nm

Quote:

---

You're essentially telling those that believe there's meat on this bone they aren't as smart as you. I'm a lot smarter than you and I absolutely believe there's meat on this bone. I don't think you understand the legal issues involved here to be able to evaluate the risk to the parties involved.

---

This.

Barr doesn't waste words. When he uttered RICO several times in August and September I doubt he was solely referring to BLM and Antifa.

The legal issues presented by the structure of these arrangements are the trees. The forest is the larger view and that is criminal conspiracy in furtherance of a criminal enterprise, IOW racketeering.

Prosperdick said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

OK so in order for this to be fake that means the laptop is fake or incriminating e-mails were placed on the hard drives but there is corroborating evidence that the e-mails are in fact genuine. Therefore, the recipients of the e-mails would also have to be faked and the witnesses lying about them.

This is just the surface level, we haven't even dived into the bank accounts showing money sent to Hunter but in order for that to be OK we need to believe all these foreign countries were so enamored by Hunter they couldn't wait to be in business with him or pay him $50,000/month to sit on their board.

The amount of cognitive dissonance required to take your stance is quite mind boggling.

---

He actually believes it's all a lie. I think he really does.

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

Here is a person who can look at the emails and texts themselves, but cannot form an independent conclusion, this person has to be told by someone else what it all means. He waits for a journalist to think for him.

---

I've seen all the same emails and texts you have. Fox and other media have seen even more. We all seem to agree that as of now, there's nothing publicly available conclusively implicating Joe, despite desperate attempts to conflate nepotism with corruption.

I know many around here desperately want it to be true, which was its original intent anyway. Trump's most loyal supporters were always going to run with this story (Joe's involvement) no matter who pushed it or how inconclusive the evidence. So far its not paying the dividends his campaign was hoping for, and time is running out.

Some insight into how Casey Anthony beat murder charges.

texaglurkerguy said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

Here is a person who can look at the emails and texts themselves, but cannot form an independent conclusion, this person has to be told by someone else what it all means. He waits for a journalist to think for him.

---

I've seen all the same emails and texts you have. Fox and other media have seen even more. We all seem to agree that as of now, there's nothing publicly available conclusively implicating Joe, despite desperate attempts to conflate nepotism with corruption.

I know many around here desperately want it to be true, which was its original intent anyway. Trump's most loyal supporters were always going to run with this story (Joe's involvement) no matter who pushed it or how inconclusive the evidence. So far its not paying the dividends his campaign was hoping for, and time is running out.

---

You sure about that?

You're purposely ignoring common sense. Nothing conclusive? No. But there's a ton of smoke there and the fact that you're willfully ignoring that says a lot about you.
Why does the share breakdown only add to 90? Why is that discussed in the same context as Hunter holding the remaining 10%? Why would Bubilinksi expose himself to a massive civil lawsuit and potential perjury charges?

So you think all the emails and info on laptop are fake? Was it Hunter's laptop?

Was Biden paid by these companies?

What Biden policy are you the most excited to see implemented?

aginlakeway said:

---

So you think all the emails and info on laptop are fake? Was it Hunter's laptop?

Was Biden paid by these companies?

What Biden policy are you the most excited to see implemented?

---

Nope, just that they don't conclusively implicate Joe. At least for now.

Inconclusive. The timing of the story (to maximize damage to Biden's campaign before election), the people pushing it (i.e. Trump's allies), the media's refusal to cover it (even among conservative media), and my own internal biases suggest to me it's a political hit piece meant to rile up the base and sway undecideds, not legitimate proof of Joe's corruption.

aginlakeway said:

---

So you think all the emails and info on laptop are fake? Was it Hunter's laptop?

Was Biden paid by these companies?

What Biden policy are you the most excited to see implemented?

---

It's probably a tie between universal shutdown/mask mandate and the Green New Deal. Oh wait, maybe its the repeal of the Trump tax cut, resulting in higher taxes for everyone (not just over $400K).

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

So you think all the emails and info on laptop are fake? Was it Hunter's laptop?

Was Biden paid by these companies?

What Biden policy are you the most excited to see implemented?

---

Nope, just that they don't conclusively implicate Joe. At least for now.

Inconclusive. The timing of the story (to maximize damage to Biden's campaign before election), the people pushing it (i.e. Trump's allies), the media's refusal to cover it (even among conservative media), and my own internal biases suggest to me it's a political hit piece meant to rile up the base and sway undecideds.

