Tip of the iceberg -- https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnns-burnett-admits-evidence-chinese-funneling-money-biden-family-doesnt-look-good?fbclid=IwAR0ZOMGL2tZSkyq1-6_Ef471n-VkjlspM0IrL58XSI75uY9tNM5esoEfDs0
Tip of the iceberg -- https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnns-burnett-admits-evidence-chinese-funneling-money-biden-family-doesnt-look-good?fbclid=IwAR0ZOMGL2tZSkyq1-6_Ef471n-VkjlspM0IrL58XSI75uY9tNM5esoEfDs0
Still beating that dumb dead horse.
Um, China was funneling money to various Biden family members. Don't worry Kevin, in another year you'll figure it out.
If you actually listen to what Burnett said at 00:22 in, you'll hear her say something different from the deceptive headline.
What she actually said was, "FOR THE LAYPERSON, that doesn't look good." She did not say SHE thinks it doesn't look good.
She was saying that for low information viewers, for persons unfamiliar with the full scope of the story, i.e. Fox News or Newsmax viewers, the story will have the misleading effect of not looking good for the Bidens. That's qualitatively, fundamentally different from what Fox News wants its audience to take away from the video.
In other words, she was saying something 180 degrees at odds with the headline that David Miller posted without having watched the video or having watched the video, hoping that no one else would watch it.
Let us know when Joe Biden gets indicted for a felony.....and then the board's conservatives who support a felon can pretend to be upset about it.
Let us know when Biden has a couple of secret China bank accounts.
Originally posted by: Jeff
If you actually listen to what Burnett said at 00:22 in, you'll hear her say something different from the deceptive headline.
What she actually said was, "FOR THE LAYPERSON, that doesn't look good." She did not say SHE thinks it doesn't look good.
She was saying that for low information viewers, for persons unfamiliar with the full scope of the story, i.e. Fox News or Newsmax viewers, the story will have the misleading effect of not looking good for the Bidens. That's qualitatively, fundamentally different from what Fox News wants its audience to take away from the video.
In other words, she was saying something 180 degrees at odds with the headline that David Miller posted without having watched the video or having watched the video, hoping that no one else would watch it.
Bullshit - "She" said it. Watch the video. You state " She was saying that for low information viewers" - which is your conclusion of what she said and who her comments were intended for. Also bullshit saying that "she was saying" something 180 degrees at odds with the headline - what she said is exactly what the "headline" alluded to. GTFU and stop your lying - better yet, get someone else with comprehension skills to explain what she said to you.
Originally posted by: PJ Stroh
Let us know when Joe Biden gets indicted for a felony.....and then the board's conservatives who support a felon can pretend to be upset about it.
It is tough to get indicted when you have a hack AG in your pocket.
Other than a connection to a VP, what expertise do the Biden's bring to the table? What do the 150 Suspicious Activity Reports consist of?
Originally posted by: tom
It is tough to get indicted when you have a hack AG in your pocket.
Other than a connection to a VP, what expertise do the Biden's bring to the table? What do the 150 Suspicious Activity Reports consist of?
Let me know when Biden's fires the head of the FBI who is investigating him....or has his hack AG rewrite the investigation summary looking into the president. Then he would be as bad as the guy Tom voted for twice.
But here's the big difference. I can actually show how Trump took money in exchange for favors during his tenure. Here's one of several examples.
Several People pay inflated MaraLago membership in return for cushy AMbassador jobs
Note how Tom cant point to money paid to Biden...or what those people got in return. Thats why his evidence is punctuated with a question mark. Thats exactly how the evidence of Obama's Africa citizenship was presented too. In case you havent figured it out by now - Tom is fundamentally dishonest.
Stupid tom....
