TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @CortesSteve

Saved - December 15, 2025 at 9:43 PM

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

Time to prioritize OUR citizens. Worker visas need to end, and we need a broader pause on legal migration to America.

@gc22gc - Grace Chong, MBI

Dillon: Is the goal really that Americans compete with the entire world for jobs in their own country? That’s one of the most psychotic ideas I’ve ever heard, and it only makes sense if you’re part of the asset owning class paying cheaper labor to service what you own. https://t.co/ofsCWDsTye

Saved - April 24, 2025 at 12:36 PM

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

The Dems are "a party of open borders, globalist trade policies, constant warfighting abroad, and cultural Marxism that elevates the most fringe aspects of human perversion into some sort of faux noble cause." No wonder Catholics turn on the Dems... https://amgreatness.com/2025/04/23/catholics-turn-on-the-democrats/

Catholics Turn on the Democrats › American Greatness With the death of Pope Francis, the attention of the world naturally turns toward the Church, and mostly toward Rome. But this focus on Catholicism should also… amgreatness.com
Saved - March 16, 2025 at 6:18 PM

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

Any president has wide latitude in removing foreigners from the United States — and it’s not subject to judicial review, per statute and long-standing precedent.

@seanmdav - Sean Davis

Lest anyone think judicial insurrectionists like Russiagate co-conspirator James Boasberg are plowing new ground with regard to deportation of hostile foreign enemies, they are not. In fact, Boasberg is maliciously violating the law as part of a corrupt conspiracy to seize the powers of the presidency for himself. We know this because the Supreme Court ruled in 1948—long after World War II was over—that the Alien Enemies Act gave the U.S. president absolute authority to detain and deport a German who had been in the U.S. legally since the 1930s. In the case of Ludecke v. Watkins, the Supreme Court ruled explicitly that not only could the president deport legal foreign residents even if they weren’t members of a foreign army, but that the courts had no authority to even review the president’s decision to do so. “The Alien Enemy Act precludes judicial review of the removal order,” the Supreme Court ruled, years after World War II had ended. “Such great war powers may be abused, no doubt, but that is a bad reason for having judges supervise their exercise, whatever the legal formulas within which such supervision would nominally be confined,” the Supreme Court majority declared. “Accordingly, we hold that full responsibility for the just exercise of this great power may validly be left where the Congress has constitutionally placed it—on the President of the United States.” The Founders in their wisdom made him not only the Commander-in-Chief but also the guiding organ in the conduct of our foreign affairs,” the Supreme Court ruling continued. “He who was entrusted with such vast powers in relation to the outside world was also entrusted by Congress, almost throughout the whole life of the nation, with the disposition of alien enemies during a state of war.” In the current instance, the president on January 20 declared a national emergency at the border, noting an ongoing invasion by hostile and violent foreign enemies. “This assault on the American people and the integrity of America’s sovereign borders represents a grave threat to our Nation,” the president declared. “Because of the gravity and emergency of this present danger and imminent threat, it is necessary for the Armed Forces to take all appropriate action to assist the Department of Homeland Security in obtaining full operational control of the southern border.” The president further designated multiple violent foreign drug cartels, including the Venezuelan organization Tren de Aragua, as foreign terrorist organizations, putting them in the same category as ISIS and al Qaeda. And to protect the safety and sovereignty of the United States, the president ordered the immediate detention and removal all Venezuelan individuals associated with that violent enemy force. In the Ludecke case from 1948, the petitioner being detained and removed was a German writer who had legally resided in the U.S. for over a decade with no history of violence and no direct ties to any German military or paramilitary unit, years after the war with Germany was over. And in that case, the Supreme Court said the president’s authority under the law and the Constitution was absolute and could not even be reviewed, let alone blocked, let alone reversed. Compare those facts to the current case: the president is removing foreign aliens who are members of a violent foreign terrorist organization who entered the U.S. illegally for the purpose of committing illegal and often brutally violent acts the United States in the midst of a national emergency at the border and ongoing military action against the drug cartels. It is simply impossible to look at the law and the facts in this case and somehow conclude that a single inferior and unelected judge with a long history of conspiring against the president and the United States somehow has the authority to personally direct the elected Commander-in-Chief on how he is to prosecute a war to protect our sovereignty from a violent invading force. The Supreme Court ruled that no judge has the authority to do that. Yet James Boasberg, the corrupt federal judge who also personally made sure a key Russiagate hoaxer and felon whose own fabrications he oversaw never spent a day in prison, is now trying to extort the Commander-in-Chief into pre-emptively submitting all presidential decisions—including individual flight plans—for him to review. This isn’t just a constitutional abomination. It is an attempt by an inferior and unelected judge to corruptly seize the powers of the presidency from the Commander-in-Chief on behalf of a hostile foreign invading force. For this reason, Boasberg needs to be placed under criminal investigation, any security clearances currently granted to him must be revoked, all his communications must be seized and reviewed, and he must be removed from the bench until the criminal investigation into his activities is concluded. The law is clear, and Boasberg is maliciously ignoring it, putting the safety and sovereignty of the entire country at risk. It’s time for him to be held to account for his actions.

