Joe Biden is "The Big Guy" Hunter Biden Confirms

[St. Louis Hawk]

Provide the exact quote from this thread where I said biden should be impeached over this please

You’re embarrassing yourself here. Again.

Post 1 talks about “it’s all coming out” and your post 2 talks about the impeachment proceedings and your post 7 video talks about the impeachment investigation and …

the impeachment inquiry is based on Joe as the “big guy” getting a cut of illegal money or committing an illegal action such that he has committed an impeachable offense …

but now you move the goal posts and say you weren’t talking about impeachment?

LOL

Just stop.

 

[Scruddy]

You’re embarrassing yourself here. Again.

Post 1 talks about “it’s all coming out” and your post 2 talks about the impeachment proceedings and your post 7 video talks about the impeachment investigation and …

the impeachment inquiry is based on Joe as the “big guy” getting a cut of illegal money or committing an illegal action such that he has committed an impeachable offense …

but now you move the goal posts and say you weren’t talking about impeachment?

LOL

Just stop.

Big mad big cope lol knew you couldn't do it

 

[jneffer]

You have zero receipts?

the article link is above.

the congressional report referenced is here.

the appendix to the report (containing the actual receipts from mazars, trump's former accountants) is here.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

Big mad big cope lol knew you couldn't do it

Another non response.

Haven’t answered any of the questions. Moved the goal posts and declared victory.

Strong work.

 

[Scruddy]

Another non response.

Haven’t answered any of the questions. Moved the goal posts and declared victory.

Strong work.

You asked for evidence and I gave it to you. Then you tried shifting the conversation based on the source of that evidence. You're really not very good at this.

 

[Scruddy]

the article link is above.

the congressional report referenced is here.

the appendix to the report (containing the actual receipts from mazars, trump's former accountants) is here.

If Jamie Ratskin said it then it must be true lmfao

I will actually read when I have time and get back to you. I have minimal expectations though given the first name involved.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

You asked for evidence and I gave it to you. Then you tried shifting the conversation based on the source of that evidence. You're really not very good at this.

You gave me evidence that a check was written. That’s it. We’ve known that for years.

That does not equal an impeachable offense or illegal conduct.

I know complex thinking is generally beyond your capacity but what evidence do you have that this was illegal or an impeachable offense?

Go back to my questions and start there. Take your time. Show your work. Sound out the big words.

 

[Scruddy]

You have me evidence that a check was written. That’s it.

That does not equal an impeachable offense or illegal conduct.

I know complex thinking is generally beyond your capacity but what evidence do you have that this was illegal or an impeachable offense?

Go back to my questions and start there. Take your time. Show your work. Sound out the big words.

10% for the big guy. You voted for a fraud lol

 

[dgordo]

Ahhh I got you to move your position from "it didn't happen" to "well, maybe it did happen but here's why it's ok and you're an idiot LOL".

I'll chalk this up as a win.

Biden loaned his brother 200k on January 12, 2018

 

[jneffer]

If Jamie Ratskin said it then it must be true lmfao

I will actually read when I have time and get back to you. I have minimal expectations though given the first name involved.

jamie raskin didn't "say" it

jamie raskin heads a committee that investigated and submitted a report with actual receipts from the subject's accountants. while making accusations and continually promising proof is just around the corner is way more politically expedient and useful, this is how its actually supposed to work. you make an accusation and present evidence that can be seen and reviewed by other people.

i realize this approach is difficult to wrap your head around.

 

[Scruddy]

jamie raskin didn't "say" it

jamie raskin heads a committee that investigated and submitted a report with actual receipts from the subject's accountants. while making accusations and continually promising proof is just around the corner is way more politically expedient and useful, this is how its actually supposed to work. you make an accusation and present evidence that can be seen and reviewed by other people.

i realize this approach is difficult to wrap your head around.

He released a report written by himself (and others). Calm down. I'll get to you when I have more time.

 

[GES4]

Not really necessary,.. All they need to prove is that Biden provided a "service", and that family members received the monetary reward.

Bad Legal Takes

 

[jneffer]

He released a report written by himself (and others). Calm down. I'll get to you when I have more time.

but you understand how ridiculous it is for someone to take tweets that provide no other documentation (or even a direct quote from a closed-door deposition) as absolute gospel, while being skeptical of literal receipts from accounting firms?

you get that, right?

and what exactly are you doing with this additional time you need? it's not like you need to spend the same amount of time reviewing the trump docs that you spent reviewing the biden docs (because there are no biden docs available to review). maybe dig back through some youtube archives to see what justification was given when the report was initially released so that you can regurgitate it here?

