Joe Biden Presidency thread *Please read OP - Threadbanned Users Added 4/5/21*

biko

Your whole comment is built on a guess by Ober.

Why would those governments not be able to discuss two separate issues. They aren't stupid are they?

Professor Moriarty

biko wrote: »

Your whole comment is built on a guess by Ober.

Why would those governments not be able to discuss two separate issues. They aren't stupid are they?

I would assume they're not stupid. It's obvious that the 4 billion and climate change are linked, so both interlinked matters would be best discussed with those who will be in receipt of the money. Makes perfect sense.

hotmail.com

Bizarre intervention from Biden on the murder trial of the police man.

He could have waited til the verdict was in to make remarks on the subject.

In Ireland, this would collapse a court case.

Overheal

The Floyd p wrote: »

www.imgur.com/CUVT4Pd

www.imgur.com/LvtXW2I

Being better than your predecessor in a narrow way doesn't make you a good president by any means. This thread feels incredibly apologetic of Joe Biden, despite not rowing back any of Trump's border policies in a meaningful way.
He's throwing the USA back into the Iran deal, despite expecting Iran to accept bad terms despite the USA being the ones who left!

How many times have we heard the We're leaving Afghanistan! shtick? Longest war in USA history. I heard Biden say similar before.

HUFFINGTON POST 12/19/2010 10:54 am ET Updated Dec 06, 2017
Joe Biden: We’ll Be Out Of Afghanistan By 2014, ‘Come Hell Or High Water’

He's desperate and the Dems will give up ground in the mid-terms if there is any will in the populace.

You’d swear the president colluded with Russians, fired public officials to defend coconspirators and used the first 10 days of his presidency to focus on the crowd size at his inauguration.

But yes, let’s pretend there’s no reason Biden enjoys the bar of low expectations. To be clear though, in spite of low bars he appears to be doing a quite capable job without being either the second coming of Christ or the harbinger of death.

Smee_Again

hotmail.com wrote: »

Bizarre intervention from Biden on the murder trial of the police man.

He could have waited til the verdict was in to make remarks on the subject.

In Ireland, this would collapse a court case.

Jury is sequestered so they won’t hear his comments but yeah, he should have waited until a verdict was announced.

And I take issue with the phrase the right verdict.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

Bizarre intervention from Biden on the murder trial of the police man.

He could have waited til the verdict was in to make remarks on the subject.

In Ireland, this would collapse a court case.

The jury is sequestered. He waited until they were sequestered on purpose. There is no possibility of altering the court case.

hotmail.com

Smee_Again wrote: »

Jury is sequestered so they won’t hear his comments but yeah, he should have waited until a verdict was announced.

And I take issue with the phrase the right verdict.

Take the point about them being sequestered but surely he is adding unnecessary fuel to the fire here.

There is already a tense situation in that state and he was best to allow the courts to do their job.

Mind boggling.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

Take the point about them being sequestered but surely he is adding unnecessary fuel to the fire here.

There is already a tense situation in that state and he was best to allow the courts to do their job.

Mind boggling.

Old enough to remember Obama being vilified for not “adding fuel to the fire,” as you put it, commenting on cases and litigation, instead allowing courts and prosecutors to do their job with regard to killings of cops.

Damned if you say something damned if you don’t.

hotmail.com

Overheal wrote: »

Old enough to remember Obama being vilified for not “adding fuel to the fire,” as you put it, commenting on cases and litigation, instead allowing courts and prosecutors to do their job with regard to killings of cops.

Damned if you say something damned if you don’t.

I'm not sure which situation you are referring to but Obama was correct not to comment on pending court cases, as is the norm in pretty much every other Western country.

Biden sees it differently. Bizarre.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

I'm not sure which situation you are referring to but Obama was correct not to comment on pending court cases, as is the norm in pretty much every other Western country.

Biden sees it differently. Bizarre.

Well, you couldn’t convince a Republican of that at the time. They flat out demanded Obama address the nation about it and make the entire nation aware of the crimes, potentially limiting the pool of jurors https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/obama-under-fire-from-police-for-silence-on-officer-deaths

hotmail.com

Overheal wrote: »

Well, you couldn’t convince a Republican of that at the time. They flat out demanded Obama address the nation about it and make the entire nation aware of the crimes, potentially limiting the pool of jurors https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/obama-under-fire-from-police-for-silence-on-officer-deaths

Right. That's bad.

Now back to Biden.

everlast75

hotmail.com wrote: »

Right. That's bad.

Now back to Biden.

Did you ever comment on Trump dangling pardons etc?

No?

Anyway, Psaki was asked about it and she said she wouldn't comment on it. She was right.

