Hunter Biden's former business partner tells Congress about Joe Biden calls

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Isaan sailor said:

Joe Biden spoke about the weather,and other pleasantries?  Do they really expect people with half a brain-to believe that’s all?  We need to hear those recorded conversations,

So Devon Archer volunteers to speak before the committee which desperately wants evidence that Joe Biden was making money out of this and offers them nothing to prove that?

[Bkk Brian]

5 minutes ago, Scott Tracy said:

Changing the subject slightly... Why would the man not be armed? Isn't it a Constitutional requirement? Is there a law proscribing standing outside someone's house?

Strange comment. Its not a Constitutional requirement to carry a gun in Washington. The reason he was there is because Trump put out Obamas address on truth Social and this idiot took up the challenge:

 

Taylor Taranto allegedly made "several concerning statements" while livestreaming outside the Obama home, prosecutors said in a memo ahead of Taranto's detention hearing originally set for Wednesday afternoon.

In the detention memo, the government also alleges Taranto re-posted a post from former President Donald Trump citing what was supposedly the location of the Obama home.

"On Telegram, Taranto then stated, 'We got these losers surrounded! See you in hell, Podesta's and Obama's,'" according to prosecutors.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/man-guns-arrested-obama-home-attempted-evade-secret/story?id=100721557

[earlinclaifornia]

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., acknowledged that the Republicans' widely-hyped witness in their probe of the Biden family's business dealings "didn't know anything" about unverified allegations that President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden had accepted millions in bribes.

“Truly stunning”: Republican admits hyped Biden witness “didn’t know anything” about alleged bribe (yahoo.com)

[Scott Tracy]

I look at all this and laugh my socks off. It's a wonder that the rest of the world don't look at the US and say.... This is the example we should follow, here is world leadership at its finest... The so called leader of the free world, being dragged into sleazy goings on by his son, allegedly... 

[Isaan sailor]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

So Devon Archer volunteers to speak before the committee which desperately wants evidence that Joe Biden was making money out of this and offers them nothing to prove that?

Remember Mr Archer did not speak under oath—very curious.

[Scott Tracy]

6 minutes ago, Isaan sailor said:

We need to hear those recorded conversations,

Why?

[Rimmer]

Some vague unattibuted posts have been removed

[Isaan sailor]

4 minutes ago, Scott Tracy said:

Why?

To exonerate, or impeach Joe Biden.  Let’s find out what he said, once and for all.

[candide]

8 minutes ago, Isaan sailor said:

Remember Mr Archer did not speak under oath—very curious.

Just curious. Where did you read it?

[BangkokReady]

14 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Because Hunter Biden would have as a motive to impress his business associates?

Why?

[BangkokReady]

15 minutes ago, placeholder said:

How far divorced are you from human feeling that you think a father wouldn't throw his child a very occasional bone? 

Regular involvement in business meetings and being part of the company's brand is just "throwing a bone"?

 

You think Hunter was struggling?

 

You dont think the Vice President of the United States of America has to have any kind of integrity?

 

How naive do you think people are?

[candide]

10 minutes ago, Isaan sailor said:

To exonerate, or impeach Joe Biden.  Let’s find out what he said, once and for all.

About which crime?

[candide]

4 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

Regular involvement in business meetings and being part of the company's brand is just "throwing a bone"?

 

You think Hunter was struggling?

 

You dont think the Vice President of the United States of America has to have any kind of integrity?

 

How naive do you think people are?

So, in brief, you still have nothing!

[candide]

14 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

No. You want me to have nothing. These are not the same.

What do you have, apart from vague allegations, based on cherry-picking parts of the testimony (around 20 calls during 10 years), and ignoring the other parts (they never talked business, Hunter was giving the "illusion", etc...)?

It's all "don't you think" etc...

Edited August 2, 2023 by candide

[billd766]

17 hours ago, xylophone said:

It appears that the House Republicans' own much-hyped witness today testified that he never heard of President Biden discussing business with his son or his son's associates, or doing anything wrong," he said. "House Republicans keep promising bombshell evidence to support their ridiculous attacks against the President, but time after time, they keep failing to produce any." 

Hunter Biden's attorney Abbe Lowell said Archer's testimony confirms that he "did not involve his father in, nor did his father assist him in, his business" and that any interaction between Hunter Biden's father and business associates "was simply to exchange small talk."

