GOP: We know Joe Biden is corrupt even if there is no evidence of it!

[BPPLEE]

Joe Biden was a private citizen at the time he is accused of bribes who did' according to you, and laundered money. There is no evidence for this, of course, so how are you so sure as to accuse the President of the United States of crimes without any evidence?

You didn’t get that from my post, you are putting words in my mouth. Please repost the post you are referring to. I don’t know what you’re talking about.
It is a fact that his family members have received millions from foreign entities and that there were numerous shell companies the payments were funneled through. I didn’t say he received any money or took any bribes so what are you talking about?

 

[BPPLEE]

And yet you brought up Hunter Biden for some reason.

Yes. Someone felt that 9 months was a long time to investigate someone. Its not

 

[BPPLEE]

They've both gotten all the indictments they deserve; how is that unfair?

I didn’t realize the impeachment inquiry was already over.

 

[BPPLEE]

Who said he has to?

Hunter.

 

[Valletta]

Who said he has to?

Hunter himself says that he pays Joe's bills, and has complained about it. Neither Joe nor Hunter have revealed the specifics.

 

[Valletta]

Joe Biden was a private citizen at the time he is accused of bribes who did' according to you, and laundered money. There is no evidence for this, of course, so how are you so sure as to accuse the President of the United States of crimes without any evidence?

Joe was the vice president at the time of the Burisma bribery scandal.

 

[JustOneWay]

Joe was the vice president at the time of the Burisma bribery scandal.

There was no Burisma bribery scandal. It is all made up by the right, and there is no evidence for said 'fake' scandal.

 

[Pommer]

And yet you brought up Hunter Biden for some reason.

Can “the laptop” be far behind?

 

[Pommer]

Hunter.

I thought Hunter was a lying criminal?
When did he become trustworthy?

 

[Valletta]

There was no Burisma bribery scandal. It is all made up by the right, and there is no evidence for said 'fake' scandal.

False. There is plenty of evidence. The prosecutor seized assets of the Burisma CEO. Burisma wanted the prosecutor fired. Joe is recorded bragging about using funds (U.S. taxpayer funds) to leverage the firing of the prosecutor. Hunter received money for a job at Burisma for which he was not qualified. Just that amount of evidence is enough to potentially gain a bribery conviction against Joe. The question of guilt or innocence should be decided upon whether there was a quid pro quo.

 

[returntosender]

MSCBC: GOP reconsiders whether anti-Biden evidence actually matters​

For months, congressional Republicans and their allies have gone to great lengths to manufacture a scandal that doesn’t appear to exist. To hear these GOP voices tell it, President Joe Biden was not only involved in his son’s business schemes, the Democrat also accepted alleged “bribes,” trading policies for cash.

Of course, the more Republicans try to substantiate these allegations with facts, the more they fail spectacularly. Indeed, it happened again yesterday, as GOP officials on the House Oversight Committee released documents showing that members of Biden’s family, and “associates” who know members of the president’s family, received money from foreign sources — a rather boring observation — while failing once again to make any meaningful connections to the president himself.

In his latest underwhelming release, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer explicitly said Republicans simply don’t feel the need to “show payments directly to the President to show corruption.” Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida, another Republican member of the panel, soon after appeared on Fox News and pushed a similar line, suggesting the party’s case against the incumbent president would still have merit, even if Biden didn’t “take a dime.”

A Washington Post analysis added, “[Comer’s] team tried to dig up this bribe that they have convinced their allies exists, without luck. So he issues a news release about the ‘Biden family’ and suggests that bribery claims don’t need actual proof and prepares for his next Sean Hannity interview.”
Where are the tapes?

Where are the bank records?

Anyone?

Bueller?

We do?

 

[Valletta]

We do?

How many hoaxes does MSNBC have to be involved in before their viewers start questioning and do some research for themselves? One way to misinform is by omission. In the article the media talks about "direct" evidence. There are two types of evidence--direct and circumstantial. There have been many convictions on strong circumstantial evidence. It all rests upon whether there was a quid pro quo. While Hunter receiving financial favors for Joe's actions in firing the prosecutor is enough for a bribery impeachment verdict against Joe, the committee is looking at whether there is direct evidence. The impeachment inquiry has the power to subpoena the records that Joe has been withholding on the basis of executive privilege and those records DOJ and NARA have been withholding. The article makes the receipt of foreign money by the Bidens a ho-hum matter. Obviously the twenty shell companies (just like the pseudonyms) were created to obfuscate what was really going on.

 

[BPPLEE]

There was no Burisma bribery scandal. It is all made up by the right, and there is no evidence for said 'fake' scandal.

Ya’ll tickle me. You won’t even consider that there could be a hint of corruption where Biden is concerned.

 

[BPPLEE]

Can “the laptop” be far behind?

Hunter is suing someone for releasing material from the laptop. Wouldn’t that be admitting that it’s his? Or that it exists?

 

[BPPLEE]

I thought Hunter was a lying criminal?
When did he become trustworthy?

I never called him a liar or a criminal, just an addict

 

[BPPLEE]

How many hoaxes does MSNBC have to be involved in before their viewers start questioning and do some research for themselves? One way to misinform is by omission. In the article the media talks about "direct" evidence. There are two types of evidence--direct and circumstantial. There have been many convictions on strong circumstantial evidence. It all rests upon whether there was a quid pro quo. While Hunter receiving financial favors for Joe's actions in firing the prosecutor is enough for a bribery impeachment verdict against Joe, the committee is looking at whether there is direct evidence. The impeachment inquiry has the power to subpoena the records that Joe has been withholding on the basis of executive privilege and those records DOJ and NARA have been withholding. The article makes the receipt of foreign money by the Bidens a ho-hum matter. Obviously the twenty shell companies (just like the pseudonyms) were created to obfuscate what was really going on.

Payments from foreign entities and shell companies seem to be considered completely normal by some people.

 

[JustOneWay]

You won’t even consider that there could be a hint of corruption where Biden is concerned.

Bring the proof! Please, provide the evidence.

Maybe ya'll tickle me back....

 

[BPPLEE]

Bring the proof! Please, provide the evidence.

Maybe ya'll tickle me back....

Give them time. Even the media are slowly coming around.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Payments from foreign entities and shell companies seem to be considered completely normal by some people.

Indeed. Even for people holding public office, though it shouldn't be.

His far-flung concerns, foreign and domestic, are nested in more than 400 separate business entities.

 

[BPPLEE]

Indeed. Even for people holding public office, though it shouldn't be.

His far-flung concerns, foreign and domestic, are nested in more than 400 separate business entities.

At least that’s business income. What business is the Biden family in? And nothing you present about Trump surprises me. I’m not in denial like people are about Biden
Oh wait those are Trump’s tax records. I don’t think any of the payments made to the Bidens would be on their tax returns, I think Hunter had a problem with that but the DOJ let the statute of limitations expire