March 23, 20241 yr 2 minutes ago, Arthur Jackson said: I don't know why I even bother You believe what you choose to believe.
March 23, 20241 yr 30 minutes ago, Procus said: So you discredit Tony Bobulinkski's testimony https://nypost.com/2024/02/13/news/read-tony-bobulinskis-blistering-impeachment-testimony-the-biden-family-business-was-joe-biden-period/ Read Tony Bobulinski’s blistering impeachment testimony: ‘The Biden family business was Joe Biden, period’ Yeah, we already know what Bobulinski's opinions are lmao.
March 23, 20241 yr 7 minutes ago, Boogyman said: Yeah, we already know what Bobulinski's opinions are lmao. I don't know why @Procus is making a federal casing out of it. (sorry, I'm out. I'm just totally out of them )
March 23, 20241 yr 24 minutes ago, Arthur Jackson said: I don't know why @Procus is making a federal casing out of it. (sorry, I'm out. I'm just totally out of them ) Don't mind Procus, he's just the wurst.
March 23, 20241 yr 1 minute ago, we_gotta_believe said: Don't mind Procus, he's just the wurst. I can't believe I ran dry on this one, I'm very disappointed in myself.
March 23, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, Boogyman said: Yeah, we already know what Bobulinski's opinions are lmao. Statements of fact are not opinions
March 23, 20241 yr 14 minutes ago, Procus said: Statements of fact are not opinions neither are hot dog puns
March 23, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, Procus said: Statements of fact are not opinions He literally stated it was his opinion that Joe was involved. But that he never directly witnessed a connection. Even if he had, which he did not, "eyewitness" testimony of a single person who has motives to lie about it is not much. You are ****e even as a fake lawyer.
March 23, 20241 yr 32 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: He literally stated it was his opinion that Joe was involved. But that he never directly witnessed a connection. Even if he had, which he did not, "eyewitness" testimony of a single person who has motives to lie about it is not much. You are ****e even as a fake lawyer. See my thumb, boy you're dumb https://abcnews.go.com/US/biden-critic-worked-hunter-tells-lawmakers-joe-biden/story?id=107195062 "Biden was more than a participant in and beneficiary of his family's business; he was an enabler, despite being buffered by a complex scheme to maintain plausible deniability." https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharyfolk/2024/02/13/who-is-tony-bobulinski-hunter-bidens-business-partner-testifies-in-biden-impeachment-inquiry/?sh=302cf1506d42 "In October 2020, Bobulinski came forward at a press conference claiming to have "emails, WhatsApp chats, agreements, documents and other evidence” that showed then-Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden profited off his son’s business ventures in China, allegedly cashing in on his family name and status as the former vice president."
March 23, 20241 yr 24 minutes ago, Procus said: See my thumb, boy you're dumb https://abcnews.go.com/US/biden-critic-worked-hunter-tells-lawmakers-joe-biden/story?id=107195062 "Biden was more than a participant in and beneficiary of his family's business; he was an enabler, despite being buffered by a complex scheme to maintain plausible deniability." https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharyfolk/2024/02/13/who-is-tony-bobulinski-hunter-bidens-business-partner-testifies-in-biden-impeachment-inquiry/?sh=302cf1506d42 "In October 2020, Bobulinski came forward at a press conference claiming to have "emails, WhatsApp chats, agreements, documents and other evidence” that showed then-Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden profited off his son’s business ventures in China, allegedly cashing in on his family name and status as the former vice president." I sure hope Biden gets impeached for this info, oh wait.
March 23, 20241 yr 56 minutes ago, Procus said: In October 2020, Bobulinski came forward at a press conference claiming to have "emails, WhatsApp chats, agreements, documents and other evidence” that showed then-Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden profited off his son’s business ventures in China, Yeah? And how'd that work out for him? I mean, such irrefutable evidence ought to move the needle, amirite?
March 24, 20241 yr 15 hours ago, Procus said: See my thumb, boy you're dumb https://abcnews.go.com/US/biden-critic-worked-hunter-tells-lawmakers-joe-biden/story?id=107195062 "Biden was more than a participant in and beneficiary of his family's business; he was an enabler, despite being buffered by a complex scheme to maintain plausible deniability." https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharyfolk/2024/02/13/who-is-tony-bobulinski-hunter-bidens-business-partner-testifies-in-biden-impeachment-inquiry/?sh=302cf1506d42 "In October 2020, Bobulinski came forward at a press conference claiming to have "emails, WhatsApp chats, agreements, documents and other evidence” that showed then-Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden profited off his son’s business ventures in China, allegedly cashing in on his family name and status as the former vice president." And yet, to date, he has not provided any direct evidence of wrongdoing by Joe. Zero. When pressed, he had exactly two interactions with Joe Biden and in neither case was anything untoward discussed. And every other person who was involved in the deals Bobulinski was is on record calling him a liar. This is not "evidence," it's little more than hearsay. And hearsay that is not corroborated by any evidence and directly contradicted by other witnesses. "Lawyer"
March 24, 20241 yr Bidenomics strikes again. Bull Market confirmed. Biden brings stability to long term investors. The BINO will destroy it.