---

Kind of like Trump stories that have been revealed in the last few weeks?

So what Biden policies are you most excited about seeing implemented?

GAC06 said:

---

Let's say you go on a business trip, and you see a prostitute enter your business partner's hotel room. An hour later you see her leave. Do you have proof that he slept with her? Is there any doubt from a reasonable person about what happened?

There is no possible innocent explanation for Hunter Biden being on the board of a Ukrainian gas company while his dad was VP. Did they do a world wide search for a crack head with zero experience in the field and it just happened to be the son of the VP?

---

THIS ^

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

So you think all the emails and info on laptop are fake? Was it Hunter's laptop?

Was Biden paid by these companies?

What Biden policy are you the most excited to see implemented?

---

Nope, just that they don't conclusively implicate Joe. At least for now.

Inconclusive. The timing of the story (to maximize damage to Biden's campaign before election), the people pushing it (i.e. Trump's allies), the media's refusal to cover it (even among conservative media), and my own internal biases suggest to me it's a political hit piece meant to rile up the base and sway undecideds.

---

Kind of like Trump stories that have been revealed in the last few weeks?

---

Exactly like that. Political theater and distractions to sway gullible people.

Conservative Ag said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

So you think all the emails and info on laptop are fake? Was it Hunter's laptop?

Was Biden paid by these companies?

What Biden policy are you the most excited to see implemented?

---

Nope, just that they don't conclusively implicate Joe. At least for now.

Inconclusive. The timing of the story (to maximize damage to Biden's campaign before election), the people pushing it (i.e. Trump's allies), the media's refusal to cover it (even among conservative media), and my own internal biases suggest to me it's a political hit piece meant to rile up the base and sway undecideds.

---

Kind of like Trump stories that have been revealed in the last few weeks?

So what Biden policies are you most excited about seeing implemented?

---

He keeps saying that the media isn't covering it. They are covering it. It's all over Fox. You're actually arguing that CNN the others avoiding it somehow cuts in favor of it not being true? Are you ****ing serious?

---

I'm not saying the media isn't covering it. Most have/are. Just that they refuse to make the leap and say Joe is involved. Hence the Fox headline I posted originally: "Ex-Hunter Biden associate's records don't show proof of Biden business relationship amid unanswered questions".

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

So you think all the emails and info on laptop are fake? Was it Hunter's laptop?

Was Biden paid by these companies?

What Biden policy are you the most excited to see implemented?

---

Nope, just that they don't conclusively implicate Joe. At least for now.

Inconclusive. The timing of the story (to maximize damage to Biden's campaign before election), the people pushing it (i.e. Trump's allies), the media's refusal to cover it (even among conservative media), and my own internal biases suggest to me it's a political hit piece meant to rile up the base and sway undecideds.

---

Kind of like Trump stories that have been revealed in the last few weeks?

---

Exactly like that. Political theater and distractions to sway gullible people.

---

So what Biden policies are you most excited about seeing implemented?

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

So you think all the emails and info on laptop are fake? Was it Hunter's laptop?

Was Biden paid by these companies?

What Biden policy are you the most excited to see implemented?

---

Nope, just that they don't conclusively implicate Joe. At least for now.

Inconclusive. The timing of the story (to maximize damage to Biden's campaign before election), the people pushing it (i.e. Trump's allies), the media's refusal to cover it (even among conservative media), and my own internal biases suggest to me it's a political hit piece meant to rile up the base and sway undecideds.

---

Kind of like Trump stories that have been revealed in the last few weeks?

---

Exactly like that. Political theater and distractions to sway gullible people.

---

So what Biden policies are you most excited about seeing implemented?

---

The fact he won't answer speaks volumes. In contrast I would have no problem listing out the accomplishments (especially in foreign policy) Trump has achieved on any liberal site around as well as his plans for the next four years.

Of course the liberals would screech with ad hominem attacks and probably "the blood of 200,000 dead are on Trump's hands!"

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

One of the oldest and the 4th largest daily publication in the US, disqualified? Why, because it's owned by Newscorp?

Yet WaPo (owned by a liberal cultural appropriator, Bezos, born Jorgensen) suppresses the story.

The NYT also undisputedly a liberal bastion, also won't report or publish anything..

