Some Thoughts On Hunter Biden, “The Big Guy”, and Those that Dismissed This…..

[bambino]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Notice how WTF always pops up whenever you call someone a "weasel"?

He's the leader of the pack!

Professor Poofter is the head Meerkat


https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/meerkat_manor

[bambino]

Hunter Biden tagged along on Air Force Two with his father during a December 2013 visit to China. On this visit, Hunter met Chinese financier Jonathan Li, who ran the private-equity fund Bohai Capital. Hunter and his partner Devon Archer had earlier discussed a plan with Li for investing Chinese cash outside the Communist nation.

During the 2013 visit, Hunter had even arranged ahandshakebetween Li and the then US Vice President at the hotel of the American delegation.

There's ample open source information on these trips, and in conjunction with the laptop contents, it doesn't take Colombo to solve the case.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

so your defense is denying your own posts as "fake". interesting approach counselor.

did you learn that watching re-runs of "Perry Mason"?

It's called the Joy Reid defense strategy lol.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/claims...ert-fall-apart

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Hey chungy, does this refresh your memory?

I said exactly the same thing this morning, in different words. So.. MAJOR FAIL

[bambino]

https://t.me/freedomforcebattalion/17758

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... Not exactly, mate. ... YOU believed the laptop was FAKE. Remember?

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

Nope, how can I remember something that didn't happen?

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

Posted June 6, 2021: I'm not buying the Hunter shit for now. Those ''the Big Guy'' references look faker than a $3 bill.

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

I said exactly the same thing this morning, in different words. So... MAJOR FAIL

Really? You're splitting hairs to double down on stupid?

You want to claim you never said the LAPTOP was fake, but you still think Hunter's own emails from his now-authenticated laptop ARE somehow fake?

Are you sure that's the argument you want to run with, Major Chungy Fail?

To quote Waco... "did you learn that watching re-runs of Perry Mason?"

[WTF]

Who gives a fuck?

This has about as much chance of implicating Joe as Trump had maintaining 3% GDP!

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by lustylad

It's called the Joy Reid defense strategy lol.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/claims...ert-fall-apart

what a fascinating reid .. er ried .. no read! that's it! bahhaaaa


let's cut to the chase .. more adventurous posters can reid the whole article which is quite interesting. Eddie Murphy along with Will Smith part of the hollyweird down low gay community? shocking!


the CliffsNotes ..


Today Nichols says Reid and her team no longer believe the archive was hacked, and the Internet Archive has denied any such manipulation could have occurred. “We found nothing to indicate tampering or hacking of the Wayback Machine versions,” an archiver for the site said in a statement.


That means the supposed hacker was posting alongside Reid for years. According to Reichmann, that even included inserting updates in Reid’s live blog of the Alito hearing in January 2006. Reichmann claimed that the hacker was responsible for two consecutive updates sandwiched between Reid’s legitimate ones. The updates report that Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch was using his questioning time to metaphorically fellate the judge. “Oh, look, Orrin Hatch is putting on his Supreme Court knee pads to save Alito,” one line read. The post’s title, which Reichmann says the hacker changed, was “Brokeback Committee Room,” another reference to the film about gay lovers. All the contested material in the post is present in the earliest archived copy, which was captured the day after the hearing.


All of this alleged hacking apparently went unnoticed at the time by Reid.



That’s an extraordinary claim, and so far the bits and pieces of evidence offered for it have not stood up to scrutiny when they’ve been specific enough to test. If she wasn’t hacked, it doesn’t necessarily follow that Reid is lying. Her decision to hire a security consultant to investigate the posts, and a lawyer to demand the access logs for her blog account, suggests she genuinely believes at least some of the posts were planted. After 12 years and tens of thousands of written words, Reid simply may not remember.


It’s possible that in the end Reid will discover her adversary isn’t a determined hacker, but a far more dogged foe: The Joy-Ann Reid of years past, writing in a voice she can no longer recognize as her own.


—with additional reporting by Andrew Kirell and Maxwell Tani

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Without reading back a bunch of pages. I presume you admit you’re just speculating regarding Joe Biden’s involvement.


Well counselor, if we were in a court of law and I said "here is an interview Bobulinski did with the media and told us he said the very same thing to the FBI, would that be "speculation" or first hand testimony? I presented "the evidence" of an interview. Now I'm no English major but I don't believe that an interview that millions of people witnessed and millions have seen and read the transcript of on line, is "speculation". So no, I'm not speculating on the Bobulinski interview, it happened. Here is an interview, that as an attorney, you would kill to have since first person testimony is surely better than what you say happened, that Hunter merely told Bobulinski these things and Bobulinski never met Joe. There are at least 5 people that can testify as to whether that even ever happened or not. That is not speculation.


What is "speculation" I grant you, is what may come of all this. I am speculating as to the outcome, I am not speculating as to the evidence that has already been presented to the public and to the FBI.


That everything appears to just be Hunter running a game on people that believed that Hunter could get his father to influence anything. That aside from this Bubbles did you keep quoting, no one else with any credibility has involved Joe.


That's pretty funny counselor, since you just "speculated" that nobody else has involved Joe. You don't know that for a fact, do you counselor?


Moreover, didn’t Bubbles say he never met or spoke with Joe about these things he claimed to implicate Joe in and that his knowledge is based on what Hunter told him.


Nope, but thanks for confirming that you either never watched the interview or if you did, are making up shit you know not to be true. Bobulinski says that he meet Joe Biden, introduced himself, shook Joe's hand and told us what happened next. He was there as a job interview because no matter what deal Hunter wanted to put together, Joe had final say on who would be involved. Hunter wanted Bobulinski to be CEO on this deal and he had to get Joe's approval, hence Joe had to meet Bobulinski in person. That is not speculation counselor, I watch the words come out of his mouth on live TV. Go pull up the interview and get back to us counselor.