Saved - December 21, 2024 at 5:18 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe Mark Milley misrepresented Joe Biden's mental fitness during a 60 Minutes interview to influence the election in favor of Trump. I frequently meet with Biden, and each time, I find him alert, engaged, and well-prepared on serious matters. It's concerning that people might doubt his capability in making critical decisions about war and peace, but I assure them he is fit for the responsibilities he holds, including those related to nuclear weapons.

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

🚨Mark “White Rage” Milley lied about Joe Biden’s mental fitness a year ago in a 60 Minutes interview because he didn’t want President Trump to win the election. This was a massive cover-up: “I meet frequently with the President and every single time I meet with [Biden] — he’s just fine. How people interpret that is up to them. But I engage with him frequently and he’s alert, sound, does his homework, reads the papers, reads all the read-ahead material. And he's very, very engaging in issues of very serious matters of war and peace and life and death. So if the American people are worried about an individual who is, you know, someone who's making decisions of war and peace and has access to, you know, makes the decisions of nuclear weapons and that sort of thing, I think they can rest easy.”

Video Transcript AI Summary
I meet frequently with the president, and each time he is alert, engaged, and well-informed. He thoroughly prepares for discussions on serious matters, including war and peace. If the American people have concerns about his decision-making, particularly regarding critical issues like nuclear weapons, they can feel reassured.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I would just tell you that, I meet frequently with the president, and every single time I meet him, he is just fine. How people interpret that is up to them, but, I I engage with him frequently and and alert, sound, does his homework, reads the papers, reads all the read ahead material, and is very, very engaging in issues of very serious matters of war and peace and life and death. So if the American people are worried about an individual, who is, you know, someone who's making decisions of war and peace and, has access to, you know, makes the decisions of nuclear weapons and that sort of thing, I think they can rest easy.
Saved - December 19, 2024 at 6:54 PM

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

@catturd2 He lied…

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

🚨Wow. You can't make this up. Speaker Johnson was on Fox News at this same time last year bragging about how Congress would no longer sell the country out exactly like he tried to do today: “We did the Continuing Resolution into January and February and what was really important about that this innovation is it broke the Christmas Omnibus fever every year. As long as I've been in Congress, and many years before that, the Senate would jam the House right before the Christmas holiday with a massive thousands of pages long bill that no one had read or amended or debated. That’s not the way to run a railroad. So we broke that fever.” - Speaker Mike Johnson on December 12th, 2023

Video Transcript AI Summary
We passed a continuing resolution that extends into January and February, which is significant because it disrupted the annual rush to pass a massive omnibus bill right before Christmas. Traditionally, the Senate would push a lengthy bill on the House without proper review or debate. This change is a step towards better legislative practices.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We did the continuing resolution into January February, and what was really important about that, this innovation is it broke the Christmas omnibus fever every year as long as I've been in congress, And many years before that, the senate would jam the house right before the Christmas holiday with a massive thousands of page long bill that no one had read or amended or debated. That's not the way to run a railroad, and so we broke that fever.
Saved - November 22, 2024 at 1:34 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe that discussions about women in combat should focus on merit and standards rather than gender. The reality is that combat situations don't differentiate between men and women; what matters is whether individuals meet the necessary standards. Our military should prioritize readiness and performance, regardless of race, gender, or background. It's about ensuring that everyone who qualifies can serve effectively, and that should be the only consideration when it comes to military service.

