Hunter Biden Laptop

[JoeWeber 2,299]

30 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

If you can't lead your children or spouse down the right path; how in the fuck are you going to lead a whole country?!?!?!

/

/

/

/

/

/

Sorry, it was too good to pass up. Flame On!

If my old man had a laptop he'd have smacked me down the right path with it.

[richravizza 25]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Don’t you think it’s is at least a bit unusual?  What would be the purpose?

 If half of those who said the laptop story made them reconsider, switched their votes Biden would have lost by millions 

LOL.... No, not at all.

Have a heart man, It's always been about taking cares of the children, all their poor poor dependents.

On point:

While switching would be inconceivable in most.

In the key swings, a simple non vote would have changed the outcome.Don't know if you've seen this, I posted it, but like a lab leak conspiracy theory, The hard Left response was " if all hats were blue" and disregarded as such.

When you have the time for a rabbit hole.

 

 

 We'll be happy to give you more info about "our political contributions in kind",but not under oath,thank you. LOL

 Pravda conrade

 

 

[SkyDekker 1,122]

6 minutes ago, richravizza said:

LOL.... No, not at all.

Have a heart man, It's always been about taking cares of the children, all their poor poor dependents.

On point:

While switching would be inconceivable in most.

In the key swings, a simple non vote would have changed the outcome.Don't know if you've seen this, I posted it, but like a lab leak conspiracy theory, The hard Left response was " if all hats were blue" and disregarded as such.

When you have the time for a rabbit hole.

 

 

 We'll be happy to give you more info about "our political contributions in kind",but not under oath,thank you. LOL

 Pravda conrade

 

 

I think one needs, at minimum, to microdose LSD to try and make sense of any of what you post. 

[richravizza 25]

In eight minutes, you must be a time traveler,or the video is censored from your eyes like the corruption.Do tell us of Hunters business prowess competence and successes.

Edited March 25, 2022 by richravizza

[jakee 1,254]

12 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Don’t you think it’s is at least a bit unusual?  What would be the purpose?

You’re going round in circles. A bunch of people literally just told you that they all do it and it’s not unusual. And then you said ‘but you’re not doing anything nefarious’ and they said ‘neither is he as far as we know’ so now you’re back to ‘isn’t it unusual though?’ 
 

Surely you know this is what you’re doing, in lieu of having a real point to make?

[kallend 1,623]

2 hours ago, jakee said:

You’re going round in circles. A bunch of people literally just told you that they all do it and it’s not unusual. And then you said ‘but you’re not doing anything nefarious’ and they said ‘neither is he as far as we know’ so now you’re back to ‘isn’t it unusual though?’ 
 

Surely you know this is what you’re doing, in lieu of having a real point to make?

You bring it upon yourself.  You KNOW what he is.

[airdvr 197]

Still finding it humorous that the left seems to think they are immune from being mislead.

I have no idea if there's anything there but the timing of events suggests different.  I guess we'll see what the investigation uncovers if anything.

[brenthutch 383]

4 hours ago, jakee said:

You’re going round in circles. A bunch of people literally just told you that they all do it and it’s not unusual. And then you said ‘but you’re not doing anything nefarious’ and they said ‘neither is he as far as we know’ so now you’re back to ‘isn’t it unusual though?’ 
 

Surely you know this is what you’re doing, in lieu of having a real point to make?

Two people said they shared an account with a child but NOBODY said they were an elected official sharing an account and having their bills paid by a 50+ year old being investigated for: tax fraud, money laundering, and illegally acting as a foreign agent.  
So, there’s that.  Let’s just wait and see how the FBI investigation plays out.

You guys never demanded the same burden of proof when the last administration was in office 

[SkyDekker 1,122]

2 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

You guys never demanded the same burden of proof when the last administration was in office

You mean the administration in which a whole whack of them got convicted and then pardoned by the president?

[brenthutch 383]

28 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

You mean the administration in which a whole whack of them got convicted and then pardoned by the president?

I was referring to the families 

[SkyDekker 1,122]

3 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I was referring to the families 

Trump made his family part of the administration. Biden has not. Why are you asking for people not part of the administration to be treated the same as people who are part of the administration?

