I guess as far as all of the plagiarism that Biden committed and has already been called out on, I can get past that for a candidate with a good strategy.

The plagiarism is definitely small potatoes compared to the authenticity issue. Voters generally want to support a candidate who they believe is authentic... which is hurting Elizabeth Warren, regardless of whether or not it's being overblown, which it is.

The authenticity issue is also the exact reason Trump doesn't want his tax returns disseminated; that entire fake backstory he created for himself would be discovered, and there goes the narrative.

I would vote for Biden over Trump every day of the week; there isn't a candidate who isn't human, but there is definitely a candidate who is arguably inhuman and couldn't care less about anyone who doesn't have his surname... and he'd throw the majority of them under the bus if need be. Sad.

I don’t want the Dems overly focused on past slights from their candidates when we know there will be no accountability being practiced with the Republicans.

True... but what doesn't come out in the primary might come out in the general; better to hash it out early. On the other hand, there is a very large portion of the electorate who no longer believes a word out of Donald Trump's face and will assume he's lying anyway. :)

Kinda like when people bring up Biden’s treatment of Anita Hill back in the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings, or a “No” vote on busing blacks into schools during desegregation — these events from 30 or 40 years ago shouldn’t be the main evidence being used to determine a person’s character today (especially if you aren’t going to list all of the good things they did during the same time frame)!

I don’t want the Dems overly focused on past slights from their candidates when we know there will be no accountability being practiced with the Republicans.

Shortly after that kerfuffle, it was discovered that Biden had "borrowed" from speeches of Hubert Humphrey (lifted passages regarding helping the neediest), Robert Kennedy (multiple long sentences), and John F. Kennedy.

Biden then admitted to receiving an F in law school for plagiarizing 5 pages of a term paper from a published article, and then he was forced to admit that British Labor official Denis Healey had not actually given him a tape of Neil Kinnock, but thank goodness that was the last incident... just kidding.

Newsweek discovered a videotape where Biden had been heckled, whereupon he defended his intelligence by inflating his credentials to the heckler, saying:

I think I probably have a much higher IQ than you do, I suspect. I went to law school on a full academic scholarship.

Fact Check: False.

He also claimed he graduated in the top half of his law-school class.

Fact Check: False.

He also stated that he had earned 3 undergraduate degrees.

Fact Check: False. One, a history/political science double major.

She makes him look juvenile on several occasions.

Yep. It's pretty striking.

I remember when that bill was being debated - it was a bad bill.

[76] Didn't know all that about the plagiarism.

Like the 'handsy' thing, it's a little shot across the bow of the front-runner. Nothing disqualifying, just meant to shake him up.

Right. Shake 'em and bake 'em during the primary... better there than in the general. Put it all out on the table. Those that can't or don't wish to navigate the minefield will be weeded out.

Some folks on the Dem side say that it helps to 'toughen' a candidate. I dunno. What I DO know is that in years with lots of candidates, the best usually emerges (McGovern was an exception) and wins.

I agree with the Dems. If you can't beat the press and the pressure, then step aside. McGovern was definitely an exception.

While Biden's team of researchers did manage to find a great-grandfather who had been a mining engineer, no one with two brain cells to rub together would confuse a mining engineer with a miner who would "come up from the mines after 12 hours and play football." It's ridiculous on its face that Biden's mining engineer great-grandfather played football with him after 12 hours in the mines, and anyway, Neil Kinnock was referring to soccer. :)

Warren explains - battling through his constant interruptions - that she agrees it's unfair, but the problem lies in the way medical/financial system is set up and unless THAT is addressed, removing bankruptcy as an avenue for people takes away the last option they have.

She makes him look juvenile on several occasions.

Biden's point is REAL - but he offers no solution - and didn't at the time.

And usually doesn't... good point.

It's kind of stunning to watch tho - just to see how he acts vs. her. (My view: he's pretty windbaggy; she's sharp as hell.)

*laughs*

Like the 'handsy' thing, it's a little shot across the bow of the front-runner. Nothing disqualifying, just meant to shake him up.

Some folks on the Dem side say that it helps to 'toughen' a candidate. I dunno. What I DO know is that in years with lots of candidates, the best usually emerges (McGovern was an exception) and wins.

