MovieChat Forums > Joe Biden Discussion > After years of the news media telling us...

After years of the news media telling us...

posted 2 years ago by KinkyInk (1694)
36 replies | jump to latest

...that Trump was compromised by his links to foreign governments, and by the fictitious Steele Dossier, why aren't they even mentioning the real millions of dollars Biden's family has received from Ukraine? Isn't there a possibility that the money was affecting his judgements in foreign policy?

Shouldn't a legitimate news organization have been talking about this leading up to this war?

And why aren't they talking about all the money the Biden family has received from China? Isn't there a possibility of Joe owing some favors or being compromised in that area of the world also? What foreign policy decisions are being influenced by Joe's corruption?

Shouldn't the news be mentioning this? Or are we just accepting the fact the news media is no longer interested in participating in real journalism, but instead is satisfied with being the mouthpiece for one of our political parties?

[–] JoWilli (16915) 2 years ago

Joe and his family are a part of the DC Elite Statas Quo Machine, nothing will ever be investigated and they will never get in trouble.

have you noticed that ONLY people associated to Trump are being investigated and their lives ruined? they dont like outsiders swimming in their pool of greed and corruption. they are trying to prevent Trump from winning in 2024, if he runs...

why are only repubs being investigated? you are telling me that there isnt one corrupt democrat at all? the odds are astounding.

real journalism died years ago, its all about gotcha news and repeating the rhetoric, yes Fox is apart of this too. all major news networks local and national all spread propaganda.

what I find most interesting though, is that any negative news against dementia Joe is fake, but negative news against Trump was real. even the national news roasted Trump every night. but now, no one, including hate night tv, celebrities and local and national news has nothing bad to say about joe and doesnt blame him for anything.

joe bungled the withdrawal from Afghanistan and now everyone is just meh and no one cares that Country has descended into chaos.

the same thing will happen to Ukraine.

[–] cyguration (3945) 2 years ago

Joe and his family are a part of the DC Elite Statas Quo Machine, nothing will ever be investigated and they will never get in trouble.

This!

It makes me SICK to my stomach how every single person who reported the sick filth that was on Hunter Biden's laptop from hell was investigated by the FBI but the FBI didn't touch Hunter.

Every time Giuliani tried to get the FBI to take the laptop with all the incriminating information on it, they ignored it and instead tried finding whatever they could to incriminating Giuliani.

Absolutely disgusting.

The media and the corrupt national security forces make my blood boil with so much hatred.

[–] JoWilli (16915) 2 years ago

thanks for reading my post...but people thinking the Bidens are innocent is laughable.

and its amazing everyone forgot that Hunter worked for Ukrainians for almost 8 years.

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

What movie are you fucking talking about? ? ?

[–] KinkyInk (1694) 2 years ago

I understand. When you only watch CNN and MSNBC, you only see things they allow you to see.

So when you're faced with reality, you think it's fiction.

[–] triplea (3577) 2 years ago

I turned on MSNBC and all 6 of their advertisements for other programming were about systemic racism, CRT, ignorant rednecks against CRT, diversity and inclusion and the importance of teaching slavery to kids....

Like are these the only issues affecting the US lol.

[–] yatzo376 (7595) 2 years ago

Giuliani TV

[–] KinkyInk (1694) 2 years ago

Don't you think the media should be looking into Joe Biden's connections with the Ukrainians and the Communist Chinese?

Don't you think those connections could adversely affect our foreign policy in those areas?

[–] Bloodshot77 (10728) 2 years ago

I know you won't see this, because you're a little bitch for blocking me, but go fuck yourself and your stupid ass opinions!

[–] triplea (3577) 2 years ago

It was their corrupt side of the gov so no they're not going to investigate themselves and the media are on board because orange man bad!

[–] Joogle83 (4285) 2 years ago

Trump Enabled Putin and Kim Jong-un Biden has done nothing wrong and much better Leader than he was The Russians Tampered with the 2016 Elections

[–] KinkyInk (1694) 2 years ago

Put down the crack pipe.

[–] Joogle83 (4285) 2 years ago

Stoping Watching Faux News and Listening to Nutjobs such Ben Shapiro

[–] KinkyInk (1694) 2 years ago

Says the guy swallowing the mainstream media's lies to the balls.

[–] chilone (17404) 2 years ago

And can't put together a coherent sentence to save his life.

[–] millsey72 (9760) 2 years ago

Thats fake news or better called disinformation. CNN did a piece on this and nothing was linked back to Biden

[–] KinkyInk (1694) 2 years ago

I don't take obvious trolls seriously, so peddle this elsewhere.

[–] juviejay (456) 2 years ago

I lean democrat, but that's a fair point. News should be unbiased. Unfortunately, it's not.
Still, I'd rather have Joe than Trump. Trump was owed by Putin. After Trump lost all of his money in Atlantic City, no US Bank would loan to him anymore. Russia stepped up.

