₦airaland Forum

IjeBos:
You are following what is going on from your 4.5 inch screen in PHC? And you know better than Ken Buck a ultra conservative REPUBLICAN member of the House who dislikes Biden and used to be a Prosecutor? Do you see how stupid you sound.
Your opinion is worthless as I think you're too stupid to formulate a rational thought. F*cking nutters.

The fact check was for anyone who stops in an wants actual FACTS.
Continue on with your nutter circle jerk.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/16/gop-rep-ken-buck-impeachment-biden-00116396

bemeruca:
Propaganda piece? hahaha, a simpleton says, so it has to be.

feedthenation:
New motion filed by Fani Willis confirms that Lin Wood has flipped on Trump and the 18 co-defendants in the Trump RICO case and is cooperating with prosecutors.

IjeBos:
The Judge accepts a deal, declines to accept or asks for more briefings if she has issues. In this case she asked for more briefings and was clear that she wasn't accepting or declining the deal. The only thing you are close to right on is that in asking questions the Judge allowed the Prosecution to 1.) lie about the FARA immunity and 2.)get out of the deal that they had negotiated with one of the Top Law Firms in the US because they had been politically pressured to. Again, the deal had included broad immunity for the FARA charges based on the emails between Hunter's attorneys and the Government. The Government could have told the truth that it did include immunity and the Judge would have accepted the agreement when the language of the diversion program had been fixed.

You don't understand half the concepts you're referring to and are here trying to lecture people on it.
Your understanding of double jeopardy is idiotic. It's like saying someone who got a plea deal for a murder charge is immune from all future murders.

But, my fault. I knew better than engaging you in anything substantive.

IjeBos:
I'm sure she telepathically struck down the deal so it wasn't in the court transcript. You shouldn't hang around people where tellign the truth gets you in trouble(aka slyfooxx, benalvino). There's a good passage about iron sharpening iron you should refer to.

If you want to participate in this class you have to do the homework as assigned. Here is the homework again below. And for you I'll add another assignment.

3. (for basilico) Show me from either the plea deal or courtroom transcript, where the deal said "future crimes will be be ignored". I will not accept any other source discussing what the plea deal said.

IjeBos:
Ahh, you've moved on after basilico of all people had to tell you you were wrong (even though he was only 75% right himself) abou hit the judge striking down the deal. How does that feel? If I have lice brains and am clearly smarter than you, what's inside your brains? lol

I gave you a homework assignment to help you evaluate if it was a sweetheart deal. You clearly didn't do the assignment and are still using a word you don't understand and were propagandized to believe. Here it is again. In order to say something was a sweetheart deal, you invariable have to be able to compare the deal to a deal wasn't a sweetheart deal.

bemeruca:
I said the judge struck down the deal. No one ever said she uttered that word but ijebos the guy with the mental capacity of a lice want to win argument by asking a stupid question.

The judge made clear that she will not accept the deal they brought to her and they have to clarify what they really mean. She gave them a chance to do that. Guess what happened? Hunter is not getting a sweet heart deal anymore. Instead he is being indicted.

LordReed:
Yeah remind me, who was CinC when Epstein epsteined himself.

bemeruca:
Wrong on what? Are you this stupid or you get incentives to win arguments on naira land.

I asked you a simple question, because you think words are always literal when you choose to believe your delusion.

Again, if the plead deal did not die why has everything change and no deal instead hunter is being charged? Are you this daft?

IjeBos:
Yes, propaganda piece. And to make my point, I found the document both you and the NY post piece relied on. And it's worse than I expected.
Here it is:
Sixth Progress Report on the Implementation by Ukraine of the Action Plan on Visa Liberalisation
https://www.eumonitor.eu/9353000/1/j4nvirkkkr58fyw_j9vvik7m1c3gyxp/vk036jhcb1zg

This is what the report is on, Action plan on Visa Liberalisation:


As I said, how many times was Shokin's actual name mentioned? 0
And the 2 mentions of General Prosectors office?
-"On 30 November, the General Prosecutor appointed the head of the specialised anti-corruption prosecution."
-"A specialised unit to coordinate investigations into money laundering and terrorism financing was set up on 2 September 2015 in the Department of Supervision in Criminal Proceedings of the Prosecutor General."

