gatomontes99 Posted May 4 Report Posted May 4 U.S. intercepted Ukraine government messages discussing plot to route money to Biden re-election Is anyone surprised that Biden was funneling money through Ukraine to his campaign? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? 1 1 Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
Deluge Posted May 5 Report Posted May 5 14 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: U.S. intercepted Ukraine government messages discussing plot to route money to Biden re-election Is anyone surprised that Biden was funneling money through Ukraine to his campaign? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? No, I'm not surprised. It's why Zelenskyy was always groveling for handouts. What a sick bunch of f*ckers. 2 Quote
Nationalist Posted May 5 Report Posted May 5 I wonder how much of that cash was given to The Green T-Shirt's wife for more shopping in Paris? Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
gatomontes99 Posted May 5 Author Report Posted May 5 I guarantee you some of that money ended up with a shell company tied to Joe. Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
robosmith Posted May 5 Report Posted May 5 22 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: U.S. intercepted Ukraine government messages discussing plot to route money to Biden re-election Is anyone surprised that Biden was funneling money through Ukraine to his campaign? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Let us know when you find a source much more legitimate than that right wing propaganda site "Just the News." Quote Based on reports emerging in late March and April 2026, newly declassified U.S. intelligence documents allegedly show that in 2022, Ukrainian officials discussed a plot to divert hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. taxpayer-funded aid back to Joe Biden's 2024 re-election campaign Allegations of a Plot is all you got. LMAO 1 Quote
gatomontes99 Posted May 5 Author Report Posted May 5 25 minutes ago, robosmith said: Let us know when you find a source much more legitimate than that right wing propaganda site "Just the News." You used the Indian Times and Huffington Post just yesterday. You don't get to complain about the sources. However, had you bothered to actually look at the article, the source is the DOJ. Just the News is just the outlet. 1 Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
robosmith Posted May 5 Report Posted May 5 (edited) 5 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: You used the Indian Times and Huffington Post just yesterday. You don't get to complain about the sources. However, had you bothered to actually look at the article, the source is the DOJ. Just the News is just the outlet. The source is Gabbard and "US intelligence." Allegations of a Plot is all you got. AKA NOT EVEN assertions that the plan was implemented. LMAO Edited May 6 by robosmith Quote
gatomontes99 Posted May 5 Author Report Posted May 5 (edited) 49 minutes ago, robosmith said: The source is Gabbard and "US inteligence." Allegations of a Plot is all you got. AKA assertions that the plan was implemented. LMAO And that is different than the Epstein files and Trump how? However, this is witnesses and documents including electronic communications. It is evidence and more than allegations Edited May 5 by gatomontes99 Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
WestCanMan Posted May 6 Report Posted May 6 1 hour ago, robosmith said: The source is Gabbard and "US inteligence." Friendly advice: people with IQ's under 80 should use a spell-checker for words with more than 5 letters The source is "evidence intercepted by US intelligence", genius. And it would be recorded, of course. So there's "actual evidence" You're a guy who calls a single person's accusation with no police reports, witnesses, medical visits, or any other form of evidence whatsoever, "from either 1995 or 1996" lol, "proof that someone is a r4pist". By your standards, this story surpasses the burden of evidence required to constitute "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". Quote Allegations of a Plot is all you got. AKA assertions that the plan was implemented. LMAO No, not mere "allegations". Allegations are no more than the words of an accuser, or accusers. This is an instance where intelligence officials have proof that Ukrainians were "talking about an ostensibly criminal plan amongst themselves." It doesn't say that the Biden administration was requesting the funds, or that they demanded the funds before they agreed to send the money, and it doesn't even say that they had contacted any Biden officials to offer them the money, or that there had ever been such an arrangement in the past. So if Biden was implicated in any way whatsoever, there's no mention of any evidence of that. Quote Allegations of a Plot is all you got. AKA assertions that the plan was implemented. LMAO In addition to the fact that your first sentence there was factually incorrect, your second sentence doesn't say what you want it to say. I think you probably meant to say "there were no assertions that the plan was implemented", but TBH, that's not necessarily important. Even if they had proof that Biden's team, or a person with high standing in the Democrat Party, was working with them to implement the plan, that would be enough to incriminate them, 100%. Just the act of planning that constitutes a crime. If "the plan" seemed to be moving along as laid out in the intercepted communications, that would look highly suspect, but again, it still wouldn't be proof of anything on Biden's end, because the Ukraine offering money to an American doesn't constitute a crime on the part of the American unless they were willing to accept it, in the spirit that it was intended. There was no mention of what the project was, or whether the project in question had been started at all, or started and then put on hold, as per the initial plot-line. As it stands, this is a lot of evidence, but it's just evidence that possibly dirty Ukrainians were conspiring to funnel US aid money back to Biden. Nothing more. It doesn't say whether it was their own plan to bribe Biden, or if it was something that they were working on with Dems of any sort. TBH, it's not even incriminating to the Ukrainians right now, because if they felt like bribing Biden with $200M would get their country an extra $5B in aid, then it was an outstanding plan for the people of Ukraine. The only solid accusation that can be made against anyone right now [imo], based on the content of that article, is: "Why didn't US officials look into it further to see if there was any criminality on the part of the Biden administration?" Biden and his people are clearly not implicated by that story at that point. There's a smoking gun, like - red hot - but no proof that anyone was even shot at. This is a "file it on the back-burner" story right now, from my POV, but if you replaced the word "Biden" with "Trump" in that story, CNN and the Dems would be framing it as "100% proof of a crime by Trump", the Comey/Mueller FBI would be committing crimes to fake evidence, Schiff would be promising "new bombshell evidence" every week for 2 years, and you would be adamant that it was 100% proof of Trump's guilt, and that he should be arrested tomorrow 😉 Yeah, own it, robo. You too @BeaverFever. Fking cultist P'sOS. 1 Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.