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

🚨Mark “White Rage” Milley really wants your daughters to fight in military combat: “Don’t lecture me about women in combat. Women have been in combat and it doesn’t matter if that 762 hits you in the chest, no one gives a sh*t if it's a woman or guy who pulled the trigger. If you meet the standards, our military must be and always should be a standard-based merit-based military, period, full stop. Doesn't matter if you are white, black, a man, a woman, Catholic, Protestant . What matters are standards, readiness standards. Do you meet the standard or not. If yes, pass go, collect 200, join the infantry.”

Video Transcript AI Summary
Women have served in combat, and when it comes to the battlefield, it doesn't matter who pulls the trigger; the outcome is the same. Our military should be based on standards and merit. Factors like race, gender, or religion are irrelevant. What truly matters is whether individuals meet the required readiness standards. If you do, then you should be able to serve, regardless of your background.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Don't lecture me about women in combat. Women have been in combat and it doesn't matter if that 762 hits you in the chest. No one gives if it's a woman or a guy who pulled that trigger, you're still dead. So if you meet the standards, our military must be and always should be a standards based, merit based military, period. Full stop. It doesn't matter if you're white, if you're black, if you're a man, if you're a woman, if you're a Catholic, if you're a Protestant. None of those identification things matter. What matters are standards, readiness standards. Do you meet the standard or not? If yes, Pasco, collect 200, join the infantry.
Saved - August 22, 2024 at 1:09 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared a new video highlighting the security measures at the DNC, noting that a Venezuelan migrant was denied entry due to lack of ID and credentials. I questioned why Kamala is enforcing these rules at her convention but not at the border.

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

🚨NEW VIDEO🚨 The DNC is more secure than America’s border. When a Venezuelan migrant tried to get into the DNC, he was denied due to lack of ID, failure to submit an application, and no credentials. Why is Kamala enforcing the rules at her convention but not at our border? https://t.co/YrFLzEC6SC

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

Video directed by @TruthyTruth.

Saved - July 9, 2024 at 9:00 AM

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

🚨Watch this video from 1987 of Joe Biden quitting the presidential race after plagiarism scandals tanked his campaign: “But now the exaggerated shadow of those mistakes has begun to obscure. the essence of my candidacy.” He’s a shell of himself now. https://t.co/xbcbWH01W8

