Biden Pressured AG to go after Trump, hypocrisy, double standards

History repeats itself....
"Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?" is a quote attributed to Henry II of England that preceded the death of Thomas Becket, the Archbishop of Canterbury, in 1170.

https://englishhistory.net/middle-ages/will-no-one-rid-me-of-this-meddlesome-priest/



Joe Biden says he had no influence over Donald Trump's indictment | USA TODAY
In this white house press conference video, Biden insisted he had no influence over Trump's indictment.
"Because you notice I never once, not one single time, suggested the Justice Department what they should do or not do relative to bringing a charge or not bringing a charge. I'm honest."


"Currently presiding over the administration, President Joe Biden told close confidants that former President Donald Trump is a 'threat to democracy' and wants Attorney General Merrick Garland’s DOJ to prosecute him, according to two sources who spoke to The New York Times."

https://www.westernjournal.com/repo...ecute-trump-stop-acting-like-ponderous-judge/


Many Democrat supporters are also posing the question, if Biden was so corrupt (as former Vice President), why didn't Trump (when President) get the DOJ to investigate?

But what they ignore is the blatant double standards. (almost Orwellian)

If Trump (during the time he was President) had tried putting direct pressure on the DOJ, even by just saying something like this to the AG, the media and Democrats would have totally characterized it as inappropriate, misuse of influence, "compromising the independence of the DOJ", corruption pressuring authorities to go after his political opponent, "fascism".

 

Which doesn't prevent him from doing it.

 

But he would have received bitter criticism for it, and the media would have used it to get many Americans to view Trump as corrupt and a fascist.

Like I said, double standards.

 

Which STILL doesn't prevent him from doing it.

 

It depends exactly what you mean by "prevent". Is someone "prevented" from doing something if there will be consequences and reprisal for doing that?
A law that criminalizes murder doesn't really "prevent" someone from carrying out a murder, it could be said, if you're going to view things that way.

It's amazing how much of a stranglehold the media holds on American thought, even when it comes to many Republican leaders. I think the media would have been able to make Trump look bad even in the eyes of several Republican leaders if he had done this.

 

No they aren't, sorry but that's just an excuse.

 

Which means, that if Trump is elected, it's perfectly ok for him to direct the DOJ to go after Biden. Right?

 

Yep. And the media will roast him for it.

 

They'll roast him no matter what. So, what's he got to lose?

 

Are you saying trump didn’t try and get Hillary? Ah, revisionist history, I see. Didn’t he make that part of his entire campaign?

As to Biden directing the AG to do anything, if he did — good. Will make me vote for him even more times in 2024 than I did in 2020.

trump is a criminal and he is about to see the ramifications of his actions.

 

Exactly, he has no excuse.

 

I think Trump was tiptoeing a bit, walking a fine line, trying to avoid giving the media any ammunition they could use to roast him.
I mean, he knew he was going to be roasted, but just wanted to give the media as little possible truthful factual basis to roast him as possible.

Another thing to consider is that people did not even know Biden was going to try to become President until 11 months before the election was already coming to a close, and even then didn't know Biden was going to win the Democratic nomination until a few months before.
April 25, 2019 : Former Vice President Joe Biden of Delaware announced his candidacy in an online video
February 2, 2020 : early voting began in the first state, Maine.
February 29, 2020 : Biden won the Democratic primary in South Carolina.
March 3 : Biden won the primary in 10 states.
March 19: Gabbard dropped out of the race and endorsed Biden.
April 8 : Bernie Sanders suspended his campaign, and Biden became the presumptive presidential nominee.
April 27 : Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi endorsed Biden, indicating he was likely going to be nominee.
August 17-20 : The Democratic National Convention was held and delegates nominated Biden for president.
November 1 : deadline for early in-person voting in the first 3 states, signaling the start of the end of public voting.

It doesn't look good for the current President to start trying to push an investigation against someone 3 years after the fact just because it now becomes apparent that person is running against him in the election.

I think if Obama had been suspected of doing something like that, Trump or the Trump-appointed AG, would have pushed to investigate from the start, but Biden was just a former Vice President up to that point, not as important of a figure and was less of a target. (Proving corruption wouldn't have yielded a very big political payout) Especially because he was already seen as an old man at that point. Most probably expected he might serve one more term in the Senate and then would probably retire.

 

Biden's a liar. And according to the Biden Administration, every time it lies it's a seperate chargeable felony.

