Lock him up! CNN reports Trump to be indicted

All I said was that it would be a poop show, someone with 14 hours trial experience as a judge presiding over one of the most watched and important cases in US history, Not sure what that is excusing, seems like pretty basic common sense.

 

I did have my year wrong of when Hunter was appointed to the Burisma Board. It was 2014. But the rest of what I posted is true. Shokin had investigated Burisma prior to Hunter being appointed. And at the time Joe Biden pushed to get Shokin ousted, the investigation was dormant.

You are just rehashing right-wing echo chamber allegations that have already been investigated, with Joe Biden being cleared of any wrongdoing.

An election-year investigation by Senate Republicans into corruption allegations against Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son, Hunter, involving Ukraine found no evidence of improper influence or wrongdoing by the former vice president, closing out an inquiry its leaders had hoped would tarnish the Democratic presidential nominee.
​

The alleged tape comes from 2020, and it's existence has never been proven. If it does exist, and it does implicate Joe Biden in a $5 million corruption scheme, then it should be investigated. But all evidence to date, including what the Johnson Committee found, shows Biden didn't do anything wrong.

Now, compare that to the indictment against Trump. Night and day.

 

Just having some there (which seems so much harder with anything Trump).

 

That's not news. Could be destroyed, could be stored somewhere in Germany, Ukraine... maybe never did exist.

But if the FBI was given reason to believe such tapes did exist, one might naively figure they ought to investigate, and attempt to determine if such exists or not.

But then there's the thing that might render such an expectation...naive.

 

Is this standard procedure to publicly announce that they have not yet recovered some piece of possible evidence for an ongoing investigation? Doesn’t seem like something we should expect to my intuition. I think most of all of what we learned about the Trump investigation from the DOJ came from court filings, right?

 

Can you please post this crap in another thread? You have derailed this thread long enough. Maybe a mod can help get this back on track.

 

I dont, neither does Grassley nor anyone else, hence the congressional inquiry, but the whistleblower indicated the tapes exist(ed), and that that it was covered up, and not investigated, if i understand correctly.

 

Is this the same whistleblower that no one is able to locate? Wake me up when you have something actually newsworthy

 

Pictured: J. Edgar Hoover on hearing that his spirit lives on …

 

Well, you said Shokin cleared Hunter and that wasn't true and your other problem is the guy who Biden pushed to replace Shokin with actually flew to New York in 2019 and spilled the beans on Biden. Both prosecutors, Shokin and Lutsenko stated they had evidence of Biden taking the bribe. Again, if your son was on the board of a Ukrainian company in 2014, it probably wasn't a good thing. Ukraine was a hotbed of corruption and just having a son working on the board there with no previous experience in the field, while you're serving as the president's point man on Ukraine, just screams corruption. If you're going to ignore all of that, don't talk to me about Donald Trump. Most of these politicians are corrupt to the core.

 

It's no different than the 2020 election theories. Unsubstantiated garbage combined with conspiracy theories parading as proof for gullible doofuses.

 

When the US Congress is the one asking, yes, the agency should at the very least make a full disclosure to Congress, not cover up.

 

Because we're not able to locate a whistleblower, that means something? I'm positive the whistleblower was quite clear that he/she didn't want their ID revealed for fear of retribution. In fact, most whistleblowers will only do so on the premise they remain anonymous. These weak attempts to discredit a whistleblower the agency has already said is credible are troubling.

 

Maybe because they have an open investigation on Hunter, and MTG, along with other Republicans IMMEDIATELY blabbed to the press about what they saw. If they didn't redact names and sources there was a reasonably high chance those same people would have named those sources to the press.

 

Wrong. Shokin cleared Burisma in a 2012 investigation. Two years before Hunter was appointed to the Board. Lutsenko is also on record saying he knows of zero wrongdoing on either Hunter or Joe Biden's part in Ukraine.

In an interview, Yuri Lutsenko said while he was Ukraine’s prosecutor general he told Rudolph W. Giuliani that he would be happy to cooperate if the FBI or other U.S. authorities began their own investigation of the former vice president and his son Hunter but insisted they had not broken any Ukrainian laws to his knowledge.
​

Lutsenko did talk to Guiliani on multiple occasions, and stated he was happy to help with any investigation. But he had no evidence against either Biden. So again, you have your facts incorrect.

Now, read the indictment against Trump. Look at the actual evidence. Notice the difference. Everything in the indictment the DOJ and Smith are prepared to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence against the Biden's? Flimsy is the first word that comes to mind.

 

Sorry...we interrupting your trump hating porn session?

 

​

Both Shokin and Lutsenko contradicted themselves though. The facts are what they are. Hunter Biden didn't have any legitimate reason to be so highly compensated by a random Ukrainian gas company, an industry he knew nothing about and located where his father just happens to be running point on.

In January, 2019, Giuliani spoke by phone with Viktor Shokin, the previous prosecutor general, about alleged misconduct by the Bidens, which set him on a new path of inquiry. That month, Lutsenko flew to New York, and, in the course of several days, spoke with Giuliani at his Park Avenue office. Parnas and his associate Igor Fruman were there, too. Lutsenko knew what would interest Giuliani, so he had brought along financial information purportedly drawn from bank records, which, he said, proved that Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company, had paid Hunter Biden and his business partner to “lobby” Joe Biden. “Lutsenko came in with guns blazing,” Parnas told me. “He came in with records showing us the money trail. That’s when it became real.” Giuliani seized on Lutsenko’s claims, offering to help him secure high-level meetings in Washington and encouraging him to pursue investigations beneficial to Trump.

The Ukrainian Prosecutor Behind Trump’s Impeachment

 

Where's the evidence? Where's the tape? Where's the paper trail?

As for Hunter, he has a lobbying background. And most Board Members aren't experts in the vertical for the business. They are appointed because of other reasons, including being an expert in a specific field that the business might need. Or fill a void a company needs. Think Shaq is an expert in running a chain pizza place? No. But he's on Papa John's Board because the founder of Papa John's made some racist comments. Having Shaq, a literal larger than life African American on the board, mitigates some of the damage done. Hunter may not have been on Burisma's board if his last name was Jones, but he was a partner in a business that had invested in Burisma, and his lobbying background could help in the energy industry, which often employs a bunch of lobbyists.

I also wouldn't trust anything that comes out of Parnas' mouth. He plead guilty to giving investors false information and is serving 20 months. If he lied to investors, it's not far fetched he lied about having evidence against Biden. Again, where is this evidence?

Now, compare all this against what the DOJ has against Trump.