We know FOR A FACT that Biden ordered Ukraine to fire a prosecutor as a quid pro quo for one billion in U.S. aid. It's on video. We do not know that the prosecutor was corrupt. No facts have been presented. We are told to believe this OPINION. No thank you!
-
-
However, as Victoria Nuland pointed out on her intercepted phone call, "Fuck the EU
”Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I find that hypothesis credible. It sounds like his other tall tales.
- Show replies
-
-
-
Scenario: Biden neglects his conflict of interest and doesn't do a single thing to prevent his son's boss from suggesting future prosecutors and other ppl that he has proven access to US VP. Unethical?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
"Good" doesn't mean right or ethical in this context. It just means he has cover because others believed (or acted as if) the prosecutor was corrupt.
- Show replies
-
-
-
nope..it doesn't ring correct
@ScottAdamsSays...because biden said on video he HAD THE POWER to threat Ukraine government to do something and Obama gave him the power. But Biden WAS COMPROMISED because his son was involved.FACTS NEED TO COME OUT..ALL OF THEMThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It would be a good idea if President Trump asked the Ukrainian government to do an investigation, so we could get to the bottom of what really happened.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This leads me to believe that the mention of Biden is a distraction... red meat for the media to tear through while the real focus and interaction with the DOJ is regarding Crowdstrike, outside of the spotlight.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.