(10-20-2020, 03:34 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: "...forced Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating his son..."

That is simply not true.  That prosecutor was not investigating Hunter Biden.  In fact, he wasn't even investigating Burisma.  The Burisma investigation was dormant.  He wasn't prosecuting anyone of any substance, and the international community wanted him out, and replaced with someone who actually would do some investigating and prosecuting.  Joe Biden was carrying out official government policy, in conjunction with our allies, who also wanted the guy removed and replaced with someone who would crack down on corruption.  

Secondly, none of the emails we have seen were either to or from Joe Biden.  This is Hunter Biden's laptop (supposedly).  Not Joe Biden.   

Thirdly, it is awfully easy to fake this stuff.  And everyone knows, the Russians are out to get Trump re-elected.  

Not even Fox News would take this story, because the source and the timing were so suspicious.

December 2013-- Hunter and Joe fly to China and meet with Xi.
December 2013-- Hunter's firm secured a $1.5B deal with a subsidiary of the Bank of China. 
Early 2014-- Joe is appointed the leading role in US policy with Ukraine. 
April 2014-- Hunter joins the board of Burisma Holdings.
November 2015-- Joe is informed, by the New York Times, that Hunter is under investigation.
December 2015-- Joe pressured Ukrainian leaders to fire the prosecutor leading the investigation into Burisma.
March 2016-- Biden threatened (repeated on TV) to withhold $1B in US aid should Ukraine not fire the prosecutor leading that investigation.

The Ukrainian prosecutor signed a sworn affidavit saying he was fired because of the investigation into Burisma. If the Burisma investigation was dormant as you suggest, why then was the VP of the United States worried about a single prosecutor in a foreign country? The entire $1B is, according to Joe, dependent on the employment of one person. I understand that it's Joe's defense that the prosecutor wasn't doing anything. Sure... Joe could be telling the truth, but we know he's already lied about knowing anything about Hunter's business dealings. It also requires us to believe that Joe wasn't selling influence and Hunter was appointed because of qualifications that Hunter said he didn't have.

All of this is to also ignore a pattern of behavior from Hunter and his family. For example, an executive at one of Hunter's old firms said (when speaking about investors), "We've got people all around the world who want to invest in Joe Biden." You just said Burisma was investigated but that it wasn't active. You still don't see the problem with Joe demanding his termination even if it were true? 

As for the emails, if you have a copy of the original hard drive, then you can determine if they were fake emails. The FBI has that original copy. 

This is definitely his laptop. They even showed a picture of the receipt with his signature. 

(10-20-2020, 03:38 PM)mikesez Wrote: Yep.

Brace yourself.  They respond to contradiction with mockery rather than introspection. You already know that though.

You'll find that people wont mock you if you argue in good faith. While I may often disagree with The Real Marty, he doesn't try to misled or misrepresent himself to others like you do.

---