnout was a more modest 5 percent over where it was four years ago. Biden carried both of those states on Tuesday. Turnout in North Dakota’s Democratic caucuses quadrupled from 2016, surging from less than 3,400 four years ago to nearly 15,000 on Tuesday. The state implemented new caucus rules that effectively made it run more like a primary. The two other states that held primaries on Tuesday, Washington and Idaho, also saw massive increases in Democratic votes cast, though it’s difficult to compare turnout to prior years, because both states switched from caucuses to primary systems, which typically drive higher turnout.

Sanders/Trump fired up their base - a small segment of the voter pool. Biden has solidly gained the support across many groups, you know, the majority. This is the fatal mistake Sanders make, I'd rather have the majority be meh about voting for my candidate, then have the minority be SUPER FIRED UP about voting for my candidate.

Not a bad breakdown my friend. You summed up 500+ pages in case anyone missed everything up until now.

Sorry, that was in reference to Obama's vetting process for VP.

I don't think anyone here is shooting down the idea of needing more information. I think both sides can agree more information is needed, which is obviously a huge hurdle right now. She has people in her circle that have corroborated her story. There are people that worked with her within Biden's campaign that have refuted some key points of her story. She nor the Senate can produce the personnel file on her, or even acknowledge its existence , a team of 10 Lawyers spend 2 months vetting Biden, and found nothing. There is no date to verify either person's whereabouts. What are most people suppose to do with this information? I mean we had a story just last week that Biden sexually harassed at 14 year old, and people collaborated that story, until it came out that he was at neither the first, or the second revised dinner she said it happened at. Theres no way for us to move forward at this point, unless maybe Reade gets a lawyer, polygraph test, testifies under oath and gets sworn affidavit's from the people corroborating her story.

And honestly it's sketch as hell a guy who wrote "We need to talk about Joe", "Trump will run rings around Joe Biden", "You don't really want to nominate Joe Biden", calls him an "ailing Biden", "Sanders needs to keep fighting", "Party needs to unite around Sanders", "A vote for Warren is a vote for Biden" "Progressives, Warren is not one of us", "Why you should be a Socialist", "Bernie proved he's still got it", "The problem with Joe Biden's chummy politics". The list goes on and on. This guy's entire history of articles is Pro Bernie, Anti Biden - and now he's advising Biden's accuser and her family? Just plain sketchy, and it makes it hard to rule out political motivations.

What is it you are trying to argue? Brother tells the WaPo that he first heard the Biden story this spring, heard about Biden making her uncomfortable with shoulder touching back in 1993, Nathan Robinson self admits he reaches out to brother for him to clarify his story, brother then decides to text WaPo that oh yeah, he did know about the assault in 1993. His account being deleted is false, his tweets being deleted are known - people have the screen captures. He obviously realized it's a pretty bad look to be guiding the brother to revise his position from the initial interview.

The far left media has been heavily involved from day one - there was outcry from the lack of coverage by the national news - but in the last couple days Reade has cancelled interviews with Chris Wallace and Don Lemon. A lot of parts of this story just seem off.

He's also admitted to telling Reade which reporters to speak to and which reporters will try and lie and twist her words - he thought the WaPo was out to get her. His getting his hands in this seems odd, huge Bernie supporter, he just re-hired Bernie's Press Secretary back to his company.

This is all very generous. Brother talked to the WaPo, his story didn't involve sexual assault. Reporter then reaches out to brother (reporter is author of "Why Bernie has to Win", and "Everyone is getting on the Bernie Train", admits it on twitter, and has since deleted that tweet), brother then days later texts WaPo and says there was sexual assault.

So option 2, they know it doesn't exist, so instead of verifying Biden - they can continue to let speculation occur.

Bingo - and the Secretary of Senate - she was communications director for Mitch McConnell. The only reasons I can think of why they wouldn't release the docs: 1. They are trying to protect Biden, despite the fact he requested them released (seems odd for a republican senate) 2. They know nothing is in the files, and would rather speculation go on to help Trump (seems right on for a republican senate) 3. Only half the parties have signed off on the release, and Reade needs to sign off on their release before they disclose the files.