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

[Irv]

What a mess.  

[Westside]

48 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

What a total POS family. How can anyone defend these criminals?

[BillsFanNC]

8 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

It's all one big hoax.

 

Hunter didn't say anything about having to give his father Joe half his salary. 

 

Joe Biden isn't on tape admitting that he leveraged holding up US loan guarantees in order to get a prosecutor fired who was investigating the very same company where his unqualified son sat on the board at a healthy $80k per month salary. 

 

Biden family business partners haven't publicly stated that Joe Biden is indeed the big guy who is to recieve 10% of his sons foreign payments.

 

None of these things are true. They aren't and can't be true even when there are documents and videos that show, without doubt, that they are true. 

 

 

 

Edited July 28, 2023 by BillsFanNC

[BillsFanNC]

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[Doc]

9 hours ago, Westside said:

What a total POS family. How can anyone defend these criminals?

 

Because Trump sent mean tweets.

[BillsFanNC]

9 hours ago, Westside said:

What a total POS family. How can anyone defend these criminals?

 

Useful idiots. They defend them because their masters demand that they do so.

[SoCal Deek]

9 hours ago, Westside said:

What a total POS family. How can anyone defend these criminals?

Simple! You have to break some eggs to fundamentally transform an entire country. So if a few crooked politicians get rich in the meantime, that’s a small price to pay on the road to universal healthcare and a massive redistribution of wealth. 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[BillsFanNC]

But, but it's all....

 

rUsSiAN diSiNForMatIoN!!

 

 

[John from Riverside]

Still not a damn thing that incriminate Joe Biden

[All_Pro_Bills]

9 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Still not a damn thing that incriminate Joe Biden

The Comer committee is going to bundle their findings into criminal referrals.  Not make any grand public statements.  If we use Trump-like criteria to assess "evidence" they'd all have been tried and convicted months ago.

What's really missing is any clear understanding of who is the "brains" of their racket.  We can cross off Hunter's name and play process of elimination to identify the most likely suspect.

[BillStime]

8 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

The Comer committee is going to bundle their findings into criminal referrals

 

3 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:

But, but it's all....

 

rUsSiAN diSiNForMatIoN!!

 

 

🎯

 

 

[John from Riverside]

39 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

The Comer committee is going to bundle their findings into criminal referrals.  Not make any grand public statements.  If we use Trump-like criteria to assess "evidence" they'd all have been tried and convicted months ago.

What's really missing is any clear understanding of who is the "brains" of their racket.  We can cross off Hunter's name and play process of elimination to identify the most likely suspect.

If they had some thing, they would be putting it out there because they have been flailing and look horrible
 

They got nothing

13 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Is it free-speech wonderful these people are allowed to say things that are not true with no recourse
 

Yay, freedom

[All_Pro_Bills]

5 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

If they had some thing, they would be putting it out there because they have been flailing and look horrible

Why would they put it out there?  In the middle of 2023 15 months away from the election.  Strategically that makes no sense.  You'll get greater impact closer to the 2024 election.  Let the Democrats make the first move.  Which is decide to run Joe, or not.  My guess is not and most likely they'll run Newsome while dressing him up as some moderate rather than a raging leftist aristocrat.

Also, Joe and Jill  filed 2017 tax return totally over over $9 million of income.  Can anyone rationalize what source, or service, or product the Biden's provided to account for that income?  About 35 times thier 2026 filing.  You're not the least bit suspicious?  As the bribe money trail lines up well timing-wise.

Are we to believe all these whistle blowers, former business associates, foreign actors, bank transaction records and suspicious activity reports to authorities are involved in some grand conspiracy hatched by Russian intelligence?  This theory from the very people that habitually mock believers of such things.  But of course, trust them here and ignore the fact that protecting Biden has been demonstrated to be a clear vital interest of these folks.  So lying and deception are required.

On top of all this, can it get any more obvious the leadership at DOJ and FBI along with the permanent Washington beauracracy are running a massive protection racket?

