Giuliani: 'Very disturbing things' on Hunter Biden hardrive

[jem]

You are defending Hunter Biden and this crooked crap.
You think he was not getting paid to not influence and share money with his father?
You think Joe was lying when he said this...

What more do you need to.
He held 1 billion foreign aid money hostage until the person prosecuting Bursima was fired.
Hunter was getting paid tremendous sums by this company for no legitmate reason.

How could turmp be impeached for what he did and Biden not imprisoned for this?

No Comrade, I wasn't going to say that. I was planning to gently remind you of what you actually said, Conrade, which was ... that "he [George Kent] had repeatedly warned his superiors in DC that Hunter was up to no good." Which of course is entirely different from what Mr. Kent Actually said. So congratulations Comrade. You've earned a gold start for Deflection and Misrepresentation.

And Comrade since you brought up that nice lady, Ambassador Yovanovitch, I couldn't help notice that you also did a good job once again of misrepresenting the Ambassador's Testimony. Since you have found the Ambassador's actual testimony you might want to take note of what she actually said, which was that she agreed with the questioner's statement that Hunter's role on the Burisma Board could create "the appearance of a conflict of interest." Not at all the same of course as you cleverly recast it, viz., "problems with Hunter on the ground." I like this! It's especially good, because you've avoided conveying what she actually said, which of course would not be helpful to our cause , comrade, and it's doubly good because it's sufficiently vague to leave your targets free to imagine the worst.

I suppose a warning is appropriate about posting direct sources, as these will invariably make your deflections less effective. For example, you perhaps should not have posted either the excerpted Yovanovitch testimony or CNN article, as they under cut the effective of your misrepresentations. Next time , Comrade just cut out the parts that reinforce your deceptions and leave out the rest please.

Be well, Comrade.

 

[piezoe]

not a single person was indicted, tried, or convicted for collusion/conspiracy or anything to do with the election

Sorry, but this is wrong. One of the several charges, among others, that Michael Cohen was sent to prison for, campaign finance violation, had to do with the election. And of Course Roger Stone was indicted and convicted of lying about his involvement in obtaining Russian Hacked, DNC-Hillary emails, via Julian Asange as an intermediary, on behalf of the Trump 2016 campaign. Stone was convicted of perjury, but this of course is in no way dispositive of the thing he was lying about, i.e., collusion! The act Stone was lyhing about does not have to be called "collusion," you can substitute several synonyms, but the act itself is of course collusion all the same. Then there are the numerous indictments (at least 36!) that came from the Mueller investigation, and numerous convictions, or confessions of guilt, and sentences. These all had to do with Russian involvement in the 2016 Trump election campaign, or else illegal acts discovered incidental to Mueller's investigation.

In addition to Stones Perjury conviction which clearly was related to indirect collusion between the campaign and Russian operatives, there is now known one case of very direct collusion not yet prosecuted, and may never be, associated with the Trump campaign. This was identified by Mueller, and later the Senate investigation shed more light on this collusive effort involving the Trump campaign Chairman and his partner, a Russian intelligence agent. According to these investigations, the Campaign Chairman regularly shared private campaign polling and other campaign data and information with his partner and Russian Agent, Konstantin Kalimnik. This was simply a continuation of the close working relationship that Kalimnik and Manafort enjoyed when Kalimnik was acting as Manaforts right-hand-man in managing the election of the Russian plant, and former Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych. They two used similar disinformation campaigns to get Trump elected, as had been successful with Yanukovych. (Yanukovych is now living in exile in Russia.)

 

[piezoe]

You are defending Hunter Biden and this crooked crap.
You think he was not getting paid to not influence and share money with his father?
You think Joe was lying when he said this...

What more do you need to.
He held 1 billion foreign aid money hostage until the person prosecuting Bursima was fired.
Hunter was getting paid tremendous sums by this company for no legitmate reason.

How could turmp be impeached for what he did and Biden not imprisoned for this?

jem, There are arguments on both sides here, but it would seem they come down on the side of Biden carrying out what at the time was official U.S. policy in Ukraine. For sure Shokin the Ukraine prosecutor was moving very slowly on prosecutuons that the U.S. wanted to see, including prosecution of the head of Burisma. There can be no question, however, that Burisma suddenly added several well connected persons to its Board -- including the former President of Poland -- obviously with the intention of influencing the prosecution to get it toned down some. After Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire Shokin, Burisma's head, Zlochevsky, was eventually prosecuted by shokin's successor, but with a lighter penalty than many were hoping for. It is also true that Shokin was moving extremely slowly , and the international community wanted Shokin to get busy prosecuting corrupt individuals in Ukraine. Here is what George Kent,our most senior State Dept official at the time, said about Shokin, "I can assess that Viktor Shokin did not seriously advance any case of corruption against any known corrupt individual during his tenure."

