![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Because, you know, a whole lot of people have used drugs in their pasts without it ruining their lives. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Caveat, Andrii Derkach has nothing to do with the Biden emails. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
In any case, the laptop was dropped off in April of 2019. My understanding is that he had already been through rehab at that point and had been clean. I could be wrong on that point, I don't know his life; but, if that's true then any drug use is a non-issue as far as his decision making goes. It just doesn't make sense that Hunter Biden would randomly wander into a small repair shop in Delaware, drop off a laptop and then forget about it. Especially if he had kicked the drugs at that point. Especially if it had information he really wanted or considered potentially damaging to himself or his father. |
Quote:
And Hunter isn’t claiming they aren’t real. I wonder why. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudy-g...dirt-on-bidens And because no where in the reported story does Andrii Derkach make an appearance. Unless you have some inside information, the hardware was left at a repair shop by Hunter Biden. The FBI was contacted through an intermediary, then given to the FBI under a Grand Jury subpoena. A copy was given through the mediator of the repair shop guy to Robert Costello who is Giuliani's attorney. |
Given that this story does include the FBI, Barr's silence is certainly not a sign of support by the DOJ for the Rudy story.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
The testimony of the computer repair shop guy that Hunter Biden left it there and then didn’t pick it up Is evidence of authenticity. If Hunter Biden had the emails on his computer, it is reasonable to assume they are authentic. I am glad I could help you with this.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_901 (a) In General. To satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is. (b) Examples. The following are examples only — not a complete list — of evidence that satisfies the requirement: (1) Testimony of a Witness with Knowledge. Testimony that an item is what it is claimed to be. |
Testimony be damned. Where's the invoice with Biden's signature?
|
Quote:
|
Joseph Biden is not involved. The son is not the father.
|
Quote:
|
Why hasn't Fox News verified that it's Biden's signature? Seems it would be a simple thing to do.
|
Quote:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...ive-c-n2578275 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...aire-pay-10-m/ |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...ive-c-n2578275 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...aire-pay-10-m/ If Biden was taking money and not reporting it, I'm sure it still wouldn't make a difference to you. Only Trump could possibly be compromised by supposed foreign money, isn't that right? |
Without Fox News bothering to verify the signature on the invoice, they are spreading mere hearsay. By linking to their hearsay, you are also spreading hearsay. Hearsay is worthless and not evidence.
|
Quote:
Hand waving it doesn't make it go away if the emails are legit https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...ive-c-n2578275 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...aire-pay-10-m/ |
Quote:
You've just shown you don't know what hearsay is. LOL. They produced the invoice. So has other publications. |
Quote:
How can you sort out which is which? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
You think the FBI won't be able to find out which is which? You think the metadata can be faked too? |
Quote:
Get a grip, they provided the invoice, AND told you they didn't have an expert look at it. |
They provided a piece of paper that they said had Biden's signature, with nothing to back that up. Again, the FBI didn't think the laptop was worthwhile so the crafters of this scam had to go searching for marks.
|
Quote:
|
My theory is that since it’s a fake invoice they know they’d have to admit that if they tried to authenticate it, so it’s really better for them not to try and hope there’s enough rubes out there. But it looks like there’s not since nobody is talking about it because the story is so ridiculous to just rely on Rudy Giuliani and a screenshot on his phone as proof. Rock and a hard place.
|
Someone is working very, very hard to convince everyone that there is something to this whole Hunter Biden thing. Very hard.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
So don't use them to support any argument of yours. What we do have is IC reports of ongoing Russian interference efforts. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
"You think the FBI won't be able to find out which is which?" "They actually aren't supposed to comment." There is no contradiction. You have nothing with regards to the Biden laptop, well, almost nothing, you have speculation. |
I've only heard about the laptop since Giuliani ate the bait and sent it to the media, not when the Senate was investigating Biden. The FBI had it then, why wasn't it shown to the Senate? I rather think you are underestimating the impact of this information if it were true.
|
Quote:
|
So now, a few days later, how's this "incriminating laptop" scam going? Like all Trump schemes, backwards and downwards on a sea of easily-disputed lies and laughable yells about fraud the other guy is doing. In short, it's yet another bust. But typical of everything he gets involved in. It would be hilarious if all he was was a failed real estate executive and two-bit reality face. But he sits in the highest office in the USA. So he is taking everyone down with him if it kills him.
|
When the Senate is investigating someone, you don't think they should get information?? The *Senate* investigated and cleared Hunter Biden. The FBI didn't think the laptop was evidence worthy of being presented to the Senate in the investigation of Hunter Biden. I don't know how much clearer this can be made.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
LOL, well if you don't know, I guess the conversation is over, thankfully. But no, the FBI does not share info of ongoing investigations with anyone, including the Senate. |
Really, you don't think the Senate investigating someone means that the Federal Bureau of Investigations is going to be involved, given that the Senate is a Federal institution? What did you think the FBI was gathering information FOR? The Senate was investigating Hunter Biden. THE SENATE. They're not a bunch of dusty academics parked in a distant room muttering to themselves, they're the legislative branch of the federal government and they get evidence from the federal bureau of investigation. They're all part of the same thing. The US Senate has cleared Hunter Biden of corruption charges. Sorry if that wasn't the outcome you devoutly prayed for.
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:34 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-22, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.