If it was you or me our ass would be in the slammer already.  It's counter to your interests as a citizen to support these crooks.  What hits me the most here is how people let themselves get hoodwinked by these grifters.

 

Edited July 30, 2023 by All_Pro_Bills

[John from Riverside]

1 hour ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Why would they put it out there?  In the middle of 2023 15 months away from the election.  Strategically that makes no sense.  You'll get greater impact closer to the 2024 election.  Let the Democrats make the first move.  Which is decide to run Joe, or not.  My guess is not and most likely they'll run Newsome while dressing him up as some moderate rather than a raging leftist aristocrat.

Also, Joe and Jill  filed 2017 tax return totally over over $9 million of income.  Can anyone rationalize what source, or service, or product the Biden's provided to account for that income?  About 35 times thier 2026 filing.  You're not the least bit suspicious?  As the bribe money trail lines up well timing-wise.

Are we to believe all these whistle blowers, former business associates, foreign actors, bank transaction records and suspicious activity reports to authorities are involved in some grand conspiracy hatched by Russian intelligence?  This theory from the very people that habitually mock believers of such things.  But of course, trust them here and ignore the fact that protecting Biden has been demonstrated to be a clear vital interest of these folks.  So lying and deception are required.

On top of all this, can it get any more obvious the leadership at DOJ and FBI along with the permanent Washington beauracracy are running a massive protection racket?

If it was you or me our ass would be in the slammer already.  It's counter to your interests as a citizen to support these crooks.  What hits me the most here is how people let themselves get hoodwinked by these grifters.

 

All that you’re lacking is the actual proof
 

Because it doesn’t exist

[Buffarukus]

1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

All that you’re lacking is the actual proof
 

Because it doesn’t exist

 

I guess it is dependent what you concider actual.

 

If your looking for concrete prosecutable proof by " name your legitamate agency or reporter" your very rarely going to get that for the powerful. Your most likely just going to get a scratch of the surface and a well timed "resignation' as a finality.

 

There is a reason basically none of them face prosecution yet we all know their is rampant corruption. 

 

Seems as trump is repeatedly the only one who is facing true reprocussions. that in itself should tell you SOMETHING other then he is the ONLY politician worthy of facing deep investigation and judgment.

 

To many here it tells them he is the ONLY one guilty of crimes. Sure. 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2023 by Buffarukus

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

All that you’re lacking is the actual proof
 

Because it doesn’t exist

Well, I'd suggest we examine the process of investigating a crime.  What is most common is the investigators, detectives, officers, prosecutors, and others don't generally have "proof" that connects a specific suspect to the crime when the investigation is at the beginning.  There is suspicion and an effort to gather evidence which will identify a suspect and place them at the scene of the crime.  As events go forward the case becomes stronger (or could be dropped) and might reveal enough evidence to result in an arrest and an indictment.  I assume your definition of proof is being in the process of presenting testimony and evidence to a court with prosecution, defense, judge, and jury.  My expectation is we're getting there.   

 

Otherwise, I'm not in personal possession of "proof" as I'm not an investigator looking into the affairs of the Biden family.  Or member of Congress or staff that has direct control of evidence.  And I wasn't personally involved in any business dealings with Hunter, his business partners, the parties extending payments to him, or a party to any conversations. 

 

But I do believe anyone with good critical thinking and reasoning skills and a high level of objective thinking will conclude there's something to this story.  I do follow along with the story.  I listen to and read the testimony of witnesses, understand the activities of the committee gathering information, evidence, and data like bank transaction records, the identify of shell companies, and other artifacts.  I understand the process of payments and transactions that are typically employed in money laundering schemes and how what is said to have been gathered about of transactions related to Biden family are consistent with the laundering process. 