And I don’t know about you but I have golfed and partied with plenty of people with no discussions of note occurring.


Ever told a jury that can you can make certain "inferences" when presented with a picture of a group of men standing together, father, son and Hunter's business partners, that Hunter introduced these men to Joe, as his business partners and then everybody in the picture will be called to the stand to testify who knew what. That isn't speculation counselor, that's exactly what would happen in a trial of Hunter Biden. What result may come from the testimony is indeed speculation and juries speculate all day long on whether they can draw one of two conclusions from the picture. Hunter did or did not introduce his father to those men as his business partners. Now here is where you jump in and say "that doesn't prove Joe knew anything about the deals Hunter was making"! True, but what it does say is that if Hunter did introduce his partners to his father that day, Joe lied about never having meet Hunters business partners. One lie, maybe no big deal, two lies and the jury starts to squirm in their seats. Three lies, four lies, how many lies does it take to lose a jury counselor?


I shouldn't have to explain this to you counselor. You catch a person in one lie, then two and after that you can present to the jury that if this guy Joe has now lied twice to you, want else might he be lying about? This is where it all changes from the realm of the courtroom to the impeachment hearing where no crime will need to be proven to convince Senators that as President, Joe Biden lied to the American people many many times and it will be up to you Senators as to whether that becomes "un-Presidential" and worthy of removal from office.

Just being in a pic doesn’t really suggest much unless you believe every that is in a photo with another person knows everything involving that person.



You are right. That is what testimony is for and I am speculating as to the outcome of any testimony.


I’m with speculation just like the next guy.


Yes, I just saw you do it but when you say I do it, somehow it is what, less valid than when you do it? Again, the interview from a first hand account of a meeting, is not speculation, it is evidence. It just hasn't been presented in a court of law YET. Doesn't mean it didn't happen.


The difference though is that I understand it’s speculation and I don’t go stating it as fact nor do I believe my speculation to be the truth no matter how good it sounds to me. More importantly, I feel no need to argue or debate anyones speculation. We can argue and even dispute facts or known information. It’s nonsense to debate a made up possible fact since - it’s made up.



And there you go speculating again. And you just stated it as fact, didn't you? Amazing how somebody trained in the law can stumble so many times in one post.


It’s like debating whether Superman or The Hulk is stronger. No one’s gives a fuck because neither are real.

I’ll repeat what I wrote and maintained in every Hunter thread - don’t vote for Hunter. If Hunter did something illegal, Hunter will go to jail for it. Otherwise, don’t really give a fuck because Joe doesn’t appear to have done anything wrong.

Joe doesn't appear to have done anything wrong unless you look at the fact of first hand testimony that Joe did meet Bobulinski and lied about it. He did meet Hunters business partners that he lied about and then we'll see if Joe ever mentioned all that money that Hunter gave him to fix up his home and pay bills but THAT is just speculation for now..

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by WTF

Who gives a fuck?

This has about as much chance of implicating Joe as my maintaining an erection!

Hmmm... sounds like it might be time for you to shuffle over to your favorite gloryhole for more therapy.

[bambino]

LEVIN: We need a Biden Crime Family Committee and we need it now. It is my contention we have a man in the Oval Office who is by all evidence, compromised


https://t.me/ChristianPatriotNews/8518

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Joe doesn't appear to have done anything wrong unless you look at the fact of first hand testimony that Joe did meet Bobulinski and lied about it. He did meet Hunters business partners that he lied about and then we'll see if Joe ever mentioned all that money that Hunter gave him to fix up his home and pay bills but THAT is just speculation for now..

Since you clearly can’t read. Let’s make this simple. What did bubbles testify to that JOE actually did or said to him. What you seem to be constantly referring back to from Bubbles doesn’t say he was told any of these things by Joe.

Did Joe tell Bubbles anything about his needing to approve him or that he was somehow involved in the business. Refer us to the part of Bubbles testimony or statement of that. If all you have is Bubbles saying the met and shook hands he’s in no different place than about a million other people.

I look forward to some specificity that Joe told Bubbles something interesting. Was Joe introduced as the Big Guy? Did Bubbles pass some money to Joe. Come with the goods.

Or is this more implication from nothing.

[Tiny]

This sounds like the Steele Dossier to me, a grain of truth surrounded by a whole lot of bull shit. I'd tend to agree with Chung Tran -- the Big Guy thing was probably Hunter angling for another 10%.

Forbes estimates Joe Biden's net worth is $8 million based on an analysis of his financial disclosure reports. They've tracked down $17.3 million in legitimate income, from speeches and books and the like, that he received since he left the office of the Vice President. It's hard to see how he could have gotten tens of millions out of China or the Ukraine or wherever and stashed it without anyone knowing.

Now did he provide Hunter with opportunities to make money that he never would have had without a father who was Vice President? Undoubtedly. And some of Biden's help, like wowing Hunter's Chinese business partners by dragging him along on an official Vice Presidential visit to China, was unscrupulous, and maybe even illegal. Still I don't think Joe himself benefited.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michela...h=43753dbe461b

[bambino]

This pesky Bobolinski guy;


https://t.me/freedomforcebattalion/17766

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by WTF

Trump's dick down your throat is strong with you...

your fascination with other peoples dicks is a sight to behold, trump in particular. lol.


you have homo tendencies for sure. still cant get him out of your head.