https://justthenews.com/accountability/whistleblowers/tueforbidden-questions-denied-warrants-witness-tipoffs-agents-detailand left veteran investigators as well as the powerful House chairman seeing political favoritism and undue interference."
"From search warrants denied to critical evidence kept from the investigative team, three experienced federal law enforcement agents have now offered Congress significant testimony and proof that the Hunter Biden probe did not follow FBI or IRS norms
Lyin' Biden is far more than damaged goods: he has been completely exposed as a master criminal that sold his political influence. And the corruption in the FBI exceeds anything in its storied history, forever tarnishing the organization.
On 2023-07-17 21:57, Tommy wrote:and left veteran investigators as well as the powerful House chairman seeing political favoritism and undue interference."
https://justthenews.com/accountability/whistleblowers/tueforbidden-questions-denied-warrants-witness-tipoffs-agents-detail
"From search warrants denied to critical evidence kept from the investigative team, three experienced federal law enforcement agents have now offered Congress significant testimony and proof that the Hunter Biden probe did not follow FBI or IRS norms
Lyin' Biden is far more than damaged goods: he has been completely exposed as a master criminal that sold his political influence. And the corruption in the FBI exceeds anything in its storied history, forever tarnishing the organization.Sorry, but that's not accurate.
In no sense has a whistleblower "come forward".
A highly biased committee has claimed that they've interviewed someone...
'"The night before the interview of Hunter Biden, both Secret Service headquarters and the Biden transition team were tipped off about the
planned interview," Comer explained.'
Not the whistleblower: Comer.
'You can read Shapley's complete interview with lawmakers here.'
Except you can't read the "complete interview"...
...because the file's been redacted (according to them)...
...and the link is (deliberately?) broken.
'In the interview with Congress on Monday, aides said, the retired FBI
agent said:'
AIDES said it... ...not the actual "whistleblower".
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 4:10:52 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:and left veteran investigators as well as the powerful House chairman seeing political favoritism and undue interference."
On 2023-07-17 21:57, Tommy wrote:
https://justthenews.com/accountability/whistleblowers/tueforbidden-questions-denied-warrants-witness-tipoffs-agents-detail
"From search warrants denied to critical evidence kept from the investigative team, three experienced federal law enforcement agents have now offered Congress significant testimony and proof that the Hunter Biden probe did not follow FBI or IRS norms
Sorry, but that's not accurate.
Lyin' Biden is far more than damaged goods: he has been completely exposed as a master criminal that sold his political influence. And the corruption in the FBI exceeds anything in its storied history, forever tarnishing the organization.
In no sense has a whistleblower "come forward".
A highly biased committee has claimed that they've interviewed someone...
'"The night before the interview of Hunter Biden, both Secret Service
headquarters and the Biden transition team were tipped off about the
planned interview," Comer explained.'
Not the whistleblower: Comer.
'You can read Shapley's complete interview with lawmakers here.'
Except you can't read the "complete interview"...
...because the file's been redacted (according to them)...
...and the link is (deliberately?) broken.
'In the interview with Congress on Monday, aides said, the retired FBI
agent said:'
AIDES said it... ...not the actual "whistleblower".
No, Fool, the whistleblower DEFINITELY came forward - nobody dragged him/her into the glaring spotlight.
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:norms and left veteran investigators as well as the powerful House chairman seeing political favoritism and undue interference."
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 4:10:52 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-17 21:57, Tommy wrote:
https://justthenews.com/accountability/whistleblowers/tueforbidden-questions-denied-warrants-witness-tipoffs-agents-detail
"From search warrants denied to critical evidence kept from the investigative team, three experienced federal law enforcement agents have now offered Congress significant testimony and proof that the Hunter Biden probe did not follow FBI or IRS
Sorry, but that's not accurate.
Lyin' Biden is far more than damaged goods: he has been completely exposed as a master criminal that sold his political influence. And the corruption in the FBI exceeds anything in its storied history, forever tarnishing the organization.
In no sense has a whistleblower "come forward".
A highly biased committee has claimed that they've interviewed someone... >>
'"The night before the interview of Hunter Biden, both Secret Service
headquarters and the Biden transition team were tipped off about the
planned interview," Comer explained.'
Not the whistleblower: Comer.
'You can read Shapley's complete interview with lawmakers here.'
Except you can't read the "complete interview"...
...because the file's been redacted (according to them)...
...and the link is (deliberately?) broken.
'In the interview with Congress on Monday, aides said, the retired FBI
agent said:'
AIDES said it... ...not the actual "whistleblower".
No, Fool, the whistleblower DEFINITELY came forward - nobody dragged him/her into the glaring spotlight.Really?
What's his name, then?
