FBI Releases Bieden related doument on Bribery- you can read it....

The deniers need to check this out. It's on Senator Grassley's website for the moment, but it will no doubt show up on many networks, as sure as some others will ignore it. The FBI has resisted efforts to get it for a very long time...

While the FBI redacted a fair amount, the essence is beyond question. For example these quotes: Burisma exec says "We hired Hunter to protect us from his dad" and "Don't worry Hunter will take care of all of those Issues through his dad."

But I kind of liked one from where the head of Burisma that says
:Zlochevsky made some comment that although Hunter Biden was stupid, and his (Z lochevsky's) dog was smarter. " Zlochevsky needed to keep Hunter Biden (on the board) so everything will be okay.".

Entertaining stuff... See the FBI doc here-

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/fd_1023_obtained_by_senator_grassley_-_biden.pdf

 

No how we know this is a nothingburger?


If it was, it would not be posted on Grassley’s website. It would damn near make prosecution impossible.

 

That would not make prosecution impossible ffs.

 

Sure, because prosecutors put their evidence public all the time. Lmao.

They have nothing and they are using there 2 years accomplishing nothing and it’s hilarious. I am pro investigate for the whole congressional session

 

You think if someone commits a crime and the evidence of it is public they somehow can't be prosecuted?

Why aren't more murders committed on TV and the person then immune under your asinine theory then?

 

What. You’re being obtuse. Blocked

 

You mean like the Floyd video?

 

That's the implication of your statement, I'm not bein obtuse. I'll take your running away from the debate for the admission of my point that it is though.

 

Exactly like the Floyd video. Those cops got a fair trial, its just that they'd murdered a guy on camera over 10 minutes then admitted doing it in the mop up also on video, so there wasn't really anything to defend them with.
Pretty hard to defend someone who is trained not to put someone in a particular position if they think they're on dope, who does so, is reminded he shouldn't but continues, then admits to a witness at the scene that he had to do what he did because the person was on drugs. That's why he put him in the position he was trained not to put people on drugs in, because dude was on drugs

 

A little different. But I could be wrong. Save my post to poke fun at me when they have a criminal indictment. But I don’t believe for a second they would be posting this in websites if they had a legit criminal conspiracy. Lmao.

 

Oh, so you mean like the photos of Trump’s docs.

 

Because a Republican congressperson said it.

It really is that simple. We know that from experience. If it comes from a Republican congressperson, it's a lie.

 

Didn’t work, head of company is on the run for his corruption

 

Some. But based on the charges I have seen. We haven’t seen the evidence yet

 

Sounds like Hunter hustled them. Good for him.

 

They only leaked almost everything they've ever had against the bad orange man. Lol

 

Your think you have seen all the evidence. I think your going to love the trials

Anyways. Let’s hear the tapes. Seems simple enough.


https://twitter.com/levparnas/status/1681792307748642816?s=46&t=VRLVQhfM2aLbXMRuoxunWQ

 

Fake news.

Sarcasm alert.... Only democrat congress people tell the truth. I've also got a bridge for sale for only $5,000 Bitcoin

 

Congrats, you now have your very own, much better formatted, Steele Dossier

Now, you just need to present some proof that "We hired Hunter to protect us from his dad" and "Don't worry Hunter will take care of all of those Issues through his dad."

 

I think the point is that prosecutors/investigators who intend to use evidence to prosecute people don't normally behave like that. They use the ambiguity of the evidence that they have to gather more evidence until it's time for discovery. Easy to understand example: Like if a murder happened, and the details of the murder are not public, they can then use the details of the murder to help them find credible leads/suspects and determine whether people are being honest with them (or get them to tell them things they don't already know) by pretending they know more or less than they really do. If somebody starts saying things only the killer would know, it's hugely helpful, but if the information had gone public, it would become useless. Just as an example.

If the target of a prosecution knows what the prosecution knows at the beginning, they can craft their lies to account for the evidence and minimize their culpability.

 

OR

You can believe the man currently ranked as the 2nd dumbest US Senator ** on this topic

"This could be coming from a very corrupt oligarch who could be making this stuff up"

** My personal ranking

 

So if its a nothing burger, we impeach, right?

 

FBI info doesn't do it for you? First-hand witness tells what he saw with nothing to gain?
Of course not. It's all just misinformation and none of that ever happened. Why, Joe even said Hunter was the smartest man he knew.
That tells you a lot about Joe.

 

Even if it’s what he really thought, it didn’t work lol they got nothing out of it.

 

Let’s assume they did hire Hunter in order to get some special treatment, they didn’t get it.

In January 2015, Prosecutor General Vitaly Yaremaannounced that Zlochevsky had been put on the wanted list for alleged financial corruption.