Hodj Proved Salty: A Tranny's Victory Thread

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
What we know about Hunter Biden's role at Burisma:
  • In April 2014, Biden's son Hunter joined the board of Burisma Holdings. Hunter served on the board until early 2019.
  • At the time, a news release from the company said Hunter would be "in charge of the Holdings' legal unit and will provide support for the Company among international organizations."
  • Hunter told the New York Times that the news release was not accurate and he was never in charge of the company's legal affairs.
  • He joined the company about a month after Russia annexed Crimea, a cataclysmic moment that continues to put the US at odds with Russia and is linked to ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine.
  • During his time with Burisma, Hunter reportedly received compensation up to $50,000 a month.
  • From the start, Hunter's role at Burisma was criticized by ethics watchdogs as a conflict of interest for his father, who was still vice president at the time and heavily focused on pressuring Ukraine to do a better job rooting out corruption. But some ethics watchdogs at the time also said that unless there was clear evidence Hunter got the job to influence US foreign policy then there was no cause for concern.
  • His hiring by Burisma was seen as an attempt by the company to bolster its image and the perception it had strong ties to the US as the world vilified Russia for its annexation of Crimea, the Times reported.
  • Yoshiko M. Herrera, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin at Madison and an an expert on Russia and Eurasia, told The Washington Post: "I think there is a conflict of interest even if it doesn't break any laws. It's a big deal. It's the vice president, who is the point person of the Obama administration's policy on Ukraine, and his son is suddenly hired to be a director on the board of Ukraine's largest private gas producer."
  • With that said, Hunter has never been accused of wrongdoing regarding his work with Burisma.
  • Hunter also said he only had one brief conversation with his father about Burisma which did not go into substantive details about the deal. Joe Biden has said he learned about his son's role at the company from news reports.
Here's why this is now linked to a whistleblower complaint that's reportedly about Trump and a conversation with Ukraine's recently elected president:
  • Trump and his attorney Rudy Giuliani have suggested that Biden improperly leveraged his role as vice president to push for the ousting of a man named Viktor Shokin as Ukraine's top prosecutor in order to help his son avoid getting caught up in corruption investigations.
  • Trump has admitted that in a July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who was elected in April, that he addressed investigating Biden and his son.
  • The White House released a memo on the call that showed Trump repeatedly pressuring Zelensky to investigate the Bidens.
  • "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," Trump said to Zelensky on the call, according to the memo. "If you can look into it … it sounds horrible to me."
  • The call is also central to a whistleblower complaint from an intelligence official that says Trump, among other things, asked Zelensky to "initiate or continue an investigation into the activities of former Vice President Joseph Biden and his son, Hunter Biden."
  • The complaint alleges Trump has used "the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 US election."
  • The scandal surrounding the call and whistleblower complaint have sparked an impeachment inquiry into Trump.
  • Trump has tried to flip the situation around, contending that the real issue is the role Biden played in Ukraine as vice president and keeps pointing to Shokin's firing and Hunter's work for Burisma.
  • After Shokin was appointed as Ukraine's prosecutor general in February 2015, he inherited the investigations into Zlochevsky. He also ultimately launched another probe into the profitable gas licenses that were awarded to Zlochevsky's companies as he served as a top minister in Yanukovych's government.
  • But by March 2016, Shokin was ousted. Hundreds of Ukrainians had demonstrated in front of the president's office calling for Shokin to be booted and the Ukrainian parliament voted to accept his resignation.
  • For months before that, the US and other countries had pressured for Shokin to be ousted because he didn't make a concerted effort to fight corruption. Biden, who was spearheading the Obama administration's Ukraine work, was at the center of these efforts, and threatened to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees from Ukraine if Shokin wasn't fired.
  • So, it's true that Biden was among those who pushed for Shokin to be fired as Ukraine's top prosecutor, but by the time this happened the probe into Burisma was dormant, according to Bloomberg.
  • According to the Times, Ukrainian and American officials have also debated whether Shokin was using the threat of prosecution against Burisma in order to solicit a bribe.
  • Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder of the Ukrainian Anti-Corruption Action Center told The Washington Post, "Shokin was not investigating. He didn't want to investigate Burisma. Shokin was fired not because he wanted to do that investigation, but quite to the contrary, because he failed that investigation."
  • Yuriy Lutsenko, Ukraine's former prosecutor general who left the post at the end of August, told Bloomberg in an interview in May that neither Biden nor Hunter are the subject of investigations: "I do not want Ukraine to again be the subject of US presidential elections. Hunter Biden did not violate any Ukrainian laws — at least as of now, we do not see any wrongdoing. A company can pay however much it wants to its board."
  • Lutsenko added: "At the end of the day, Shokin submitted his own resignation."
  • Additionally, Lutsenko on September 26 told The Washington Post: "From the perspective of Ukrainian legislation, [Hunter Biden] did not violate anything."
  • Lutsenko in an interview with the Los Angeles Times on September 29 echoed his previous comments and said that he'd not seen any evidence of wrongdoing on the part of either Biden.
  • Trump on October 3 stood on the White House lawn and once again called on Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.
  • On October 4, it was reported Ukraine's new prosecutor general, Ruslan Ryaboshapka, is reviewing past investigations into the owner of Burisma. This raised the possibility of inquiries being restarted, the Wall Street Journal reported.
  • Ryaboshapka on October 4 also told Reuters he's not aware of any evidence of wrongdoing on Hunter's part and that he'd not been in touch with any foreign lawyers regarding the case.
  • Multiple witnesses in the impeachment inquiry have said there's no evidence of illegal activity on the part of the Bidens in relation to Burisma.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
I keep scrolling past your posts because my brain registers those rapidly-posted blocks of text as being Vanessa posts

