Trump Indictments

Originally posted by spinefx: ↑

H,

"Note how a most convincing man...Bobulinski...well..."

Just because he convinced you doesn't mean he's convincing. He convinced himself that he was a witness to a crime, he can't identify what that crime was but there must have been one. Is this a whistleblowers are good day again?

"If Trump wins we might..."

Is this a sign that your confidence is not what it was?

"Why is the State Dpt stonewalling Comer's access to Biden's off shore account?"

You have the majority in the House, use it.

"Why are there 10 shell companies to hide the trail of money?"

LLC's are completely legal and are not in themself a proof of any illegality. Many people/corporate entities use them, even your man. Whose shell companies are they? Joe's, Hunter's, Jim's,..... You don't know so stop with this line of thinking. Even your main man Rep Farmer James uses LLC's should he be investigated because he's doing something illegal.

"Why is there a cheque to JB of 40k..."

I don't know. That's the job of your crack(head) team to find out. You didn't send your best did you?

"And 100s more valid questions"

I'm sure you do, although the validity of them could be questionable. Maybe narrow your focus and get onto something you can prove. This scattergun approach isn't working is it.

"And you lot go "Meh...noting to see here lets keep after Trump"

Nope. Mind you, if he does have LLC's and they are proof of some nefarious illegal activity maybe they should be looked at. You'd support that wouldn't you? What's good for the goose is good for the gander?

Expand

First off...re the offshore a/c...we could have every house seat and get nowhere if the State Dept doesn't act

LLCs are, of course, normal...but 10 is not and all familiar with these things tell us unequivocally...its a sign you're seeking to hide transactions and trails...so again why if its all above board?

As for "not being able to name a crime"...you're siding with the moron AOC who didn't even know there IS a crime of RICO ...and Bobulinski is a first-hand witness.

But again why not follow up i/v the guy if you are the FBI?

Bottom line...putting all we know together (massive amounts) with the inability of any Biden to proffer what it was that they sold for all the money that flowed...IS without a doubt..a case that has merits to pul before a jury. Some evidence may be quite circumstantial ...some of it is factual... witnesses' veracity... the weight of the preponderance of evidence... the defence that is provided..are all matters for the jury to decide.

BTW...on that point of what did the Bidens give to the money sources for all that money...seeing they cant show a single thing...whats your explanation and given all else we know...why are you so UTTERLY uninterested in that CRITICAL piece of the puzzle????

Most of the country agrees with me and not with your lot.

Not expecting an impeachment this year...Congress recesses and proximity to ELection dictate otherwise. IN Nov when we win WH and House..we can go thru the DoJ and FBI and dig DEEPER. If we lose WH and hold the House...the committee keeps digging.

The truth will eventually be out.

So well keep digging and might have to wait till DT is on and he puts in a DoJ an FBI that will do their job and then we'll have an ex-POTUS in the sights...and now that the Dems have opened that door... dont expect the GOP to not go thru it.,

Occasionally, you show the signs of reasoned thinking capacity...so Im sure on this matter, you absolutely know I am right cause to think otherwise you'd have to be either stupid or an ideologue...but instead, youre doing your, "Im gonna argue for argument sake"