[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags  
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]

 No.7348

File: 1602908688125.jpg (409.17 KB, 1332x1532, 333:383, 1602715851324.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Will the Hunter Biden laptop leak have much influence on the election?

 No.7349

My guess is 'virtually no influence' because the story is only getting pick-up from Trump supporters who already basically consider Biden the anti-Christ. As a former conservative who went from Republican to Democrat due to Trump in 2016 (and for other reasons), I can say that I've seen little interest among independents and other key demographics in the election. And, naturally, Democrats are going to not care about more of what they consider as anti-Biden sliming by right-wing yellow journalism.

 No.7352

>>7349
As an independent I have to say that the republicans have used up my attention span for "We have damning evidence!" I heard this story already. If you have evidence give it to a law court, because I'm not the right person to give it to. There are probably a hundred technicalities and contextual issues that this has to be considered in context of to make it look either good or bad and I really don't care enough to keep it straight.

Somebody had associates that had dubiously appropriate communications with Eastern European leaders many years ago that have been mostly covered up and even if technically legal they should have known better. I have to say, dubiously grounded semi-official improprieties of the past aren't my hot button issue this year for some reason.

 No.7353

>>7352
Agreed 100%. This election, to me, hinges on three things:

1. Coronavirus in terms of health and wellness.
2. Health care in general.
3. Jobs and the economy w.r.t the coronavirus' effects.

It's not as if nothing else matters, like I'm one to really oppose banning assault weapons and am kind of pissed off at how popular the idea has gotten lately, but those three suck up the oxygen just about totally for me.

 No.7356

They've been banging that Hunter Biden drum for a while now hoping to stir up fear like they did with Hillary's emails. Both aren't actually anything real, and I think people have figured that out.

This would really only matter to people who are already against Biden.

 No.7358

File: 1603041789661.jpg (36.67 KB, 348x342, 58:57, 1498613385167.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>7356
>Both aren't actually anything real,
Huh?  I'm fairly certain that Hillary's alleged emails were real.  And while there's a chance that the alleged Hunter Biden emails might have been fabricated, so far it's looking like they're real.

 No.7361

>>7358
"real" in the sense that Hillary had used email at some point in her life, but they didn't find any classified information or anything law-breaking.

Emails existing dont mean anything, they have to prove unlawful activity.

 No.7362

>>7358
>so far it's looking like they're real
I honestly know nothing about this topic so I'm curious what about them makes you believe that.
Not to suggest it's impossible, I'm just skeptical of *anything* that breaks in a tabloid as a rule until it's corroborated.

 No.7363

>>7362

They're at least believable, because ultimately they aren't all that interesting.  A couple tweets have displayed them as this big campaign killing knife, but they're so benign and the news kinda came out a year or two ago anyway, there's just no room for this to have any impact.  Not to mention that some of the emails on there are Hunter telling his dad that he feels bad his coke addiction is ruining his campaign, and Joe is just like "Son you're doing great and I love you."  It's probably the most humanizing thing that's ever happened to the Biden campaign.

 No.7364

To be brutally honest, Biden's son could've beaten somebody upside the head with his smartphone that's being investigated, and I still would be voting for him against Trump. It's not as if Trump himself and his family don't have rotten as week old fish personal histories anyways. For real.

 No.7369

>>7362
I think he took it completely literally to mean "emails existed" not "the emails actually proved anyone broke the law". But I don't wanna speak for him.

>>7364
And it was pretty hypocritical for Trump to go after Biden for supposedly using his position to get his son a better job when half of Trump's staff is his own family.

 No.7371

File: 1603168936356.jpeg (609.73 KB, 1600x1200, 4:3, rozen_maiden_suiseiseki_g….jpeg) ImgOps Google

>>7349
>My guess is 'virtually no influence'
Yeah, it's looking that.  I guess Trump has so many scandals of his own that the Hunter/Burisma thing is small potatoes anyway.

>>7353
>This election, to me, hinges on three things...
For me, I'd add another: threats to the institutions and norms of our constitutional republic.  Trump has been a major offender here, but Biden/Kamala court packing might tip the scale.  I'm gonna hold off filling my ballot until Joe Biden answers the question.  Trump's rhetoric about locking up his political opponents also deeply concerns me, and any indications that it's not merely empty rhetoric (as it was in 2016) will switch my vote to Biden even if he does endorse court packing.