Whether the mistake was made by Biden himself, or one of his speechwriters is unknown.

But it was awhile ago, and nobody thinks that Biden would do it again, so bringing it up is a bit silly.

While I certainly hope it isn't brought up again, technology has caught up to history and old habits die hard. :)

Do you concede that we never would have heard a SINGLE PEEP from the Democrats about Russian interference if Hillary had won???

Not exactly possible since it was mentioned in all three debates and was being "robustly" investigated by the FBI for many months before the election. Your Worship had asked the Russians to find Hillary's emails on live television, and within 5 hours they were actively doing it. You and Trump can keep insisting it was a "joke" until the cows come home, but he knows better, and you would too if you'd read the Mueller Report where multiple witnesses have stated that Donald kept insisting repeatedly that someone find the hacked emails.

Connect the dots, please. :)

I'm sorry, Kick, but that's hilarious.

You don't know what you don't know until you know it, and it's all "fun and games" until someone loses an eye.

Ignorance is bliss... so laugh it up, sweetie. :)

The scary thing now is that Trump’s re-election may be the only thing that can keep him from being federally indicted in 2020. Statute of limitations for obstruction of justice charges is five years from the date of the obstruction’s occurrence. The examples of obstruction listed in Mueller’s report are from 2017, so Trump wouldn’t be off the hook until 2022.

I know, right!? Poor Donald barely won the first time. At the moment, all things considered, it looks like he likely cannot pull off another win, but I will say that I do think the Democrats could screw it up and lose. It's not likely that Trump can run out the clock on the statute of limitations, and there's nothing he can do when New York State decides to throw down on him. He appears finally cornered.

You know he’ll pardon himself (and probably his family as well) prior to leaving office, as a last ditch Hail Mary that might run out the clocks on the statute of limitations with the resulting court battles if nothing else.

You just know he'll try. Hopefully we don't live in a country that would allow any president to pardon himself/herself or his/her co-conspirators. Nixon contemplated it... until the Department of Justice produced a memo against it under "the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case," a president could not pardon himself. The Constitution limits pardon in "cases of impeachment." If that question were to go to the SCOTUS, I don't like Trump's chances of successfully pardoning anyone involved in his shenanigans.

Now his competitors are scrambling to find vulnerabilities.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/rivals-are-scrambling-dig-dirt-pete-buttigieg-n997031

Ah... The "unity" of the Democrat Party..

Bloodsport.. Live and in living color..

It's going to be hilarious to watch Democrats snipe and slash and try to utterly destroy each other in the coming 18 months.. :D

That's the best strategy a Dem could have.. If they want to win the election to the exclusion to all else..

In the Age of TV, what gets a candidate elected president is "charisma". Bill Clinto had charisma and got elected, Obama had charisma and got elected, Hillary had whatever the opposite of charisma happens to be (maybe 'negative charisma'), and lost to a guy who didn't have much charisma, but more than Hillary.

Now comes the problem - the whole 2 dozen currently declared Democratics for 2020 don't have as much collective charisma as Obama had in his left pinkie.

I'd suggest the winner ought to cozy up to Putin. You Weigantians think it was the Russians that got Trump elected, maybe you can get them to switch allegiance and rescue your guy/girl. Otherwise, it's lookin' bleak.

The upshot: Biden agrees people are being squeezed to death from medical bills but thinks it's unfair to make the gas company or credit card company or any other creditor have to take a loss when they loaned money or provided product in good faith.

Warren explains - battling through his constant interruptions - that she agrees it's unfair, but the problem lies in the way medical/financial system is set up and unless THAT is addressed, removing bankruptcy as an avenue for people takes away the last option they have.

Biden's point is REAL - but he offers no solution - and didn't at the time.

It's kind of stunning to watch tho - just to see how he acts vs. her. (My view: he's pretty windbaggy; she's sharp as hell.)

She's been doing it steadily since Donald Trump kicked Hillary's ass all over the election.. :D

Not in a single post did she refer to Trump as President Trump...

So I don't hold out much hope..

Whenever Paula stops using Blotus and the like.. :D

That's too bad. Maybe you could try it for a while and then others may follow.

Stranger things have already happened!