Video Transcript AI Summary
I announced my candidacy for president but decided to withdraw to focus on preventing a harmful Supreme Court nomination. I am grateful for the support I received and will continue to fight for what I believe in. I aim to rekindle idealism in America and will remain active in politics. Thank you for understanding.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hello, everybody. Hello. Delightful to see you all here. Thank you. You know my wife, Jill? I'm gonna make a brief statement. John Martillo of my staff will stay behind and answer any questions you have, and I'm gonna go off and conduct a hearing. Would you close this door, please? 3 and a half months ago, I announced my candidacy for president of the United States. At that time, I did so because I believed, as I still believe now, that for 200 years, the persistent idea of our country that has characterized the journey of this nation has been that each generation has left behind the country a little bit better than the country that it inherited. I believed that then, and I believe that now. And I believed I could, and I still believe I will make a difference in fulfilling that legacy. I know, from campaigning, some of some of you are, not as optimistic as I about the people of my age and what they're capable of Come on. And those who are younger. I know that, some, cynics believe that people my age and those younger are shortsighted and selfish, And that they, some are convinced that we no longer have that spark of idealism and compassion and conviction that mark the America of our youth. But I believe that, that compassion, that idealism still exist. Not to mention the commitment that I think that, my generation and the younger generation have to their children. And quite frankly, in my zeal to, rekindle that idealism, I made some mistakes. But now the exaggerated shadow of those mistakes has begun to obscure the essence of my candidacy and the essence of Joe Biden. And, folks, I see my good friend Fritz Hollings over there. I've been here long enough to know that when the tide starts to roll, when things start to move, when things like this begin to happen, it requires all of one's time, energy, and concentration to put it back on track. And it would require all of my time, my commitment in the weeks ahead. And then who knows? Maybe I would or would not be able to put it back on track. At the same time, somewhat coincidentally, at the same time, all of my energy and skill is required to deal with president Reagan's effort to reshape the Supreme Court in a way that I truly believe will be harmful for this country. And therefore, it seems to me I have a choice. I have to choose between running for president and doing my job to keep the Supreme Court from moving in a direction that I believe to be truly harmful. There will be other opportunities for me to campaign for president, but there will not be many other opportunities for me to influence president Reagan's choice on the Supreme Court. And although it's awfully clear to me what choice I have to make, I have to tell you honestly, I do it with incredible reluctance and it makes me angry. I'm angry with myself for having been put in the position put myself in the position of having to make this choice. And I am, no less frustrated with the environment of presidential politics that makes it so difficult to let the American people measure the whole Joe Biden and not just misstatements that I have made. But, folks, be that as it may, I've concluded that I will stop being a candidate for president of the United States. I learned, several other things from this whole experience. I learned that notwithstanding our political differences in this body, that honor and integrity, treating people honorably and acting with integrity count for a whole lot even with your political opponents. Not a single public official who announced for me has withdrawn their support. And my colleagues in both political parties needed no explanation of my conduct before they immediately stood up and vouched for my honor, my integrity, and my credibility. And those who taught me in school, law school, those who went to school with me, law school, high school, and grade school, also did the same exact thing, notwithstanding the fact that I was not the valedictorian. And I wanna tell you and tell them, that means more to me than they will ever know. I also wanna thank those who given so much of themselves to try to get me nominated this time. Those who helped me raise money. Those who organized Iowa, New Hampshire, and other parts of the country. Those who have done everything from lick envelopes to travel 1, 000 of miles on my behalf. Most of all, I wanna thank my Delaware for standing with me. You know, this presidential politics, 1 of you press folks asked me, I said, Biden, what's gonna happen when the white hot heat turns on? You warned me what it's gonna be like. I thought I knew. It's a tough arena but I'm a big boy. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But now it's time for me to do just what I would have done had I not won in Iowa. It's just what I would have done had I lost on the convention floor. It's time for me to assess my mistakes and make sure that I don't make them again. It's time for me to remind myself of why I got involved in politics in the first place because I believed, as I do now, that I can make a little bit of a difference. To use a Biden phrase that others seem to use these days that I can bend history just a little bit, I still believe that. And for me, the next battle has already been engaged. For me, there's no doubt that the appointment of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court would profoundly affect our future. I intend to be deeply involved in that battle. I intend to attempt to bring it to victory. And let me tell you folks 1 other thing. I still believe it's time to rekindle the spirit of idealism in this country. I think it's time for the world once again to look at America and be proud of what we stand for. I think it's time for the Democratic party to demonstrate to the American people that we have that sense of idealism and we're not ashamed of. And I think the Democratic party will do that in 1988. But for me, the effort now shifts. First of all, the judiciary committee and the foreign relations committee and the great debates in the floor of the United States Senate. There'll be other presidential campaigns, and I'll be there, Alephont. I'll be there. There will be other opportunities. There'll be other battles in other places, other times, and I'll be there. And I'll be there seeking to share with all Americans and those who will stand with me The promise proclaimed in the communion hymn you heard me recite all across this country. And he will lift you up on eagle's wings bear you on the breath of dawn, and make the sun to shine on you. This country is gonna be lifted up. I'm gonna play a big part in doing it. But for now folks, gotta go handle the Bork hearings. I have no questions. I appreciate your consideration. I appreciate you being here and, lest I, say something that might be somewhat sarcastic, I should go to the board meeting. Thanks, folks. My wife and I thank you very much. And, Tommy, thank you very much. We've got a
Saved - May 24, 2024 at 9:33 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Chuck Schumer's goal is to grant citizenship to all illegal aliens, which he believes will help Democrats reshape the electorate. The actual number of illegal immigrants is likely higher than the 11 million Schumer mentions, with a Yale University study estimating at least 22 million.