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.Yes:
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:norms and left veteran investigators as well as the powerful House chairman seeing political favoritism and undue interference."
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 4:10:52 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-17 21:57, Tommy wrote:
https://justthenews.com/accountability/whistleblowers/tueforbidden-questions-denied-warrants-witness-tipoffs-agents-detail
"From search warrants denied to critical evidence kept from the investigative team, three experienced federal law enforcement agents have now offered Congress significant testimony and proof that the Hunter Biden probe did not follow FBI or IRS
Really?Sorry, but that's not accurate.
Lyin' Biden is far more than damaged goods: he has been completely exposed as a master criminal that sold his political influence. And the corruption in the FBI exceeds anything in its storied history, forever tarnishing the organization.
In no sense has a whistleblower "come forward".
A highly biased committee has claimed that they've interviewed someone... >>>>
'"The night before the interview of Hunter Biden, both Secret Service
headquarters and the Biden transition team were tipped off about the
planned interview," Comer explained.'
Not the whistleblower: Comer.
'You can read Shapley's complete interview with lawmakers here.'
Except you can't read the "complete interview"...
...because the file's been redacted (according to them)...
...and the link is (deliberately?) broken.
'In the interview with Congress on Monday, aides said, the retired FBI >>>> agent said:'
AIDES said it... ...not the actual "whistleblower".
No, Fool, the whistleblower DEFINITELY came forward - nobody dragged him/her into the glaring spotlight.
What's his name, then?
Special Agent Joseph Ziegler
Yes:
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been
completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
...
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
Yes: <file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
On Wednesday, July 19, 2023 at 8:18:14 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
...
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
Yes:
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been
completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
Suggest you look again, Tommy. Because a triple slash ("///") is a format protocol violation that isn't supported.
And even if it did somehow work, its a pointer to a local file stored on that one computer,
not a web-based HTML link, so just how is anyone else expected to be able to access it?
Case in point, you can't access this file because its not on your local computer:
file://SSD/Users/Shared/documents/proof_that_Tommy_isn't_really_a_millionaire.pdf
-hh
On Wednesday, July 19, 2023 at 8:18:14 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
...
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
Yes:
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been
completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
Suggest you look again, Tommy. Because a triple slash ("///") is a format protocol violation that isn't supported.
And even if it did somehow work, its a pointer to a local file stored on that one computer,
not a web-based HTML link, so just how is anyone else expected to be able to access it?
Case in point, you can't access this file because its not on your local computer:
file://SSD/Users/Shared/documents/proof_that_Tommy_isn't_really_a_millionaire.pdf
On 2023-07-20 02:54, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, July 19, 2023 at 8:18:14 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
...
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
Yes:
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been
completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
Suggest you look again, Tommy. Because a triple slash ("///") is a format protocol violation that isn't supported.
And even if it did somehow work, its a pointer to a local file stored on that one computer,
not a web-based HTML link, so just how is anyone else expected to be able to access it?
Case in point, you can't access this file because its not on your local computer:
file://SSD/Users/Shared/documents/proof_that_Tommy_isn't_really_a_millionaire.pdfImagine that:
Tommy Sunshine is a straight-up, proven liar.
On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 10:54:11 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-20 02:54, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, July 19, 2023 at 8:18:14 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:Imagine that:
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
...
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
Yes:
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been >>>>> completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
Suggest you look again, Tommy. Because a triple slash ("///") is a format protocol violation that isn't supported.
And even if it did somehow work, its a pointer to a local file stored on that one computer,
not a web-based HTML link, so just how is anyone else expected to be able to access it?
Case in point, you can't access this file because its not on your local computer:
file://SSD/Users/Shared/documents/proof_that_Tommy_isn't_really_a_millionaire.pdf
Tommy Sunshine is a straight-up, proven liar.
Oh, REALLY?
https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Whistleblower-1-Transcript_Redacted.pdf
On 2023-07-22 08:11, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 10:54:11 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-20 02:54, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, July 19, 2023 at 8:18:14 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:Imagine that:
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
...
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
Yes:
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been >>>>> completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
Suggest you look again, Tommy. Because a triple slash ("///") is a format protocol violation that isn't supported.
And even if it did somehow work, its a pointer to a local file stored on that one computer,
not a web-based HTML link, so just how is anyone else expected to be able to access it?
Case in point, you can't access this file because its not on your local computer:
file://SSD/Users/Shared/documents/proof_that_Tommy_isn't_really_a_millionaire.pdf
Tommy Sunshine is a straight-up, proven liar.
Oh, REALLY?
https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Whistleblower-1-Transcript_Redacted.pdfThat link was NOT in the article you referenced.
Still IS not in the article you referenced.
Therefore, when you said the link in the article you referenced worked...