Hey genius, it's 2020, you don't need to get your information from any of those to make up your mind. There is this thing that Al Gore invented called the internet where you can find things for yourself.

From Fox
Ex-Hunter Biden associate's records don't show proof of Biden business relationship amid unanswered questions

Quote:

---

"Fox News has reviewed emails from Bobulinski related to the venture and they don't show that the elder Biden had business dealings with SinoHawk Holdings, or took any payments from them or the Chinese."

---

Of course Joe did not have business dealings with SinoHawk, that's how money laundering works.

Quote:

---

"Still, the issue does give rise to unanswered questions about how much the former vice president knew of his son's business arrangements at the time, an issue that President Trump recently spotlighted during his campaign."

---

Lots of unanswered questions.

Quote:

---

"Bobulinski provided text messages and emails related to his venture to The Wall Street Journal, mainly from the spring and summer of 2017, which don't show Hunter or James Biden discussing Joe Biden's purported role."

---

Of course they don't show the family members discussing Joe's role, remember the text admonishing Bobulinski that that is only discussed IN PERSON.

Quote:

---

""Mrng plse let me knw if we will do early dinner w your Uncle & dad and where, also for document translation do you want it simple Chinese or traditional?" Bobulinski texted Hunter Biden on May 2, 2017.
"Not sure on dinner yet and whatever is the most common for a Chinese legal DOC," Hunter Biden replied."
.
"Additional messages then seem to indicate that a meeting took place, though it's unclear what the substance of the meeting might have been. They are unrelated to the laptop or hard drive purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden."

---

So the meeting with Joe probably took place , yet we would be led to believe the discussions were about football or weddings or anything not related to business. Joe Biden a known liar and plagiarist never discussed business with Hunter or is family.

Quote:

---

"The meeting on May 2, 2017 would have taken place just 11 days before a May 13 email obtained by Fox News last week that included a discussion of "remuneration packages" for people involved in a business deal with a Chinese energy firm. The email appeared to identify Hunter Biden as "Chair/Vice Chair depending on agreement with CEFC," in an apparent reference to now-bankrupt CEFC China Energy Co.

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden."

---

So on a whim the "remunerations packages" for people involved were discussed.

Of course there is NO SHAREHOLDING STRUCTURE, AND RECORDS FOR ALL STAGES OF THE NEGOTIATION showing a role for Joe Biden, that's how money laundering works.

Quote:

---

""In that email, there is no question that 'H' stands for Hunter, 'big guy' for his father, Joe Biden, and Jim for Jim Biden," Bobulinski claimed Thursday in a statement he gave ahead of the second presidential debate, where he was President Trump's guest.
"In fact, Hunter often referred to his father as the big guy or 'my chairman.' On numerous occasions, it was made clear to me that Joe Biden's involvement was not to be mentioned in writing but only face-to-face. In fact, I was advised by [James] Gillier and [Rob] Walker that Hunter and Jim Biden were paranoid about keeping Joe Biden's involvement secret."
According to separate emails obtained and analyzed by Fox News, the "chairman" appears to refer to China."

---

Bobulinski in a statement said "my chairman" and "big guy" refers to Joe Biden. Then in later emails reviewed by Fox the "chairman" refers to China. The email discussing remuneration STATES "big guy" nowhere does is state "my chairman" let alone "chairman".

Quote:

---

Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates has told Fox News: "Joe Biden has never even considered being involved in business with his family, nor in any overseas business whatsoever.

---

Of course he personally wasn't involved "in the business" with his corrupt bag men, he only took laundered money to influence US policy often in direct conflict with our country's national security.

Quote:

---

He has never held stock in any such business arrangements nor has any family member or any other person ever held stock for him."

---

Stocks are too easy to track transactions. There are many many better ways to launder money. For example the minion(bag man) buys a property, holds for a period of time, sells said property at a loss, takes a write off. Purchaser or big guy walks away wealthier. Bag man forms shell company, guarantees purchase of millions of books from publisher, publisher pays big man huge up front fee for book no one but idiots read.

ETA: I think some people do not understand what the article means and misread much of the article. The article doesn't exonerate the creepy old, liar, plagiarist corrupt pile of dog doo that is Creepy Joe Biden.

VitruvianAg said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

One of the oldest and the 4th largest daily publication in the US, disqualified? Why, because it's owned by Newscorp?

Yet WaPo (owned by a liberal cultural appropriator, Bezos, born Jorgensen) suppresses the story.

