Anti- globalist does not mean isolationist.
1 Like
That you should not see yourself as the ultimate measure of clever?
to oust [someone the personnel also behind the anti-Trump Russia-gate hoax alleged was] a corrupt prosecutor that [they alleged] was soliciting bribes and was wanted out of his position by the [globalism- backing] US [administration of the time] and several [globalism- backing] EU governments.â
No quid pro quo? Potentially knocking out his Democrat opponent?
Because having own-pocket-lining officials administering in the name of the US is never good for âwe the peopleâ in the US. All constitutionalist citizens should be concerned about the caliber of officials filling the nationâs high offices.
Ivanka and her clothing line???
The circumstances are Biden is made point man for Ukraine, including delivering funds in 2014. A couple of months late Biden is given cushy high paying job in Ukraine. Later, prosecutor looking at Hunterâs company is fired at insistance and threat from Joe. There are other reasons besides Hunter that many wanted the prosecutor fired.
Likely no one will ever find a sealed hidden contract proving a quid pro quo. Just like lobbyists in this country, deals are a little more tacit than that.
Seriously, do you think that Hunter getting that job and Biden being the Ukraine point man for the admnistration are not connected in any way?
Some just donât get that! Letâs not forget what Biden said himself talking to supporters on the campaign trail âwe want truth, not factsâ! 
If you have actual proof of anyone asking Ukraine to fabricate any charges you should contact the FBI immediately.
And I wouldnât mind a link to your evidence, either.
Do you have any evidence that the prosecutor in question was looking into Hunter Bidenâs company?
No one else does.
No. Iâm not.
âShokin told me in written answers to questions that, before he was fired as general prosecutor, he had made âspecific plansâ for the investigation that âincluded interrogations and other crime-investigation procedures into all members of the executive board, including Hunter Biden.ââ
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived
But, in any case, I was told for two and a half years that you had the investigation first to find out the answers.
They donât want facts, they want their truths!
Well, yeah. Got any.
I believe, best I can tell, is that Trump was asking for proof, one way or the other, was he not?
Somehow this has been interpreted to mean he wanted a fore gone conclusion.
Iâve seen the video clip of Biden bragging about successfully using the threat of withholding loan guarantees to have the Ukrainian fired. And Bidenâs son was dishonorably discharged from the Navy for cocaine abuse and almost immediately landed 50,000 dollar a month position on the board of a Ukrainian company âŚ
Biden received a second waiver because of past drug use and drug-related arrests. One month after commissioning, Biden tested positive for cocaine use and was discharged from the Navy reserve in February 2014. ⌠In a statement released by his attorney, Biden later acknowledged his discharge .
On April 18, 2014, Burisma Holdings announced Bidenâs appointment to its board of directors in a press release.[19] Hunter Biden stepped down from the board when his term expired in April 2019.[20]
Plenty of smoke worth investigatingâŚ
What evidence have you seen, other than dubious unverified msm reportage of a whistle-blower supposedly reporting hearsay to the IG?
Thatâs it? Thatâs the entirety of the evidence? This guys answer to a written questIon?
The investigation wasnât active, but he had made âspecific plansââŚ
How inconvenient that he didnât let anyone else know about these specific plansâŚ
That makes about as much sense as any of the other idiotic crap that Trump and Giuliani want is to believe about this.
Beats the âevidenceâ of the Great Russian Collusion Theory that lasted two and a half years.
But arenât you supposed to to the investigation to find the evidence, like we were told?
1 Like
You think the statement (not even under oath) of a corrupt prosecutor has any credibility?
Are you being serious?
