Trump is an idiot

What was known 500 days ago?

The FBI claims Trump had damaging documents in his possession for over 500 days.

They are saying now that Trump had damaging documents in his possession for over 500 days.

Any complaint about 500 days is entirely due to Trump's lying and criminal activity on a very personally engaged basis.  At any time before Aug 8th, Trump could have avoided the search and halted a criminal investigation by returning all stolen items.

Watch as this narrative crumbles to pieces bit by bit over the next two years, but by then it will be old news and oromagi will be on to new conspiracies to allege.

Watch as this narrative crumbles to pieces bit by bit over the next two years

The money is the money paid to Hunter Biden.

Now which part of the premises I recounted to you reject? Do you reject that Hunter was paid the money? Do you reject that he was utterly useless in that role? Do you reject that Biden was the policy maker of a very nosy and involved US Ukraine tentacle that could very well help keep burisma out of legal trouble and getting all the permits and favours it needed? Do you reject that Hunter's financial prospects are indistinguishable from his father's?

The only alternative (which you suggested) required Shokin to be aware of the corruption to be plausible.

The first letter is as much evidence of "no problem" as the second is of "problem".

You display a fundamental misunderstanding of political epistemology. People do indeed rely on others to tell them what to believe, often starting from a group of conspirators that could fit in one room. Once the assertion is out in the wild it is amplified and modified by those with pre-existing reasons to favor it, like a giant game of telephone.

They don't need to be stupid. They don't need to be pawns. They don't even have to be wrong, they just need to have relied on information that originated with Biden's actions

How could you possibly explain away the negligence required to take 500 days to suspect a crime?

a process that alone took weeks.

The money is the money paid to Hunter Biden.

This conversation isn't about Hunter Biden.

I reject your assertion that Joe Biden somehow was in control of the opinions of all of US intelligence as well as international intelligence and even opinions within Ukraine - a premise essential to argument that the best explanation here is that Joe did what he did not because it was in the US's best interest, but to interject to save his son from an investigation that we don't even know was when going on at the time and one that wouldn't have targeted Hunter anyway.

I also reject as unsupported the notion that Hunter and Joe were entangled financially. Provide the evidence.

Hunter received a series of text messages from a former agent who repeatedly urged him to come out of his hotel room and reminded him “this is linked to Celtic’s account.” “Celtic” was Joe Biden’s Secret Service code name when he was vice president.

In a 2018 email to one his own assistants, Hunter complained that he had been shut out of his own bank account and that his father had been using it. 

Before Joe left office, he was referred to as 'the big guy' and described in an email from a Ukrainian executive at Burisma which suggested he'd gotten access to him through Hunter.

Another former Hunter Biden partner, US Navy veteran Tony Bobulinski, later revealed that “the big guy” was Hunter’s dad, then the Democratic candidate for president, saying, “I have heard Joe Biden say he has never discussed his dealings with Hunter. That is false.”

The only alternative (which you suggested) required Shokin to be aware of the corruption to be plausible.

Double_R: It's not the only alternative. This is a classic argument from incredulity.

Yet, somehow, you seem to think these letters cancel each other out and show disagreement amongst US intelligence. You can only arrive at that conclusion by fundamentally ignoring both the timing of these letters as well as what they actually said.

We're talking about people who actually work in US intelligence. If this is honestly how's you think the world works it's no wonder that you buy into these nonsense conspiracy theories.

They don't need to be stupid. They don't need to be pawns. They don't even have to be wrong, they just need to have relied on information that originated with Biden's actions

US intelligence does not come from the Vice President, it comes from boots on the ground and makes it's way up to the executive branch. This is really basic stuff.

What we can judge, however, is his handling of classified material, as he once did with Hillary.

True, and so the approprite response is "Lock him up, lock him up, lock him up"

Also, Trump didn't use to FBI to destroy any of his rivals despite what some of his more extremist supporters chanted.

I will go duckduckgo on this one, but I find it very suspicious that anyone does not know the evidence for this already. If you truly don't that speaks volumes to the news bubble you live in.

It is the timing I relied on to say that there was no international consensus before Biden got involved and it was ALL after Hunter was laundering.

I can't argue against your faith in institutions, faith has no supporting arguments.

. It's basic human nature for people who work with intelligence and make entire careers out of discerning truth from fiction to resist narratives being fed to them that they cannot verify. It's also common sense that intelligence comes from those working in the field, not from the people they are feeding their intelligence to.