As for Biden, the Trial is over and the jury are sequestered presumably?

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

Right. That's bad.

Now back to Biden.

Well Biden shared empathy with the family and the nation (Obama did the same in the link above in those cases, to the families), he’s in as good a position to lead with a statement after the verdict should a not guilty come down and violent animus metastasize. Fact is a large set of politically active Americans are glued to the case so it makes sense for them to connect with all of them in a way that hasn’t impacted the jury or the deliberation and gets out ahead of a verdict in so much that you are actually heard and considered at this time. The spin machine will spin that how it wants but no incitement to violence and no attack on due process. As the Trump administration master-classed, “Mr Biden was opining in his personal capacity, etc etc”

mcmoustache

hotmail.com wrote: »

Bizarre intervention from Biden on the murder trial of the police man.

He could have waited til the verdict was in to make remarks on the subject.

In Ireland, this would collapse a court case.

I agree. He should have said nothing until the verdict was in.

EDIT: Even if the jury is sequestered, he should still have said nothing till it's over.

hotmail.com

everlast75 wrote: »

Did you ever comment on Trump dangling pardons etc?

No?

Anyway, Psaki was asked about it and she said she wouldn't comment on it. She was right.

As for Biden, the Trial is over and the jury are sequestered presumably?

It's really an insufferable thread whenever you write up something you get a question back about Trump.

Do you realise how silly it looks now at this stage?

hotmail.com

Overheal wrote: »

Well Biden shared empathy with the family and the nation (Obama did the same in the link above in those cases, to the families), he’s in as good a position to lead with a statement after the verdict should a not guilty come down and violent animus metastasize. Fact is a large set of politically active Americans are glued to the case so it makes sense for them to connect with all of them in a way that hasn’t impacted the jury or the deliberation and gets out ahead of a verdict in so much that you are actually heard and considered at this time. The spin machine will spin that how it wants but no incitement to violence and no attack on due process. As the Trump administration master-classed, “Mr Biden was opining in his personal capacity, etc etc”

No one is disputing whether he has empathy or not.

The point is that he commented publicly on an ongoing trial, something that is unheard of in Europe.

I don't know to what extent the sequestration is policed as I would imagine they can contact family members.

Either way, his comments are either naive at best, or populist at worst.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

No one is disputing whether he has empathy or not.

The point is that he commented publicly on an ongoing trial, something that is unheard of in Europe.

I don't know to what extent the sequestration is policed as I would imagine they can contact family members.

Either way, his comments are either naive at best, or populist at the worst.

Your imagination is incorrect. There is no harm to due process here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_sequestration

hotmail.com

Overheal wrote: »

Your imagination is incorrect. There is no harm to due process here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_sequestration

Looks like Biden can do no wrong for some people.

Obviously American culture just different from Europe.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

Looks like Biden can do no wrong for some people.

Obviously American culture just different from Europe.

“Biden did no harm here”

“Ugh! He just can’t do anything wrong can he”

Calm down there lad.

hotmail.com

Overheal wrote: »

“Biden did no harm here”

“Ugh! He just can’t do anything wrong can he”

Calm down there lad.

There was a time when people criticised and hated all politicians.

But when it comes to America, people seem to be so one sided, it just looks irrational.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

There was a time when people criticised and hated all politicians.

But when it comes to America, people seem to be so one sided, it just looks irrational.

Complains about being asked about Trump then engages in the same tone of activity.

Cant say I saw much of any time you hated and criticized Trump? To the others question then if this is your hallmark: where are your comments about the dangling of Pardons by Trump?

hotmail.com

Overheal wrote: »

Complains about being asked about Trump then engages in the same tone of activity.

Nope I'm questioning your blind faith.

hotmail.com

Overheal wrote: »

Complains about being asked about Trump then engages in the same tone of activity.

Cant say I saw much of any time you hated and criticized Trump? To the others question then if this is your hallmark: where are your comments about the dangling of Pardons by Trump?

Oh back to questions about Trump. I'm out.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

Nope I'm questioning your blind faith.

What blind faith? You haven’t demonstrated any. You should verify you have a leg to stand on.

hotmail.com

hotmail.com wrote: »

Nope I'm questioning your blind faith.

You have blind hatred for CNN but can't back up why that is with facts and evidence.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

Oh back to questions about Trump. I'm out.

Well Hotmail you just said your expectation is for us to hate and criticize all politicians. Just 2 posts ago or there about. So it should be an easy question for you to stop avoiding?

Running is an option to for those with legs only suited for running - and not standing on.

mcmoustache

hotmail.com wrote: »

It's really an insufferable thread whenever you write up something you get a question back about Trump.