 

[IACub]

C'mon, Scruffy. Get back up. You're like a little mini Rocky.

 

[GES4]

C'mon, Scruffy. Get back up. You're like a little mini Rocky.

Rocky Dennis

 

[nu2u]

Bombshell!! This breaks everything wide open. I expect the filing of Articles of Impeachment within 48 hours. I underestimated James Comer

 

[Scruddy]

but you understand how ridiculous it is for someone to take tweets that provide no other documentation (or even a direct quote from a closed-door deposition) as absolute gospel, while being skeptical of literal receipts from accounting firms?

you get that, right?

and what exactly are you doing with this additional time you need? it's not like you need to spend the same amount of time reviewing the trump docs that you spent reviewing the biden docs (because there are no biden docs available to review). maybe dig back through some youtube archives to see what justification was given when the report was initially released so that you can regurgitate it here?

Bro I promise I will get back to you please be patient

 

[biggreydogs]

 

[Dr. Spaceman]

Bro I promise I will get back to you please be patient

Exactly, bro. Bro just needs to be patient so Bro has some time to do his own research, bro.

 

[Scruddy]

Exactly, bro. Bro just needs to be patient so Bro has some time to do his own research, bro.

Thank you, bro

 

[Scruddy]

Original article for those who want to read it

 

[IACub]

Thank you, bro

It's remarkable that you're too stupid to know when everyone is laughing at you.

 

[Scruddy]

It's remarkable that you're too stupid to know when everyone is laughing at you.

This is the level of take I've come to expect from cubs fans tbh

 

[biggreydogs]

 

[Dr. Spaceman]

View embedded media

GOT HIM!!!!

 

[biggreydogs]

GOT HIM!!!!

10%

 

[ISUBryceC]

Given that 2 business associates have said "the big guy" got 10% of the cut do you find this concerning at all? Or are you hoping if you yell loudly enough that people will stop bringing this up? This is incredibly damning to joe biden.

When do you think the hammer comes down and what do you think happens?

If this came from the congressional report, why haven’t they done anything yet?

 

[Scruddy]

 

[Scruddy]

 

[Scruddy]

😳😬

 

[stillh8unlv]

Rocky Dennis

So wrong, yet so funny

 

[Scruddy]

Hunter is high as a kite lol

 

[Finance85]

but you understand how ridiculous it is for someone to take tweets that provide no other documentation (or even a direct quote from a closed-door deposition) as absolute gospel, while being skeptical of literal receipts from accounting firms?

you get that, right?

and what exactly are you doing with this additional time you need? it's not like you need to spend the same amount of time reviewing the trump docs that you spent reviewing the biden docs (because there are no biden docs available to review). maybe dig back through some youtube archives to see what justification was given when the report was initially released so that you can regurgitate it here?

Jeesh. Without getting into the merits of either side of your back and forth, please remember that tweet standard when Chis or Joes Place post something.

 

[Finance85]

Last things first - as I've posted previously, trying to impeach Biden is a fools errand and a waste of time and taxpayer money. That out of the way, posters here have been denying for a couple of years that Joe is "the Big Guy", and have been ridiculing that notion. Well, it's been confirmed, and the goalpost is now moving.

So now they say there's no proof Joe received any benefit for being the Big Guy, he was being repaid for loans, and so on. That's just denial, but that will come out too, but as Hillary famously said, at this point what difference does it make.

Hunter and James clearly profited from their association with Joe, in their dealing with China. There's a money trail that's been made public by members of Congress, even if some posters deny it. What does it mean? We'll likely never know. Has it had any affect on policy decisions? Probably some, but likely not very significant.

I just wish everyone would do some self examination once in awhile and ask themselves if they would take the same position if the names were changed from Trump to Biden, or Biden to Trump.

 

[Scruddy]

Last things first - as I've posted previously, trying to impeach Biden is a fools errand and a waste of time and taxpayer money. That out of the way, posters here have been denying for a couple of years that Joe is "the Big Guy", and have been ridiculing that notion. Well, it's been confirmed, and the goalpost is now moving.

