Newsweek is reporting the inquiry, not substantiating the facts, much less validating the implied allegations, behind the inquiry.tech37 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 30, 2023 4:14 pm"mudslinging"...ha! This is Newsweek not Newsmax mdlax, but okay I'll continue to play along.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 30, 2023 9:28 am
As to these emails, I understand why you're taking this bait, but do you think DOJ hasn't had access for the past 5 years? It's not as if these sorts of inquiries about Joe and Hunter weren't present throughout the Trump admin, right? Were they simply totally inept? Or do you buy into the newest stuff that Sessions and Barr were "in on it" too?
Don't they already have Hunter's emails?? Did Joe use these pseudonyms with him?? Were they referred to by him? Did his business partner who testified get emails from Joe under these pseudonyms? Nope...
This is mudslinging at its worst...at some point maybe something will stick, but the motivations are painfully clear..."retribution"
"at some point maybe something will stick"... more plausible deniability pour vous?
The motivations are obvious behind the inquiry...I note that you again refuse to answer direct questions...mudslinging at its worst is right.