There is a reason we have mainstream media, and right wing media. Unlike the latter, the former has journalistic standards. 

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

All of your evidence is coming from the NY Post and the Daily mail. These are not news organizations, they're tabloids

And the source of all of their claims comes from hunter Biden's laptop drive

which had been shown to be copied and very possibly tampered with dozens of times over.

After scowering the internet, I could only find two of the controversial emails circulating were externally verified.

The latter merely showed that they had dinner. That tells us nothing nor is there anything remarkable about someone being thrilled at the chance to meet the VPOTUS.

So at worst this shows that Hunter was trying to get his dad to go along with the deal and his dad refused.

So does this mean all of the emails are faked? No, it means we have no reason to take it at face value and given that this laptop ended up inn the hands of Rudy Giuliani, it's crazy to think they wouldn't tamper with the material to put it out there given that right wing media couldn't care less about verifying this stuff before reporting on it.

You act as if no one noticed a thing until Joe Biden came out and told the world "look over there", then suddenly the world agreed. That is just cartoonish and there is no evidence Biden lead the world in this consensus.

The meeting he had with Porshenko was private, that's why no one knew about it until Biden told the world about it two years later.

I can't argue against your faith in institutions, faith has no supporting arguments.

It's not faith, it's common sense. It's basic human nature for people who work with intelligence and make entire careers out of discerning truth from fiction to resist narratives being fed to them that they cannot verify. It's also common sense that intelligence comes from those working in the field, not from the people they are feeding their intelligence to.

Did the laptop come encrypted and you know for a fact that the key was only given to you? If the answer is "No" then it could all be fake. Because of this I know that claims of "russian hackers" are guesses. There is no such thing as leaving evidence behind that can be definitely shown to not be intentionally planted frame job.

The fact that you think Giuliani touching it discredits it but FBI touching it doesn't do the same is a testament to the unbridgeable tribal gap that has already formed in the USA.

Giuliani was a famous anti-crime mayor of one of the leading cities of the world, but to you he's some sort of conniving minion who wouldn't think twice about fabricating evidence.

Think about that fall from grace in your opinion, now imagine those same feelings about the FBI. That's how the other side feels.

Anyway we have every reason to take them at face value, they fit perfectly into the puzzle.

I'm not the one with a burden of proof to show that Biden engineered the whole thing, I'm simply saying it's possible and you have failed to rule it out...

If we could know for sure that the anti-shokin sentiment was not created or amplified by Biden it would be a dent in the circumstantial evidence against him...

That cannot be established, or at least no one has in this thread established it.

You can't keep your story straight, in order for Shokin to take revenge on Slovchesky as a proxy for Biden he must have known Biden was the one who made it happen.

you do realize that you haven't posted anything to do with "intelligence", you got news papers talking past tense about complaints and a letter from senators which is extraordinarily vague.

There is a reason we have mainstream media, and right wing media. Unlike the latter, the former has journalistic standards. 

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

Did the laptop come encrypted and you know for a fact that the key was only given to you? If the answer is "No" then it could all be fake. Because of this I know that claims of "russian hackers" are guesses. There is no such thing as leaving evidence behind that can be definitely shown to not be intentionally planted frame job.

There is also no such thing as words spoken or written that can definitely be shown to not be a lie, so if you're information is coming from words it can all be faked.

So given the fact that the chain of custody includes his hands and as I pointed out does show signs of tampering

it is frankly absurd to take that as a reliable source of information.

On the one hand we have a federal law enforcement institution whose most basic principal is to remain apolitical, with checks and balances, career employees who have been hired under and worked for democratic and republican administrations, and where every piece of communication is subject to subpoeana and congressional oversight.

On the other hand you have a paid political operative.

But you think these two are even.

Even republican politicians recognize how dumb it is to talk about the FBI as some purely politicized institution

the director of the FBI was appointed by Donald Trump

The fall from grace is certainly remarkable, but it's what we have observed from him.

The fact that he enthusiasticly supports the most childish, ignorant, narcissistic, fascistic, petulant, vile president we've even seen is bad enough.

and when and under oath about false claims he made publicly stated it wasn't house job to fact check information before putting it out there. 

You can feel the same way about the FBI all day, but you do not have the facts to back it up.

The obvious go to in response for those on the political right is the Carter Page controversy

it was also discovered through an internal investigation which just makes my point about checks and balances.