 

I also believe I have a good understanding of what is customarily legal and what might be illegal.  And following along with the story, events, statements, and activities of the House committee, the whistle blowers that have come forward, and statements from business partners, and foreign officials involved in the alleged payments I conclude its highly likely they're running a bribery and extortion operation.  How else to explain a lavish lifestyle absent any employment or income sources that would generate the funds to support it?.  Large amounts of income unaccounted for from legitimately understood sources.  What else is there but to conclude the Biden's have been receiving income from illegal activities which in this case is an influence peddling and bribery operation.  These allegations of receiving millions in payments from foreign officials in exchange for political favors is as real as it gets.  

 

What I'm beginning to come around to is the revelation that these kinds of scams and operations are more common than not in Washington.

[BillsFanNC]

As of this moment there's 1000000x more solid "proof"  that Joe Biden is a corrupt foreign agent who collected millions from foreign adversaries around the world via his bag man son Hunter...

 

Than there is or was about Trump colluding with Russia to steal the 2016 election.

 

The Biden situation is a raging Canadian forest fire spewing smoke over the continent. 

 

The Trump situation was a never ending series of attempts to start a fire with wet flint and kindling.

[Doc]

There's more there to at least impeach Joke than there was to impeach Trump.  There won't be any indictments because he's POTUS and by the time he leaves office it won't be worth it given his declining state.

[John from Riverside]

1 hour ago, Buffarukus said:

 

I guess it is dependent what you concider actual.

 

If your looking for concrete prosecutable proof by " name your legitamate agency or reporter" your very rarely going to get that for the powerful. Your most likely just going to get a scratch of the surface and a well timed "resignation' as a finality.

 

There is a reason basically none of them face prosecution yet we all know their is rampant corruption. 

 

Seems as trump is repeatedly the only one who is facing true reprocussions. that in itself should tell you SOMETHING other then he is the ONLY politician worthy of facing deep investigation and judgment.

 

To many here it tells them he is the ONLY one guilty of crimes. Sure. 

 

 

Perhaps if Trump was directly involved in the crimes that he commits
 

I’m talking about evidence that can be used in an actual trial to convict. It’s not there for Joe Biden.

 

Did he take a bribe? No one really knows no one’s ever going to know because there is no evidence of it however, in a trial, you were presumed innocent until proven guilty

[B-Man]

 

 

Comer Lays out Why Those 170 Biden Suspicious Activity Reports Are So Bad

by Nick Arama

 

The House Oversight Committee is accumulating a lot of evidence regarding Joe Biden and the Biden family’s foreign business dealings scandal. On Thursday, Chairman James Comer revealed that the IRS whistleblowers were indicating they had evidence of offshore accounts that could be related to Joe Biden. If they have the records of those accounts and can link Joe Biden to foreign payments, that may be the smoking gun right there if the Republicans get around to an impeachment trial. Our friends at Townhall pointed out how Comer laid out more information about the 170 “Suspicious Activity Reports” and how significant it was that there were 170 of them about the Bidens.

 

 

.https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2023/07/28/comer-lays-out-why-those-170-biden-suspicious-activity-reports-are-so-bad-n783853

[John from Riverside]

Redstate.com, lol

[BillsFanNC]

In the interview with Cruz Comer stated he used to be a banking executive for 10 years. In those 10 years the bank he worked for issued "maybe two" suspicious activity reports.

 

They are exceedingly rare. Furthermore, why would a bank want to draw attention to millions of dollars flowing through it unless absolutely necessary? More money is good for business at a bank, right?

 

Now consider that there are 170. 170! SARs relating to the Bidens and their associates. 

 

And leftists will STILL tell you with a straight face that there's nothing to see here.

 

 

Edited July 30, 2023 by BillsFanNC

[Doc]

3 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

In the interview with Cruz Comer stated he used to be a banking executive for 10 years. In those 10 years the bank he worked for issued "maybe two" suspicious activity reports.

 

They are exceedingly rare. Furthermore, why would a bank want to draw attention to millions of dollars flowing through it unless absolutely necessary? More money is good for business at a bank, right?