Also, Trump didn't know world history. Trump has an enormous ego. And Trump is, face it, not very intelligent.

Biden's not the brightest guy to be President, but he understands what it's about. He's been around it enough. He knows the importance of NATO. Trump would have probably let Putin run over Ukraine with no opposition. He probably would have praised him.

I'm not saying we should go toe to toe with Russia, but working with our allies (many of who Trump alienated) seems to be effective so far.

[–] KinkyInk (1694) 2 years ago

"Trump was owed by Putin."

You're just swallowing the bullshit the media is feeding you.

https://www.timesreporter.com/story/opinion/2021/01/07/byron-york-how-trump-actually-tough-russia/6563520002/

Democrats and their allies in the press spent the last four years accusing President Donald Trump of being soft on Russia. And worse: Some called the president a Russian asset, a traitor, Putin's patsy and much, much more. It was all nonsense, because behind the rhetoric was the stark reality that Trump, and his administration, have actually been tougher on Russia than many of his predecessors. Now, with the president on the way out, one lone voice in the anti-Trump press — CNN, specifically — has spoken the truth out loud.

On CNN's "New Day" on New Year's morning, the network's Fareed Zakaria was asked how U.S. Russia policy under President Joe Biden might differ from policy under President Trump. "I think, in general, there isn't going to be as much difference as people imagine," Zakaria said. "The Biden folks are pretty tough on Russia, Iran, North Korea. You know, the dirty little secret about the Trump administration was that while Donald Trump clearly had a kind of soft spot for Putin, the Trump administration was pretty tough on the Russians. They armed Ukraine. They armed the Poles. They extended NATO operations and exercises in ways that even the Obama administration had not done. They maintained the sanctions. So I don't think it will be that different."

The dirty little secret??? It was never a secret at all. All of the actions Zakaria listed were well-known public policy during the Trump years. Any of Zakaria's colleagues, at CNN and in the press as a whole, might have cited them. But many instead chose to contribute to the media's Russia hysteria that began even before the president was inaugurated and continued through the years of Trump-Russia special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.

Flash back a few years. On Feb. 20, 2018, Trump tweeted, "I have been much tougher on Russia than Obama, just look at the facts. Total Fake News!" Much of the media stood up as one to denounce Trump's statement. "Simply false," said CNN. "That's not true," said TIME. "The facts suggest the opposite," said The Washington Post. "Mostly false," declared PolitiFact, adding that Trump's tweet "immediately drew guffaws among media commentators."

But of course, Trump's tweet was true, something that most of those media outlets cannot admit even today. But at the time, I texted with a Republican lawmaker who was baffled by the media denials. Of course Trump is tougher on Russia than Obama was, he noted. Then the evidence started coming in a fast and furious series of texts.

Trump had, the lawmaker noted: 1) Bombed Syria, Russia's main client, and unleashed the U.S. military in Syria, including against Russians; 2) Armed Ukraine; 3) Weakened the Iran nuclear deal, and would likely soon end it [which Trump later did]; 4) Browbeat NATO allies to increase defense spending; 5) Approved $130 billion in new defense spending; 6) Added low-yield nukes to the U.S. arsenal; 7) Started research and development on a new missile after Russia deployed a missile that did not comply with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty; 8) Shut down Russia's consulate in San Francisco; and 9) Pumped more U.S. oil and gas, making the U.S. more energy independent.

Those were just the reasons at the time, in 2018. As time went on, Trump continued and expanded on all those Russia-limiting moves. Plus, he not only kept in place earlier sanctions against Russia, but he added new ones.

The short version of the story: Trump was right, and the media consensus was wrong.

[–] juviejay (456) 2 years ago

The problem with this is that Trump was often at odds with his intelligence agencies. Remember when he tried to extort the President of Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden's son or he would withhold missiles? I'm going from memory here so I can't give specific details, but you know what I mean.

These policies went on regardless of Trump, not because of him. Didn't he fire a lot of his top military aides? Rex Tillerson called him a "fucking idiot." His campaign manager (I forget his name but he helped several tyrants take power around the world) was hung out to dry. His former lawyer, Michael Cohen, has turned against him, as has his former Attorney General.

He did bomb in Syria (at his daughter's behest) but stopped when Putin told him not to do it again.

He said he believed Putin when he told him when he said he didn't interfere with the elections, despite the fact that all 17 of our intelligence agencies said he did.

Putin and Russia was happy when Trump was elected. They had been cultivating him as an asset for years. Trump admired Putin. Remember him praising Putin and criticizing Obama when Obama was president?

Back in the eighties, Trump visited Russia and lied and said he met with Gorbachev. He never did. He's a joke, a liar, a fraud, a buffoon. And you've all eaten it up.

