Phoenix68
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2022
- Messages
- 12,613
The SC is controlled by republicans 6 to 3.I agree. As long as dirty Democrats control the judiciary in large Democrat sanctuary cities the likelihood of a Democrat answering for his crimes remains slim. Trump, on the other hand, is in danger of being mobbed by the leftist mobocracy currently illegally controlling power in the US through fraud.
Here is another long-recognized phrase:
How about "Any excuse will serve a tyrant"
Added at the end of (one of the variants of) "The Wolf and the Lamb", as the moral of the story. Written by Aesop (620-550 BCE) this is a well-known fable where a victim (the lamb) is falsely accused and killed (by the wolf) despite a reasonable defence.
The Ukrainian prosecutor was at the point of calling Hunter Biden to testify in the Burisma investigation when Joe Biden raced there to have him fired, using American aid money as leverage..
View attachment 7634
.
"The LOONEY MOONY TIMES!!!!!"
.
.
Why Was Ukraine's Top Prosecutor Fired?
September 24, 2019
.
The SC did not indict Trump on bogus charges, those were Biden's weaponized Justice Dept. boys.The SC is controlled by republicans 6 to 3.
You're an idiot.
Proof he was at the point of calling hunter?The Ukrainian prosecutor was at the point of calling Hunter Biden to testify in the Burisma investigation when Joe Biden raced there to have him fired, using American aid money as leverage.
You would know the facts if you investigated them for yourself instead of leaving it to lying leftists to tell you what to believe.Proof he was at the point of calling hunter?
Cast doubt? LolYou would know the facts if you investigated them for yourself instead of leaving it to lying leftists to tell you what to believe.
Solomon: These once-secret memos cast doubt on Joe Biden’s Ukraine story | The Hill
Solomon: These once-secret memos cast doubt on Joe Biden’s Ukraine story
BY JOHN SOLOMON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 09/26/19 6:00 PM ET
I have sued the State Department for any records related to that meeting. The reason is simple: There is both a public interest and an ethics question to knowing if Hunter Biden and his team sought State’s assistance while his father was vice president.
The controversy ignited anew earlier this year when I disclosed that Joe Biden admitted during a 2018 videotaped speech that, as vice president in March 2016, he threatened to cancel $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, to pressure Ukraine’s then-President Petro Poroshenko to fire Shokin.
At the time, Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma. Shokin told me he was making plans to question Hunter Biden about $3 million in fees that Biden and his partner, Archer, collected from Burisma through their American firm. Documents seized by the FBI in an unrelated case confirm the payments, which in many months totaled more than $166,000.
Some media outlets have reported that, at the time Joe Biden forced the firing in March 2016, there were no open investigations. Those reports are wrong. A British-based investigation of Burisma’s owner was closed down in early 2015 on a technicality when a deadline for documents was not met. But the Ukraine Prosecutor General’s office still had two open inquiries in March 2016, according to the official case file provided me. One of those cases involved taxes; the other, allegations of corruption. Burisma announced the cases against it were not closed and settled until January 2017.
You cannot prove Shokin was not investigating Burisma as well as its officers, including Hunter Biden, no matter how many lies leftists deceive you into believing.Cast doubt? Lol
Just an opinion not proof duh
Disgraced prosecutor claims he was making plans? Lol totally worthless claim with no proof and you fell for it lol
You cannot prove Shokin was not investigating Burisma as well as its officers, including Hunter Biden, no matter how many lies leftists deceive you into believing.
I don't need to prove or try to disprove the facts. The facts exist on their own. If some disagree with the facts then let them try to disprove them.Prove he was
Your claim your proof duh
You have no actual facts to disprove lolI don't need to prove or try to disprove the facts. The facts exist on their own. If some disagree with the facts then let them try to disprove them.
You obviously don't know what I and millions of other Americans know of the facts that you seem ignorant of.You have no actual facts to disprove lol
That's the point duh
Post proven facts along with their proof lolYou obviously don't know what I and millions of other Americans know of the facts that you seem ignorant of.
I have posted facts you disagreed with but could not disprove.Post proven facts along with their proof lol
I have posted facts you disagreed with but could not disprove.