 

Now consider that the are 170. 170! SARs relating to the Bidens and their associates. 

 

And leftists will STILL tell you with a straight face that there's nothing to see here.

 

They pretty much have to at this point.  But even they know, deep down, it's true.

[B-Man]

10 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Redstate.com, lol

 

 

John,  as I have explained frequently to Billstime and Tiberius.

 

Adults don't accept that "I don't approve of your site" childishness"  anymore.

 

There are a world of news/opinion sources out there now, and they have proven to be just as, if not more, reliable than the mainstream media.

 

There are usually links in each of these stories to their sources to validate their article

 

You can continue your bias or try to learn more about the world outside your California cocoon.

 

 

 

 

. 

 

 

[John from Riverside]

1 minute ago, B-Man said:

 

 

John,  as I have explained frequently to Billstime and Tiberius.

 

Adults don't accept that "I don't approve of your site" childishness"  anymore.

 

There are a world of news/opinion sources out there now, and they have proven to be just as, if not more, reliable than the mainstream media.

 

There are usually links in each of these stories to their sources to validate their article

 

You can continue your bias or try to learn more about the world outside your California cocoon.

 

 

 

 

. 

 

 

You’re seeking confirmation bias it’s nothing more than that. If you can’t find some thing from a neutral new station to post on here and continue to post right wing propaganda, no one is going to take you seriously except for other right wing propagandists sit in your echo chamber if you like

[SoCal Deek]

27 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Perhaps if Trump was directly involved in the crimes that he commits
 

I’m talking about evidence that can be used in an actual trial to convict. It’s not there for Joe Biden.

 

Did he take a bribe? No one really knows no one’s ever going to know because there is no evidence of it however, in a trial, you were presumed innocent until proven guilty

Did he take a bribe? He ARRANGED for them! 

[John from Riverside]

14 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

In the interview with Cruz Comer stated he used to be a banking executive for 10 years. In those 10 years the bank he worked for issued "maybe two" suspicious activity reports.

 

They are exceedingly rare. Furthermore, why would a bank want to draw attention to millions of dollars flowing through it unless absolutely necessary? More money is good for business at a bank, right?

 

Now consider that there are 170. 170! SARs relating to the Bidens and their associates. 

 

And leftists will STILL tell you with a straight face that there's nothing to see here.

 

 

It’s not evidence

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

Did he take a bribe? He ARRANGED for them! 

Prove it

[All_Pro_Bills]

2 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

You’re seeking confirmation bias it’s nothing more than that. If you can’t find some thing from a neutral new station to post on here and continue to post right wing propaganda, no one is going to take you seriously except for other right wing propagandists sit in your echo chamber if you like

While we can debate the reliability of sources, but the actual question is reliability of the information.  Does the House Oversight Committee have records of suspicious bank transactions reported to the IRS and cited by the IRS whistle blowers that their investigations identified as suspect transactions involving funds that found their way into accounting belonging to the Biden's or not?  

 

 

https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-probes-hunter-bidens-suspicious-foreign-business-transactions-flagged-by-u-s-banks/

 

[John from Riverside]

2 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

While we can debate the reliability of sources, but the actual question is reliability of the information.  Does the House Oversight Committee have records of suspicious bank transactions reported to the IRS and cited by the IRS whistle blowers that their investigations identified as suspect transactions involving funds that found their way into accounting belonging to the Biden's or not?  

 

 

https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-probes-hunter-bidens-suspicious-foreign-business-transactions-flagged-by-u-s-banks/

 

Well, now that would be an example of evidence
 

Not somebody saying they have it, but actually having it

[Buffarukus]

1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

Perhaps if Trump was directly involved in the crimes that he commits
 

I’m talking about evidence that can be used in an actual trial to convict. It’s not there for Joe Biden.