March 24, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said: And yet, to date, he has not provided any direct evidence of wrongdoing by Joe. Zero. When pressed, he had exactly two interactions with Joe Biden and in neither case was anything untoward discussed. And every other person who was involved in the deals Bobulinski was is on record calling him a liar. This is not "evidence," it's little more than hearsay. And hearsay that is not corroborated by any evidence and directly contradicted by other witnesses. "Lawyer" You show how ignorant you are about the law. . . again. There are two types of evidence, direct and circumstantial. His testimony is direct evidence. Don't spout off about things you know nothing about.
March 24, 20241 yr 29 minutes ago, Procus said: You show how ignorant you are about the law. . . again. There are two types of evidence, direct and circumstantial. His testimony is direct evidence. Don't spout off about things you know nothing about. So an impeachment should happen this week then
March 24, 20241 yr Just now, DaEagles4Life said: So an impeachment should happen this week then I didn't say that. I personally am against impeachment. It's an exercise in futility since there will never be a conviction. And while Bobulinski's testimony is direct evidence, there can be contravening direct evidence as well. Just don't say there isn't direct evidence of wrongdoing when there is. I personally believe Biden is very corrupt and not qualified to serve due to corruption and both physical and mental limitations. But this testimony needs to be corroborated with more to make a good case for impeachment. He is, however, a good candidate for invocation of the 25th amendment.
March 24, 20241 yr 35 minutes ago, Procus said: You show how ignorant you are about the law. . . again. There are two types of evidence, direct and circumstantial. His testimony is direct evidence. Don't spout off about things you know nothing about. Again dope: he did not testify to ever witnessing wrongdoing by Joe. Literally nobody is disputing that Hunter and Jim were trading on the family name. But literally zero evidence has been presented by Bobulinski or otherwise that Joe Biden benefited from any of this personally, or that any of Hunter or Jim Biden's dealmakings impacted policy. Joe Biden had a 10 minute sit down with Bobulinski and talked about their families. That is what Bobulinski says. The rest is his own opinions - which are not facts.
March 24, 20241 yr 15 minutes ago, Procus said: I didn't say that. I personally am against impeachment. It's an exercise in futility since there will never be a conviction. And while Bobulinski's testimony is direct evidence, there can be contravening direct evidence as well. Just don't say there isn't direct evidence of wrongdoing when there is. I personally believe Biden is very corrupt and not qualified to serve due to corruption and both physical and mental limitations. But this testimony needs to be corroborated with more to make a good case for impeachment. He is, however, a good candidate for invocation of the 25th amendment. Show me where Bobulinski testifies that he witnessed wrongdoing by Joe Biden. Go ahead. Not where he talks about "the Biden family" in the abstract, or what Hunter and Jim were saying. Show any bit of direct evidence that Joe Biden committed a crime or even acted in a way that showed he was directly benefiting from Hunter and Jim's deals. Notwithstanding the fact that Joe met Bobulinski when he was out of office as a private citizen, there was ZERO discussed about any deals. Joe and Bobulinski literally discussed their families, Joe thanked Bobulinski for his service, and that was the entirety of it. The rest is speculation and conjecture by Bobulinski.
March 24, 20241 yr 18 hours ago, Procus said: See my thumb, boy you're dumb https://abcnews.go.com/US/biden-critic-worked-hunter-tells-lawmakers-joe-biden/story?id=107195062 "Biden was more than a participant in and beneficiary of his family's business; he was an enabler, despite being buffered by a complex scheme to maintain plausible deniability." https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharyfolk/2024/02/13/who-is-tony-bobulinski-hunter-bidens-business-partner-testifies-in-biden-impeachment-inquiry/?sh=302cf1506d42 "In October 2020, Bobulinski came forward at a press conference claiming to have "emails, WhatsApp chats, agreements, documents and other evidence” that showed then-Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden profited off his son’s business ventures in China, allegedly cashing in on his family name and status as the former vice president." Did he lose the flash drive as well?
March 24, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, Procus said: You show how ignorant you are about the law. . . again. There are two types of evidence, direct and circumstantial. His testimony is direct evidence. Don't spout off about things you know nothing about. Quote There are four types of evidence used to prove or disprove facts at trial: Real evidence Demonstrative evidence Documentary evidence Testimonial evidence
March 24, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, Tnt4philly said: Your categories are correct - but when speaking of direct evidence as John did, it's in the context of direct vs. circumstantial evidence in federal court. Some state courts have different standards. There is more than one manner of classifying types of evidence.
Create an account or sign in to comment