The Hunter Biden Thread

You see the lack of a story in the mainstream and work backwards to conclude that the story must not be important. Maybe you should consider re-framing your perspective. The story is absolutely huge. If the Democrats had this kind of evidence against Trump he wouldn't be president right now. But somehow, it isn't a big deal to you and every TDS imbecile out there. The fact that every mainstream news outlet is cooperating simultaneously to kill the story is just proof that the story isn't serious? Your partisan hackery is showing.

It's not proof of anything. It's an unverified story.
 
It's not proof of anything. It's an unverified story.

How does it become verified? By ignoring it? By attacking the sources but not investigating the content?

It’s an amazing circular argument....it can’t be true because we don’t trust the sources, so we won’t report on it, and since it’s not reported on, it can’t be true.
 
How does it become verified? By ignoring it? By attacking the sources but not investigating the content?

It’s an amazing circular argument....it can’t be true because we don’t trust the sources, so we won’t report on it, and since it’s not reported on, it can’t be true.
The sources have to be anonymous, and you need to throw in a few 'Trumps' and 'Russias'... and then it becomes worthy of investigation.
 
There are over 24,000 pictures from Hunter’s laptop being reviewed and reported on.

Are you suggesting that someone conjured those out of thin air or photoshop / deep fakes?
Show me the very worst and damning 10 or 12. I haven't seen anything that verifies criminality.
 
Show me the very worst and damning 10 or 12. I haven't seen anything that verifies criminality.
Wait, I thought you were arguing that you agreed with the media’s stance that there is no story and that they should not investigate or cover this to determine whether a story exists or not.

If the media did their job I wouldn’t have to show you anything.
 
How does it become verified? By ignoring it? By attacking the sources but not investigating the content?

It’s an amazing circular argument....it can’t be true because we don’t trust the sources, so we won’t report on it, and since it’s not reported on, it can’t be true.
Not trusting a source is a good reason not to report on it. One is inspector Rudy Clouseau.
 
Wait, I thought you were arguing that you agreed with the media’s stance that there is no story and that they should not investigate or cover this to determine whether a story exists or not.

If the media did their job I wouldn’t have to show you anything.
Can you show me anything?
 
Not trusting a source is a good reason not to report on it. One is one is inspector Rudy Clouseau.
Ask Hunter, Jim and Joe Biden if the emails / texts are authentic.

If they deny it, then that’s a story that requires more investigation.

If they confirm it, then that’s a story that requires more investigation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Not trusting a source is a good reason not to report on it. One is inspector Rudy Clouseau.

So, you can categorically deny truth based on the source of that truth?

Wouldn’t it be nice if one of our country’s many “objective” investigative journalists took it upon themselves to independently verify that the information is true or false?
 
Pretty clear now why the Democrats rigged the primary to hand to Biden. He’s so compromised he has to do whatever the party overlords tell him to do. He’ll continue to hide in the basement while the party runs things. Exactly how this campaign is being run. Obama certainly has financial interest in it as well that’s why he’s in Florida campaigning today, telling people only the rich are better off now. I guess he would know? If only he had 8 years to fix that.
 
What specifically are you asking for?

Proof of corruption? Proof of criminality? Proof that Hunter Biden is a drug addict who had no business being appointed to the BOD of Burisma?

What qualifies as “anything”?
He seems to be very specifically asking for proof of criminality.
 

Advertisement



Back
Top