#46 President Joe Biden

tbergs

brianlux said:

tbergs said:

brianlux said:

I don't understand what some of you mean by "lie".  To me, if you say something knowing it isn't or will not be true, that is a lie.  And if you say something you believe you will stand by, but later realize that what you planned on doing was a bad choice OR circumstances have changed OR things didn't turn out as you had expected, AND you do something different, is that a lie?  I don't think so.  I'd say it is a change of mind. 

And this:  who here will cast the first stone? 

So much anger.  Anger and hatred.  Lovely.

And I mean me too, though I'm not so much angry lately.  What good does arguing do?  Nothing.  What good endless anger?  Nothing.  There has to be a better way to spend our time and energy.  Like actually doing something to help make positive change happen instead of just being pissed off and arguing.

I'm open to ideas!

Brian, I get what you're saying, but I think that way of looking at it provides way too much benefit of the doubt in instances that simply seem implausible. Are any of us willing to give this same benefit to Trump for anything he says and later does/doesn't do? Most likely not and I don't see anyone trying to provide this argument for him about anything.

Trump is an easy target in this instance, so let's dig a little deeper and consider what the most recent SCOTUS appointees (Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch) said during their confirmation hearings about abortion. Many of them were asked point blank if they believe Roe v. Wade was stare decisis and they repeatedly stated they believed it was, but yet less than 5 years later a new case came along and they overturned what they said they wouldn't. Again, I know many here have said they lied in the hearing, but isn't it then also fair for them to say they changed their mind based on new circumstances? I would call bullshit because their personal beliefs made it pretty clear which side they favored and I would say the same thing about the Biden pardon.

Sorry t, but no, I would not give the same benefit to D.T. because he is a know chronic liar.  Biden is not.  It's just  that simple.

Yeah, Trump lies all the time and we know it because he lies with impunity. Biden is usually more tactful in his lies, more politician like I would say. It's just so weird that we've come to a point where republicans won't call out blatant Trump lies and Dems won't call out clear Biden lies. Both parties should be able to call out all lies, but instead they both pretend only their opponent lies.

tbergs

Lerxst1992 said:

tbergs said:

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

I know calling it a lie is politically convenient...Romney even made a comment saying that he lied and it was disgraceful or something but give me a break. Circumstances changed.

And, like I mentioned before, even Gowdy and Graham said that the charges wouldn't have happened if it weren't Biden's son.

He lied. Do you really not know what a lie is? He said he wouldn’t do something….then he did it. 

So you know for a fact that he intended to pardon at the point he was asked? Can I borrow your crystal ball? 

It doesn't matter what he was thinking internally, he lied by doing something he said he wouldn't do. The mental gymnastics he did later to take the action he said he wouldn't still makes it a lie based on his repeated public statements to the contrary. I'm not sure why you're trying to construct some new meaning of lying. Maybe his initial intent wasn't to lie, but he did the thing he said he wouldn't so it became a lie. People trying to project on his fear of what the incoming Trump admin will do are reaching in my opinion.

Let's go back to when he was still the candidate,  if he won relection, do you really think he wouldn't pardon his son in a 2nd term with nothing left to worry about? He just didn't think he'd have to go back on his word so quickly. I'd argue that at this point, he always knew he would do it unless Harris won and could do it for him.

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

I know calling it a lie is politically convenient...Romney even made a comment saying that he lied and it was disgraceful or something but give me a break. Circumstances changed.

And, like I mentioned before, even Gowdy and Graham said that the charges wouldn't have happened if it weren't Biden's son.

He lied. Do you really not know what a lie is? He said he wouldn’t do something….then he did it. 

He changed his mind due to the increasingly unhinged comments by the opposition leader over the last three months, specifically related to going after the enemy within.

If you don't believe you would not make the same exact change of mind in this situation, imo you are not being honest with yerselves.


Edit, reading the comparison to USSC and abortion, if you have a specific example of a significant change in abortions, there could be a comparable there. But there is no such change. Biden is reacting specifically to the unhinged comments where 47 specifically threatened him and his family. Saying, "well they might see it differently under a new case" is not being specific. 

