What you must believe to think Biden is innocent.

[BlindBoo]

He is literally on video - bragging about a quid pro quo with taxpayer funds.

But that's okay - that just lunch pail joe.

You mean he successfully carried out US foreign policy without trying to corrupt the process by withholding much needed military aid until that president attacked his political rivals.

 

[DBA]

That's all they have to show. "One plus rumor plus frog" does not equal "bribe".

Get that done and we can nail him.

Yes we're supposed to believe that Hunter was paid all this money for the illusion of access, with no real results. I only expect people of low IQ to truly believe nonsense like that.

 

[Marener]

Again, you don't have to actually see it rain to make a reasonable assumption that it did.

Your political bias might make it difficult for you to make “reasonable” assumptions.

Your mind will ignore reality if you’re already emotionally invested in your narrative.

 

[Mac1958]

Yes we're supposed to believe that Hunter was paid all this money for the illusion of access, with no real results. I only expect people of low IQ to truly believe nonsense like that.

You're making assumptions.

You just have to provide proof.

Do you understand the difference?

 

[Care4all]

To be a bribe, you don’t have to see the money go to Joe Biden specifically, but you do need to see some agreement that he take an official action for the money given to Hunter.

And even more clarty,

they would have to prove Joe Biden made those changes in policy to benefit Hunter and his foreign business connection,

that was not already U.S. Policy.

 

[Lisa558]

Again, you don't have to actually see it rain to make a reasonable assumption that it did.

Yup. If I go to bed when the grass is green and wake up to a layer of snow covering the lawn, I can assume it snowed. I don’t have to SEE it. That is called circumstantial evidence and it can be quite strong.

 

[Nostra]

Sure. Why not? Evidence and the requirement for it is what our system is founded on.

In order to believe that Biden is innocent of taking bribes for favorable foreign policy decisions, we must ignore his own words, his son’s text messages and emails, all the “spontaneous” meetings, all the whistleblowers and witnesses, and the need for more than 20 shell companies to launder and distribute loot among family members who have no demonstrable skills. Finally, we must believe that $20 million — and probably much more — has been lavished on all of these people except the only one possessed of the power to make it rain.

 

[Lisa558]

You can't charge or convict someone on assumptions, thank the Good Lord, for all of us!!!

You can charge them based on circumstantial evidence, and get a conviction based on the same, and we already have plenty of it.

 

[DBA]

The only “evidence” out there is…

Hunter made money in foreign investments
A vague reference to some “Big Guy”
VP Biden engaged in phone calls with his son in front of business associates
As VP, Biden demanded the removal of a corrupt prosecutor

Yeah and the fact that Tony Bobolinsky identified Joe as the "big guy" and the fact that Joe flat out lied about having any contact with Hunter's business associates. And oh yeah and Devin Archer's, Hunter's business partner talking about how many times Joe was on the phone 20+ times with Hunter's business partners... just to talk about the weather of course.

 

[Marener]

Yup. If I go to bed when the grass is green and wake up to a layer of snow covering the lawn, I can assume it snowed. I don’t have to SEE it. That is called circumstantial evidence and it can be quite strong.

What you guys don’t seem to understand is that you need to consider ALL the evidence and not just the parts that you can twist into your narrative.

 

[Nostra]

Your political bias might make it difficult for you to make “reasonable” assumptions.

Your mind will ignore reality if you’re already emotionally invested in your narrative.

In order to believe that Biden is innocent of taking bribes for favorable foreign policy decisions, we must ignore his own words, his son’s text messages and emails, all the “spontaneous” meetings, all the whistleblowers and witnesses, and the need for more than 20 shell companies to launder and distribute loot among family members who have no demonstrable skills. Finally, we must believe that $20 million — and probably much more — has been lavished on all of these people except the only one possessed of the power to make it rain.

 

[Lisa558]

Your political bias might make it difficult for you to make “reasonable” assumptions.

Your mind will ignore reality if you’re already emotionally invested in your narrative.

Oh, the irony….. ^^^

 

[jc456]

You mean most people still require evidence in court and out number you here and in most places in the country by a wide margin and you feel burned by the fact as this nagging need for actual evidence has not been eradicated in the post trump era? You guys are failures.

are you suggesting emails aren't evidence? Are you suggesting that first hand knowledge of a business partner isn't evidence? What is it then?

In order to believe that Biden is innocent of taking bribes for favorable foreign policy decisions, we must ignore his own words, his son’s text messages and emails, all the “spontaneous” meetings, all the whistleblowers and witnesses, and the need for more than 20 shell companies to launder and distribute loot among family members who have no demonstrable skills. Finally, we must believe that $20 million — and probably much more — has been lavished on all of these people except the only one possessed of the power to make it rain.

 

[Nostra]

What you guys don’t seem to understand is that you need to consider ALL the evidence and not just the parts that you can twist into your narrative.

What 'evidence' is not being considered?

 

[Care4all]

You can charge them based on circumstantial evidence, and get a conviction based on the same, and we already have plenty of it.

Nope, you actually do NOT have enough!

 

[DBA]

You can charge them based on circumstantial evidence, and get a conviction based on the same, and we already have plenty of it.

They don't seem to get that. For some reason, they believe that you have to have a smoking gun to convict someone in this country. Imagine how many criminals would have been released if this were the case. Preponderance of evidence is the standard.

 

[White 6]

Your post might make sense if a sitting President could be indicted. Since he can't, and the process is called Impeachment, your post is useless.

But thanks for stopping by.

Well, lets see the evidence in that, even if it does not lead to anything or charges. Dragging through the tabloids doesn't impress anyone with the slanted partisan attacks, except the fellow partisans. The rest of us will just wait until you guy find some kind of actual link and if not, will know it was just partisan BS, like that from the trump lawyers after 2020 loss at the polls, many of you morons still have not gotten over, as your feelings appear hurt, at continually losing in the court of facts, even in your own courts with your own judges and your side represented by your own lawyers. Could be, you guys are just the same sore losers, you have consistently projected to be. Get it through your head. The rest of us are waiting for the real deal, not in your right wing tabloids or other places outside of official proceedings.

 

[Marener]

Oh, the irony….. ^^^

To be a bribe, you have to say what Biden was bribed to do.

The only specific thing anyone has ever come up with is that he got Shokin fired.

This narrative requires you ignore the mountain of evidence that Shokin was fired because the everyone involved in Ukrainian reforms saw he was corrupt and preventing progress in cleaning up the prosecutor office.

I don’t think any of you even know about it because it’s censored by your media.

 

[Lisa558]

Well, lets see the evidence in that, even if it does not lead to anything or charges. Dragging through the tabloids doesn't impress anyone with the slanted partisan attacks, except the fellow partisans. The rest of us will just wait until you guy find some kind of actual link and if not, will know it was just partisan BS, like that from the trump lawyers after 2020 loss at the polls, many of you morons still have not gotten over, as your feelings appear hurt, at continually losing in the court of facts, even in your own courts with your own judges and your side represented by your own lawyers. Could be, you guys are just the same sore losers, you have consistently projected to be. Get it through your head. The rest of us are waiting for the real deal, not in your right wing tabloids or other places outside of official proceedings.

So I take it you support the impeachment inquiry to explore these anomalies and unexplained occurrences that walk and talk like a duck?

 

[my2¢]

Finally, we must believe that $20 million — and probably much more — has been lavished on all of these people except the only one possessed of the power to make it rain.

It is much easier than that. Not on "all of these people", only a portion of it on "Joe Biden" himself.