Here is a very well balanced , and quite thorough article on the matter:
"Vhttps://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/joe-bidens-bid-oust-ukraine-prosecutor-followed-intense

jem, I'm not defending anyone. I'm a defender of truth and facts against innuendo and prejudicial statements that have no basis in fact. When frog claimed that George Kent had testified under oath that he had warned people in DC that Hunter was up to no good, I was immediately certain that Kent said no such thing. I knew Kent was a trained diplomat and would never have said such a thing. And of course he did not. I listened intently to his live testimony and remember it well. What he said was entirely different and neither prejudicial nor derogatory of Biden's son, nor was it loaded with innuendo as was Frog's fictional paraphrase of Kent..

What frog does more or less routinely is claim to be paraphrasing someone when in fact he is creating a fictional narrative bearing little resemblance to what was actually said. He is a master of innuendo. And I can not let that kind on nonsense go unchallenged.

 

[themickey]

Fairfax media in Australia, not a peep about this story (unless its well hidden somewhere....?).
Plenty of anti Turnip Trump coverage though.

 

[easymon1]

Fairfax media in Australia, not a peep about this story (unless its well hidden somewhere....?).
Plenty of anti Turnip Trump coverage though.

Does Australia support Freedom of Speech?

 

[easymon1]

https://www.infowars.com/

 

[easymon1]

https://www.infowars.com/

 

[exGOPer]

LOL. The Senate Report. Swamp dwellers. The Senate Report was garbage. It shows no proof of collusion or conspiracy, in fact it completely contradicts its own findings within the report. It spends much of the time talking about the Steele Dossier's claims in depth (not adding anything new to it, just discussing it) -- then at the end of the document concludes by saying the Steele Dossier was BS.

Alright, link me to the full Mueller report that says there was no collusion or conspiracy. Even Senate Republicans are the swamp - the guy who constantly lies, hides his tax returns, fills his administration with lobbyists and ran multiple scams and wives throughout his life is the honest one.

Now go ahead, provide link to the full Mueller report or simply answer why won't the administration release the full version if it exonerates them.

 

[Cuddles]

Fairfax media in Australia, not a peep about this story (unless its well hidden somewhere....?).
Plenty of anti Turnip Trump coverage though.

The world's media outside of America actually has some integrity and a bit of accountability. Tabloids there aren't going to run w/foreign made up scandals and will tend to stay local.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

No Comrade, I wasn't going to say that. I was planning to gently remind you of what you actually said, Conrade, which was ... that "he [George Kent] had repeatedly warned his superiors in DC that Hunter was up to no good." Which of course is entirely different from what Mr. Kent Actually said. So congratulations Comrade. You've earned a gold start for Deflection and Misrepresentation.

And Comrade since you brought up that nice lady, Ambassador Yovanovitch, I couldn't help notice that you also did a good job once again of misrepresenting the Ambassador's Testimony. Since you have found the Ambassador's actual testimony you might want to take note of what she actually said, which was that she agreed with the questioner's statement that Hunter's role on the Burisma Board could create "the appearance of a conflict of interest." Not at all the same of course as you cleverly recast it, viz., "problems with Hunter on the ground." I like this! It's especially good, because you've avoided conveying what she actually said, which of course would not be helpful to our cause , comrade, and it's doubly good because it's sufficiently vague to leave your targets free to imagine the worst.

I suppose a warning is appropriate about posting direct sources, as there is a danger that someone will take the time to watch a video or read an article in its entirety. This will invariably make your deflections and misrepresentation less effective. For example, you perhaps should not have posted either the excerpted Yovanovitch testimony or CNN article, as they under cut the effective of your misrepresentations. Next time , Comrade just cut out the parts that reinforce your deceptions and leave out the rest please.

Be well, Comrade.

You are embarrassed more than a little, I see.

Maybe ten more paragraphs from you will make it all go away.

As I said, you have declined considerably in the last two years. Give more thought before you post to compensate for it.