'The crime the Trump special counsel has identified is conspiring to prevent Joe Biden from being inaugurated. It is unclear whether, if for instance, a majority of the House or Senate had voted to accept the rival electors, regardless of evidence, it would still have been a fraud. Is Smith’s contention that Biden deserved to win, in which case blocking that outcome through any method, including the ones Smith says Trump was entitled to use, would still be a fraud? Or was it only a fraud because Biden did win and become president, in which case Donald Trump is not being punished for allegedly attempting to succeed, but rather for attempting and then failing?'

https://amac.us/newsline/society/un-american-trump-indictment-echoes-monarchical-lese-majeste-laws/

 

welcome to the double standards in DC

 

You're very much changing the topic, but I can very quickly address that. I think it still would have been election fraud if Congress had chosen to accept the rival electors. However, that does not mean Trump would or should have been to blame in the same sort of way as if he committed what is normally considered to be election fraud. Fraud involves a concealment of information, to trick people. In this case it could easily be argued that no information was actually going to be concealed and no one was going to be tricked. It would have been obvious to Congress and the states what the real situation was. Trump was just preparing to possibly try to create a legal pretense (even if that pretense would have been wrong, unconstitutional and unjustified). I'd use the analogy of someone trying to bring a frivolous lawsuit to a judge, where the judge can easily see all the real facts, but the lawsuit is wrong. And to top it off, Trump didn't even end up going through with the plan. This is just not the criminal type of election fraud in the normal sense of the word. You might as well start sending politicians to prison then if they even started planning to get Congress to pass a law based on faulty logic and wrongful interpretation of the Constitution but they never even ended up bringing it in front of Congress. Ridiculous. How do you charge the president with election fraud if it never actually was brought to Congress and Congress would have had to be in on the election fraud too to get it to work?

Beyond that, I think most probably the real point of all this was to delay the election results, not to wrongfully give the president another term. Trump was trying to delay the election results because he believed there was fraud and was trying to create time to uncover it. (Because once Biden took over, the usual departments of federal government would not investigate) If he had been able to prove fraud, then the state governments may have decided to change their electors, and the possibility that Trump may have been able to be legitimately reelected existed. Trump would have been easily forgiven for such ridiculous antics if that had been the outcome.

 

But Biden actually did do it.

 

But you will give him a pass like you are giving Biden?

Lol... Consider that a rhetorical question because the answer is already known.

 

Agreed. For some of the Left, were it not for double standards, they would have no standards at all.

Exactly, which isn't against the law. According to Bribed Joe and Crazy Jack The Fraidy Cat, every time Lying Joe Biden lies, it's a seperate chargeable felony.

Corrupt DOJ Slapped By Judge In Trump Documents Case

"The response shall address the legal propriety of using an out-of-district grand jury..."

'The judge overseeing former President Trump's classified documents case, Florida District Judge Aileen Cannon, rebuked federal prosecutors on Monday while striking down two of their filings.'

Not a great start for Lying Jack The Fraidy Cat.

 

Just like you give trump a pass but not biden.

 

I don't pretend to be nonpartisan... But to be honest.. pretty sure you don't either

 

Well, you know he's right. Trump is a menace to society and a threat to national security. Trump used the DOJ as a weapon, and is now threatening to go after those who went after him. What, you didn't notice?

Did Biden tweet 'if you come after me, I will come after you" ? No.

Did Trump? Yes,

While he was in office, Trump pressured Barr to investigate Hunter.

What did Barr do?

In 2018 he assigned US Attorney David Weiss to investigate Hunter, in the hopes of finding something on Joe.

He is still investigating him and under 3 years under Trump, no charges. 2 years under Biden, no charges.

Now think about that. When a new administration takes over, it is routine to replace all the US Attorneys with your own team.

What did Biden do? He let Weiss continue into the investigation of his own son.

HIS OWN SON.

Does that sound like corruption?

No, it sounds like integrity. Biden has it. Trump does not.

What are you guys waiting for?

Also, Trump tried to get Zelensky to investigate Biden, so he could say that Ukraine was investigating Biden, and he tried
to withhold congressionally appropriated funds to cajole him to do. It was an abuse of power for which he was impeached.

McCarthy wanted to impeach Biden. Guess what? He couldn't get the votes.

See, you need evidence and those who know something about evidence knows that there isn't any against Joe.

 

Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Biden.

Payback is a b****

 

That's fair enough, but that was about uncovering information, not pushing to prosecute.

It's also a little bit different because that involved the possibility of a crime between two separate countries, so it was more appropriate for politics to get involved.
Ukraine wouldn't really have had much of a strong reason to investigate, if not for the Americans asking.

So overall I don't really see that as comparable.

 

Where is Biden pushing to prosecute?

 

You'll have to read the OP.
(third paragraph)