Do you realise how silly it looks now at this stage?

I think it's your history that gets that reaction. You spent years ignoring and downplaying Trump's behaviour and questioning people's interests in US politics. Like it or not, you are bound to that standard. Your new found concern for standards isn't credible in light of that history, even if you happen to be correct in this instance.

Tony EH

hotmail.com wrote: »

There was a time when people criticised and hated all politicians.

There was never a time when this happened.

hotmail.com

mcmoustache wrote: »

I think it's your history that gets that reaction. You spent years ignoring and downplaying Trump's behaviour and questioning people's interests in US politics. Like it or not, you are bound to that standard. Your new found concern for standards isn't credible in light of that history, even if you happen to be correct in this instance.

Trump was bad.

Does this clarify matters?

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

Trump was bad.

Does this clarify matters?

Blood from a stone!

Now you’ll have to explain why that dangling of pardons got so little effort and much consternation from your but Biden calling the family while the jury is securely sequestered has you out in arms.

hotmail.com

Overheal wrote: »

Blood from a stone!

Now you’ll have to explain why that dangling of pardons got so little effort and much consternation from your but Biden calling the family while the jury is securely sequestered has you out in arms.

This isn't a Trump thread. I don't want to derail the thread.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

This isn't a Trump thread. I don't want to derail the thread.

Oh, that must be it.

hotmail.com

hotmail.com wrote: »

This isn't a Trump thread. I don't want to derail the thread.

You're aware though that it seems like you cherry pick the few things that you personally feel Biden has done wrong? You never seem to be around to comment when Biden does an objectively good thing. Almost as if you have a confirmation bias to focus on those few things, some might say.

everlast75

hotmail.com wrote: »

It's really an insufferable thread whenever you write up something you get a question back about Trump.

Do you realise how silly it looks now at this stage?

Do you realise how little people care about folk that sat on their hands, with their mouths shut when *the* most egregious malcontent strutted around and shat all over the constitution and various arms of state, with obstruction of justice being the order of the day, dangling pardons, multiple attempts at bullying judges, tainting jury pools and said **** all?

The same folk who now emerge from under their rocks to crack their knuckles, type as quickly as they can, whilst simultaneously clutching their pearls, regarding any slight issue they perceive to have with the current administration?

Give me a break. It's rank hypocrisy. You can pretend it is otherwise but you're fooling no one.

If you didn't call it then, then you have no credibility trying to call it now.

And by the way, I wouldn't mind if the usual suspects stuck around and debated the issues. Usually however, it's the equivalent of someone walking into a room, letting rip with a 10 second fart, and walking out to let others suffer the presence of it.

Billy Mays

hotmail.com wrote: »

It's really an insufferable thread whenever you write up something you get a question back about Trump.

Do you realise how silly it looks now at this stage?

I don't agree with hotmail much but he's right here

I despise Trump and the GOP and think Biden's done a good job since he was sworn in but this constant need to refer to Trump every time someone says anything remotely negative aboit Joe is f*cking boring at this stage

Overheal

Billy Mays wrote: »

I don't agree with hotmail much but he's right here

I despise Trump and the GOP and think Biden's done a good job since he was sworn in but this constant need to refer to Trump every time someone says anything remotely negative aboit Joe is f*cking boring at this stage

I'm sure if I did a word search for "Obama" in the Trump threads I'd find no pattern there? "Bush" in the Obama threads? "Clinton" in the Bush threads?

Trying to kick water for flowing down there.

everlast75

Overheal wrote: »

I'm sure if I did a word search for "Obama" in the Trump threads I'd find no pattern there? "Bush" in the Obama threads? "Clinton" in the Bush threads?

Trying to kick water for flowing down there.

Trump with his "lock her up" for 5 ****ing years ringing any bells?

Overheal

everlast75 wrote: »

Trump with his "lock her up" for 5 ****ing years ringing any bells?

"Mr. Trump was opining in his personal capacity..."

mcmoustache

Billy Mays wrote: »

I don't agree with hotmail much but he's right here

I despise Trump and the GOP and think Biden's done a good job since he was sworn in but this constant need to refer to Trump every time someone says anything remotely negative aboit Joe is f*cking boring at this stage

I agree to an extent but it's also useful to point out when a user ignored/defended/downplayed actions by Trump that they pretend to be concerned about now. I don't like whataboutery myself and will happily criticise Biden and his administration without referring to Trump but I can understand the temptation to do so when you have posters showing up like pious priests being dismayed all of a sudden at something that is only a fraction of the transgressions committed by the person they spent years backing.

