You don’t seem to be nearly as upset by all the times Trump plagiarized others.
Notice no one was fired for this one.
This is clearly not what happened. Biden took Kinnock’s speech and carefully inserted himself and his wife and family and told it as a story about his own experiences. That’s not an accident. That’s not ‘forgetting to attribute a quote’.
There’s no way that happens by accident. Do you think he accidentally forgot that his family weren’t coal miners? That his wife’s father and sister both went to college before her? Did he forget that he wasn’t the first member of his family to go to college?
What you are repeating as facts that everyone knows was in fact spin from his campaign manager. No one bought it, and Biden ended his presidential run soon afterwards. It was a BIG deal at the time. I remember it well. Biden was a running joke on late night TV after that.
Bothsidesism. And Trump isn’t President. And I have never supported Trump and have always known he was a serial liar. Is that the bar we are going for now? Trump lies too, so it’s okay? Yay.
Other than that, good work.
Perhaps because this isn’t one of the 10450122 threads on Trump?
Name one, and I’ll cite it for you.
Biden plagiarized Kinnock in the 80s. And paid a hefty political price for it.
Who cares? How could this possibly be relevant now?
Cite for all of them aside from the plagiarism and the Mother Jones cite you already gave. Especially anything since the 80s.
I just looked through some of your posts in P&E mentioning Trump. You’re far more supportive of Trump than you are of Biden. Barely any criticism and even approval of some of Trump’s actions.
That’s what they say now. But the police report was clear. Biden’s wife was at a stop sign, she then rolled onto the highway and was struck by a semi. The driver of the semi was not charged, and alcohol was determined to be not a factor in any way.
You appear to be correct that Biden didn’t mention it again after he got called out by th pe family in 2009, so I’ll retract the part about him saying it more recently. But he said it more than once before then, when he knew what the official police report said. If he thought it was a drunk driver, that’s just another example of Biden needing to embellish everything.
I’m not falling for your sealioning. Tell me what you think is wrong, and I’ll cite it.
How about a cite for all of this? Cite that the driver of the semi wasn’t charged? Cite that they positively determined that “alcohol was not a factor in any way”? Cite that he “knew what the official police report said”?
I hope you’ll understand that I trust your own uncited posts about as much as I trust the tweets of a recent former president.
I think all of it’s wrong except what was already cited. I know your claim about Biden and Iraq in 2007 is incorrect – perhaps more charitably, you just greatly embellished what he actually said, the context, and surrounding facts (ironic, considering your stated opinion on embellishment). Presumably your accuracy on the other uncited claims is similar – or at least that’s my assumption without cites.
EDIT: You just walked back a big part of your “drunk driving” claim. And you’re really surprised when we don’t trust your other uncited claims?
Did you see the one where I called him ‘a stain on the Presidency’?
Oh, and why is my opinion of Trump even relevant to a cited link to what Biden said? This is just another form of personal attack. I could be the most rabid Teump supporter around, or the biggest Teump hater, and it would have no relevance in determin8ng whether what I said about Biden is true.
You claimed that Biden didn’t study political science, even though his degree is in “history and political science” (from your very own link). The University of Delaware itself calls it a “double major”:
http://www1.udel.edu/udmessenger/vol16no3/stories/features_biden.html
Whether or not you want to nitpick the difference between degrees and majors, it’s wholly inaccurate to say he didn’t study political science. To remind you of what you said:
From Politifact:
Bolding mine.
And are you seriously suggesting that Joe Biden didn’t know the details of his wife’s death? C’mon, man.
Some of that is different than what you claimed. I don’t see anything that suggests the police positively determined that “alcohol was not a factor in any way”, and that Biden necessarily “knew what the official police report said”.
When criticizing someone else’s lies or embellishments, I’d recommend not making embellishments yourself.
Oh? What is different? No, I didn’t use the exact words, because I never read this particular article before I described what happened. But it is materially the same, and you know it.
Also, you need to stop accusing me of lying outside of the pit. Actually, you should stop accusing me of it at all, since I keep backing up my ‘lies’ with cites.
I don’t think you lied – I think you said something inaccurate because you thought it was true but didn’t know. And now, hopefully, you know that it was wrong and inaccurate to say that it’s a fact (rather than your opinion, or your guess, or your supposition) that the police positively determined that “alcohol was not a factor in any way”, and that Biden “knew what the official police report said”. Those are different things than the information in your cite.
Also, your statement about Biden and Iraq in 2007 was factually incorrect (in that Biden, or the location he was in, may well have been shot at – he was certainly in the area of active fighting on multiple occasions).
Without cites, I’m assuming the remainder of your uncited claims are similarly inaccurate, embellished, etc.
No, but it does explain your biases, why you believe and repeat these things that are repeatedly shown to be either blown out of proportion or entirely fabricated.
If you’re going to slam someone for supposedly repeated lies, embellishments, inaccuracies, etc., are you really going to be surprised, and then complain, when someone goes through your own claims for possible embellishments and inaccuracies?
It pays to be careful when making such accusations.