It should be now clear why the NY Post didn't link the article. And again even clearer why you are the idiot you are.

IjeBos:
Whenever you write a post I'm thankful I went to good schools that was thought how to think critically. You saw my posts, I included links and quotes and I try to include1st hand sources (i.e. the actual pdf of the State Dep. briefing Biden received).
But you? You went online, googled Burisma, found the first article that aligned with what you thought and basically wrote verbatim what you found in the article.
Here is the article. (I found it by putting a couple of your lines in your post in google)
https://nypost.com/2023/09/08/despite-bidens-claim-europeans-werent-trying-to-oust-ukraine-prosecutor-targeting-hunters-firm/
And it was clearly written as a propaganda piece that you swallowed and regurgitated. What's the first tell. It's the NY Post.

So, where is this EU report your post is largely based on? Did you read it? Did you see the Shokin's name mentioned when they were praising the reforms? Or is that what the article told you it said? Are you just taking the word of whomever wrote the article? And then expecting me to take your word on it? In fact I'm 100% sure it doesn't mention Shokin by name. That's the difference between you and I. I would have found that report and read it myself, to make sure it said what the article said it said, before talking about it. And that's the reason you're an idiot who repeatedly falls prey to Right Wing propaganda.



That you posted this, wow. There is a huge logical flaw in what you wrote. Figure it out and you may be smarter than a 5th grader. I'll check in to see if you figured it out and thus figured out how ridiculous what you wrote is.

IjeBos:

That happened AFTER Shokin was fired. Lol.
Please, stop type typing and figure out your own conspiracy.

IjeBos:
Ahh.. I get it. You are really stupid. You don't understand what you posted. Holy Sh*t.

Archer is repeating what he was told by Bursima's board before Shokin was fired. The Burisma board did NOT want Shokin to be fired, because they "neutralized him". That's why the investigation was dormant. If they fired Shokin (the corrupt prosecutor), the new prosecutor may reopen the investigation.



You have no idea what you are reading. That people like you exist in life makes me sad.

IjeBos:
Idiot, it was your post. Don't cry now.
Your whistle blower's testimony which YOU posted destroyed your whole conspiracy theory. He testified he was told getting rid of Shokin was BAD for Burisma. So, how does your theory, Burisma paid Biden to get rid of Shokin, make any sense?
Be mad at yourself that you're too stupid to understand the propaganda you post.

I'll repost it again for you.

IjeBos:
Fact check:

Below is a clip from the mental midget's own post above. Burisma did not want him fired, because they probably paid him off already. Again, Shokin was corrupt. Which is why US policy was to get rid of him. Getting rid if him would have gotten Burisma a new prosecutor and a "non-dormant" investigation.



Really, how do you function in real life?

IjeBos:
Fact Check
1.) Shokin (the Ukrainian Prosecutor General) was not investigating Burisma at the time he was fired. That was the problem, he wasn't investigating corruption. Because he was corrupt. So removing him would have brought in a prosecutor who would investigate corruption.
2.) The EU and the US State Department wanted him gone. Obama was the president and Biden was sent to deliver the message for the policy Obama's State Dept wanted. In fact some Republican Senators wrote a letter in support of the policy. The goal was to reduce corruption in Ukraine so that they could get EU membership and/or the US could give them more aid.
3.) Your argument is somehow, Hunter paid the EU, Obama, Secretary of State and some Republican Senators to get rid of a prosecutor that wasn't investigating Burisma and advocate for one who would?
4.) But don't believe me. Listen to super conservative (Freedom Caucus member, the caucus of all those leftists (Boebert, Gaetz and formerly MTG) Republican Ken Buck on Fox News on Sunday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9Dtq8bUxdo

You are what a dullard, inhaling right wing propaganda sounds like.