[–] KinkyInk (1694) 2 years ago

"Remember when he tried to extort the President of Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden's son or he would withhold missiles?"

The President of Ukraine denied that happened.

"I'm going from memory here so I can't give specific details"
"I forget his name but he helped several tyrants take power around the world"
"at his daughter's behest"
"when Putin told him not to do it again"
"They had been cultivating him as an asset for years"
"He's a joke, a liar, a fraud, a buffoon"

You sound like a twelve-year-old who watched the news and kinda remember some of it.

[–] KinkyInk (1694) 2 years ago

"He knows the importance of NATO. Trump would have probably let Putin run over Ukraine with no opposition."

Seriously, what are you talking about?

Trump was constantly bitching about how the members of NATO weren't paying their fair share. He wanted them to contribute more so that NATO would be stronger.

And it worked:

https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/nato-allies-now-spend-50-billion-more-defense-2016

NATO Allies Now Spend $50 Billion More on Defense Than in 2016

President Donald Trump has placed a significant emphasis on the need for increased defense spending among NATO allies, and the newest data suggests his efforts are paying off.

In 2016, non-U.S. NATO members spent $262 billion on defense; in 2020, they will spend $313 billion. Regardless of whether this increase resulted from changing threat perceptions, or Trump’s laser-like focus on inadequate defense spending, or of some combination of the two, the results speak for themselves. The $50 billion increase is equivalent to the entire defense budget of France.

And that is just one year. Since 2016, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg noted that European allies and Canada will have added $130 billion to their defense budgets.

As an intergovernmental security alliance, NATO is only as strong as its member states. Weak defense spending in Europe beginning with the end of the Cold War led to a significant loss of capabilities and embarrassing gaps in readiness for NATO allies, and American presidents of both political parties have long called for increases in defense spending by NATO allies.

Please, try to become informed on the issues before you make a post like this.

[–] millsey72 (9760) 2 years ago

Biden understands what its about? Have you heard any of his speeches? And yes, you rather have Biden over Trump because open borders, socialism, higher taxes and defunding the police are all great for this country, right?

[–] chilone (17404) 2 years ago

You forgot mean tweets.

[–] Enigmaticocean77 (2181) 2 years ago

I stopped reading at "I lean Democrat". These The word democrat translates to someone who has no brain. Thanks for not wasting my time, ahead of time. Although, I know that that wasn't your intention.

[–] juviejay (456) 2 years ago

"These the word democrat translates to someone who has no brain."

Sad thing is you're probably not intelligent enough to appreciate the irony in this sentence.

[–] Enigmaticocean77 (2181) 2 years ago

You're obviously not intelligent enough to spot a typo...

[–] juviejay (456) 2 years ago

Cofeefee

[–] Enigmaticocean77 (2181) 2 years ago

Well, with some thought you have proven that you're intelligent enough to write a typo-like word, but you've already proven yourself not to be intelligent enough to spot a typo when someone else makes one.

I'm done with you anyway. Progressive Democrats always point out typos, and they do it because they have no valid argument when it comes to anything else.

[–] juviejay (456) 2 years ago

No, it's because we don't enjoy being lectured to by people who haven't yet mastered their native language.

And a typo is when you get one letter wrong, typing beet instead of beer, for example.

What you did was inject a whole unnecessary word, thus screwing up the whole sentence.

But your close-mindedness is typical of conservatives. You don't listen to reason.

[–] Enigmaticocean77 (2181) 2 years ago

You're funny... and I'm not a conservative. I'll take poor assumptions for $500 Alex.

[–] juviejay (456) 2 years ago

Just closed minded, eh?

[–] Mensa1856 (135) 2 years ago

Trump tried to dismantle NATO right in your face and you're too stupid to see it.

[–] KinkyInk (1694) 2 years ago

Moron.

Trump made NATO stronger by demanding the members pay their fair share.

Do I have to draw this in crayon for you:

https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/nato-allies-now-spend-50-billion-more-defense-2016

NATO Allies Now Spend $50 Billion More on Defense Than in 2016

President Donald Trump has placed a significant emphasis on the need for increased defense spending among NATO allies, and the newest data suggests his efforts are paying off.

In 2016, non-U.S. NATO members spent $262 billion on defense; in 2020, they will spend $313 billion. Regardless of whether this increase resulted from changing threat perceptions, or Trump’s laser-like focus on inadequate defense spending, or of some combination of the two, the results speak for themselves. The $50 billion increase is equivalent to the entire defense budget of France.

And that is just one year. Since 2016, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg noted that European allies and Canada will have added $130 billion to their defense budgets.

As an intergovernmental security alliance, NATO is only as strong as its member states. Weak defense spending in Europe beginning with the end of the Cold War led to a significant loss of capabilities and embarrassing gaps in readiness for NATO allies, and American presidents of both political parties have long called for increases in defense spending by NATO allies.