>>7364
I guess I kinda agree.  Even if it turns out that Hunter Biden enjoyed child sex slaves courtesy of Burisma --- well, Hunter Biden isn't the one running for president.  And it doesn't look like Joe Biden had very much involvement in this scandal.

>>7369
>I think he took it completely literally to mean "emails existed" not "the emails actually proved anyone broke the law". But I don't wanna speak for him.
Yes, that is what I meant.

 No.7374

>>7369
>And it was pretty hypocritical for Trump to go after Biden for supposedly using his position to get his son a better job when half of Trump's staff is his own family.

Exactly. And that's on top of, business-related scandal wise, how Trump cheats on his taxes. He hires illegal aliens to work for him too. He has long standing ties to the U.S. mafia as well.

Put all of the personal stuff such as how Trump likes to abuse women aside and just focus on his business dealings? Trump remains a scumbag's scumbag. Look at he full picture, and honestly Trump comes across as a villainous cartoon character that somebody who passionately hates capitalism, Christianity, the elderly, men, and white people would invent in a propaganda tract. A rich pasty doddering old fool almost sweating 100$s as he walks because Jesus blessed him so.

>>7371
I don't agree with your relative weighing of the issues, personally, but I concur that threats to institutions and norms are pretty damn important. I don't think that the damage is permanent. But then I'm one who's not naturally a pessimist, eh.

 No.7380

>>7348
Possibly, but I doubt it.
I think most people already realized there was a clear case of corruption in that case.
And, those who don't aren't likely to care about something the MSM and major social media is either ignoring or censoring.

>>7349
This is about what I figured.
While I disagree with the "anti christ" comment, that does seem to be the case for Democrats and Trump.
I am convinced nothing Biden does would convince those who regard Trump as the second coming of Hitler to vote for someone else.
Independent is pretty well regarded as a waste, unfortunately. So they see it as Biden or Nazi Germany.

 No.7381

>>7352
Do you really have that much faith in our court systems?

I can tell you, given what is happening to Flynn, the justice system is exceptionally flawed.
And I can say from personal experience, judges do not actually give a damn about justice. Just preserving the authority of the state.

We ought to all be able to agree, getting the guy investigating your son fired is a conflict of interests, if absolutely nothing else.

 No.7382

>>7356
If they aren't real, why did Hilary nuke her servers, and Biden vehemently deny what we know now factually occurred?

It's fine if you don't think it matters, but to pretend there was nothing there is nonsense.

And of course I suppose you're going to also tell me that Trump was absolutely colluding with Russia, right?

 No.7383

>>7369
That wasn't what he was going after Biden for.
You've clearly just not been paying attention

The issue is Biden withheld money from Ukraine unless they fired the guy who was actively investigating the company his son got hired for purely because of his connection to Biden.

This narrative is simply false, and suggests you're not actually listening to what Trump has said, but what people who've had a vested interest in misrepresenting what he's said have claimed.

I suppose next you're going to tell me he called White supremacists very fine people.

>>7371
Out of curiosity, does the similar action actually done by Democrats in regards to Trump and his people bother you, as well?
They've harassed Flynn for ages now, and evidence seems to be that the FBI outright fabricated the case, intentionally, to try to get him fired.
Oh, or how about the investigation on Trump started by Obama was built on a now thoroughly discredited dossier that the source of, as I understand, wasn't revealed to the judge giving the order.
Or, hell, how about the attempt to impeach Trump off of what seems to be by all accounts at this point nothing more than a conspiracy theory?

The level of hypocrisy from the left is exceptionally irritating.
I don't even like Trump particularly. His stance on guns is garbage, between the bump stock nonsense and the red flag laws, and he's not stopped the lockdowns. He's also been terribly light handed on the corruption he was supposed to weed out.
It's annoying that I keep having to defend him on stuff that really shouldn't be the big issue

 No.7386

File: 1603316473449.png (420.02 KB, 600x660, 10:11, 1603296109952.png) ImgOps Google

>>7383
>The issue is Biden withheld money from Ukraine unless they fired the guy who was actively investigating the company his son got hired for purely because of his connection to Biden.
I'm pretty sure that Hunter's connection to Burisma wasn't a significant factor in Joe Biden's pressuring the firing of the prosecutor.  There were enough legitimate concerns.

Of course, that's not to say that Hunter Biden was blameless.  On the contrary, his decision to sit on Burisma's board was highly questionable.  His mere presence there probably discouraged the new prosecutor from going after Burisma.