I was thinking the same thing m'self.. :D

I have a pretty good idea about what Biden has said and done since being elected to the US senate in 1972.

Did you know that Biden gave the speech with the Neil Kinnock bit many times on the stump and he ALWAYS gave attribution.

Biden made the mistake alright and it was a mistake that saved his life, literally!

The day he didn't attach the attribution to his speech the media jumped on it like it was the first time they heard. I expect the media to behave similarly now.

Another NNL glitch...

Wordpress doesn't like 'conservativereview'

I'de say a couple of American soldiers are looking at Article 15 action...

Don't count yer Biden eggs before they are hatched..

Awww... Lookit the bromance.. :D

Biden's got the idea. Why bother to rephrase it every time?

Michale New And Improved

despite his usual drivel of posting up conservative columns.

AKA FACTS and REALITY :D

Let me put the Biden stuff to bed, EM:

Back a few elections ago, Biden gave a speech that turned out to have been almost word-for-word identical to that spoken by Neil Kinnock, a British labor candidate. Whether the mistake was made by Biden himself, or one of his speechwriters is unknown.

It sunk his campaign, and he got out of the race.

But it was awhile ago, and nobody thinks that Biden would do it again, so bringing it up is a bit silly.

I don't think it's too much to ask ...

Whenever Paula stops using Blotus and the like.. :D

Thanks. But, you don't think it bothers me when you use it with others?

I don't think it's too much to ask ...

Very important to Left Wing voters..

There.. Fixed it for you.. :D

"We were already hearing about it before the election, Michale."

:D

But, it is nice to see you refer to the former president by his correct name.

With you, I will.. :D

Actually, I think you are the one who keeps pointing that out. But, it is nice to see you refer to the former president by his correct name.

At the time, there were no facts to support it..

And, as you point out, it happened on OBAMA'S watch...

Funny how no one wants to talk about that, eh?? :D

I actually believe that the Russians TRIED to interfere..

But, as EVERYONE who has chimed in and stated it up to AND INCLUDING Obama...

The integrity of the election was NEVER compromised.. It was a free, fair and legal election..

So, yes.. The Russians tried to interfere.. Just as they always have done.. Just as they tried in 2018... Just as the US tries to interfere in elections of other countries to further our own national interests...

Do you concede that we never would have heard a SINGLE PEEP from the Democrats about Russian interference if Hillary had won???

I'm sorry, Kick, but that's hilarious.

Are you sure about that? I mean, if it was the Russians, then we would never have known about it, right?

Well, wonders never cease. :)

BBC:
Ukrainian president “authorized” an illegal payment of $400,000 to Michael Cohen for additional face time during a June 2017 meeting with President Trump.

51 instances of the MSM (AKA Demcorat Party Propaganda Arm) making totally bullshit claims against President Trump that were not factually accurate...

Compare THAT to the number of bullshit claims these same media outlets made that FAVORED President Trump....

ZERO... NONE... NADA... ZILCH

The agenda is clear.. These are just random run of the mill reporting errors.. This is a specific and targeted agenda to bring forth a specific goal...

“In his selective memory, he forgets to also mention the thousands of Somalis killed by the American forces that day! #NotTodaySatan,” Omar wrote in response to a Twitter user’s lament that 19 US service members were killed and 73 injured in the battle.
https://nypost.com/2019/04/23/critics-blast-ilhan-omar-over-old-black-hawk-down-tweet/

Once again, America/Israel Hating Ilan Omar steps on her wee wee...

In the end, there’s only one way to take back what Democrats believe was stolen from them in 2016. That’s to win the 2020 election, which will require some deftness, not perpetual grievance and enraged wishfulness.

Talk of impeachment shows that Democrats aren't confident they can win at the ballot box...

They have good cause not to be confident.. They are blowing it, big time..

When you are desperate to, in the memorable words of Democratic freshman congresswoman Rashida Tlaib “impeach this mother—,” any rationale will do.
https://nypost.com/2019/04/22/impeachment-is-now-the-deranged-fantasy-of-rage-driven-dems/

As I said...

Is there ANYONE who honestly believes that President Trump can be removed by impeachment??

Anyone?? Anyone?? Buehler??

Really BAD....

Bad for Odumbo...