I think you're trying really hard to make something true that isn't. Biden, and pretty much all dems, have been spouting about Trump as a threat to democracy for years with it peaking the last 6 months to the point of comparisons to being fascist or nazi-esque. You're trying to convince me that even though Biden and his party were already saying stuff like that about Trump that he still wasn't sure he would pardon Hunter? I think what he really should have said is that he would only pardon Hunter if Trump was elected because of the threat he poses to unbiased justice and respect for the rule of law. I don't know though, maybe he didn't want to put himself in another political pickle by even saying that, but it's also been pretty clear for a long time what a 2nd Trump presidency would look like.

As for the abortion comparison, you don't agree that something changed, but others do, including the justices. I don't agree with them or their reasons because the support of their reasons is lacking. Same as it is for Biden. So is it only a "changed mind" instead of a lie if you agree with the reasons provided? I think we're wading in to some muddy waters if that's the standard. This isn't like me telling my wife I am coming straight home, but then I stop for gas because I didn't realize my tank was low. I think certain situations can be perceived in such a way that allow reasonable people to know when it's an intentionally misleading statement and when it truly is an unknown.

Gern Blansten

tbergs said:

josevolution said:

Booo booo whooo he lied so fucking what the old man is done to be gone from public life did he pardon a harden criminal or an insurrectionist! Go cry somewhere else 

None of us are crying about it. I'm just annoyed that people keep trying to say it wasn't a lie. You're right, who cares, call it what it is and move on. The people defending it as not a lie seem to need this advice more than anyone else.

I don't know if it was a lie or not. In truth, no one does. We don't know if it was a lie when Biden said it.

I don't understand why that is so hard to understand.

mace1229

mickeyrat said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

I know calling it a lie is politically convenient...Romney even made a comment saying that he lied and it was disgraceful or something but give me a break. Circumstances changed.

And, like I mentioned before, even Gowdy and Graham said that the charges wouldn't have happened if it weren't Biden's son.

He lied. Do you really not know what a lie is? He said he wouldn’t do something….then he did it. 

So you know for a fact that he intended to pardon at the point he was asked? Can I borrow your crystal ball? 

What are you trying to say? 

Thought of this yestetday and wasnt going to post it.

changed my mind.

show me on the doll where hunter touched you.

I know a few strippers that can answer that question.

mace1229

tbergs said:

mickeyrat said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

I know calling it a lie is politically convenient...Romney even made a comment saying that he lied and it was disgraceful or something but give me a break. Circumstances changed.

And, like I mentioned before, even Gowdy and Graham said that the charges wouldn't have happened if it weren't Biden's son.

He lied. Do you really not know what a lie is? He said he wouldn’t do something….then he did it. 

So you know for a fact that he intended to pardon at the point he was asked? Can I borrow your crystal ball? 

What are you trying to say? 

DO YOU EVER HAVE OCCASION TO CHANGE YOUR MIND?

Why are you jumping through hoops on this issue? It's weird to see all of the defense for Biden on this. It really isn't a big deal because I think any rational person expected him to pardon his son at some point. He lied. It's fine, Trump maliciously lies all the time and no one cares. Biden lied about his intentions because he thought it was political suicide at the time and was right to assume that it would have been. This is actually more of a normal political lie and one that could just die if people didn't keep trying to justify it.

I agree with this with the exception of the sweeping pardon. You are right, most of us probably expected him to do it ( I know I did) and we understand it would be giving away the election if he advertised it at the time. Had he just pardoned him for what he had been charged and found guilty of that would have been one thing. Its the blanket any and all charges for 11 years, even ones not known of yet, that warrants scrutiny. 

Gern Blansten

mace1229 said:

tbergs said:

mickeyrat said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

I know calling it a lie is politically convenient...Romney even made a comment saying that he lied and it was disgraceful or something but give me a break. Circumstances changed.

And, like I mentioned before, even Gowdy and Graham said that the charges wouldn't have happened if it weren't Biden's son.

He lied. Do you really not know what a lie is? He said he wouldn’t do something….then he did it. 

So you know for a fact that he intended to pardon at the point he was asked? Can I borrow your crystal ball? 

What are you trying to say? 

DO YOU EVER HAVE OCCASION TO CHANGE YOUR MIND?