[brenthutch 383]

“York Times on March 17 was political dynamite—the information on the laptop that veterans of the national security establishment claimed was Russian disinformation was, in fact, exactly what reports published in the New York Post in October 2020 said they were: evidence of the Biden family's influence peddling abroad, that the senior Biden was aware of his son's activities and might well have profited from them.”

https://www.newsweek.com/burying-hunter-biden-laptop-story-was-journalistic-malpractice-opinion-1691437
 

Newsweek calls it Journalistic Malpractice.

The FBI will get some help next year when Pelosi looses the gavel and the Rs start investigations.

BTW looks like Hunter was on Joe’s shadow cabinet 

Edited March 25, 2022 by brenthutch

[SkyDekker 1,122]

11 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Newsweek calls it Journalistic Malpractice.

No they don't. Considering you don't understand that basic concept, not sure you should try and delve too much into "journalistic malpractice".

[brenthutch 383]

11 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

No they don't. Considering you don't understand that basic concept, not sure you should try and delve too much into "journalistic malpractice".

Deny and counter accuse, nice.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

Deny and counter accuse, nice.

Not deny, your statement is simply factually incorrect. If you still don't understand it, click on your link (for once) then actually read the opinion piece (for once) and make sure you actually read all the way to the end (for once).

Considering you need all this hand holding to figure out a very simple concept shows that you are not well equipped to understand what would or would not constitute "journalistic malpractice".

[kallend 1,623]

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

You mean the administration in which a whole whack of them got convicted and then pardoned by the president?

Recent administrations with the MOST criminal indictments:

Trump (Republican) — 215

Nixon (Republican) — 76

Reagan (Republican) — 26

Recent administrations with the LEAST criminal indictments:

Obama (Democrat) — 0

Carter (Democrat) — 1

Clinton (Democrat) — 2

Notice a pattern?

[airdvr 197]

29 minutes ago, kallend said:

Recent administrations with the MOST criminal indictments:

Trump (Republican) — 215

Nixon (Republican) — 76

Reagan (Republican) — 26

Recent administrations with the LEAST criminal indictments:

Obama (Democrat) — 0

Carter (Democrat) — 1

Clinton (Democrat) — 2

Notice a pattern?

I'd say one possibility is the Dems are more adept at covering their illegal activities.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

1 minute ago, airdvr said:

I'd say one possibility is the Dems are more adept at covering their illegal activities.

Of course you'd say that. Why not? You know, just sayin'.

[airdvr 197]

4 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Of course you'd say that. Why not? You know, just sayin'.

I said it's a possibility...ya know...just sayin'

[JoeWeber 2,299]

1 minute ago, airdvr said:

I said it's a possibility...ya know...just sayin'

Exactly. You really aren't saying it, just putting it out there. If someone else wants to get all confused and repeat it as if it were fact that's on them not you. You were just sayin', and in perfect innocence, too.

[airdvr 197]

3 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Exactly. You really aren't saying it, just putting it out there. If someone else wants to get all confused and repeat it as if it were fact that's on them not you. You were just sayin', and in perfect innocence, too.

Correct.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

25 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I'd say one possibility is the Dems are more adept at covering their illegal activities.

Yeah that makes perfect sense, law enforcement agencies are notoriously liberal.

[kallend 1,623]

42 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I'd say one possibility is the Dems are more adept at covering their illegal activities.

Occam's razor would suggest otherwise.

[jakee 1,254]

5 hours ago, airdvr said:

Still finding it humorous that the left seems to think they are immune from being mislead.

Mislead about what?

5 hours ago, airdvr said:

I have no idea if there's anything there but the timing of events suggests different.

The timing of what events?

[SkyDekker 1,122]

I don't think it is a "coincidence" that Hunter's laptop is being brought back just as it comes out that a SC Justice's wife was planning an insurrection with the President's Chief of Staff. And that same SC Justice is the only Justice who voted against making materials available to the Jan 6th committee.

I think you have much bigger problems than trying to decide if Hunter Biden made money cause his last name is Biden.