Mueller's report looks bad for Obama

Obama's supporters claim he did stand up to Russia by deploying sanctions after the election to punish them for their actions. But, Obama, according to the Washington Post, "approved a modest package... with economic sanctions so narrowly targeted that even those who helped design them describe their impact as largely symbolic." In other words, a toothless response to a serious incursion.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opinions/mueller-report-obama-jennings/index.html

But, of course no one here wants to talk about that..

"Gee!!! I wonder why that is!!!?"
-Kevin Spacey, THE NEGOTIATOR

Kamala I-Slept-My-Way-To-The-Top Harris just guaranteed she will lose the General Election if she is the nominee...

Them darn "basket of deplorables" will see to that..

Well, it looks like Democrats are going to focus on the Mueller report for the next 18 months..

"Excellent.."
-Montgomery Burns

Nothing will more guarantee a massive landslide Trump re-election than that.. :D

You heard it here first...

Police Officer Kyle Olinger
Montgomery County Police Department, Maryland
End of Watch: Thursday, April 18, 2019

https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1c1f544ea7b54a58eeb922b13ed887fee999c194c40e07aed62a98eda2ef6593.jpg

The scary thing now is that Trump’s re-election may be the only thing that can keep him from being federally indicted in 2020. Statute of limitations for obstruction of justice charges is five years from the date of the obstruction’s occurrence. The examples of obstruction listed in Mueller’s report are from 2017, so Trump wouldn’t be off the hook until 2022.

You know he’ll pardon himself (and probably his family as well) prior to leaving office, as a last ditch Hail Mary that might run out the clocks on the statute of limitations with the resulting court battles if nothing else.

Why won't you say what the storyline on Biden's plagiarism is. It's not some deep, dark secret. I'm sincerely curious about what you would have to say about it … I am so painfully aware of how the media/punditocracy/blogosphere have treated Biden over the years, PAINFULLY aware.

I'm not posting information about Joe Biden's plagiarism that isn't yet public. If and when someone else does, it will be then that I'll know how high up the chain someone exists who doesn't want Biden to be the Democratic nominee.

The media storyline on Biden has been nothing short of asinine.

The media storyline of every viable candidate fits the same description, and all of them will have to clear the media minefield if they want to win the Democratic nomination... and for what? For the pleasure of running against the con artist candidate who will fabricate endlessly and use whatever means necessary to win at all costs, democracy be damned.

Trump has no shame; that is his superpower, but it all blows up in his face if the sheeple can wise up long enough to catch on to the ultimate con and stop allowing themselves to be spoon-fed a steady diet of propaganda phrases and bleating them back on cue like good little sheeple in the service of Trump. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

I hope whoever wins the Democratic nomination is ready for the onslaught and fully vetted during the primary. They'll need it. :)

The media storyline on Biden has been nothing short of asinine.

Why won't you say what the storyline on Biden's plagiarism is. It's not some deep, dark secret.

I'm sincerely curious about what you would have to say about it ...

I demand a discussion about pie... NOW!

I like the pie idea! Cover the wonderfulness of pie or suffer the consequences of losing your man card. You have been forewarned. ;)

Right, EM, and no one in the press will ever say a word about it or publish a story about Joe's "baggage" or even think to ask any of the other two dozen candidates about it either. *shakes head* :)

Put another way: Technology is catching up to history. :)

What can you tell me about Biden's plagiarism, Kick?

More than is in the public realm at the present time. Shelve it unless it goes public. Full stop. :)

I think a lot of Democrats in Congress agree with you on impeachment. Timing is vital. Congressional oversight sets the stage for what happens next. Impeachment won't happen without strong public support. Voting Trump out of office is a viable alternative because it's almost certain to be quicker.

I can see both sides on the impeachment issue. I just cannot for the life of me see how they can ultimately avoid doing it eventually under the circumstances. I hope they figure it out. In the meantime, I'm tired of hearing people say that Bill Clinton got reelected because he was impeached; he was reelected in 1996 and wasn't impeached until 1998.