...you were lying.
You either lied by knowing it didn't work and claiming it did.
Or you lied by actually trying the link, but implicitly claiming you had.
No run along to an adult to have that explained to you, Sunshine.
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 9:01:43 AM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-22 08:11, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 10:54:11 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:That link was NOT in the article you referenced.
On 2023-07-20 02:54, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, July 19, 2023 at 8:18:14 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:Imagine that:
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
...
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
Yes:
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been >>>>>>> completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
Suggest you look again, Tommy. Because a triple slash ("///") is a format protocol violation that isn't supported.
And even if it did somehow work, its a pointer to a local file stored on that one computer,
not a web-based HTML link, so just how is anyone else expected to be able to access it?
Case in point, you can't access this file because its not on your local computer:
file://SSD/Users/Shared/documents/proof_that_Tommy_isn't_really_a_millionaire.pdf
Tommy Sunshine is a straight-up, proven liar.
Oh, REALLY?
https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Whistleblower-1-Transcript_Redacted.pdf
Still IS not in the article you referenced.
Therefore, when you said the link in the article you referenced worked...
...you were lying.
You either lied by knowing it didn't work and claiming it did.
Or you lied by actually trying the link, but implicitly claiming you had.
No run along to an adult to have that explained to you, Sunshine.
Do you lay awake at night dreaming up this NONSENSE? Apparently so...
On 2023-07-23 22:14, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 9:01:43 AM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-22 08:11, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 10:54:11 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:That link was NOT in the article you referenced.
On 2023-07-20 02:54, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, July 19, 2023 at 8:18:14 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote:Imagine that:
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
...
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
Yes:
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been >>>>>>> completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
Suggest you look again, Tommy. Because a triple slash ("///") is a format protocol violation that isn't supported.
And even if it did somehow work, its a pointer to a local file stored on that one computer,
not a web-based HTML link, so just how is anyone else expected to be able to access it?
Case in point, you can't access this file because its not on your local computer:
file://SSD/Users/Shared/documents/proof_that_Tommy_isn't_really_a_millionaire.pdf
Tommy Sunshine is a straight-up, proven liar.
Oh, REALLY?
https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Whistleblower-1-Transcript_Redacted.pdf
Still IS not in the article you referenced.
Therefore, when you said the link in the article you referenced worked... >>
...you were lying.
You either lied by knowing it didn't work and claiming it did.
Or you lied by actually trying the link, but implicitly claiming you had. >>
No run along to an adult to have that explained to you, Sunshine.
Do you lay awake at night dreaming up this NONSENSE? Apparently so...What was nonsense, Sunshine?
I said the link didn't work, and that was a fact.
You said it did, and that was a lie.
On Sunday, July 23, 2023 at 11:39:55 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
On 2023-07-23 22:14, Tommy wrote:
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 9:01:43 AM UTC-7, Alan wrote:What was nonsense, Sunshine?
On 2023-07-22 08:11, Tommy wrote:
On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 10:54:11 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:That link was NOT in the article you referenced.
On 2023-07-20 02:54, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, July 19, 2023 at 8:18:14 PM UTC-4, Tommy wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:54:08 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:Imagine that:
On 2023-07-18 20:57, Tommy wrote:
...
Also, NO, the link is NOT broken, Fool.
Yes:
<file:///sites/default/files/2023-06/Whistleblower%25201%2520Transcript_Redacted.pdf>
Now... ...since a "file:///" link cannot lead to a file, you've been >>>>>>>>> completely exposed as a liar by claiming it wasn't broken.
Worked for me, Fool.
Suggest you look again, Tommy. Because a triple slash ("///") is a format protocol violation that isn't supported.
And even if it did somehow work, its a pointer to a local file stored on that one computer,
not a web-based HTML link, so just how is anyone else expected to be able to access it?
Case in point, you can't access this file because its not on your local computer:
file://SSD/Users/Shared/documents/proof_that_Tommy_isn't_really_a_millionaire.pdf
Tommy Sunshine is a straight-up, proven liar.
Oh, REALLY?
https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Whistleblower-1-Transcript_Redacted.pdf
Still IS not in the article you referenced.
Therefore, when you said the link in the article you referenced worked... >>>>
...you were lying.
You either lied by knowing it didn't work and claiming it did.
Or you lied by actually trying the link, but implicitly claiming you had. >>>>
No run along to an adult to have that explained to you, Sunshine.
Do you lay awake at night dreaming up this NONSENSE? Apparently so...
I said the link didn't work, and that was a fact.
You said it did, and that was a lie.
Did you read the testimony, YES OR NO???????????
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 59:50:27 |
| Calls: | 6,712 |
| Files: | 12,243 |
| Messages: | 5,355,702 |