 

Did he take a bribe? No one really knows no one’s ever going to know because there is no evidence of it however, in a trial, you were presumed innocent until proven guilty

 

Thats exactly what im talking about. You think on the ground level your going to get that type of proof? If you did then explain to me which president had it verifiably up to your standard and did not face charges. Id argue every single one. But clinton had nothing going on with their shell charities. Barrack never illegally ordered drone strikes of civilians. Hillary never destroyed evidence in a investigation. Bush and his Iraq war was simply a mistake of intelligence. The banking sector commited no fraud in the crisis. 

 

Weres the proof? Just a propoderence of suggestions and info but no prosicutable concrete proof that you require. Its all legit. I mean, alot of these were "investigated" and "mistakes" were found, people were shuffled but no crimes commited? Right?

 

Its how it works. Your world the DA found damning evidence for trumps top secret papers but nothing for biden. Thats the story. You see evidence in trump tampering in ukrain but biden..nothing to see. No proof. You have trump indicted, right before a campain for president but fbi just cant seem to reach a conclusion on "ongoing investigations" from 2019 and before. Very slow to prosecute. Lol

 

If theres nothing to see then be transparent. Same way they were "unsure" the labtop was hunters. Same way they found "mistakes" in russiagate. Same story. Same way whoops! hunter was so close to accidently getting sweeping immunity for his sweetheart deal for crimes others are in a cell for years. Just a mistake. No proof the DA and defendents on the case are in bed trying to protect power. On and on.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2023 by Buffarukus

[snafu]

51 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

You’re seeking confirmation bias it’s nothing more than that. If you can’t find some thing from a neutral new station to post on here and continue to post right wing propaganda, no one is going to take you seriously except for other right wing propagandists sit in your echo chamber if you like

Can you point me to a news station that’s generally accepted as being neutral? 

Just like people say that Redsatate.com is right wing propaganda, there’s about half the country who’d claim that NYTimes.com is the opposite. It is a real problem. 
 

[BillsFanNC]

This whole saga illustrates how the left has flipped standards on its head.

 

1. What IS supposed to happen is you investigate suspected crimes to lead to finding and charging, if appropriate, those responsible.

 

This is what should be happening with the Biden family, but it's not.

 

2. What's NOT supposed to happen is exhaustively investigating people in search of crimes.

 

This is what should not be happening to Trump, but it is.

 

 

Leftists scream that #1 is wrong and without merit, while #2 is completely justified.

 

This is because they live under a green sky in a clown world.

[SoCal Deek]

The funny thing about evidence is that law enforcement finds exactly 0% of the evidence they were purposefully never looking for. 

[Doc]

33 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

The funny thing about evidence is that law enforcement finds exactly 0% of the evidence they were purposefully never looking for. 

 

Wayne Gretzky would be proud.

[B-Man]

 

 

Hunter Biden investigation: Why the Devon Archer testimony is so important

by Sarah Edford

 

When Devon Archer sits down on Monday with the House Oversight Committee, the Hunter Biden investigation could enter a new and more significant phase.

 

That’s because Archer, a former business partner of Hunter Biden’s and a former friend to the family, is expected to testify about the extent of President Joe Biden’s involvement in his son’s foreign business dealings, potentially roping the president more deeply into a scandal he has thus far studiously avoided. Archer will be the closest business associate of Hunter Biden’s to speak with Congress to date. The two served together on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, and handled a range of other business deals together through Rosemont Seneca, their investment firm.

 

While other witnesses have discussed the evidence that Hunter Biden engaged in illegal activity during his time working for overseas companies, Archer’s testimony could be the first that directly links Joe Biden to the lobbying his son did.

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house/hunter-biden-investigation-why-devon-archer-testimony-important

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Big Blitz]

 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                              

[SoCal Deek]

On 7/30/2023 at 9:24 AM, Doc said:

 

Wayne Gretzky would be proud.

I’ve gotta admit I don’t know what that means…but since he lives up the street from me, I guess I could go over ask him. 😉