>>7383
I don't know much about the Flynn thing.  But all the Russia stuff seemed to be the Dems making a mountain out of a molehill.  There was a lot of noise about Russia "interfering with election" but no actual evidence.  Closest thing was Russia spreading propaganda to influence voters' choices.  Of course, that's not to say that our election security is any good.  On the contrary, I'd say that touchscreen voting with a voter-verified paper audit trail (VVPAT) is inherently insecure.  Mail-in ballots can be done securely, but I have doubts that the actual implementation used by states is particularly secure.

>Or, hell, how about the attempt to impeach Trump off of what seems to be by all accounts at this point nothing more than a conspiracy theory?
Eh, I read the transcript of Trump's call, and it seemed quite damning for him.  At best, severe incompetence.  At worst, corruption.  If Joe Biden hadn't been running for president, I highly doubt Trump would have been so interested in Hunter's affairs in Ukraine.

>The level of hypocrisy from the left is exceptionally irritating.
I see a lot of hypocrisy on both sides of the aisle.  E.g., the Republicans' explanation of why they refused to hear Merrick Garland, contrasted with how they're rushing to seat Amy Coney Barrett.  (For the record, I think both Merrick Garland and Amy Coney Barrett are very highly qualified nominees.  I prefer Amy Coney Barrett's judicial philosophy.)  

And for hypocrisy on the left, well, pic related.

 No.7388

>>7382
The FBI investigated Hillary's emails throughly. Thousands of them. And then they were investigated a second time right before the election just to tarnish her character. And both times they found that while she acted carelessly, no laws were broken.

It's pretty clear Trump colluded with Russia to anyone with eyes, but they didn't have enough evidence to convict him of it.

>>7383
>and suggests you're not actually listening to what Trump has said,

I tend not to, as he has a tendency to tell outright lies and give bad advice like injecting bleach into your veins.

The Hunter Biden thing is just a distraction, when Trump is the one who was withholding aid from Ukraine in exchange for dirt on a political opponent.

 No.7391

>>7386
>I'm pretty sure that Hunter's connection to Burisma wasn't a significant factor in Joe Biden's pressuring the firing of the prosecutor.  
Possible. But whether or not it is, it's a conflict of interest.
I'm fine with an investigation into the matter.

And like you say, it may well be that Biden isn't at fault, it's just his son. But, that's still something to investigate, and I would hope, punish. Though American law does put a lot of covers for the corrupt, so, who knows.

>Eh, I read the transcript of Trump's call, and it seemed quite damning for him.
I did as well. Could you clarify the particular issue?
It seemed to me, as I had read, he wasn't even the one who brought it up, and it certainly didn't strike me as tied to any particular benefit to Ukraine.

Oh, and of course, Biden did exactly what they claim Trump did, anyway.

>E.g., the Republicans' explanation of why they refused to hear Merrick Garland, contrasted with how they're rushing to seat Amy Coney Barrett.  
Sure. I don't disagree with that. I'll call them hypocrites just as easily.
I don't like the republican establishment politicians. They pretty much all suck universally.

 No.7392

>>7388
You'll excuse me if I do not really consider the FBI to be a credible organization at this point.

Well, to be fair, it isn't really "at this point". Stuff like Ruby Ridge have rather thoroughly placed my trust in them into the dumpster a long time ago.

Also, isn't it more than a little hypocritical to say Hillary is innocent, but Trump is totally guilty?

>The Hunter Biden thing is just a distraction, when Trump is the one who was withholding aid from Ukraine in exchange for dirt on a political opponent.
As opposed to Biden withholding aid from Ukraine in exchange for the removal of the guy investigating his son...

I don't even agree that's what happened. It seems to run contrary to what information I've actually seen. But, I understand how someone who listens to only the biased news who love to omit or outright fabricate things might think that.

 No.7394

>>7392
>You'll excuse me if I do not really consider the FBI to be a credible organization at this point.

There's no reason not to.

>Also, isn't it more than a little hypocritical to say Hillary is innocent, but Trump is totally guilty?

You know how easy it is to flip that around? It's hypocritical of you to imply Hillary is guilt and Trump is innocent. Especially when you consider one was accused of being careless with emails and one was accused of trying to blackmail a foreign leader. A much worse crime.

>As opposed to Biden...
Good thing he didn't do that and the claim is unsubstantiated. Whereas we have recording s of Trump trying to withhold aid for personal gain...