Why are you jumping through hoops on this issue? It's weird to see all of the defense for Biden on this. It really isn't a big deal because I think any rational person expected him to pardon his son at some point. He lied. It's fine, Trump maliciously lies all the time and no one cares. Biden lied about his intentions because he thought it was political suicide at the time and was right to assume that it would have been. This is actually more of a normal political lie and one that could just die if people didn't keep trying to justify it.

I agree with this with the exception of the sweeping pardon. You are right, most of us probably expected him to do it ( I know I did) and we understand it would be giving away the election if he advertised it at the time. Had he just pardoned him for what he had been charged and found guilty of that would have been one thing. Its the blanket any and all charges for 11 years, even ones not known of yet, that warrants scrutiny. 

My opinion is that there would have been no pardon if Harris had won. I do think that the Biden's were willing to accept the charges because they knew there would likely not be any prison time.

It's all the revenge bullshit and trump's unfortunate victory that led to the pardon.

mace1229

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

tbergs said:

mickeyrat said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

I know calling it a lie is politically convenient...Romney even made a comment saying that he lied and it was disgraceful or something but give me a break. Circumstances changed.

And, like I mentioned before, even Gowdy and Graham said that the charges wouldn't have happened if it weren't Biden's son.

He lied. Do you really not know what a lie is? He said he wouldn’t do something….then he did it. 

So you know for a fact that he intended to pardon at the point he was asked? Can I borrow your crystal ball? 

What are you trying to say? 

DO YOU EVER HAVE OCCASION TO CHANGE YOUR MIND?

Why are you jumping through hoops on this issue? It's weird to see all of the defense for Biden on this. It really isn't a big deal because I think any rational person expected him to pardon his son at some point. He lied. It's fine, Trump maliciously lies all the time and no one cares. Biden lied about his intentions because he thought it was political suicide at the time and was right to assume that it would have been. This is actually more of a normal political lie and one that could just die if people didn't keep trying to justify it.

I agree with this with the exception of the sweeping pardon. You are right, most of us probably expected him to do it ( I know I did) and we understand it would be giving away the election if he advertised it at the time. Had he just pardoned him for what he had been charged and found guilty of that would have been one thing. Its the blanket any and all charges for 11 years, even ones not known of yet, that warrants scrutiny. 

My opinion is that there would have been no pardon if Harris had won. I do think that the Biden's were willing to accept the charges because they knew there would likely not be any prison time.

It's all the revenge bullshit and trump's unfortunate victory that led to the pardon.

Maybe. But the weird part is, why not wait until sentencing this month? Isn't the judge and everyone else in charge of the process the same no matter who won?
That's the weirdest part to me, why not wait? He probably would have just gotten a fine and probation anyway, I don't see Hunter serving prison time. And if he was sentenced to prison, then pardon him citing it was an unjust sentence. If not, let him pay the fine and serve probation and then there's no backlash. He had time to wait and see what the sentence was. 

eddiec

It's just crazy that there's agreement that Joe would have been committing political suicide if he said he was going to pardon his son over tax evasion, but Trump openly says he'll pardon the J6ers and he gets elected.

And people say both sides are the same? It's bizarro world.

Gern Blansten

eddiec said:

It's just crazy that there's agreement that Joe would have been committing political suicide if he said he was going to pardon his son over tax evasion, but Trump openly says he'll pardon the J6ers and he gets elected.

And people say both sides are the same? It's bizarro world.

yeah we're in an alternate reality for at least the next four years...Idiocracy

Gern Blansten

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

tbergs said:

mickeyrat said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

I know calling it a lie is politically convenient...Romney even made a comment saying that he lied and it was disgraceful or something but give me a break. Circumstances changed.

And, like I mentioned before, even Gowdy and Graham said that the charges wouldn't have happened if it weren't Biden's son.

He lied. Do you really not know what a lie is? He said he wouldn’t do something….then he did it. 

So you know for a fact that he intended to pardon at the point he was asked? Can I borrow your crystal ball? 

What are you trying to say? 

DO YOU EVER HAVE OCCASION TO CHANGE YOUR MIND?

Why are you jumping through hoops on this issue? It's weird to see all of the defense for Biden on this. It really isn't a big deal because I think any rational person expected him to pardon his son at some point. He lied. It's fine, Trump maliciously lies all the time and no one cares. Biden lied about his intentions because he thought it was political suicide at the time and was right to assume that it would have been. This is actually more of a normal political lie and one that could just die if people didn't keep trying to justify it.

