It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Documents from Bidens sons defense lawyers show he lied

page: 3
37
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Democrats have one question. How does this hurt Trump. If it doesn't, then they have no interest.




posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: JustJohnny
I watched Ben Shapiro, obviously nothing resembling a liberal say this morning that “the Biden thing looked like there is nothing there”.

Which could mean something... or nothing... depending on what Ben knows and doesn't know.

In other words, it doesn't prove anything, unless he provided proof/evidence to support it.


Everyone on both sides and in every branch of intelligence agreed the prosecutor was uniquely corrupt.

Anytime I see the phrase 'everyone knows' or 'everyone said/says', I am suspicious.

Show me all of these people saying this. Or STFU until you actually have evidence.



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

No..


I expect to actually see some evidence is all lmao..

I personally think the wash, rinse , repeat of the GOP claiming XY and Z bigwig democrat has committed felonies, yet they never provide proof of said felonies NOR IS ANYONE EVER HELD ACCOUNTABLE.. is F’n laughable..


I mean LITERALLY every month or two trump and the gop will start slinging new accusations, but never once have they proven them or held a serious investigation that led ANYWHERE..

For AT LEAST a decade I have watched that happen 100s of times..



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

If Biden used his power and influence for the purpose to end a corruption probe into his son, do you think we should know about it?

I make no claim as to what happened, the question is only if we should know if that happened.



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 03:26 PM
link   
The house has subpoenaed State Department documents and people related to Ukraine.

mobile.twitter.com...

Adam Schiff says the house intelligence committee will forgo their two-week break, due to these urgent matters that need to be addressed ASAP.



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

Evidence was provided

You ignored it



posted on Sep, 27 2019 @ 05:39 PM
link   
This is where the investigation that matters (US/UKR DOJ) is focusing.

Jump to 1min 15sec to hear Joe Biden bragging about how he had the Ukraine prosecutor fired who had the nerve to investigate his son's $50,000 @ month golden-goose employer. Not from a "grapevine" source, but from the horse's mouth...JOE BIDEN.



posted on Sep, 28 2019 @ 12:00 AM
link   
I don't follow the logic of these alleged events. If Blue Star was hired by Bursima to protect it from successful prosecution, why would they visit Sevruk to vigorously allege that Shokin, the fired prosecutor, is not corrupt? This runs counter to Blue Star's mission. Wouldn't Blue Star want to INSIST that Shokin is corrupt, thereby weakening the credibility of his investigation? After all, Blue Star was hired to thwart this investigation. They would hardly be inclined to "apologize" for alleged misinformation, i.e. Shokin's corruption, that would actually help their client. Differently stated, it seems far-fetched that Blue Star attorneys would run to Sevruk to champion the honesty and integrity of a man (Shokin) who was prosecuting their client.

I wouldn't be surprised if the memo partly reproduced above is a forgery or at least concocted by Sevruk (or someone) to give the false appearance that people (Blue Start Strategies) close to the case have vouched for Shokin. The problem is that these people had no reasonable motive for doing this. Or I can't see any.



posted on Sep, 28 2019 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Criko

Blue star would have known that the incoming prosecutor knew shokin was not corrupt. Therefore they wanted to seem like honest people to the new prosecutor by lamenting the treatment of his predecessor.

Notice their claims go from admitting disinfo was spread about the former prosecutor, straight to an offer to have the new prosecutor meet with Obamas state dept. to smooth out the investigation?



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join