 No.7396

File: 1603411797426.png (1.11 MB, 640x1280, 1:2, 1507134034568.png) ImgOps Google

>>7391
>>Eh, I read the transcript of Trump's call, and it seemed quite damning for him.
>I did as well. Could you clarify the particular issue?

I am thinking of this part:
"There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."

I ask whether Trump would have made those remarks if Biden weren't running for president.  I doubt he would have.  Thus, I am left to conclude that those remarks came from a corrupt partisan motive rather than a legitimate law-enforcement motive.  Although I guess this is highly subjective, and I can see reasonable people disagreeing, based on their priors about Trump.

 No.7420

>>7396
As I recall, though, Trump wasn't the one who even brought it up. But besides that, it seems a completely fair thing to investigate

And again; look at what was done to Trump.
If that's wrong, the Democrats are horrible people given the whole Russia conspiracy nonsense. Same for Obama and his spying on Trump and his campaign during the election.
Especially since it appears to have been done on completely fabricated pretenses.

If we're going to condemn Trump for, in passing after someone else brought it up, saying someone should investigate a case of corruption, we've got a lot of folk on the left to condemn as well for doing a whole lot worse.

 No.7439

>>7420
>As I recall, though, Trump wasn't the one who even brought it up.
First mention of Biden seems to be from Trump in the transcript:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/25/politics/donald-trump-ukraine-transcript-call/index.html

>But besides that, it seems a completely fair thing to investigate
Perhaps in the abstract.  But Trump's request really feels politically motivated, rather than a routine law-enforcement request.  

>the whole Russia conspiracy nonsense
I'm pretty sure that Russian disinformation campaigns really did exist.  I'd say that claims of 'collusion' with Putin were vastly overblown, though.

>we've got a lot of folk on the left to condemn as well
I agree with that.  There's plenty of dishonest tactics from both parties.

 No.7443

>>7439
>  But Trump's request really feels politically motivated, rather than a routine law-enforcement request.  
Maybe, but again, that means the entire Democrat establishment is, if that is your standard for corruption, far, far more corrupt.

>I'm pretty sure that Russian disinformation campaigns really did exist
In the same way American ones do in countless other foreign elections, sure. Or for that matter, how half of our "allies" do during our elections.

Nonetheless, mere Russian typical state funded operations everyone does was not the focus.
The focus was clearly on the collusion narrative, and for that matter, it seems to be a complete and total fabrication, to the point where the justification to spy on Trump was outright fabricated by partisan organizations, and then lied about when brought for the warrant.

Again; if Trump is corrupt for investigating someone for something that appears to have actually happened, the whole of the Democrats, and Obama's administration especially, are far, far dirtier.

Personally, I am of the firm stance it isn't wrong to hang someone by their own rope.
If we're going to waste years on an investigation which seems to be based on nothing other than political interests, I do not see why we shouldn't do the same when something appears to have actually happened, even if political interests are involved.

 No.7645

>>7348
That all depends if people believe Bidens are as stupid as Trumps.

Is there any evidence that the laptop is really Hunter's?  Is there any evidence he typically takes such poor care of his data?  

Its hard to know; im so used to stupid im not what i believe anymore

 No.8126

Is there any more information on this? I haven't heard anything in a while.

 No.8127

>>8126
No. Because it was mostly lies fabricated to smear Biden before the election. Since the effort failed to affect the election, the Trump administration has moved on to it's next grift.

 No.8128

>>8127
>Because it was mostly lies fabricated to smear Biden
Do you have a source for that?  IIRC, they used the DKIM signatures to authenticate the emails.  In terms of implicating Joe Biden, however, it was a big nothingburger, and Hunter Biden isn't running for any office.

 No.8129

>>8127
>>8128
I'm just curious. I remember Carlson saying he would have damning evidence "tomorrow". I have no trust of Carlson but Hunter and Joe are also sus as fuck. It seemed excessively convenient that he'd just randomly forget a stack of government laptops at a computer repair store that apparently has a policy of picking through the emails of their clients with a fine tooth comb and handing over anything suspicious to the National Enquirer.

But stranger things happen and it's also entirely possible that the cliffnotes version of events looks far more suspicious than it is. Discrediting an unexpected source in the national narrative isn't too difficult.

 No.8130

>>8129
Tucker Carlson claims the "evidence" was lost by his editor. Which is like one step above "my dog ate it."

 No.8131



[]
[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]