The Hunter Biden Thread

[Vol8188]

I don’t think it is. Hunter would have to testify that it happened, right?

That ain’t happening.

I’m not understanding. Why would you need his testimony? It would be like saying Nixon is innocent because his testimony (rather than his audio recordings) said so.

Given Joe admits he fired the Ukrainian prosecutor, Hunter claims his dad took half his salary, both sides seem to agree his salary was based on at a minimum perceived influence (if not actual influence)

At a minimum that seems like enough to warrant a serious investigation into Joe’s involvement here.

 

[85SugarVol]

I’m not understanding. Why would you need his testimony? It would be like saying Nixon is innocent because his testimony (rather than his audio recordings) said so.

Given Joe admits he fired the Ukrainian prosecutor, Hunter claims his dad took half his salary, both sides seem to agree his salary was based on at a minimum perceived influence (if not actual influence)

At a minimum that seems like enough to warrant a serious investigation into Joe’s involvement here.

I’m not saying don’t investigate Joe. The entire Biden family looks dirty as sin.

Is it an audio recording of Hunter saying that? I thought it was a text for some reason.

 

[Vol8188]

Hunter Biden was a crackhead who said a lot of things---it was probably bull$hit and won't mean anything. It's unseemly for someone related to an influential public figure to take money from outsiders on the pretext of influencing decisions by the public official---but it's not illegal and of course nearly all of our politicians receive a raft of benefits regularly to influence public policy for public-interest groups.

Failing to register as a foreign agent is illegal. So is extortion. So is tax fraud.

But I’ll ask you the same question I just asked above. Given these statements:

1. Hunter claims his dad took half his money
2. Everyone seems to agree at a minimum Hunter was paid for the perception of influence
3. Joe openly admits to forcing the Ukrainians to fire the prosecutor who was investigating the company his son worked for.

If we agree these are true (you seem to be agreeing with 2 in your reply and the others are indisputable facts), why are we not having a serious investigation into Joe Biden? His emails, his bank records, lol or at a minimum being able to ask simple questions like “who’s the big guy refer to”.

Instead they’re sweeping it all under the rug by charging him with something unrelated so they don’t have to ask those questions

 

[Vol8188]

I’m not saying don’t investigate Joe. The entire Biden family looks dirty as sin.

Is it an audio recording of Hunter saying that? I thought it was a text for some reason.

It is a text. But I don’t see how a text is less incriminating than an audio recording.

 

[Septic]

Nice. One of those gluten free ones?

I don't think so.

 

[Septic]

Failing to register as a foreign agent is illegal. So is extortion. So is tax fraud.

But I’ll ask you the same question I just asked above. Given these statements:

1. Hunter claims his dad took half his money
2. Everyone seems to agree at a minimum Hunter was paid for the perception of influence
3. Joe openly admits to forcing the Ukrainians to fire the prosecutor who was investigating the company his son worked for.

If we agree these are true (you seem to be agreeing with 2 in your reply and the others are indisputable facts), why are we not having a serious investigation into Joe Biden? His emails, his bank records, lol or at a minimum being able to ask simple questions like “who’s the big guy refer to”.

Instead they’re sweeping it all under the rug by charging him with something unrelated so they don’t have to ask those questions

A conservative appeals court just ruled against the federal gun law used to charge Hunter Biden


Tragic.

 

[StarRaider]

It is a text. But I don’t see how a text is less incriminating than an audio recording.

they wuz talkin bout the weather man.... fiddy percent of a salary mean fiddy percent chance of rain.... that's all it was

 

[volfanhill]

A conservative appeals court just ruled against the federal gun law used to charge Hunter Biden


Tragic.

100% agree unconstitutional

 

[Septic]

they wuz talkin bout the weather man.... fiddy percent of a salary mean fiddy percent chance of rain.... that's all it was

You guys have to admit it, come on.

Y'all acting like it's suddenly shocking to see a POTUS grift Washington. Joe getting in on the action really that unbelievable to you?

I mean you guys get why there's a general lack of concern over the outrage you Trumpers are feigning, right?

 

[Vol8188]

A conservative appeals court just ruled against the federal gun law used to charge Hunter Biden


Tragic.

What does that have to do with anything I said?

You’ve also still not responded to the my response message to you.

 

[85SugarVol]

It is a text. But I don’t see how a text is less incriminating than an audio recording.

If the accusation is “Hunter said” then the text could be incriminating. Assuming you could prove Hunter was the one that sent it.

If the accusation is “Joe received” then I doubt a text from Hunter saying it is all that incriminating.

The audio would be more incriminating if the accusation is “Hunter said”, but still wouldn’t prove “Joe received”.

 

[Vol8188]

You guys have to admit it, come on.

Y'all acting like it's suddenly shocking to see a POTUS grift Washington. Joe getting in on the action really that unbelievable to you?

I mean you guys get why there's a general lack of concern over the outrage you Trumpers are feigning, right?

