Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
But you forget who has the burden of proof here.What you consider plausible is heavily influenced by your deep seated biases.
You will refuse to accept any alternate explanations because you have totally bought into the narrative.
you rejecting the proof because of your deep seated bias doesnt mean the proof isnt there,,But you forget who has the burden of proof here.
It’s not me.
Corruption is a plausible explanation, but when there are other non-corrupt explanations, we can’t say that corruption has been proven.
I don't think you have ever provided your "plausable" explaination. What service did the crackhead perform to earn $20,000,000+?What you consider plausible is heavily influenced by your deep seated biases.
You will refuse to accept any alternate explanations because you have totally bought into the narrative.
Your “proof” isn’t really proof. If you had direct evidence that’d be one thing but all I’m hearing here is that Hunter Biden made business deals and you can’t see how that would be possible unless there’s corruption. You don’t have evidence of the corruption, you just assume it is there.you rejecting the proof because of your deep seated bias doesnt mean the proof isnt there,,
Business and legal consulting.I don't think you have ever provided your "plausable" explaination. What service did the crackhead perform to earn $20,000,000+?
considering your deep seated bias that makes sense,,Your “proof” isn’t really proof. If you had direct evidence that’d be one thing but all I’m hearing here is that Hunter Biden made business deals and you can’t see how that would be possible unless there’s corruption. You don’t have evidence of the corruption, you just assume it is there.
Like when Devon Archer testified that he never saw any illegal actions?considering your deep seated bias that makes sense,,
we on the otherhand can see that actual documents and firsthand testimony by people directly involved requires no bias but the ability to read and listen,,
of course you have to selectively choose a single comment out of mountains of evidence,,Like when Devon Archer testified that he never saw any illegal actions?
Maybe you’re referring to that.
Of course you have declined to reference anything specific and instead just wave your hands around alluding to unspecific probably imaginary “first hand testimony”.of course you have to selectively choose a single comment out of mountains of evidence,,
thats the very definition of deep seated bias,,
again its your deep seated bias that didnt allow you to read or watch the evidence the first time it was posted and now you use that to justify your ignorance now,,Of course you have declined to reference anything specific and instead just wave your hands around alluding to unspecific probably imaginary “first hand testimony”.
If you don’t say anything specific enough to be verifiable you can never be wrong.
That’s your game.
Your inability to even reference anything specific demonstrates either profound laziness or profound dishonesty.again its your deep seated bias that didnt allow you to read or watch the evidence the first time it was posted and now you use that to justify your ignorance now,,
its all on you now,,
Really? In what countries did he have a law license?Business and legal consulting.
Many of these contracts were taken off the infamous laptop.
I have done so many times,,Your inability to even reference anything specific demonstrates either profound laziness or profound dishonesty.
You can’t even find the scrap of intelligence to give a single name.
This one.Really? In what countries did he have a law license?
And then you completely forgot what you posted?I have done so many times,,
your deep seated bias just wont allow you to see it,,
Which states?This one.
I don't know for sure. I don't have time to ask every state bar association.Which states?
Lol, you go girl! Now roll up your sleeves track the evidence and we will see ya in court. Till then just crying wolf.So the National Archives has Joe Biden’s pseudonym emails and is protecting the Usurper from scrutiny. How much bribery money has the National Archives received and what entity may be funding them?
National Archives acknowledges 5,400 Biden pseudonym emails, faces lawsuit for their release
The new lawsuit turns up the pressure on the archives to release the documents.justthenews.com