Fuck you then

You either care about the truth or you dont. I do. Your claim has no merit. I've examined the evidence and found their argument lacking in substance. Therefore I don't owe them a fucking ounce of time to repeat it. Period.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
  • Multiple witnesses in the impeachment inquiry have said there's no evidence of illegal activity on the part of the Bidens in relation to Burisma.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
And that's the evidence I'm going to consider because it was given under oath at penalty of perjury and I find the witnesses credible and doubt we'll ever see perjury charges on this topic leveled against them.

If that day comes, or more people who currently refuse to testify under oath at penalty of perjury come forward to dispute the claim, I'll re examine the evidence then.

But I won't re examine the evidence based on what so idiot trolls jacking one another off and more interested in scoring points on an internet message board than they do the stability of our country and our national foreign policy and security demanding I listen their half cocked theories have to say.

You're being a faggot and go fuck yourself
 

a_skeleton_05

<Banned>
13,843
34,510
And that's the evidence I'm going to consider because it was given under oath at penalty of perjury and I find the witnesses credible and doubt we'll ever see perjury charges on this topic leveled against them.

If that day comes, or more people who currently refuse to testify under oath at penalty of perjury come forward to dispute the claim, I'll re examine the evidence then.

But I won't re examine the evidence based on what so idiot trolls jacking one another off and more interested in scoring points on an internet message board than they do the stability of our country and our national foreign policy and security demanding I listen their half cocked theories have to say.

You're being a faggot and go fuck yourself

You alright man? I'm asking this seriously. You had that clot and within a week you're being far more angry than I've seen you. Hit me up if you want to talk.
 
  • 1Picard
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Let's talk right here.

Why should I give endless time to already debunked conspiracy theories meant solely to distract from the crux of the issue, which is actual, proven, testified and admitted, corruption on the part of the Trump administration?
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Do I owe people who think the lizard people run a simulation world the time to debunk every one of their crack pot theories we already know to be nonsense, @Dom, yes or no?
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Do I owe people who think vaccines cause autism the time to listen to their pseudo science nonsense and refute all their claims all day every day?

Wouldn't that be an incredible waste of time and energy invested into people who do not come to the table with an honest heart seeking to have their positions challenged?
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Do I owe people who think Muhammad flew on a magical human headed white horse to Heaven where Allah read him the Quran directly into his brain the time of day to refute that claim as well?