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

Chuck Schumer: “Our ultimate goal” is to give every illegal alien citizenship. The open border is by design. Democrats want to remake the electorate and replace American citizens. https://t.co/aB2lBishje

Video Transcript AI Summary
We need more workers due to a declining population. To ensure a bright future, we must welcome immigrants, including dreamers, and provide a path to citizenship for all undocumented individuals in America. Our goal is to support dreamers and grant citizenship to all undocumented individuals.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now more than ever, we're short of workers. We have a population that is not reproducing it on its own with the same level that it used to. The only way we're gonna have a great future in America is if we welcome and embrace immigrants, the dreamers, and all of them. Because our ultimate goal is to help the dreamers but get a path to citizenship for all 11,000,000 or however many undocumented there are here.

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

https://t.co/5NFUyHTe8W

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

Also, note that Schumer uses the ludicrously low number of only 11 million illegals. The real number is likely about 3 times that high - a Yale University study in 2021 estimated at least 22 million.

Saved - May 16, 2024 at 11:48 PM

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

Watch Robert Costello – a lawyer who formerly advised Michael Cohen – completely blow up Cohen’s entire testimony in the ongoing sham trial in Manhattan against President Trump. https://t.co/L25cUQujuA

Video Transcript AI Summary
Robert Costello, former attorney for Michael Cohen, discussed his interactions with the grand jury and the legal issues surrounding Cohen's case. Costello emphasized the lack of exculpatory evidence presented and the focus on non-criminal matters. He also mentioned Cohen's involvement in the Stormy Daniels NDA, highlighting Cohen's decision to handle the situation himself. Costello debunked allegations of obstruction of justice and witness tampering, showcasing the lack of evidence to support these claims. Ultimately, Costello criticized the handling of Cohen's case by the Southern District of New York and the Manhattan DA's office.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: His name is Robert Costello. He represented Cohen at the start of the federal investigation and has been released from his attorney client confidentiality agreement, hence the reason why you're able to talk to us. And, sir, thank you for your time today. And we watched you, before congress yesterday, and that was that was something else. This is part of what you had said to congress yesterday. You said Cohen told you, I swear to God, Bob, I don't have anything on Donald Trump. Now you testified before Alvin Bragg's grand jury. Did did you tell them what you told congress yesterday? Speaker 1: Well, it's interesting you bring that up because, when before I testified on a Monday before the grand jury, I gave Alvin Bragg's assistant DAs the courtesy of about an hour and a half Zoom conference where I told them all of the exculpatory material that I had that they were supposed to put before the grand jury. But when I appeared before the grand jury, they were asking me questions that in my opinion, and I've been a federal prosecutor myself, I was deputy chief for the criminal division in the Southern District of New York. Those questions they were asking me were not going to elicit the exculpatory information that I had. So I began to expand upon my answers, and the DA's office was trying to shut me down saying that I had finished my answer. And I told them that, when I'm in the middle of answering a question, I'll decide when I finish my answer. And I ask them not to interrupt me again. But, basically, they only put in a small, cherry picked group of emails. I presented maybe 2 to 300 emails and text messages to them. I had them with me, luckily, in chronological order. They put 2 or 3 in to evidence. I asked them, are you gonna put the rest of them into evidence? And they said no. And I said, remember, there's a court reporter there. I said, why not? They said there's a legal issue with him. I said, what's the legal issue? And he said, hearsay. Now first of all, hearsay is admissible in the grand jury, so that's really not an objection. But I played along with him, and I said, hearsay, well then pay close attention to the next two sentences. I said these documents were made in the regular course of business, and it was the