The NYT also undisputedly a liberal bastion, also won't report or publish anything..

Hey genius, it's 2020, you don't need to get your information from any of those to make up your mind. There is this thing that Al Gore invented called the internet where you can find things for yourself.

---

Guarantee this guy never even looked at the trove of Wikileaks e-mails (all of them verified and none of them disputed) which details how various MSM reporters would cede editorial control of their articles to John Podesta.

It's when I realized journalism had been absolutely and completely infiltrated with partisan hacks for the Dems and the only scoops they report on (besides how many Trump got with his ice cream dessert) were simply leaks from anonymous sources that were never corroborated, which to them is a feature, and not a bug.

VitruvianAg said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

One of the oldest and the 4th largest daily publication in the US, disqualified? Why, because it's owned by Newscorp?

Yet WaPo (owned by a liberal cultural appropriator, Bezos, born Jorgensen) suppresses the story.

The NYT also undisputedly a liberal bastion, also won't report or publish anything..

Hey genius, it's 2020, you don't need to get your information from any of those to make up your mind. There is this thing that Al Gore invented called the internet where you can find things for yourself.

---

You're right! Fortunately I've also reviewed the texts and emails and have arrived at a similar conclusion to media consensus: there's not enough there to prove Joe's involvement at the moment. If there was I suspect we'd have seen it by now.

texaglurkerguy said:

---

VitruvianAg said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

One of the oldest and the 4th largest daily publication in the US, disqualified? Why, because it's owned by Newscorp?

Yet WaPo (owned by a liberal cultural appropriator, Bezos, born Jorgensen) suppresses the story.

The NYT also undisputedly a liberal bastion, also won't report or publish anything..

Hey genius, it's 2020, you don't need to get your information from any of those to make up your mind. There is this thing that Al Gore invented called the internet where you can find things for yourself.

---

You're right! Fortunately I've also reviewed the texts and emails and have arrived at a similar conclusion to media consensus: there's not enough there to prove Joe's involvement at the moment. If there was I suspect we'd have seen it by now.

---

How have you reviewed all the texts and emails that were on that hard drive? How did you get access to them?

texaglurkerguy said:

---

VitruvianAg said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

One of the oldest and the 4th largest daily publication in the US, disqualified? Why, because it's owned by Newscorp?

Yet WaPo (owned by a liberal cultural appropriator, Bezos, born Jorgensen) suppresses the story.

The NYT also undisputedly a liberal bastion, also won't report or publish anything..

Hey genius, it's 2020, you don't need to get your information from any of those to make up your mind. There is this thing that Al Gore invented called the internet where you can find things for yourself.

---

You're right! Fortunately I've also reviewed the texts and emails and have arrived at a similar conclusion to media consensus: there's not enough there to prove Joe's involvement at the moment. If there was I suspect we'd have seen it by now.

---

Uhhh....that's why investigative devices (interviews, depositions, testimony, etc) are done. It's never CONCLUSIVE FROM THE COMMUNICATIONS. I've been a litigation attorney for 13 years.

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

VitruvianAg said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

One of the oldest and the 4th largest daily publication in the US, disqualified? Why, because it's owned by Newscorp?

Yet WaPo (owned by a liberal cultural appropriator, Bezos, born Jorgensen) suppresses the story.

The NYT also undisputedly a liberal bastion, also won't report or publish anything..

Hey genius, it's 2020, you don't need to get your information from any of those to make up your mind. There is this thing that Al Gore invented called the internet where you can find things for yourself.

---

You're right! Fortunately I've also reviewed the texts and emails and have arrived at a similar conclusion to media consensus: there's not enough there to prove Joe's involvement at the moment. If there was I suspect we'd have seen it by now.

---

How have you reviewed all the texts and emails that were on that hard drive? How did you get access to them?

---

Should have clarified, just those that are publicly available. No idea what else is in that hard drive or those phones, there very well could be proof that removes all doubt, but I haven't seen it yet.

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

VitruvianAg said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

One of the oldest and the 4th largest daily publication in the US, disqualified? Why, because it's owned by Newscorp?

Yet WaPo (owned by a liberal cultural appropriator, Bezos, born Jorgensen) suppresses the story.

The NYT also undisputedly a liberal bastion, also won't report or publish anything..

Hey genius, it's 2020, you don't need to get your information from any of those to make up your mind. There is this thing that Al Gore invented called the internet where you can find things for yourself.