Once again, this is about Joe Biden's reason for pushing for Shokin's firing. The emails don't merely fit into the puzzle, they are the line that connects the dots.

This is a reversal of the burden of proof. You are the one claiming without evidence that Biden engineered this, so the burden is on you to provide evidence for that claim. The fact that we cannot disprove your baseless assertion does not validate your argument.

you do realize that you haven't posted anything to do with "intelligence", you got news papers talking past tense about complaints and a letter from senators which is extraordinarily vague.

Two of the articles I posted were published in November 2015, a month before Biden's meeting with Porshenko.

We've already been through the Senate letter, you've already acknowledged they were talking about Shokin. You can stop with the bad faith reversals.

That is perhaps more true as technology is advancing, but there was a time when an ink pen was almost impossible to undo and a contract with a signature represented something exceedingly difficult to fake, same with an audio recording.

There were no checks and balances to prevent the fabrication of evidence submitted to FISA courts, there was no check and balance to prevent a single document commissioned by a paid political operative from generating literal years of controversy intentionally prolonged and enlarged by the FBI, there was no check and balance to prevent agents from preempting the laptop story (and thus running deeply afoul of the 1st amendment).

The only difference I see is that Trump's paid political operative works alone and Clinton's paid political operative can throw a snowball on the hill and the FBI turns it into a boulder.

It's what you've been told to believe.

before the laptop plenty of people recognized that it beggared belief that Biden was the prime mover in removing a prosecutor who moved against the corrupt foreign company where his very American son was inexplicably 'employed' with an absurd 'wage'.

Your deductive argument failed, you cannot rule out personal motivation or even rule out the possibility that Biden engineered the anti-Shokin movement. Thus...

Articles published by intelligence agencies?

The reversal is only being caused by your double standards. I agreed it implicated Shokin because I was being objective, later when you refused to accept the implications of the "good job" letter I pointed out the double standard.

I was addressing your fallacious appeal to certainty, which has become a theme in your arguments.

To the first, the check and balance is the inspector generals office who prosecuted the individual who falsified the documents.

That was an incredibly stupid thing to lose his career over.

And ironically, the judge said he probably would have approved the warrant anyway, which not only shows how pointless it was, it also shows how the scale of this controversy is being completely blown out of proportion. 

(not one thing in that dossier has been proven false)

The only connection you can draw there is that they used the document in their quest to get a warrant, that doesn't discredit anything. No one is claiming it was proven, if that were the case they wouldn't be investigating it. They used it because it corroborated the information they already had and the threats posed were serious enough to warrant investigation.

The last is just a claim made by a self professed Trump supporter. If that's your proof you have incredibly low standards.

I know that's the only difference you see, that's the problem. It's a common right wing tactic to disregard context and focus only on the end result in order to make everything seem equal when they're not.

the intelligence is treated as serious findings rather than being blasted on CNN

the information corroborates what the FBI already had

and so the FBI takes that seriously, you see it as politicization.

But when a paid political operative who goes to other countries in search of political dirt on his client's opponent

comes across a laptop handed to him by a Trump supporter weeks before a presidential election claiming to belong to the son of his political opponent, goes on TV to talk about all of the damming information found on this laptop

even as former intelligence officers warn that this has the hallmarks of Russian propaganda,

following an election where Russian propaganda proved consequential in shaping public sentiment, results in extreme caution before accepting this information and spreading it...

You see that as politicization.

The dossier, despite being in the FBI's hands well before the election, was never disclosed to the public or even congress until well after the results were final.

Meanwhile the fact that Clinton was being investigated again for her emails was made public knowledge 10 days before the election and arguably handed Trump the White House.

It's not a deductive argument.

Add to that the fact that Hunter was never in any legal jeapordy and claims that Biden was really motivated by personal interests competely violates Occam's razor.

you do realize that you haven't posted anything to do with "intelligence", you got news papers talking past tense about complaints

Two of the articles I posted were published in November 2015, a month before Biden's meeting with Porshenko.

Articles published by intelligence agencies?

Intelligence agencies do not publish articles.

The reversal is only being caused by your double standards. I agreed it implicated Shokin because I was being objective, later when you refused to accept the implications of the "good job" letter I pointed out the double standard.

My standards have nothing to do with your position, or at least they shouldn't. If they do then it's no wonder your arguments rely on such inconsistencies and logical fallacies.

I explained to you in detail why the letter was not what you were claiming it to be.