There are several Trump supporters here on ANN/TVF promising amazing revelations coming very soon, but for some reason they never release anything remote like evidence or proof that can be taken to a court and form a prosecution.

 

I gave up waiting, believing and holding my breath months ago. I just give myself a quiet chuckle and pass on.

[billd766]

16 hours ago, nauseus said:

What's not suspicious already? C'mon man. 

Suspicions and allegations are NOT conclusive proof of anything.

 

If they are, why has Comer not released the transcripts as proof?

[billd766]

14 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

I'm not sure why you're ignoring what the article actually said and substituting the above fiction.  I presume you like this version better as it is less damming than the actual facts?

 

Unfortunately, you won't be the judge and won't get to choose how the evidence is presented to them.

Neither will you.

 

Do you have any uncontroversial proof of President Biden's guilt?

 

If so please publish it and send a copy to R Comer as committee have spent countless man hours and countless fund yet cannot seem to find any proof that could lead to a prosecution or a successful conviction of President Biden.

 

All I have heard and read so far from Comer, some but not all of the GOP and the Trumps supporters is rumour, allegations and sly digs, but no actual proof or evidence of ANY involvement in Hunter Biden's business.

[ozimoron]

I think the Hunter Biden deflection strategy has run its course.

[BangkokReady]

1 hour ago, candide said:

What do you have, apart from vague allegations, based on cherry-picking parts of the testimony (around 20 calls during 10 years), and ignoring the other parts (they never talked business, Hunter was giving the "illusion", etc...)?

It's all "don't you think" etc...

Not really. Biden was involved in the business. Someone must have been getting paid. It's fairly clear.

[billd766]

4 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

He was being used to promote the business.  He was involved in business meetings.  There's no way that Joe or Hunter weren't financially compensated for that.

Don YOU have any proof of your claim?

 

If you do please publish it.

 

If you don't have any hard proof then, as usual you are making things up, again.

[ozimoron]

7 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

Not really. Biden was involved in the business. Someone must have been getting paid. It's fairly clear.

What's not clear is how you form your opinion that Biden was involved. I'm all ears.

 

I wonder what the MAGA acolytes are going to do when no charges are laid against Joe Biden? Drag out the gallows again? Pitchforks? Cane BBQ lanterns? Rally around the pine tree flag?

Edited August 2, 2023 by ozimoron

[BangkokReady]

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

Don YOU have any proof of your claim?

 

If you do please publish it.

Everything I am saying relates to the article, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

 

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

If you don't have any hard proof then, as usual you are making things up, again.

I don't make up anything. That's you. Just read the article. I haven't said anything that isn't there.

[BangkokReady]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

What's not clear is how you form your opinion that Biden was involved. I'm all ears.

You're unclear about how Biden, who joined business meetings over the phone and was viewed as being integral to the company brand, was involved in the business? Seriously?

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

Everything I am saying relates to the article, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

 

I don't make up anything. That's you. Just read the article. I haven't said anything that isn't there.

If you're not making it up then surely you can post some evidence that passes a sanity check?

[ozimoron]

Just now, BangkokReady said:

You're unclear about how Biden, who joined business meetings over the phone and was viewed as being integral to the company brand, was involved in the business? Seriously?

He didn't

[billd766]

3 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

Everything I am saying relates to the article, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

 

I don't make up anything. That's you. Just read the article. I haven't said anything that isn't there.

But you still have NO proof, only your word which having read this post, is not worth anything.

 

Is everybody supposed to take your word for what has transpired?

[placeholder]

Just now, BangkokReady said:

I just said it's in the article. I've only been referring to the article. Do you think it might be in the article???

There's absolutely no mention of Joe Biden being paid anything in the article. You're just making it all up. When you're called to account you just engage in silly evasions like when asked to name the chap in the article you claimed had said Biden was hired. What you are up to is the essence of trolling.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

The article is quite clear about Biden's role in his son's company. Obviously someone is getting paid for that.

They article makes no mention of Joe being involved in his sons business stop the false representations of what it says.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

The article is quite clear about Biden's role in his son's company. Obviously someone is getting paid for that.

If it was so obvious, why couldn't the Trump administration find evidence that this was the case?

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

The article is quite clear about Biden's role in his son's company. Obviously someone is getting paid for that.

This is what you call evidence? What you construe from the fact that Joe Biden talked over the phone? That would be laughed out of court. The fact is you  claiimed that a chap in the article said Joe Biden was hired to speak. Yet you refuse to produce his name.