I don't know. I only seen Hunter's videos. His production style is pedestrian, but he does have an unique style. He has a future in a low grade "home porn" market.Oh, did Rudy make some videos of Putin doing crack too?
I don't know. I only seen Hunter's videos. His production style is pedestrian, but he does have an unique style. He has a future in a low grade "home porn" market.Oh, did Rudy make some videos of Putin doing crack too?
Living the GOP dream.I don't know. I only seen Hunter's videos. His production style is pedestrian, but he does have an unique style. He has a future in a low grade "home porn" market.
I told you, whataboutism doesn't work.Living the GOP dream.
In the latest charges against Rudy, his victim said that Rudy was jealous of Hunter and wanted to live like him.
Or was it Bill C?
Yet your conspiracy theory complaints only ever seem to go after Democrats. Hmm."I don't think he is unique, far from it"
Well that kills your little argument.....
What part of the word evidence do you not understand? Not liking democrats doesn't means you can just assume they're all criminals.Yes, and then Hunter got the job. What part of Hunter gets money because of his dad don't ypu understand? Money doesn't have to flow directly to Joe. Paying off the kids counts in my book.
But hey if you want to call it different then I guess you are fine with Trump kids grifting.
Not in your new red robe and your mission to stomp out allI told you, whataboutism doesn't work.
Dude, there is no evidence it was crack. That's conjecture. We know Hunter did use crack, but can you say with 100% certainty that he used crack when he was 18? No legit media outlet would say that without evidence. How old was he in 1988? Do you think his addiction started that young, and yet he was able to go to university and become a successful lawyer? The odds of that are...well...very small.Because he has admitted to being a crack addict for decades? Through multiple rehabs? That it is his drug of choice? And its highly addictive?
Hmmmm.....
Either way thats myopic cherry picking. Its still a controlled substance that his father said shouuld ALWAYS result in jail time. Hence "controlled substance".
Yes, we all know Hunter used crack. That is not in dispute. What we don't know is if he was arrested for crack when he was, what, 18? And if it was crack, there is the implication that Biden Sr. stepped in to make it all go away. But since the records are sealed, we don't know what "controlled substance" Hunter was arrested with back 35 years ago...Pardon me, but we actually have videos, directed and starred by Hunter, weighing crack, arguing about crack, smoking crack and passed out after smoking crack...with hookers and at least one dog. Oh, yeah. Hunter also lied on a federal gun permit form(federal felony)and improperly disposed of a firearm ...no problem, if your name is Biden.
The point, sweetheart, is that Hunter's immune from prosecution because of his last name and your media's almost total blackout of anything negative pertaining to the Bidens.Yes, we all know Hunter used crack. That is not in dispute. What we don't know is if he was arrested for crack when he was, what, 18? And if it was crack, there is the implication that Biden Sr. stepped in to make it all go away. But since the records are sealed, we don't know what "controlled substance" Hunter was arrested with back 35 years ago...
But...considering Hunter's age, and the addictiveness of crack....I highly doubt he was smoking it at 18. I mean, crack addicts usually don't do well in a college like Georgetown nor do they graduate from a law school like Yale. Now, I know nothing I say to y'all will make a difference. You think Hunter is the anti-christ or something...but the reality here is that a lack of evidence or official record allows you to speculate about this, and imply that Joe used his influence. Now, I'm not saying he didn't, but I am saying there is a strong chance the drug he was caught with could have been anything. Pot, mushrooms, LSD, powdered cocaine (which had a lesser charge then crack), quaaludes, other prescription drugs. Who knows.
To quote you "ROTFLMAO"The point, sweetheart, is that Hunter's immune from prosecution because of his last name and your media's almost total blackout of anything negative pertaining to the Bidens.
Without Joe there're no Hunter.To quote you "ROTFLMAO"
Let's take a look at your statement: Hunter is immune from prosecution. Doubtful. He's been under investigation for a while. Sorry if the timeline doesn't fit with yours. Now, will he actually be prosecuted? Is there a credible case against him? I know Fox and the right-wing echo chamber believes there is. But no prosecutor wants to look like righty hero Durham and bring a pathetically weak case to court only to see someone get acquitted in record time....
And here are just a few of the reasons why the press aren't covering it:
- Hunter isn't Joe.
- There is no evidence Joe did anything illegal
- This 35 year old drug case has no facts. We know something happened, but what is a mystery. Good luck reporting on that.
- Most of this is innuendo and speculation from people who just want to tar Joe.
- Its newsworthiness isn't really there. Sure, the right-wing echo chamber has been trying to use Hunter as a hammer against Joe for years, but the reality is most Americans not caught up in Qnon or the fever swamp don't give a flying fuck about this.
So, pumpkin, if this is the best you got, you're going to be real butt sore when no legit news source covers any of this...
