Did President Peters (Crooked Joe) have the FBI harass Trump at his maralogo home because he uncovered Joe's pseudonym?

[robosmith]

36 minutes ago, ironstone said:

There is a distinction between evidence and proof.

Contrary to what you are saying, there is a fair bit of evidence that points to shady behavior with the Biden family. Trial outcomes are decided one way or the other all the time on the evidence presented, even if there is no proof shown. You have simply chosen to ignore all evidence regarding the Biden family business.

 

Joe is not implicated in "the Biden family business," and you have NO EVIDENCE that says he is a participant in whatever that is.

All you right wingers are participants in the blatant PARTISAN efforts to tar Joe, but keep coming up EMPTY.

Of course, you  know that McCarthy bragged about the dozen Benghazi hearing's ONLY success, which was damaging Hillary's approval ratings. ?

[ironstone]

17 hours ago, robosmith said:

Joe is not implicated in "the Biden family business," and you have NO EVIDENCE that says he is a participant in whatever that is.

All you right wingers are participants in the blatant PARTISAN efforts to tar Joe, but keep coming up EMPTY.

Of course, you  know that McCarthy bragged about the dozen Benghazi hearing's ONLY success, which was damaging Hillary's approval ratings. ?

It boils down to what constitutes evidence. Specifically, what constitutes evidence when it comes to the Biden family business.

In your world, it's clear that NOTHING can possibly be considered evidence. Not the laptop. Not the emails from said laptop. Not the numerous shell accounts associated with the Biden's. Not Joe's lying about ever meeting with Hunter's business partners. Not Joe's use of pseudonym emails(which he won't release). Not the curiously high wealth of Biden family members despite not having real business experience.

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, ironstone said:

It boils down to what constitutes evidence. Specifically, what constitutes evidence when it comes to the Biden family business.

In your world, it's clear that NOTHING can possibly be considered evidence. Not the laptop. Not the emails from said laptop. Not the numerous shell accounts associated with the Biden's. Not Joe's lying about ever meeting with Hunter's business partners. Not Joe's use of pseudonym emails(which he won't release). Not the curiously high wealth of Biden family members despite not having real business experience.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/politics/a31265187/joe-biden-net-worth/

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, ironstone said:

It boils down to what constitutes evidence. Specifically, what constitutes evidence when it comes to the Biden family business.

In your world, it's clear that NOTHING can possibly be considered evidence. Not the laptop. Not the emails from said laptop. Not the numerous shell accounts associated with the Biden's. Not Joe's lying about ever meeting with Hunter's business partners. Not Joe's use of pseudonym emails(which he won't release). Not the curiously high wealth of Biden family members despite not having real business experience.

Joe made the big bucks AFTER being VP with book sales. And none of the "evidence" you mention ^here is likely admissible in court. Joe's POSSIBLY false off the cuff statements is NOT evidence, either.

Esp NOT the laptop, which has unknown chain of custody problems, and was ILLEGALLY leaked to the press IN VIOLATION of Delaware confidentiality laws. That shop owner is lucky he didn't get charged for violating DE LAW.

12B-100. Protection of personal information.

Quote

Any person who conducts business in this State and owns, licenses, or maintains personal information shall implement and maintain reasonable procedures and practices to prevent the unauthorized acquisition, use, modification, disclosure, or destruction of personal information collected or maintained in the regular course of business.

 

Edited September 4, 2023 by robosmith