When would I have time to do anything else but debunk and refute already refuted ridiculous claims?
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
This is a tactic by the dishonest to bog down debate until you throw your hands up and give up and let them just beat on you relentlessly with lies

I don't owe these trolls fucking shit.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Go fuck yourself if you disgree

I'm furious at where honesty and integrity are in our society. You bet your bloody red ass I am. I'm furious that you would try to contort what's going on to such a distortion, insulting me in the process while ignoring that these people are totally dishonest in their demands and that their claims have no merit and all the evidence shows that.

I'm furious you'd equate my justified knowledge to their unjustified conspiracy theories and demand I waste my time giving them the time of day when I've already refuted the claim 100 times by simply CITING THEIR OWN WITNESS TESTIMONY UNDER OATH REJECTING THAT CLAIM
 

a_skeleton_05

<Banned>
13,843
34,510
You've posted several times in the time it took me to write a single sentence. It is literally impossible to reply to you right now.

My offer stands.
 
  • 1Potato
Reactions: 1 user

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377


See this? This is them being refuted on the Biden conspiracy claim.

They are not going to impugn this man's character in my eyes. Their claims have no credibility. I don't need to address them past posting this repeatedly. Its the end of the story as far as I'm concerned. I don't owe trolls shit.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
You've posted several times in the time it took me to write a single sentence. It is literally impossible to reply to you right now.

My offer stands.

I dont give a fuck I"m making my point forcefully my offer to go fuck yourself still stands
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377


See this? This is them being refuted on the Biden conspiracy claim.

They are not going to impugn this man's character in my eyes. Their claims have no credibility. I don't need to address them past posting this repeatedly. Its the end of the story as far as I'm concerned. I don't owe trolls shit.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
That is all the evidence I need to refute them. That's all the time I need to consider their already refuted claims. Period.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
And no, its not literally impossible to reply to me. You're just not being honest and I won't tolerate it. Die mad about it. This is me, telling you, to make your case why I owe trolls endless repetition of the same refuted argument over and over til I'm exhausted and they get to declare "victory" for their BLATANT LIE simply because I won't bother any more.

The claim has been made that Biden was engaging in illegal conduct in his role in asking the Ukraine to remove a corrupt prosecutor from his position so that corruption could be properly pursued in the nation. That claim has been found non credible and stated so under oath at penalty of perjury.

There is no there there. I don't owe them shit. I'm not being closed minded. I'm just not leaving my mind so open my brain falls out, either.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Meanwhile we know that the Ukrainian aid was withheld the same day as the phone call between Trump and Zelensky, that Trump sent the money on after being briefed on the whistleblower complaint, that multiple people at the OMB (office of management and budget) were sounding alarms that this was illegal, up to the point several QUIT OVER THE STOPPING OF THE AID TO UKRAINE, and that the effort to spread the Biden Burisma conspiracy theory ramped up EX POST FACTO to help cover up the quid pro quo extortion scheme Trump was running


All the evidence points to Trump and none of it points to Biden. Biden is a distraction fallacy and a non sequitur. An attempt to muddy the waters to protect the actual criminal activity in the equation, a corrupt quid pro quo, an extortion bribery scheme, a violation of the letter and intent of the law, and a high crime if ever I saw one warranting impeachment.

Period.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
On Tuesday afternoon, documents were released which revealed the White House first took action to withhold $250 million in military aid to the Ukraine on July 25–the same day of President Donald Trump‘s fateful phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

“This is an obvious extortion plan,” said former White House ethics counsel Richard Painter. “Criminal and impeachable.”

“It’s also an impermissible use of our foreign and military policy to support [Trump’s] political campaign,” Painter added, in a message to Law&Crime.

According to a summary of White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) documents released by the House Budget Committee and obtained by CNN, the hold on aid for the Ukraine was initially signed by career OMB official Mark Sandy at the beginning of July.

Subsequent holds, however, bear the signature of Trump’s handpicked OMB Associate Director for National Security Programs Michael Duffeythe former chair of the Wisconsin Republican Party.

