FBI Document Shows Joe Biden Took $5M From Burisma As part of a Bribery Scheme

They, Them.......(pronouns, you know) Comer, Grassley...and Wray's defiance kinda hits the nail on the head.
You do not know the identity of the person, yes? So their veracity is nil. You have no recordings, no bank records showing funds inflows or untracked balances. There is no apparent basis to make a claim.
 
Again no proof.

Except for the:

- Dept of the Treasury Biden financial documents

- IRS Biden financial documents

- Biden financial documents from 12 banks

- Testimony from the State Dept rep who tesyified Biden ignored war ings not to.meet eith Burisma teps because of the appearance of a Conflict of Interest

- Tesyimony from Hunter Biden's Burisma partner confirming Joe Biden was the 'Big Guy'

- Hundreds of Suspicious Account Activity alerts made every time money was laundered / moved from ome fake Biden LLC to another fake Biden LLC

- Hunter Biden laptop e-mails that reference the payments

- Numerous whistleblowers

- The testimony of the Burisma member who bribed Biden to fire the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Burisma and Hunter Biden

- The 15 video recordings the Burisma member who bribed Biden made as 'insurance'

- And Joe Biden on video bragging about how he extorted the Ukrainian PM into firing the prosecutor


Other than that you are SPOT ON.


:auiqs.jpg:
 
Please show Joe Biden's transfer documents showing the money or bank statements that reference more funds than Joe Biden obtained outside of legal means? Please cite the testimony of persons under oath who have attested to the such.
 
You miss the boat, once again. It was Comer and Grassley, through the WB contacts that verified his track record.
The WB came to Comer and/or Grassley.
Comer and Grassley know the WB's identity, he came to them.
The WB told them of the 1023 and what was in it.
FBI fought tooth and nail to prevent any release of the 1023.
After several contempt threats, Wray let both Comer and Grassley view the unredacted 1023 in a FBI SCIF.
In viewing the 1023 in a SCIF, unredacted, it confirmed what the WB had told them.
Another threat of noncompliance, and Wray agreed to provide the 1023 to the rest of the committee in a SCIF. Wray complied, only this time, the 1023 was redacted, as was reported.
Grassely revealed, yesterday, on the Senate floor, the existence of some 17 odd tapes made by a high level Burisma offical as a CYA, of both the Biden's in question, revealed in the unredacted 1023, yet redacted in the viewing by the rest of the committee.
Grassley has vowed to release the unredacted 1023 to the public.

Even the existence of those 17 tapes is unverified.
 
Please show Joe Biden's transfer documents showing the money or bank statements that reference more funds than Joe Biden obtained outside of legal means? Please cite the testimony of persons under oath who have attested to the such.
Denied.

The FBI says you're not entitled to that information.
 
You have no recordings, no bank records showing funds inflows or untracked balances. There is no apparent basis to make a claim.
Why would I have recordings?
Bank records have and are being subpoenaed to track the cash flow. Guess you didn't hear of the SAR's generated by many questionable deposits by Hunter?
No evidence you say? You don't get evidence without investigating the paper trail.
 
Even the existence of those 17 tapes is unverified.
Reported by the WB and was part of the info he supplied to Comer and/or Grassley.
Will be hell if they get them......who's to say they or the FBI don't already have them?
FYI- I bet there are lots of other tapes regarding kickbacks on both sides of the aisle.....you see the seemingly endless trips to Ukraine by certain smiling ear to ear Pol's?
Probably why there isn't any great rush to audit monies given to Ukraine.
 
Why would I have recordings?
Its your argument.
Bank records have and are being subpoenaed to track the cash flow.
They have been. Nothing has been produced by you guys.
Guess you didn't hear of the SAR's generated by many questionable deposits by Hunter?
SARs are standard and meaningless. Especially meaningless when its not JOE Biden. You know, JOE Biden. Not Hunter Biden.
No evidence you say? You don't get evidence without investigating the paper trail.
You've not supplied any paper trail to JOE Biden.
If Hunter Biden did something illegal, prosecute him. If Joe Biden did something, prosecute him. I am dispposed that all politicians are slimy potential criminals - thats why they do it. But come on, gets some damn evidence already.
 
If Hunter Biden did something illegal, prosecute him. If Joe Biden did something, prosecute him.
Under active investigation.
They have been. Nothing has been produced by you guys.

SARs are standard and meaningless. Especially meaningless when its not JOE Biden. You know, JOE Biden. Not Hunter Biden.
Investigating the paper trail of one SAR has revealed payments to 10 or 11 shell companies under Biden family names. Still under investigation....be patient.
You've not supplied any paper trail to JOE Biden.
I'm not the one investigating. It will be in the news when the committees are ready.
 
Reported by the WB and was part of the info he supplied to Comer and/or Grassley.
Will be hell if they get them......who's to say they or the FBI don't already have them?
FYI- I bet there are lots of other tapes regarding kickbacks on both sides of the aisle.....you see the seemingly endless trips to Ukraine by certain smiling ear to ear Pol's?
Probably why there isn't any great rush to audit monies given to Ukraine.

No one says because no one knows. It's not known if the tapes really exist. Again, this all comes from an FD-1023, which means its contents are unverified.
 
Under active investigation.



Investigating the paper trail of one SAR has revealed payments to 10 or 11 shell companies under Biden family names. Still under investigation....be patient.
Yes LLCs. Protip, your average lawyer has two or three. If one is wealthy with assets to protect they would have multiple trusts and LLCs. By this logic all the Trumps would be under the jail.
I'm not the one investigating. It will be in the news when the committees are ready.
COmmittees cannot prosecute a crime.
 
No one says because no one knows. It's not known if the tapes really exist. Again, this all comes from an FD-1023, which means its contents are unverified.
Not according to WB claims.
How do you know the contents weren't verified by FBI and sat on for something like three years now?

FBI obstruction of justice?
 
Yes LLCs. Protip, your average lawyer has two or three. If one is wealthy with assets to protect they would have multiple trusts and LLCs. By this logic all the Trumps would be under the jail.
Only one way to get to the bottom of possible foreign influence is a thorough investigation and a finding report to the American public.
COmmittees cannot prosecute a crime.
You're kidding.
 
Not according to WB claims.
How do you know the contents weren't verified by FBI and sat on for something like three years now?

FBI obstruction of justice?

How many times need I repeat this until it sinks in? The whistleblower's claims are unverified. That's all we know for now with any amount of certainty.
 

Forum List

Back
Top