Billy Mays

mcmoustache wrote: »

I agree to an extent but it's also useful to point out when a user ignored/defended/downplayed actions by Trump that they pretend to be concerned about now. I don't like whataboutery myself and will happily criticise Biden and his administration without referring to Trump but I can understand the temptation to do so when you have posters showing up like pious priests being dismayed all of a sudden at something that is only a fraction of the transgressions committed by the person they spent years backing.

I agree with that but does it have to be pointed out every single time they make a post?

Are people still going to be pointing it out in 3 years time if hotmail says something negative about Biden?

everlast75

Billy Mays wrote: »

I agree with that but does it have to be pointed out every single time they make a post?

Are people still going to be pointing it out in 3 years time if hotmail says something negative about Biden?

OP says "dogs are bastards"

You post - "I agree - they are bastards"

OP replies - "no they are not - dogs are great"

Now, are you going to re to ignore the poster's previous position?

No.

This is an oversimplification but it is to make the point.

Poster says nothing for 5 years and then raises an issue when Trump is gone.

It goes to credibility.

It goes to sincerity.

It goes to whether or not it is worthwhile debating with that person.

So, with Trump having been around for 5 long ****ing years only being out of office 3 months, frankly I think it's fair game to point out that some folk had no issue with Trump doing one thing, and Biden allegedly doing something minuscule by comparison.

Anyway, verdict is in.

This might be the shortest scandal in presidential history.

mcmoustache

Billy Mays wrote: »

I agree with that but does it have to be pointed out every single time they make a post?

Are people still going to be pointing it out in 3 years time if hotmail says something negative about Biden?

Probably. I would prefer that it not be as an excuse for Biden's missteps but I also see the importance of not letting people wash off their Trump stench as they try to reinvent themselves as people of integrity.

Faugheen

Billy Mays wrote: »

I agree with that but does it have to be pointed out every single time they make a post?

Are people still going to be pointing it out in 3 years time if hotmail says something negative about Biden?

Until they acknowledge some inconsistencies in that it was ok when their guy did it but not ok when this guy does it.

They don't get to become moral, ethical citizens just because their guy isn't in office anymore. They absolutely deserve to have this sh*t called out.

salmocab

On this Trump stuff, it’s very fair to compare stuff that both did as they both are dealing with the same things, especially this early in Biden's tenure, the world hasn’t changed in 3 months so there is definitely plenty of reason to make comparisons. If the comparisons were constantly with Bush or Clinton it would be different but it’s absolutely fair to compare the two.

Overheal

salmocab wrote: »

On this Trump stuff, it’s very fair to compare stuff that both did as they both are dealing with the same things, especially this early in Biden's tenure, the world hasn’t changed in 3 months so there is definitely plenty of reason to make comparisons. If the comparisons were constantly with Bush or Clinton it would be different but it’s absolutely fair to compare the two.

And it's literally the same criminal case. Both presidents have opined on it in public.

ohnonotgmail

Overheal wrote: »

And it's literally the same criminal case. Both presidents have opined on it in public.

except biden waited until the jury had been sequestered.

mcmoustache

salmocab wrote: »

On this Trump stuff, it’s very fair to compare stuff that both did as they both are dealing with the same things, especially this early in Biden's tenure, the world hasn’t changed in 3 months so there is definitely plenty of reason to make comparisons. If the comparisons were constantly with Bush or Clinton it would be different but it’s absolutely fair to compare the two.

I wouldn't compare them. It's like comparing a 6 year old sociopath to a first-team team player at Man Utd in terms of football - it's great that he isn't whinging and acting like an ass all the time but the comparison isn't as useful as that with his peers. On the other hand, if someone spent the last 4 years dismissing complaints about the suitability of the six year old, then it's fair to bring that up when they complain about the adult's ability to kick the ball.

MisterAnarchy

Really cringeworthy speech by Biden just now.
Complete virtue signalling and race baiting.

Very disappointing to see the head of the country saying that there is systemic racism in America.
He mentioned Georges's legacy and also said that George changed the world.

Its this melodramatic virtue signalling that is destroying the US.
George Floyd was not a good man, but he didn't deserve what he got, but he is no saint.
There are 800000 police in the US, the vast majority do a good job, lets not tar them all with the same brush.

y0ssar1an22

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

except biden waited until the jury had been sequestered.

i''m jumping in here but the jury was never sequestered.

Brian?

hotmail.com wrote: »

Take the point about them being sequestered but surely he is adding unnecessary fuel to the fire here.

There is already a tense situation in that state and he was best to allow the courts to do their job.

Mind boggling.

Your mind is fierce easy to boggle these days.