People's decisions based on history should be based on actual history versus revisionist history. The majority getting it wrong are my Republican friends, and I blame the misinformation of Fox News and GOP talking points that contain outright BS. :)

I'm just saying, impeachment is a hot topic in this country for obvious reasons. Buckle up if you're tired of hearing about Nixon and/or Clinton because that's the most recent impeachment history of America that people are discussing in order to inform their current decisions regarding same.

Best get the history straight if you're making decisions based on it. :)

I think a lot of Democrats in Congress agree with you on impeachment. Timing is vital. Congressional oversight sets the stage for what happens next. Impeachment won't happen without strong public support. Voting Trump out of office is a viable alternative because it's almost certain to be quicker.

Heh.

If Biden is the nominee, then I'd be very surprised if his VP pick is chosen from his fellow Democratic candidates.

If anyone not named Kamala Harris is the Democratic nominee, I give her very good chances of being the VP nominee... without some huge disqualifying or intervening event happening, of course. :)

Off topic, but I just ordered the print copy of the Mueller Report. It's paperback and I'm very disappointed in the lack of a proper lurid cover. Trump in his tighty-whities man handling Lady Liberty, as a square jawed G-Man Mueller busts down the door....now that's a proper lurid cover! When did the publishing industry lose its sense of style? A Classics Illustrated Comic version ....or a more modern graphic novel might appeal to those with limited reading time caused by compulsively re-hashing Cable
News and AM Radio talking points to unmoderated comments sections.

I would also be surprised if Biden goes even the least bit seriously negative on any of his fellow candidates.

Have you not been paying attention to recent history?

And, I can't imagine anything that any of them could throw at him that would stick or that he wouldn't have a very good explanation for.

Oh, really? Well, allow me to educate you on history:

Google: Joe Biden Neil Kinnock

That'll do for starters. :)

Can we please dispense with the Clintons, thank-you very much. :)

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. If you would like your neighbors to the South to be doomed because they didn't learn from history, well then, that's on you. :)

I would also be surprised if Biden goes even the least bit seriously negative on any of his fellow candidates.

And, I can't imagine anything that any of them could throw at him that would stick or that he wouldn't have a very good explanation for.

Case in point - his vote in the affirmative for the 2005 bankruptcy bill.

If Biden is the nominee, then I'd be very surprised if his VP pick is chosen from his fellow Democratic candidates.

Oh, I can't wait to see them try. :)

Me too. Go ahead and throw everything you've got at him. Anything anybody has on anybody else needs to come out during the primary season. The person emerging as the winner needs to have all the crap on the table before the general election.

If a ham sandwich wins the Democratic primary, it has my vote over Benedict Donald Trump. :)

Who? Am I supposed to know who that is? I seriously have never even heard of this person.

So eventually we'll all begin to focus on the candidates with a real chance of winning. But that won't happen for at least the next few months, so until it does we've all got to do our best to remember the name of every Democrat running for president -- a challenge which seems to still be ever-growing.

With the addition of Marianne Whosit, I am officially allowing you to keep up with all this. I give up. ;)

Excellent writeup. Thank you.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Off Topic

I need to leave this right here in order to get it off my chest; I am tired of seeing so much misinformation (not from CW, other places).

Bill Clinton was reelected in 1996 and wasn't impeached until December 1998 so it obviously couldn't have been the impeachment of Clinton that got him reelected. I am tired of 'splaining this to every Tom, Dick, and Harry who are screwed up about history. On the contrary, it was the belief of a majority of the American people that the Republican investigation into a myriad of things not related to his presidency being an overreach by the Republicans... as well as the fact that the economy was booming, of course, among other things.

Had Clinton been impeached in December 1998 for accepting the help of Russian operatives and Russian cutouts disseminating stolen information in order to win the office of the presidency, as well as money flowing into the coffers from a foreign adversary and subsequent massive coverup of all of the above, I would wager his impeachment trial would have gone way differently.

Yes, Clinton became more popular after he was impeached 2 years after he was reelected, but then again, Bill Clinton was dealing with extramarital relations between two consenting adults and not winning the presidency via help from Russia and the subsequent multiple lies to the American people and moving of the goalposts and a myriad of crimes committed in the commission of the attempt to cover it up.

CW: I sure hope you cover this issue of impeachment again. I don't see how Democrats can ultimately avoid it under the circumstances.

Oh, I can't wait to see them try. :)