I agree with this with the exception of the sweeping pardon. You are right, most of us probably expected him to do it ( I know I did) and we understand it would be giving away the election if he advertised it at the time. Had he just pardoned him for what he had been charged and found guilty of that would have been one thing. Its the blanket any and all charges for 11 years, even ones not known of yet, that warrants scrutiny. 

My opinion is that there would have been no pardon if Harris had won. I do think that the Biden's were willing to accept the charges because they knew there would likely not be any prison time.

It's all the revenge bullshit and trump's unfortunate victory that led to the pardon.

Maybe. But the weird part is, why not wait until sentencing this month? Isn't the judge and everyone else in charge of the process the same no matter who won?
That's the weirdest part to me, why not wait? He probably would have just gotten a fine and probation anyway, I don't see Hunter serving prison time. And if he was sentenced to prison, then pardon him citing it was an unjust sentence. If not, let him pay the fine and serve probation and then there's no backlash. He had time to wait and see what the sentence was. 

My only guess would be the pardon came now just in case there was harsh prison time. Although I'm not sure if the reaction would be different if they had waited. Pardoning a fine looks worse than pardoning prison time in my opinion.

mace1229

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

tbergs said:

mickeyrat said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

I know calling it a lie is politically convenient...Romney even made a comment saying that he lied and it was disgraceful or something but give me a break. Circumstances changed.

And, like I mentioned before, even Gowdy and Graham said that the charges wouldn't have happened if it weren't Biden's son.

He lied. Do you really not know what a lie is? He said he wouldn’t do something….then he did it. 

So you know for a fact that he intended to pardon at the point he was asked? Can I borrow your crystal ball? 

What are you trying to say? 

DO YOU EVER HAVE OCCASION TO CHANGE YOUR MIND?

Why are you jumping through hoops on this issue? It's weird to see all of the defense for Biden on this. It really isn't a big deal because I think any rational person expected him to pardon his son at some point. He lied. It's fine, Trump maliciously lies all the time and no one cares. Biden lied about his intentions because he thought it was political suicide at the time and was right to assume that it would have been. This is actually more of a normal political lie and one that could just die if people didn't keep trying to justify it.

I agree with this with the exception of the sweeping pardon. You are right, most of us probably expected him to do it ( I know I did) and we understand it would be giving away the election if he advertised it at the time. Had he just pardoned him for what he had been charged and found guilty of that would have been one thing. Its the blanket any and all charges for 11 years, even ones not known of yet, that warrants scrutiny. 

My opinion is that there would have been no pardon if Harris had won. I do think that the Biden's were willing to accept the charges because they knew there would likely not be any prison time.

It's all the revenge bullshit and trump's unfortunate victory that led to the pardon.

Maybe. But the weird part is, why not wait until sentencing this month? Isn't the judge and everyone else in charge of the process the same no matter who won?
That's the weirdest part to me, why not wait? He probably would have just gotten a fine and probation anyway, I don't see Hunter serving prison time. And if he was sentenced to prison, then pardon him citing it was an unjust sentence. If not, let him pay the fine and serve probation and then there's no backlash. He had time to wait and see what the sentence was. 

My only guess would be the pardon came now just in case there was harsh prison time. Although I'm not sure if the reaction would be different if they had waited. Pardoning a fine looks worse than pardoning prison time in my opinion.

Yeah, so that's why it doesn't make sense not to wait. Had it been just a fine then don't pardon and no scrutiny. If there was a harsh prison sentence, then issue the pardon and there's no difference. 
Wait the week or two until the sentence. If it a hefty fine, just pay it, they have the money and the means. If it's a sentence, issue an immediate pardon and have him home within the hour. It's the president's son, its not like its going to take 3 months of paperwork to process. 
I don't see any reason not to wait unless you're just trying to get out of a fine, which like you said, looks worse. 
Issuing the sweeping 11-year all inclusive pardon now is about as bad of a look as you can get.

bootlegger10

eddiec said:

It's just crazy that there's agreement that Joe would have been committing political suicide if he said he was going to pardon his son over tax evasion, but Trump openly says he'll pardon the J6ers and he gets elected.

