Hunter Biden's laptop revealed evidence of an international criminal money laundering operation that directly implicates his father [/b]in his criminal activity.[/i]
okay
where is this evidence?
You don't think that crackhold won't squeal like a pig?
Yes or No answer only.
Disparaging the witness you plan to rely on?
Shrewd!
Pretty easy to look at the bank accounts and figure out where the money was going. Surprised that someone with a hypothetical MBA couldn't figure that out.
You're making my point, ma'am.
So where's this evidence?
Who are you kidding Dazzler? If don't give a fuck if Biden is guilty or not. If letting Joe shit in your mouth meant that it would keep Trump out of the White House you'd have done it.
The Captain Parmenter of the TugCon gals says it doesn't matter that you don't have the evidence because I wouldn't care anyway.
White flag
It doesn't matter what evidence you're presented.
That theory is untested.
Please define your standard of evidence for us. It seems somewhat contextual.
Gasbag says we need to see financial records. He's right . . . for once.
So we need Biden to be investigated. I'm glad we agree.
If the law enforcement investigation of Hunter actually implicates Joe, then yes.
Unlike you gals, I don't cheer when people on "my team" stonewall law enforcement.
Dazzler's position is that everyone in Biden's family was cashing in on access to Joe but Joe was too stupid to realize it. His meetings with Hunter's business partners was totally innocent and had nothing to do with Hunter's business. The fact that people were willing to toss millions of dollars at someone he knew to be a crack head who was fucking his dead son's widow raised no red flags with Joe. Hunter was just traveling the world, often with Joe, and cutting all these deals because he was such a savvy businessman.
And then imagine you actually voted for that person to be President. Cock sucking is far too tame to describe what Dazzler is engaging in.
So "Joe must have cashed in" is still all you've got.
I'm glad to see the admission that this is your "evidence" so far.
You keep moving the goalposts and then pretending your latest line in the sand has been your position all along. But keep shouting "Ivan" "Comrade" "Boris" all you want. I'm sure you at least think it's clever
Did you know financial benefits should leave some sort of trace? An inflow and an outflow--like your checking account, for example.
waiting for that dam to burst[/i][/b]. . .
If Biden has nothing to hide then he shouldn't mind being investigated. It should clear his name of any wrong doing correct?
This was the standard you argued for with Trump after all. Is there any difference?
If you see something that went to Joe, that should definitely be investigated.
still waiting . . .
So if I can clarify your position, "There's no investigation so therefore there's no evidence so therefore there's no need for an investigation."
Do I have that right "counselor"?
Hunter Biden is[/b][/b] being investigated for a host of things. You keep saying that this will produce evidence, or already has produced evidence tending to show personal benefit to Joe.
If so, investigate where that evidence leads.
still waiting . . .
"Tony Bobulinski, a former business associate of Hunter Biden, said Wednesday night that he can confirm details regarding his overseas business dealings, including that a reference to a “Big Guy” in a May 13, 2017 email did, in fact, refer to Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden."[/i]
"In an article discussing Hunter Biden’s tax liability and potential criminal charges, The New York Times reporters noted that they and prosecutors gathered evidence from “a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop.” It is the only mention of Biden’s laptop in the article, but the piece goes on to describe how emails pertaining to the tax liability case, “were authenticated by people familiar with them and the investigation.”[/i]
So we just need Joe to show his financial records and that should clear this right up and exonerate him. Easy peasy.
So far you haven't even identified any flows in his direction. Where are those records?
"The email, dated May 13, 2017, included a discussion of “remuneration packages” for six people in a business deal with the now-bankrupt Chinese firm CEFC China Energy Co. The email includes a note that “Hunter has some office expectations he will elaborate.” A proposed equity split references “20” for “H” and “10 held by H for the big guy?”[/b]
“I realized the Chinese were not really focused on a healthy financial [return on investment],” Bobulinski said. “They were looking at this as a political or influence investment. Once I realized that Hunter wanted to use the company as his personal piggy bank by just taking money out of it as soon as it came from the Chinese, I took steps to prevent that from happening.”"[/i]
Whistling past the graveyard counselor?
It seems we have an authenticated accusation from a former business partner. Why won't Biden just clear this up by releasing the financials that exonerate him?
Wow! You mean you have a real life accusation[/i][/b]?!?!?!
this is big
And the laptop to corroborate it counselor, and the laptop. Your eyes must be failing you in your age.
Also, I'm pretty sure I'm only advocating for an investigation into wrongdoing, surely Biden has no problem with that since he's innocent. If anything, it will exonerate him.
As you said, it should be a simple matter.
You seem to be confusing and conflating evidence for an investigation for evidence of wrongdoing itself. I'm sure it's a simple error of omission on your part.
Simple task: find evidence that anything headed in Joe's direction[/b]. Then you can investigate its receipt, or lack thereof.
Until then, it's just another "prove the election wasn't stolen" demand by the idiot class.
If we had that there would be no need for an investigation, we would be at the press charges stage.
I'm still under the impression Biden is innocent until proven guilty. An investigation should clear that up.
Just because you refuse to see, read, or hear there's any[/b] evidence doesn't make the laptop, emails, videos of Joe admitting it, multiple meetings with business partners, or accusations by business partners go away. Now, to my standard of evidence that seems adequate to trigger an investigation, especially compared to recent investigations. What exactly counselor, would it take for you to be convinced there's a need for an investigation? I suppose it's the financial records themselves the investigation would uncover. circulus in probando counselor, you should know better.
It seems you want the Tug to produce the actual financial records themselves, of which, as you know, we wouldn't have access to even were they to be discovered. We just want an investigation to clear Joey's name.
