XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican

On 2024-03-04 09:35, AlleyCat wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GH1-7e6XIAArrW4?format=png&name=large

But they agree he committed insurection...

...loser.

============================================================================

James Biden Admits 'Loan Repayment' To Joe Was Possible Thanks To ...

https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2024/03/01/james-biden-admits-loan-repayment-to- joe-was-possible-thanks-to-chinese-money-n3783920

Today - James, 74, insisted that he didn't believe the company, CEFC China Energy, was controlled by Beijing - claiming that "I just misspoke" when telling the IRS in a 2022 interview that first son Hunter Biden, who was partnering with his uncle, had described CEFC chairman Ye Jianming as a "protégé" of Chinese President Xi Jinping.

=====

Hunter Makes A Lot Of Intriguing Admissions And Finally ... - Redstate

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2024/03/01/hunter-made-a-lot-of-intriguing- admissions-including-who-the-big-guy-was-n2170803

Today - Hunter admitted that he got $250,000 as a "loan" from Li but then never
had to pay it back and that his "sugar brother" Kevin Morris took on the debt.
As the House Oversight thread notes, Li was the CEO of a "state-backed investment firm." Li, the CEO of a state-backed investment firm, wired $250,000
to Hunter Biden as a "loan" that Hunter ...

=====

Hunter Biden Admits 'Big Guy' Joe Biden Email

https://www.ibtimes.sg/hunter-biden-admits-big-guy-joe-biden-email-claims- father-wasnt-involved-business-deal-he-73671

Today - Hunter also admitted putting his father Joe on speakerphone and inviting him to numerous lunches with business associates and 'friends' over the years. By R. Ghosh March 1, 2024 15:21 +08

=====

Hunter Biden Says He Was High When Texting Chinese Exec: Letters

https://nypost.com/2024/03/01/opinion/hunter-biden-says-he-was-high-when- texting-chinese-exec-letters/

Hunter admits Joe Biden's the 'big guy' at long last - but we knew all along The week in whoppers: Hunter gaslights on Biden corruption, MSNBC writer smears
GOP on voting rights and more ...

=====

Transcript Of Hunter Biden Testimony Makes Eric Swalwell ... - Townhall

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/rebeccadowns/2024/03/01/release-of-hunter-biden-
transcript-does-not-bode-well-for-eric-swalwell-n2635979

Today - Hunter Biden confirmed his father, then-Vice President Biden, dined with Russian oligarch, Yelena Baturina, Kazakhstani oligarch, Kenes Rakishev, and Burisma's corporate secretary, Vadym ...

=====

Hunter Biden Admits 'Big Guy' Joe Biden Email But Claims Father Wasn't ...

https://www.ibtimes.sg/hunter-biden-admits-big-guy-joe-biden-email-claims- father-wasnt-involved-business-deal-he-73671

Today - Hunter asked, adding "I do not recall the date of the meeting." He strongly claimed that his business dealings with CEFC were "completely legitimate and 100 percent in line with my experience and ...

=====

Hunter Makes A Lot Of Intriguing Admissions And Finally ... - Redstate

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2024/03/01/hunter-made-a-lot-of-intriguing- admissions-including-who-the-big-guy-was-n2170803

Today - Hunter admitted that he got $250,000 as a "loan" from Li but then never
had to pay it back and that his "sugar brother" Kevin Morris took on the debt.
As the House Oversight thread notes, Li was the CEO of a "state-backed investment firm." Li, the CEO of a state-backed investment firm, wired $250,000
to Hunter Biden as a "loan" that Hunter ...

=====

Biden Family Members Confirm Key Details Of Impeachment Inquiry ...

https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/biden-family-members- confirm-key-details-impeachment-inquiry

Today - Hunter Biden admitted he received a $250,000 wire from the CEO of a Chinese state-backed investment fund, Jonathan Li. He confirmed that five weeks
after the end of his father's term, he received a share of a $3 million payment
sent by State Energy HK Limited to an entity owned by his business partner.

=====

Nudes For Nothing: Marjorie Taylor Greene Doesn't Ask Hunter Biden ...

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/nudes-nothing-marjorie-taylor-greene-211117825.html

Today - One of Hunter Biden's vocal antagonists on Capitol Hill, Greene has repeatedly used her time during committee hearings to display images of him apparently engaged in sex acts with prostitutes. Greene said the photos showed
that the younger Biden had committed crimes - namely, violations of the Mann Act, a federal law that forbids ...

=====

James Biden Admits Joe Biden Received $40,000 From Hunter Biden's ...

https://politicom.com.au/james-biden-admits-joe-biden-received-40000-from- hunter-bidens-laundered-china-money/

The House Oversight Committee on Friday released a transcript of James Biden's
February 21 closed-door impeachment inquiry interview. Joe Biden's slimy brother and 'family fixer' James Biden worked with Hunter Biden on various overseas business ventures. One of their more notable ventures included CEFC, an energy company linked to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). James

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican

On 2024-03-04 19:53, AlleyCat wrote:

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 13:07:10 -0800, Alan says...