So now they say there's no proof Joe received any benefit for being the Big Guy, he was being repaid for loans, and so on. That's just denial, but that will come out too, but as Hillary famously said, at this point what difference does it make.

Hunter and James clearly profited from their association with Joe, in their dealing with China. There's a money trail that's been made public by members of Congress, even if some posters deny it. What does it mean? We'll likely never know. Has it had any affect on policy decisions? Probably some, but likely not very significant.

I just wish everyone would do some self examination once in awhile and ask themselves if they would take the same position if the names were changed from Trump to Biden, or Biden to Trump.

Excellent take.

 

[joelbc1]

Last things first - as I've posted previously, trying to impeach Biden is a fools errand and a waste of time and taxpayer money. That out of the way, posters here have been denying for a couple of years that Joe is "the Big Guy", and have been ridiculing that notion. Well, it's been confirmed, and the goalpost is now moving.

So now they say there's no proof Joe received any benefit for being the Big Guy, he was being repaid for loans, and so on. That's just denial, but that will come out too, but as Hillary famously said, at this point what difference does it make.

Hunter and James clearly profited from their association with Joe, in their dealing with China. There's a money trail that's been made public by members of Congress, even if some posters deny it. What does it mean? We'll likely never know. Has it had any affect on policy decisions? Probably some, but likely not very significant.

I just wish everyone would do some self examination once in awhile and ask themselves if they would take the same position if the names were changed from Trump to Biden, or Biden to Trump.

Let’s not forget Finance, at this point in time, other than pettiness and ignorance, Thera is ZERO reason for this House Committee to hold these Hearings. Theee has been no new evidence turned up giving the Repubbers an excuse to continue. Is the purpose of House Republicans to show tge world that they can Texas dysfunctional as any law making body in the world?

 

[Scruddy]

Let’s not forget Finance, at this point in time, other than pettiness and ignorance, Thera is ZERO reason for this House Committee to hold these Hearings. Theee has been no new evidence turned up giving the Repubbers an excuse to continue. Is the purpose of House Republicans to show tge world that they can Texas dysfunctional as any law making body in the world?

The "no evidence" claim is total bunk lol there's mountains of evidence against the Biden family.

 

[jneffer]

Last things first - as I've posted previously, trying to impeach Biden is a fools errand and a waste of time and taxpayer money. That out of the way, posters here have been denying for a couple of years that Joe is "the Big Guy", and have been ridiculing that notion. Well, it's been confirmed, and the goalpost is now moving.

So now they say there's no proof Joe received any benefit for being the Big Guy, he was being repaid for loans, and so on. That's just denial, but that will come out too, but as Hillary famously said, at this point what difference does it make.

Hunter and James clearly profited from their association with Joe, in their dealing with China. There's a money trail that's been made public by members of Congress, even if some posters deny it. What does it mean? We'll likely never know. Has it had any affect on policy decisions? Probably some, but likely not very significant.

I just wish everyone would do some self examination once in awhile and ask themselves if they would take the same position if the names were changed from Trump to Biden, or Biden to Trump.

but we don't really need a theoretical pondering of what would happen...because there have been issues with trump violating the emoluments clause as soon as he took office...and while it didn't go completely unnoticed, there wasn't a years long public investigation/hearings about it from congressional democrats

there is infinitely more proof that trump businesses profited from foreign governments and that trump could withdraw/transfer money and assets from his businesses at anytime without disclosing anything than anything presented against biden

 

[ICHawk-I]

Ahhh I got you to move your position from "it didn't happen" to "well, maybe it did happen but here's why it's ok and you're an idiot LOL".

I'll chalk this up as a win.

So you took all the time to confidently present all these "facts" and figures, then when someone calls them into question, and asks you to defend you claims, you deflect and don't answer. This is why you'll never be taken seriously and have zero credibility here. The only reason to anyone replies to you is because they know you'll back yourself into an argument you can't defend, and then watch you slither away as you cast insults and deflect. It happens on the daily, and its very entertaining. Keep it up.

 

[IACub]

This is the level of take I've come to expect from cubs fans tbh

Because you always commit to such an intelligent discourse? You're a f***ing troll and no one likes you. All you do is post your hot takes from bullshit sources, then pretend to "calm things down" after you've stirred the pot. Your shtick is worn out and tepid.