Who says it was vaporised? Still kinda fishy...but I don't get this "argue a conspiracy for conspiracies sake" trend. At least tell me why you think they planted DNA.
Whether the FBI did or didn't plant DNA is inconsequential.
If the FBI planted the DNA, they're covering up for Hunter Biden.
If the FBI found legitimate DNA and have the technology to do so, why haven't they broken down the information on Hunter Biden's laptop and indicted him yet?
I wasn't aware that there was much of a "point" being made. It's all relying on assumptions. I don't have to automatically accept O.Ps premise.
I'm pretty sure it's consequential for the FBI to be planting DNA....
This is ridiculous. Of course they're covering up for Hunter Biden. But that doesn't mean they planted DNA and it also isn't even the same thing as investigating the laptop. One is a pretty clear cut thing like a DNA test...the other is a forensic examination of a computer and its contents.
And if that doesn't make it clear, how about this equation?
Warner's DNA evidence at the scene = vaporized DNA in a bomb blast
How is that an assumption when it's the official story?
The point of this is the FBI hasn't investigated Hunter Biden's laptop to even a tenth of this level of detail. You obviously are unaware if you don't see the "point" of this. This has nothing to do with whether or not the DNA evidence is planted or organic, that I can tell you.
Yes I "realise" that. You sound dumb for saying that. I wasn't contradicting that story. I was referring to the primary assumption that all the DNA was vaporised where it might have been sourced.
Tried your links, second didn't work. No information on vaporised DNA which you later imply is the "official story".
Your 'equation' is just the title of the post.
How is it an assumption? Because you're assuming that all the DNA was vaporised or that it was gathered where it would have/could have been vaporised. You don't have the slightest clue how they discovered that evidence yet.
Yes of course the FBI is stonewalling an investigation into Hunter/Joe. That's a highly politically charged situation involving the losing Presidential candidate and his son. And allegations from people overseas and involving financial fraud. The two cases are silly to compare, but as usual the FBI looks inept in both and/or focused in one.
If you say it doesn't matter whether DNA was planted, then you're agreeing with me. I asked why we needed a conspiracy to explain this and you've just given me the answer. We don't.
What's wrong with explaining why you think they planted the DNA?
Are you such a spoon fed individual that you want to guess everything and live your life in a constant state of conjecture?
Be targeted with your theories. I don't wanna hear that you have a theory on literally anything that happens. Explain why this is significant or even true.
You should do your research on the FBI’s history of intimidation to grassroots conservative movements. This is right up there ally and fits the mold to a tea. We probably won’t get evidence this is a false flag until Trump appoints a new interim FBI director after the 6th
"You should do your research" is another way of saying you don't have jack shit to prove your claims but you want me to leap to conclusions based on what is probably more conjecture.
Yeah, I'll believe it when it comes out. Until then there are far less ridiculous explanations for what happened.
I also think it's absurd. If the FBI was going to kill somebody and then plant their DNA to...I dunno why they even need to do that when they could just say they couldn't identify the remains...stage a fake bombing for what appears to be no clear reason (yet) I'm pretty sure they would have gone for the jugular a LONG time ago and Trump wouldn't be sitting around letting it happen.
Who says it was vaporised? Still kinda fishy...but I don't get this "argue a conspiracy for conspiracies sake" trend. At least tell me why you think they planted DNA.
Do you even get the point of this?
Whether the FBI did or didn't plant DNA is inconsequential.
If the FBI planted the DNA, they're covering up for Hunter Biden.
If the FBI found legitimate DNA and have the technology to do so, why haven't they broken down the information on Hunter Biden's laptop and indicted him yet?
I wasn't aware that there was much of a "point" being made. It's all relying on assumptions. I don't have to automatically accept O.Ps premise.
I'm pretty sure it's consequential for the FBI to be planting DNA....
This is ridiculous. Of course they're covering up for Hunter Biden. But that doesn't mean they planted DNA and it also isn't even the same thing as investigating the laptop. One is a pretty clear cut thing like a DNA test...the other is a forensic examination of a computer and its contents.
You realize the official story is that FBI investigators found Warner's DNA evidence at the scene, right?
https://abcnews.go.com/US/nashville-hero-police-officers-recall-bomb-countdown-eerie/story?id=74923946
Archived link here (eventually) - https://archive.is/1B700
And if that doesn't make it clear, how about this equation?
Warner's DNA evidence at the scene = vaporized DNA in a bomb blast
How is that an assumption when it's the official story?
The point of this is the FBI hasn't investigated Hunter Biden's laptop to even a tenth of this level of detail. You obviously are unaware if you don't see the "point" of this. This has nothing to do with whether or not the DNA evidence is planted or organic, that I can tell you.
Yes I "realise" that. You sound dumb for saying that. I wasn't contradicting that story. I was referring to the primary assumption that all the DNA was vaporised where it might have been sourced.
Tried your links, second didn't work. No information on vaporised DNA which you later imply is the "official story".
Your 'equation' is just the title of the post.
How is it an assumption? Because you're assuming that all the DNA was vaporised or that it was gathered where it would have/could have been vaporised. You don't have the slightest clue how they discovered that evidence yet.
Yes of course the FBI is stonewalling an investigation into Hunter/Joe. That's a highly politically charged situation involving the losing Presidential candidate and his son. And allegations from people overseas and involving financial fraud. The two cases are silly to compare, but as usual the FBI looks inept in both and/or focused in one.
If you say it doesn't matter whether DNA was planted, then you're agreeing with me. I asked why we needed a conspiracy to explain this and you've just given me the answer. We don't.
Shill
Low effort loser.
What's wrong with explaining why you think they planted the DNA?
Are you such a spoon fed individual that you want to guess everything and live your life in a constant state of conjecture?
Be targeted with your theories. I don't wanna hear that you have a theory on literally anything that happens. Explain why this is significant or even true.
You should do your research on the FBI’s history of intimidation to grassroots conservative movements. This is right up there ally and fits the mold to a tea. We probably won’t get evidence this is a false flag until Trump appoints a new interim FBI director after the 6th
Their alley? The mould? Autocorrect is savage.
"You should do your research" is another way of saying you don't have jack shit to prove your claims but you want me to leap to conclusions based on what is probably more conjecture.
Yeah, I'll believe it when it comes out. Until then there are far less ridiculous explanations for what happened.
I also think it's absurd. If the FBI was going to kill somebody and then plant their DNA to...I dunno why they even need to do that when they could just say they couldn't identify the remains...stage a fake bombing for what appears to be no clear reason (yet) I'm pretty sure they would have gone for the jugular a LONG time ago and Trump wouldn't be sitting around letting it happen.