But they agree he committed insurection...

Nope.

Yup.

A non-ruling is not a ruling. How can the court "agree" on something that wasn't even brought up?

With a conservative majority, they would not have hesitated to address
that point, since Trump's lawyers included it in their brief.

"Donald Trump Can Remain on The Presidential Ballot But The Question of Whether
He Was Guilty of Insurrection Unresolved"

What was your source for that quote, loser?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican

On 2024-03-04 19:53, AlleyCat wrote:

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 13:07:10 -0800, Alan says...

But they agree he committed insurection...

Nope.

A non-ruling is not a ruling. How can the court "agree" on something that wasn't even brought up?

"Donald Trump Can Remain on The Presidential Ballot But The Question of Whether
He Was Guilty of Insurrection Unresolved"

"Unresolved" because it wasn't addressed.

A non-ruling is not a ruling. How can the court "agree" on something that wasn't even addressed?

It was addressed in Trump's brief, loser.

From page 27:

'18
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

1. The Court should reverse because President Trump is not subject to
section 3. The president is not an “officer of the United States” as
that term is used in the Constitution. President Trump also never swore
an oath before he became president that could trigger the appli- cation
of section 3.

2. The Court should also reverse because President Trump did not “engage
in insurrection.” The Colorado Supreme Court tried to impute the conduct
of others to President Trump. But the Anderson litigants needed to show
that President Trump’s own conduct qualified as “insurrection,” and they cannot make that showing when President Trump never participated in or
directed any of the illegal conduct that occurred at the Capitol on
Janu- ary 6, 2021. In fact, the opposite is true, as President Trump
repeatedly called for peace, patriotism, and law and order.'

<https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/298125/20240118171750343_Trump%20v%20Anderson%20Petitioner%20Brief%20on%20the%20Merits.pdf>

Let me write that most pertinent sentence again for you, loser:

'The Court should also reverse because President Trump did not “engage
in insurrection.”'

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican

On 2024-03-05 10:44, AlleyCat wrote:

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 20:04:06 -0800, Alan says...

What was your source for that quote, loser?

A source you've already looked up.

So what was it? Telling me would be quicker than this, loser.

But...

This quote:

"Donald Trump Can Remain on The Presidential Ballot But The Question of
Whether He Was Guilty of Insurrection Unresolved"

...is wrong.

Both the US House of Representatives and the courts in Colorado have
agreed he engaged in insurrection...

...and despite being asked to rule that he hadn't, the US Supreme Court
did not reverse that finding.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican

On 2024-03-05 17:30, AlleyCat wrote:

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 13:07:10 -0800, Alan says...

But they agree he committed insurection...

No, they didn't.

They let that finding of fact stand when Trump made the argument that
that finding was wrong.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican

On 2024-03-05 17:30, AlleyCat wrote:

Colorado

No jurisdiction.

Supreme Court said so.

Conflating two different things, loser.

The Supreme Court ruled that COLORADO couldn't use the FACT that Trump
engaged in an insurrection to disqualify him.

They didn't deny that finding of fact.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican

On 2024-03-06 16:19, AlleyCat wrote:

On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 17:32:40 -0800, Alan says...

Conflating two different things, loser.

No... YOU are the one conflating, because you're suing it as an argument against what the Court DID find... that Colorado has NO jurisdiction.

Nope.

I already TOLD you this.

"The decision did not conclude one way or the other if Trump had engaged in insurrection, as Colorado's high court did." - NBC

Let's see how honest you can be, loser.

Yes or no only:

Did the district court in Denver find that Trump had engaged in an insurrection? Yes or no, and then you can editorialize about "kangaroo
courts".

Did the Colorado Supreme Court affirm that finding? (same conditions).

Did Trump argue to the US Supreme Court that he hadn't actually engaged
in an insurrection? (same conditions)

Did the US Supreme Court overturn the finding that Trump had engaged in
an insurrection? (same conditions).

Can you be this honest, loser?

I seriously doubt it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican

On 2024-03-06 16:19, AlleyCat wrote:

On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 17:33:22 -0800, Alan says...

They let that finding of fact stand when Trump made the argument that
that finding was wrong.

Letting it "stand" does NOT mean they disagreed with it or not. They probably can NOT care less about what the Kangaroo Courts of Colorado think or did.

I law that is EXACTLY what it means.

The undisputed conclusion of the courts is that Trump DID engage in an insurrection.

Sorry... you arguing of ONLY the "insurrection" issue that Colorado "found", is
moot.

Except that Trump explicitly argued to the USSC...

...and they didn't overturn the finding.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)