So you’re admitting Joe was involved but it’s okay because you assume they all do it?

 

[85SugarVol]

You guys have to admit it, come on.

Y'all acting like it's suddenly shocking to see a POTUS grift Washington. Joe getting in on the action really that unbelievable to you?

I mean you guys get why there's a general lack of concern over the outrage you Trumpers are feigning, right?

I think they should both be nailed to the wall.

 

[Vol8188]

If the accusation is “Hunter said” then the text could be incriminating. Assuming you could prove Hunter was the one that sent it.

If the accusation is “Joe received” then I doubt a text from Hunter saying it is all that incriminating.

The audio would be more incriminating if the accusation is “Hunter said”, but still wouldn’t prove “Joe received”.

So you don’t believe it’s incriminating because you think someone stole his phone? It seems like you’re moving outside the realm of a “reasonable doubt”.

You could just as easily claim the audio was faked as you could claim someone stole Hunter’s phone.

But the real question is still why are we not investigating Joe. There seems to be a lot of circumstantial evidence that points to his involvement and the DOJ seems to have zero interest in opening that can. Which is why we are getting this nonsense gun charge

 

[Septic]

So you’re admitting Joe was involved but it’s okay because you assume they all do it?

I don't know if Joe was involved. He probably was but it's just speculation. That's not worth much in court.

And no. If you can prove it, burn him down. Your kryptonite is that idgaf about Joe or Hunter.

I just find it funny that you guys are suddenly clutching your pearls over speculation when Donny gifted DC for four years.

 

[Septic]

What does that have to do with anything I said?

You’ve also still not responded to the my response message to you.

Each time we cross paths, you seem to feel like your entitled to me responding to your questions or demands.

Sooner or later you're gonna learn.

 

[85SugarVol]

So you don’t believe it’s incriminating because you think someone stole his phone? It seems like you’re moving outside the realm of a “reasonable doubt”.

You could just as easily claim the audio was faked as you could claim someone stole Hunter’s phone.

But the real question is still why are we not investigating Joe. There seems to be a lot of circumstantial evidence that points to his involvement and the DOJ seems to have zero interest in opening that can. Which is why we are getting this nonsense gun charge

No. I said it’s not incriminating of Joe actually receiving anything.

Authenticate the text or the audio. It’s Hunter.
All it proves is that Hunter said it.

Only a fool would believe Joe didn’t receive anything. But the text/audio doesn’t prove anything but the fact that Hunter said it.

 

[Vol8188]

I don't know if Joe was involved. He probably was but it's just speculating. That's not worth much in court.

And no. If you can prove it, burn him down.

I just find it funny that you guys are suddenly clutching your pearls over speculation when Donny gifted DC for four years.

We would love to prove it. Sadly the DOJ refuses to investigate. Which is why we are getting the nonsense gun charge rather than failing to register or tax charges. Because those both come back on his dad and they don’t want to open that can of worms.

Surely you see the problem there?

 

[Vol8188]

Each time we cross paths, you seem to feel like your entitled to me responding to your questions or demands.

Sooner or later you're gonna learn.

That you’re a loser troll who refuses to engage in genuine dialogue? I’m learning

 

[Vol8188]

No. I said it’s not incriminating of Joe actually receiving anything.

Authenticate the text or the audio. It’s Hunter.
All it proves is that Hunter said it.

Only a fool would believe Joe didn’t receive anything. But the text/audio doesn’t prove anything but the fact that Hunter said it.

How is your son saying you get half his money not incriminating? You’re losing me there.

Prove and incriminating are different things. I’m not proclaiming it’s proof. Rather I’m saying that message mixed with other information is worth investigating. That’s my issue. The lack of investigation into this

 

[Septic]

That you’re a loser troll who refuses to engage in genuine dialogue

 

[Septic]

We would love to prove it. Sadly the DOJ refuses to investigate. Which is why we are getting the nonsense gun charge rather than failing to register or tax charges. Because those both come back on his dad and they don’t want to open that can of worms.

Surely you see the problem there?

You should write a letter to the editor of OAN voicing your displeasure.

 

[85SugarVol]

How is your son saying you get half his money not incriminating? You’re losing me there.

Prove and incriminating are different things. I’m not proclaiming it’s proof. Rather I’m saying that message mixed with other information is worth investigating. That’s my issue. The lack of investigation into this

Ok well maybe we’re crossed up on terminology. Incriminating evidence is proof imo.

I’ve already said investigate away. I think the text is probably probable cause.

 

[StarRaider]

i tell ya wut.... deez fools defending the patron saint of plagiarizing anything he gets his hands on...... is gold jerry gold

 

[BreatheUT]

So which crimes do we want Hunter to walk on and which do we want to persue?

I know you aren't this naive. Do you think Hunter is going to get time? Just a month ago they were trying to sweep this under the rug including this very special counsel. Now exactly two days after opening the impeachment inquiry, now this.