You are missing the real point. They have no interest in Hunter except to the extent that it damages Joe and helps their boss. You know the only twice impeached, sexual abuser and now indicted former POTUS in history.To quote you "ROTFLMAO"
Let's take a look at your statement: Hunter is immune from prosecution. Doubtful. He's been under investigation for a while. Sorry if the timeline doesn't fit with yours. Now, will he actually be prosecuted? Is there a credible case against him? I know Fox and the right-wing echo chamber believes there is. But no prosecutor wants to look like righty hero Durham and bring a pathetically weak case to court only to see someone get acquitted in record time....
And here are just a few of the reasons why the press aren't covering it:
- Hunter isn't Joe.
- There is no evidence Joe did anything illegal
- This 35 year old drug case has no facts. We know something happened, but what is a mystery. Good luck reporting on that.
- Most of this is innuendo and speculation from people who just want to tar Joe.
- Its newsworthiness isn't really there. Sure, the right-wing echo chamber has been trying to use Hunter as a hammer against Joe for years, but the reality is most Americans not caught up in Qnon or the fever swamp don't give a flying fuck about this.
So, pumpkin, if this is the best you got, you're going to be real butt sore when no legit news source covers any of this...
Sure, but when his father was a Senator his position on Drug use was zero tolerance. So to him it didn't matter the drug. Hell he STILL BELIEVES pot is a "gateway" drug and that's why he won't look at legalizing it federally.Dude, there is no evidence it was crack. That's conjecture. We know Hunter did use crack, but can you say with 100% certainty that he used crack when he was 18? No legit media outlet would say that without evidence. How old was he in 1988? Do you think his addiction started that young, and yet he was able to go to university and become a successful lawyer? The odds of that are...well...very small.
A much more likely scenario, which could help explain why he was diverted to rehab and had his files sealed, is because the drug in question was something less addictive, like pot or mushrooms. Both are controlled substances, but I could see a DA being less hard ass about that than crack or heroine. But, the reality is we will never know. So, that gives you the runway to speculate about Hunter all you like, or the influence that daddy brought to that case. You may believe that. You might be right. But we'll never know. I mean, the DA or the cops who arrested him could come forward and say what truly happened. But, until then, you cannot say one way or the other which of us is correct.
You are so profound. Yes, with out a father, there would be no son. That's usually how biology works....with maybe the exception of the immaculate conception.Without Joe there're no Hunter.
Dude, I can't argue that the "war on drugs" is a costly and damaging affair. The crime bill Biden pushed back then was garbage, and helped create the prison -industrial complex while seriously damaging the black community.Sure, but when his father was a Senator his position on Drug use was zero tolerance. So to him it didn't matter the drug. Hell he STILL BELIEVES pot is a "gateway" drug and that's why he won't look at legalizing it federally.
So no matter how you look at it he still turned a blind eye to his son's drug use while insisting everyone elses children should be in jail.
How many lives ruined by that position and hypocrisy? That the point.
In the case of Hunter, he is a criminal imo. And a bad one. A cheap grifter who has spent his life taking the easy way and using his father to either get him out of trouble, or get him gigs to support his bad habits. The definition of black sheep.Dude, I can't argue that the "war on drugs" is a costly and damaging affair. The crime bill Biden pushed back then was garbage, and helped create the prison -industrial complex while seriously damaging the black community.
But, what I can argue is that you don't know what happened. I don't know what happened. Hunter probably doesn't remember. If it was such a big scandal, don't you think someone who knows the details of the case would have come forward? The arresting officer, the DA, a legal secretary? I mean, Joe was a senator. You would think someone would remember if he stuck his nose into the case or used his influence. But we hear NOTHING.
Now, granted, there is a chance they're all dead.... But let's just say that all your continue to do here is spin a narrative that you are convinced happened. And, while I am sure it could have, it is equally likely that something else happened here. And, as I said, there are millions of examples where being white or affluent got a lot of shit heels out of the crowbar motel, even for charges that have zero tolerance. So, where does that leave this? You believing with all your heart that Hunter was a crack head at 18 and his dad was able to get him off....Even though you have absolutely zero evidence that it happened.As I said, because there is an information vacuum here, you basically decided to jump on the conspiracy theory train because you just know Hunter got helped.
You know very well to what I'm referring. You're just too much of a coward to admit it.You are so profound. Yes, with out a father, there would be no son. That's usually how biology works....with maybe the exception of the immaculate conception.
While ignoring Dear Leader has criminal indictments and is likely to have more soon.You are missing the real point. They have no interest in Hunter except to the extent that it damages Joe and helps their boss. ...
Or, like Rob Ford, there wasn't enough evidence to press charges.The point, sweetheart, is that Hunter's immune from prosecution because of his last name and your media's almost total blackout of anything negative pertaining to the Bidens.
If he used crack in Stony Beach, NJ and got special treatment in expunging the record, that makes it a glaring case of Joe Biden's hypocrisy.Dude, there is no evidence it was crack. That's conjecture. We know Hunter did use crack, but can you say with 100% certainty that he used crack when he was 18?