Sandy was recently deposed by the House Intelligence Committee as part of the ongoing impeachment inquiry and said that on July 18, after returning from leave, Duffey informed him “of the President’s direction to hold military support funding for Ukraine.”

And, according to Sandy’s testimony–a redacted version of which was released late Tuesday–at least one OMB attorney tendered his resignation due, in part, to the hold placed on Ukrainian military aid.

“Did this person at OMB Legal tell you that they were leaving on resigning from OMB at least in part because of their concerns or frustrations about the hold on Ukraine security assistance?” asked Investigation Counsel Nicolas Mitchell.

“Yes,” Sandy replied, “In terms of that process, in part.”

Reaction to Sandy’s disclosures and the House Budget Committee’s summary were categorically negative for the White House.

“Simple – it’s not a coincidence,” former federal prosecutor, Pace Law School scholar and MSNBC legal analyst Mimi Rocah told Law&Crime. “There is a connection and right now the State Dept, OMB and Trump are trying to hide it from the American people, which is obstructive.”

People for the American Way Senior Counsel Elliot Mincberg said it was another day and another piece of damning evidence against the Trump administration’s impeachment defenses.

“Yet additional evidence of improper action by Trump and the administration,” Mincberg told Law&Crime. “The House Budget Committee is concerned even beyond impeachment because of the use of budget authority to get around the Impoundment Control Act to withhold aid when they weren’t supposed to do this. This is clearly more evidence–between the committee summary and the Sandy deposition–of direct involvement by the president to withhold aid to the Ukraine right around the call pushing Zelensky to conduct these investigations into his political enemies.”

Mincberg, who previously served as the former chief counsel for oversight and investigations of the House Judiciary Committee, also said the intervention by Duffey–originally reported in early October–should have raised alarms.

“What’s also suspicious is that after Sandy’s initial order the hold was taken over by political officials at OMB and provides even more evidence that something fishy was going on,” he said.

National security attorney Bradley P. Moss summed up the day’s revelations in context of what they meant for the overall task facing the House of Representatives going forward:

The key goal of the Democrats as they move towards a Christmas-time impeachment vote is going to be messaging, and particularly explaining a rather complicated foreign policy scandal in simple and easy terms that the public writ large can digest. One of the most obvious ways to do that is to line up the factual chronology in as clear and explicit of terms as possible. Obtaining information like that which was derived from the OMB official’s deposition is just another critical piece of the evidentiary puzzle that will be put forward not only in the context of the House vote but even more prominently in the (likely) Senate trial.
“This is just another piece of information in an avalanche of evidence to support that aid was in fact conditioned on doing that favor, that is, condition aid in exchange for political dirt on the Bidens, that the U.S. president asked for on the call,” explained former New Jersey prosecutor and current Law&Crime Network host Bob Bianchi.

“OMB takes its orders from the White House,” Bianchi continued. “The call on July 25 to Zelensky alone is all that is needed by any fair minded person to show an attempt to solicit a solely personal political favor for a thing of value before aid would be released.”

Bianchi also took a shot at “intellectually dishonest” defenses of the president:

The withholding of monies by OMB was the “substantial step” in furtherance of that conspiracy… Those defending the U.S. president are manipulating the citizens to the obvious facts here. It is just intellectually dishonest not to see that this is the case. The call to Zelensky alone is all that is needed to know what was happening. But, last week’s testimony just adds to the darkness of it all.
Trump named OMB Director Mick Mulvaney acting White House chief of staff in Dec. 2018.

In October 2019, while answering a question from Jonathan Karl of ABC News about why the Ukraine aid was withheld, Mulvaney blurted out, “Did [President Trump] also mention to me in the past the corruption that related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about that. But that’s it, and that’s why we hung up the money.”

“So the demand for an investigation into the Democrats was part of the reason that he ordered to withhold funding from Ukraine?” Karl followed-up.

“The look back to what happened in 2016, certainly, was part of the things that he was worried about in corruption with that nation, and that is absolutely appropriate,” Mulvaney responded, seemingly unaware that he had just torched the White House’s oft-echoed defense. “We do it all the time with foreign policy.”