And people say both sides are the same? It's bizarro world.

It is bizarre, but not for these reasons.  Trump at least said he was going to pardon people and people voted for him whether they wanted him to or in spite of it.  But the key thing is they knew it.  Now, we'll see if Trump ends up a liar on this front as we'll have to see if ultimately does pardon them.

The difference here is that Biden lied.  I think we are all taught as kids that lying about something could be a lot worse than the something you are lying about.  In this case, pardoning Hunter is well within the president's right, but it is the lie that people are up in arms about.  

You (not pointed at eddiec) can say he changed his mind, but don't expect everyone to believe it.  Clearly most aren't.  Like I said before, time and time again the left on this board justify anything for politicians/parties they support.   The only difference is there is a lot more for Republicans to have to justify with Trump.    

cincybearcat

HughFreakingDillon said:

Lie implies intent to mislead/knowing what you are saying is untrue at the time you said it. 

What Biden is claiming is that he reneged. 

We’ll never know which is true, but I know what I would have done. 

This is all semantics.  If Trump had done this I would venture to guess the vast majority of you would be singing a different tune.

Y'all probably bought Slick Willy's stupid argument during his investigation.

Gern Blansten

bootlegger10 said:

eddiec said:

It's just crazy that there's agreement that Joe would have been committing political suicide if he said he was going to pardon his son over tax evasion, but Trump openly says he'll pardon the J6ers and he gets elected.

And people say both sides are the same? It's bizarro world.

It is bizarre, but not for these reasons.  Trump at least said he was going to pardon people and people voted for him whether they wanted him to or in spite of it.  But the key thing is they knew it.  Now, we'll see if Trump ends up a liar on this front as we'll have to see if ultimately does pardon them.

The difference here is that Biden lied.  I think we are all taught as kids that lying about something could be a lot worse than the something you are lying about.  In this case, pardoning Hunter is well within the president's right, but it is the lie that people are up in arms about.  

You (not pointed at eddiec) can say he changed his mind, but don't expect everyone to believe it.  Clearly most aren't.  Like I said before, time and time again the left on this board justify anything for politicians/parties they support.   The only difference is there is a lot more for Republicans to have to justify with Trump.    

But you don't know that for a fact. That's my only point. Unless Biden comes out and says "I lied" we simply don't know for sure.

Gern Blansten

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Lie implies intent to mislead/knowing what you are saying is untrue at the time you said it. 

What Biden is claiming is that he reneged. 

We’ll never know which is true, but I know what I would have done. 

This is all semantics.  If Trump had done this I would venture to guess the vast majority of you would be singing a different tune.

Y'all probably bought Slick Willy's stupid argument during his investigation.

Maybe...but he lies all the fucking time so what's the diff?

OnWis97

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Lie implies intent to mislead/knowing what you are saying is untrue at the time you said it. 

What Biden is claiming is that he reneged. 

We’ll never know which is true, but I know what I would have done. 

This is all semantics.  If Trump had done this I would venture to guess the vast majority of you would be singing a different tune.

Y'all probably bought Slick Willy's stupid argument during his investigation.

He did pardon Kushner's father. I really don't remember much hubub over that one, at least until Trump appointed him ambassador to France. But maybe the reaction to that appointment was deflection from what Joe just did.

tempo_n_groove

Kat said:

Biden in Angola: U.S. Competes with China for Influence in Africa 

Amid Fight for Key Resources

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyWgduBEn4Y

This fell flat on Africa from what I've heard.  This was the first time Biden visited Africa so they see this as them being low on the Totem Pole.

shecky

Federal judge accuses President Biden of attempting to 'rewrite history' in Hunter Biden pardon

Scarsi accused President Biden of 'rewriting history' with the pardon of his son, Hunter

 By Sarah Rumpf-Whitten Fox News

Published December 4, 2024 12:23am EST

The federal judge overseeing Hunter Biden’s tax case issued a sharp rebuke of President Biden's claim that his son was unfairly treated as well as the president's delivery method following the president's last-minute pardon.

U.S. District Judge Mark Scarsi, who is based in the Central District of California and was nominated by President-elect Trump, accused President Biden in a scathing five-page order of "rewriting history" with the pardon and suggested that the breadth of the pardon granted to his son is unconstitutional.