---

You're right! Fortunately I've also reviewed the texts and emails and have arrived at a similar conclusion to media consensus: there's not enough there to prove Joe's involvement at the moment. If there was I suspect we'd have seen it by now.

---

Uhhh....that's why investigative devices (interviews, depositions, testimony, etc) are done. It's never CONCLUSIVE FROM THE COMMUNICATIONS. I've been a litigation attorney for 13 years.

---

Not only does this guy bring new meaning to the term cognitive dissonance but also the term intentionally obtuse. It's quite remarkable actually. He might have a future as a Democrat pundit, they love the true believers.

Congratulations on your many years of service! Think we'll get another special investigation into this like the Mueller one?

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Congratulations on your many years of service! Think we'll get another special investigation into this like the Mueller one?

---

I'm trying to explain to you why your "conclusion" is absurd. Do you believe the information raises logical questions?

texaglurkerguy said:

---

VitruvianAg said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

"The big guy" is still Biden.

But within that precise context with Sinohawk, "the chairman" is supposedly China, according to Fox, is how I read that.

But both could be true that at times Hunter referred to his Dad as "chairman."

---

From the same article:

Quote:

---

However, according to separate emails obtained by Fox News, Bobulinski states there are no other members besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar and Anthony Bobulinski, regarding the shareholding structure, and records for all stages of company negotiations show no role for Joe Biden.

---

Even Fox refuses to touch this one.

---

So is that every email that was sent out? Again, I tend to believe in-person statements over ANY media reporting. Don't you?

FYI ... your candidate is trouble. And it's not because of this.

---

If your question here boils down to do I trust the aggregate of media doubting Joe's involvement or Bobulinksi, then undoubtedly the former. I don't even believe the people pushing this story (Giuliani, Bannon, etc.) think it's true, because it doesn't need to be to achieve its intended effect.

We'll see, signs suggest just the opposite!

---

You trust the media over a fact witness that turned over documents to federal authorities, spoke to the FBI, and subjected himself to a slander suit by issuing his public statements on the matter?

---

I do. Until any major publication or outlet independently verifies or outright confirms Joe's involvement (and as we've established, even right-leaning Fox and WSJ refuse to do so), this story is filed away under "wishful Trump supporter speculation" as far as I'm concerned. I understand that I won't convince many in this thread of that, since nothing is more compelling than what people want to be true. And that's exactly what the folks pushing this story are banking on. Fortunately, I think most of the American electorate is smart enough to see through this.

---

One of the oldest and the 4th largest daily publication in the US, disqualified? Why, because it's owned by Newscorp?

Yet WaPo (owned by a liberal cultural appropriator, Bezos, born Jorgensen) suppresses the story.

The NYT also undisputedly a liberal bastion, also won't report or publish anything..

Hey genius, it's 2020, you don't need to get your information from any of those to make up your mind. There is this thing that Al Gore invented called the internet where you can find things for yourself.

---

You're right! Fortunately I've also reviewed the texts and emails and have arrived at a similar conclusion to media consensus: there's not enough there to prove Joe's involvement at the moment. If there was I suspect we'd have seen it by now.

---

Yeah, Hunter, a crack addict, being put on Burisma board and paid 50k a month, along with his VP dad Biden extorting Ukraine for 1 Billion dollars to fire the lead investigator into Burisma corruption is totally on the up and up.
Joe is totally clear of wrong doing since the big guy could be anybody and Joe taking half of Hunters earnings is a completely innocent family dynamic.

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Congratulations on your many years of service! Think we'll get another special investigation into this like the Mueller one?

---

I'm trying to explain to you why your "conclusion" is absurd. Do you believe the information raises logical questions?

---

Does the evidence currently released to the public raise questions? Certainly. Does it prove his involvement? No. As a litigation attorney I'm sure you can appreciate the difference.

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

texaglurkerguy said:

---

Congratulations on your many years of service! Think we'll get another special investigation into this like the Mueller one?

---

I'm trying to explain to you why your "conclusion" is absurd. Do you believe the information raises logical questions?

---

Does the evidence currently released to the public raise questions? Certainly. Does it prove his involvement? No. As a litigation attorney I'm sure you can appreciate the difference.

---

I just said that above.

If it raises legitimate questions, then you should ask why certain news sources aren't even acknowledging those questions.