🇨🇳🇷🇴🇺🇦 Biden's Corruption: $20M+ bribes. All the evidence that isn't evidence.

[daz28]

4 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I was just kidding about the shaming, but I’m quite certain no one is scared about facing the Hunteream.  It seems quite obvious Joe Biden was involved intimately in the business, and that makes his unconditional denial of any involvement quite odd.  I’m willing to see where it goes, and polling suggests a majority of people believe he’s involved. 
 

As for public testimony, when every committee follows suit, every time, I’m all for it.  In the meantime, the game has to be played the way it’s played.  Get the popcorn ready! 

If your basing that on the emails from Schwerin, I'd hold off on that, because Fox is portraying him as Hunter's business partner/financier, but from what I've read Joe has known him for over 20 years, and also has had his own dealing with him.  The timing of the emails is suspicious, but the information surrounding that is still also unknown.  I'll definitely have the popcorn out, although it is bittersweet, because I have little hope that even if proven it won't curb the corruption in DC.    

20 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

He had zero business being on the board of Burisma.  Except to sell influence.  To what end?  I think we have a good idea...

Maybe Joe should have put Hunter's wife in charge of the Middle East, instead.  I'm sure billions of dollars in influence weren't sold there, and if they were it was done in the open so as not to arouse any suspicions.  Besides, why would an energy company have any interest in hiring lawyers??  😉

[Doc]

35 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Maybe Joe should have put Hunter's wife in charge of the Middle East, instead.  I'm sure billions of dollars in influence weren't sold there, and if they were it was done in the open so as not to arouse any suspicions.  Besides, why would an energy company have any interest in hiring lawyers??  😉

What influence did Jared sell?  Maybe if Joke hadn't bent over backwards for MBS after all his fake tough talk while campaigning from his basement, you'd have a point.

 

And yes, I'm sure Burisma needed a crackhead "attorney" from America to handle business in a field he knew nothing about, who just happened to be the son of the man who was responsible for billions of dollars being allocated there unless his bidding wasn't heeded. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by Doc

[John from Riverside]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

That’s not how the committee wants to proceed, and it’s now about who benefits, or who doesn’t…it’s about the truth.  

So the truth is going to be less of the truth, if it’s done in public?

 

The only reason why they wanna do it behind closed doors so that they can misquote the ***** out of him and set the narrative of what happened in the meeting

 

I’m not a Hunter Biden fan, but if he’s willing to go in front of the public and answer their questions, let him do it. People are literally ignoring subpoenas on that committee.
 

 

 

 

[daz28]

32 minutes ago, Doc said:

What influence did Jared sell?  Maybe if Joke hadn't bent over backwards for MBS after all his fake tough talk while campaigning from his basement, you'd have a point.

 

And yes, I'm sure Burisma needed a crackhead "attorney" from America to handle business in a field he knew nothing about, who just happened to be the son of the man who was responsible for billions of dollars being allocated there unless his bidding wasn't heeded. 

I call it the Jamal Khashoggi fund, but in case you missed it he got a $2B investment from the murdering Saudi family.  Just so you can't be coy about the appearance this has, I'll leave you a quote:   "The Committee is concerned by your decision to solicit billions of dollars from the Saudi government immediately following your significant involvement in shaping U.S.-Saudi relations," Maloney said, adding that Kushner's close relationship with the crown prince as well as his pro-Saudi positions during the Trump administration and the Saudi government's funding "create the appearance of a quid pro quo for your foreign policy work during the Trump Administration."

24 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

So the truth is going to be less of the truth, if it’s done in public?

 

The only reason why they wanna do it behind closed doors so that they can misquote the ***** out of him and set the narrative of what happened in the meeting

 

I’m not a Hunter Biden fan, but if he’s willing to go in front of the public and answer their questions, let him do it. People are literally ignoring subpoenas on that committee.
 

 

 

 

He already answered in a post to me that it would not.  Also, the Republicans did promise to provide a transcript of the closed-door hearings, which does provide some transparency(as long as it doesn't look like the Mueller report).  I think they realize reading isn't big with the cult, so they could pick and choose their talking points, and the zombies would run with it, whereas if it were live, they'd watch the whole thing and order pizza.    ...and yes, the hypocrisy is pure gold. 

[BillsFanNC]

5 hours ago, daz28 said:

So the answer to the million dollar question of why this shouldn't be done in public for all Americans to see is because Democrats did it the wrong way before???  

 

Right. As if the J6 committee didn't engage in this selective testimony rules BS constantly. 

 

Was it wrong when Ray Epps gave sworn testimony privately and never publicly? 

 

How about Cassidy Hutchinson giving testimony in private first before the public circus testimony? 

