Ya, try to be more fun and less douchey. Big ask though.I see jazzyfresh is still attempting to troll everyone. He needs to study under mtjk to learn how it's done.
I can't. I simply can't.Ya, try to be more fun and less douchey. Big ask though.
Well banks and school and all government offices have that day off. I have never really heard of a "president's day celebration" to that is weird. I wonder what she did to celebrate presidents day, besides ******** all over the president who was actually doing presidential work.Wait, how does she think Biden should have celebrated presidents day? Do people actually celebrate presidents day?
Nothing about “Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure,” indicates the meeting had already occurred. He's being thanked for an invitation to a meeting, nor for an actual meeting. Yes, nothing indicates that the meeting did not occur. which is why I said "... the email was unclear about that".Please clarify which one of the non-existent emails you are referring to. The one you supplied a link to makes no mention of The Big Guy, nor does it suggest a scheduled meeting with Joe Biden. It thanks Hunter for the meeting with his father that had already occurred.
Also, an individual by the name of Tony Bobulinski who has been confirmed by multiple sources as a former business partner of the Bidens has claimed that he is 100% certain that the reference to The Big Guy that you have mistakenly brought up refers to Joe Biden.
But Gillar told the Wall Street Journal in 2020: “I would like to clear up any speculation that former Vice President Biden was involved with the 2017 discussions about our potential business structure. I am unaware of any involvement at anytime of the former vice president. The activity in question never delivered any project revenue.”
Gillar wrote that email. Does he exist?I'm sure you will easily explain this away, though. Clearly Tony Bobulinski does not exist, right?
The vast majority of the media has to report on facts, not conspiracies and opinions of political rivals (such as Bobulinski, who was a guest of Trump at the Presidential debates).The vast majority of the media- who are still doing their best to minimize, discredit and hide this story rather than report on it like the public has been led to believe that journalists do - is clearly on your side.
Interestingly, this is the very same "vast majority of the media" who informed us that Trump had paid Russian prostitutes to pee on him, that he had colluded with Putin to steal the electioin, etc. on the basis of a report that was written by a guy who admitted that none of it was verifiable. Can you explain why their standards of proof changed so much between those two stories?The vast majority of the media has to report on facts, not conspiracies and opinions of political rivals (such as Bobulinski, who was a guest of Trump at the Presidential debates).
Rather, that it was claimed to be so in the Steele dossier (which it was).Interestingly, this is the very same "vast majority of the media" who informed us that Trump had paid Russian prostitutes to pee on him,
that he had colluded with Putin to steal the electioin, etc.
They had access to the contents of Steele's dossier. Giuliani only allowed the NYPost access to the data files from the supposed laptop for months, until well after the election.on the basis of a report that was written by a guy who admitted that none of it was verifiable. Can you explain why their standards of proof changed so much between those two stories?