"The Constitution provides the President with broad authority to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, but nowhere does the Constitution give the President the authority to rewrite history," he wrote.

The judge voiced his displeasure that the president alerted the judicial system of his order to pardon his son via a White House press release.

"Rather than providing a true and correct copy of the pardon with the notice, Mr. Biden provided a hyperlink to a White House press release presenting a statement by the President regarding the pardon and the purported text of the pardon," he wrote.

"In short, a press release is not a pardon," he continued.

Scarsi continued, reacting to the president's statement on his son's tax case: "the President asserts that Mr. Biden ‘was treated differently’ from others ‘who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions,’ implying that Mr. Biden was among those individuals who untimely paid taxes due to addiction. But he is not."

"According to the President, ‘[n]o reasonable person who looks at the facts of [Mr. Biden’s] cases can reach any other conclusion than [Mr. Biden] was singled out only because he is [the President’s] son.’ But two federal judges expressly rejected Biden’s arguments that the Government prosecuted Mr. Biden because of his familial relation to the President. And the President’s own Attorney General and Department of Justice personnel oversaw the investigation leading to the charges," Scarsi wrote.

"In the President’s estimation, this legion of federal civil servants, the undersigned included, are unreasonable people," he said.

The judge said he would dispose of the case once he receives the official pardon from "the appropriate executive agency." 

He also vacated Hunter Biden’s sentencing, which was scheduled for Dec. 16.  The charges carried up to 17 years behind bars, but the first son would likely have faced a much shorter sentence under federal sentencing guidelines.

"Subject to the following discussion, the Court assumes the pardon is effective and will dispose of the case. The Supreme Court long has recognized that, notwithstanding its nearly unlimited nature, the pardon power extends only to past offenses," he wrote.

Hunter Biden, 54, has had a busy year in court, kicking off his first trial in Delaware in June, when he faced three felony firearm offenses, before he pleaded guilty in a separate felony tax case in September. 

President Biden pardoning his son is a departure from his previous remarks to the media over the summer when he insisted he would not pardon the first son.

"Yes," President Biden told ABC News when asked if he would rule out pardoning Hunter ahead of his guilty verdict in the gun case. 

Days later, following a jury of Hunter’s peers finding him guilty of three felony firearm offenses, the president again said he would not pardon his son. 

"I am not going to do anything," Biden said after Hunter was convicted. "I will abide by the jury’s decision."

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

HughFreakingDillon

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Lie implies intent to mislead/knowing what you are saying is untrue at the time you said it. 

What Biden is claiming is that he reneged. 

We’ll never know which is true, but I know what I would have done. 

This is all semantics.  If Trump had done this I would venture to guess the vast majority of you would be singing a different tune.

Y'all probably bought Slick Willy's stupid argument during his investigation.

If Trump had done this I believe he would have intended to lie 100%. Because he’s pathological. Biden isn’t (to my knowledge). Really odd that you think that’s apples to apples. 

And no, I didn’t. That was another point in American history where the world was laughing. And *gasp* it was a DEMOCRAT. THAT CANNOT BE TRUE!!! Liberals thought a democrat was a sleazy liar? Don’t they know what team they’re on???

Gern Blansten

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Lie implies intent to mislead/knowing what you are saying is untrue at the time you said it. 

What Biden is claiming is that he reneged. 

We’ll never know which is true, but I know what I would have done. 

This is all semantics.  If Trump had done this I would venture to guess the vast majority of you would be singing a different tune.

Y'all probably bought Slick Willy's stupid argument during his investigation.

If Trump had done this I believe he would have intended to lie 100%. Because he’s pathological. Biden isn’t (to my knowledge). Really odd that you think that’s apples to apples. 

And no, I didn’t. That was another point in American history where the world was laughing. And *gasp* it was a DEMOCRAT. THAT CANNOT BE TRUE!!! Liberals thought a democrat was a sleazy liar? Don’t they know what team they’re on???

Yeah I don't think I'm a Biden apologist but I don't get the confidence calling it a "lie."

If you want to believe it's a lie that's fine but that doesn't change the fact that you don't know whether it was a lie or not.