 

How come we never heard public testimony from Kash Patel and still don't have a full transcript of his private testimony?

 

Which way that dems did it before was wrong again?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

VP Biden....err... I mean Robert L. Peters.

 

The use of aliases to correspond with Hunter and his business associates should not raise any red flags at all. It just screams squeaky clean.

 

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

5 hours ago, daz28 said:

 

....or GOP Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Andy Biggs of Arizona, Mo Brooks of Alabama, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy him???

 

Not following. Unless any of those guys ignored congressional subpoenas AND were subsequently found guilty of contempt of congress?

 

I know Eric Holder wasn't.

 

You won't get me defending Republicans.  They suck too. Democrats are just worse.

 

[Doc]

8 hours ago, daz28 said:

I call it the Jamal Khashoggi fund, but in case you missed it he got a $2B investment from the murdering Saudi family.  Just so you can't be coy about the appearance this has, I'll leave you a quote:   "The Committee is concerned by your decision to solicit billions of dollars from the Saudi government immediately following your significant involvement in shaping U.S.-Saudi relations," Maloney said, adding that Kushner's close relationship with the crown prince as well as his pro-Saudi positions during the Trump administration and the Saudi government's funding "create the appearance of a quid pro quo for your foreign policy work during the Trump Administration."

 

Yeah I know what you were getting at, which is why I said that if Joke didn't also do absolutely nothing to MBS over JK's death, then your claims of Kushner/Donald being paid-off by MBS are moot.  Unless you're also implicating Joke.  Never mind that this corrupt Admin has had no problems going after their political rivals, investigated and found nothing untoward in the SA-Kushner deal.  

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

12 hours ago, daz28 said:

If your basing that on the emails from Schwerin, I'd hold off on that, because Fox is portraying him as Hunter's business partner/financier, but from what I've read Joe has known him for over 20 years, and also has had his own dealing with him.  The timing of the emails is suspicious, but the information surrounding that is still also unknown.  I'll definitely have the popcorn out, although it is bittersweet, because I have little hope that even if proven it won't curb the corruption in DC.    😉

I'm basing it on my perception of the typical bid-rigging, influence peddling, you-scratch-my-back-and-I-scratch-yours  that permeates Washington and likely most state government(s).  I also consider Biden's history, his friendships, his tendency to embellish and puff himself up, his obvious narcism, the special treatment his son has gotten from the government, and the fact that power corrupts.   When I combine what I think, his absolute declaration that he knew nothing, and what the committee has released, it leads me to believe that he would use his influence to create opportunities for his dopey son, and look to benefit for doing so. 

 

If it turns out he's an unfortunate angel tainted by the stank of politics, I'm happy to acknowledge that at a later date.  In the meantime, it just plays out.  He knows that and has participated in just this sort of thing. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

12 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

So the truth is going to be less of the truth, if it’s done in public?

No.  I doubt we get to the truth to begin with, but be that as it may, I would assume his answers will be the same in public or closed door testimony.  You seem concerned that his answers might vary? 

12 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

 

The only reason why they wanna do it behind closed doors so that they can misquote the ***** out of him and set the narrative of what happened in the meeting

That's a consideration and up to the American people to decide.  Observationally, it seems to me you're generally pretty cool with misquotes and insinuations when it happens to certain people, not so much when it happens to others.   Still, if it happens, it happens.   Let's also acknowledge that regardless of what Hunter says or does, his focus group people will be working on the spin that he's a victim of the system. 

 

12 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

 

I’m not a Hunter Biden fan, but if he’s willing to go in front of the public and answer their questions, let him do it. People are literally ignoring subpoenas on that committee.

You sound an awful lot like a Hunter Biden fan, actually.  If the rules of engagement allow for closed door hearings, and the committee chooses to pursue accordingly, what you're pimping for is special consideration because you're fond of the old man.     

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

12 hours ago, daz28 said:

I call it the Jamal Khashoggi fund, but in case you missed it he got a $2B investment from the murdering Saudi family.  Just so you can't be coy about the appearance this has, I'll leave you a quote:   "The Committee is concerned by your decision to solicit billions of dollars from the Saudi government immediately following your significant involvement in shaping U.S.-Saudi relations," Maloney said, adding that Kushner's close relationship with the crown prince as well as his pro-Saudi positions during the Trump administration and the Saudi government's funding "create the appearance of a quid pro quo for your foreign policy work during the Trump Administration."

He already answered in a post to me that it would not.  Also, the Republicans did promise to provide a transcript of the closed-door hearings, which does provide some transparency(as long as it doesn't look like the Mueller report).  I think they realize reading isn't big with the cult, so they could pick and choose their talking points, and the zombies would run with it, whereas if it were live, they'd watch the whole thing and order pizza.    ...and yes, the hypocrisy is pure gold. 