BornAgainCow:
I agree with you. Boebert should be held accountable for her own actions. I have a feeling she will lose her next primary but that is on her. I don’t see how that’s an indictment of the entire Republican Party. Yes the party is generally guided by Judeo-Christian principles but at the end of the day humans fall short. And every human should be held responsible for their actions individually.

The fact these liberals see this as a big win for them is hilarious. But as you said they are not true liberals. They are just political opportunists. A true liberal will stand up against slut shaming a woman. But these internet liberals are basking in it just because it’s a conservative. And it’s not like she has nudes or sex tapes like Hunter Biden ooooo. That one is okay to them lol. Silly hypocrites.

BornAgainCow:
Lol. I don’t understand these liberals making a mountain over this Boebert story. So the fact that someone is conservative means they are infallible? And the fact that ONE conservative does something silly in her personal life means the entire party must be held accountable for it? Because she’s a child right? Lol. I can’t get the logic.

They are just desperate for any type of republican scandal to distract from the fact that their president is currently imploding all over the place.

And for the last time not every conservative is religious. There is a religious wing of the party no doubt but I have explained it many times before that the Republican Party is a multi-faction party. There are Many non-religious and even socially liberal Republicans.

bemeruca:
There is evidence that Joe Biden was complicit in his son Hunter's corrupt business dealings in Ukraine when Biden was Vice President.
Hunter Biden was paid lavishly to serve on the board of Burisma, a shady Ukrainian energy company, likely to sell access to his father.
After Hunter joined Burisma, the company asked him to use his influence to get Ukraine to halt an investigation into Burisma and its founder.
Hunter contacted Joe Biden on behalf of Burisma. Soon after, Biden pressured Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma.
This was a clear conflict of interest and abuse of power by Joe Biden to help his son's business interests.
Biden helped cover up the scandal by approving a statement denying wrongdoing.
A politician concerned about propriety would have condemned and stopped these corrupt dealings, but Joe Biden tolerated and participated in them.

These are all facts

IjeBos:
Yeah, Republican voters are definitely not fools nor gullible. basilico will be right along to tell us all how Republicans are really the party of Christ.

feedthenation:

---Boebert will surely be primaried---someone who only won her seat by 500 votes---A good representation of the GOP---a party known for their family values---

BornAgainCow:
Ironically the one Democrat who I believe would easily wipe the floor with Trump in a general election is Bernie Sanders but the DNC is too corrupt to ever allow a populist like him win their nomination like Trump did in the Republican Party.

They rigged Bernie out the primaries TWICE in favour of Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, two of the most swampy and corrupt establishment politicians in Washington.

BornAgainCow:
Lol all you have is emotions. I’m showing you FACTS! And facts don’t care about your feelings kiddo. I’m showing you Polls and articles by well known establishment democrats urging Biden to step aside because they know he will lose. And you are here spewing emotions. Hahaha.

Here’s another FACT for you. Trump currently leads Biden among Independent voters. You are here saying it’s only his “bigoted MAGA base “ hahahaha

E go shock you!

stanluiz:
There's no political come back anywhere. Trump will loose like he lost in 2020 presidential election.

Trump popularity is only growing within his bigoted maga base.

70% of his popularity came from uneducated and undereducated white men with no jobs and college degree. This are the type of people that supports Trump.

Emotional, poor, and bigoted whitemen who feels that minorities and immigrants are more rich and successful than them. These are the people that supports Trump.

Biden may not that popular. But one and one with Trump. He will beat Trump again like he did in 2020 election.

Trump is a bigoted loser that will not rest till he destroy America. But he will be defeated in 2024 again.

A Shameful incompetent ex president who does not respect the will of American people but respect autocratic foreign leaders.

IjeBos:
You sound very confused about your personal theology and theology in general.
But maybe you are not. Maybe you are using religion the way a lot of people try to use it.. to oppress others.

IjeBos:
I guess it depends on your definition of religious. So, if you have 3 wives (break 2 covenants), steal from children's charities, repeatedly lie and rape/sexual harass women, buy say you a religious, then you are religious?

I see you dodged my question. "What tenants of the New Testament do you think conservatives emulate?".