I'll stay out of the Khashogi discussion, beyond stating the obvious:  The US government has proclaimed the Saudi's to be our valued ally, and Biden would have been well-within his rights to send a clear message regarding the Khashogi matter to the Saudis when he took office.  He did.  The partnership continued and many would say improved.   If you're upset by Kushner's partnership, you haven't been paying attention. 

 

R's providing transcripts is a good idea, assuming of course the transcripts are scrubbed and redacted where national security issues are involved.  

 

 

[John from Riverside]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

No.  I doubt we get to the truth to begin with, but be that as it may, I would assume his answers will be the same in public or closed door testimony.  You seem concerned that his answers might vary? 

That's a consideration and up to the American people to decide.  Observationally, it seems to me you're generally pretty cool with misquotes and insinuations when it happens to certain people, not so much when it happens to others.   Still, if it happens, it happens.   Let's also acknowledge that regardless of what Hunter says or does, his focus group people will be working on the spin that he's a victim of the system. 

 

You sound an awful lot like a Hunter Biden fan, actually.  If the rules of engagement allow for closed door hearings, and the committee chooses to pursue accordingly, what you're pimping for is special consideration because you're fond of the old man.     

 

I could care less if Hunter Biden goes to prison
 

If by being fond of the old man, is he a better option than Donald Trump? Then the answer is yes.  Biden is a better option than Trump.

 

I can Think of a lot of people I’d rather have in that position then Biden

[Tommy Callahan]

15 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Biden is a better option than Trump.

If just talking results of policies. Not the person.. What demo or group is doing better under Bidens policies, than trumps policies?  the very top?

 

 

Edited December 7, 2023 by Tommy Callahan

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

32 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

I could care less if Hunter Biden goes to prison
 

If by being fond of the old man, is he a better option than Donald Trump? Then the answer is yes.  Biden is a better option than Trump.

No, I meant what I said--your posting history shows that you're squarely in the Joe Biden camp, and it seems to me that Hunter comes along for the ride.    What's odd is that he's violated federal firearm statutes, he was a 1% wage earner and completely disregarded his tax obligations, he's a dead beat dad, had an affair with the widow of his deceased brother, worked for a corrupt energy company in a corrupt country, and here you are banging the table for special treatment because you're worried about the fallout from what he might say.  Why?  Imo, it's because he's a Biden.   This guy represents just about everything that common sense liberal and conservative voters rail against...but not you. 

 

 

[John from Riverside]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

No, I meant what I said--your posting history shows that you're squarely in the Joe Biden camp, and it seems to me that Hunter comes along for the ride.    What's odd is that he's violated federal firearm statutes, he was a 1% wage earner and completely disregarded his tax obligations, he's a dead beat dad, had an affair with the widow of his deceased brother, worked for a corrupt energy company in a corrupt country, and here you are banging the table for special treatment because you're worried about the fallout from what he might say.  Why?  Imo, it's because he's a Biden.   This guy represents just about everything that common sense liberal and conservative voters rail against...but not you. 

 

 

Unlike you, I have the ability to separate Hunter Biden from Joe Biden, whenever it comes to politics

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 minute ago, John from Riverside said:

Unlike you, I have the ability to separate Hunter Biden from Joe Biden, whenever it comes to politics

You should exercise the ability, at least every now and again.   
 

Next up, you’ll be advocating a safe space for Hunter to be interviewed in!  

[Pokebball]

41 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Unlike you, I have the ability to separate Hunter Biden from Joe Biden, whenever it comes to politics

even when you obviously shouldn't be

[BillStime]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

hat's odd is that he's violated federal firearm statutes, he was a 1% wage earner and completely disregarded his tax obligations, he's a dead beat dad, had an affair with the widow of his deceased brother, worked for a corrupt energy company in a corrupt country, and here you are banging the table for special treatment because you're worried about the fallout from what he might say.  Why?  Imo, it's because he's a Biden. 

 

Now, do Trump. 

 

 

[daz28]

17 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Right. As if the J6 committee didn't engage in this selective testimony rules BS constantly. 

 

Was it wrong when Ray Epps gave sworn testimony privately and never publicly? 

 

How about Cassidy Hutchinson giving testimony in private first before the public circus testimony? 

 

How come we never heard public testimony from Kash Patel and still don't have a full transcript of his private testimony?

 

Which way that dems did it before was wrong again?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't have a "side", so showing me what one side did wrong to justify the other side doing it wrong holds no water with me.  Wrong is always wrong. Not sure why I have to repeat myself.