regular course of business to make and maintain documents such as these at or about the dates indicated. I said now you know and I know, but the grand jurors don't know, That makes these documents business records. And you know and I know, but the grand jurors don't know that business records are an exception to the hearsay rule. So are you gonna put the rest of the documents into evidence? And they indicated most likely no. So I simply said to the grand jurors, I said, you people should demand these documents. You should demand to see everything in chronological order, so you get a real view of what Michael Cohen was was like in those days at that moment in time. I said, and then ask yourself this question. Why are they trying to keep these documents from me? Well, after that, I left the grand jury. I have no idea whether they put the documents into evidence or what happened, but, subsequently Donald Trump was indicted. And you've seen the fruits of that indictment in this trial, which is a trial about something that's not a crime. When I met with Michael Cohen on the 1st day at the Regency Hotel when he was suicidal by his own admission, I explained to him, non disclosure agreements, NDAs as he was calling them, I said are perfectly legal. Because he kept on saying, why are they trying to put me in jail for an NDA? And I explained to him, that's not why they're trying to put you in jail. Obviously, they think you've done other things. What are they? He denied having done anything else. I didn't do anything illegal. I'm cooperating with the special counsel. I'm cooperating with Congress, because he forgot to tell us that he lied to Congress. But he was desperately seeking, according to his own words, an escape route. I want you guys to tell me how I can get out of this, because he saw these enormous legal problems coming his way. They were so bad in his mind that he was willing to kill himself. And so I kept on going back and suggesting to him, listen, Michael, if you have something truthful on Donald Trump, now is the time to cooperate. I and he kept on saying over and over again, 10 to 20 times, I swear to God, Bob, I don't have anything on Donald Trump. I even said to him, Michael, think about this. Isn't it easier to cooperate against Donald Trump if you have truthful information than it is to kill yourself? Well, the answer is obvious. That was his moment in time. If he had something truthful to say I'm willing to cooperate, but he didn't take that. He kept on saying, I have nothing on Donald Trump. And then when we got into the discussion of the Stormy Daniels NDA, he said specifically, and I cross examined him on this, this was my idea. It was his idea to take care of the NDA because he had been contacted by a lawyer for Stormy Daniels, who said she was gonna claim that Donald Trump had sex with her. Cohen said, I didn't believe the allegation, but nevertheless, it would be embarrassing to Melania. That's Michael Cohen's words. He said, and so I decided to take care of this myself. Now he got he took out a home equity loan for a $130,000 and used that, and he did tell us that he got repaid later. We didn't get into the details of that because that was not what we were focused on at the moment. We were trying to figure out what was Michael Cohen going to be charged with by the Southern District of New York. And then, as you know, ultimately, he plead guilty to 8 counts, 7 of which had nothing to do with Donald Trump. And then after that, he attempted to cooperate by telling fibs to the US attorney's office that Rudy Giuliani and I conspired basically to obstruct justice and tamper with the witness, the witness being Michael Cohen. With all these emails and text messages that I had, it was absolutely clear that there was no truth whatsoever to that. So the US attorney said to Michael Cohen, in order for us to investigate this, you have to waive the attorney client privilege. And that's what he did. And when they called me up and presented me with the waiver, I then gave them the documents they requested. I went down and I was interviewed for a couple of hours with 2 AUSAs and 2 FBI agents. At the end of that interview, everybody was laughing because I showed how ludicrous the accusation was. And they they, being the southern district of New York, never used Michael Cohen again. They didn't indict Donald Trump for anything, and they never used Michael Cohen, and they didn't give him any credit for his cooperation. That's a lesson that the Manhattan DA's office should have learned, but they haven't learned it yet. Speaker 0: One of the things I found so interesting about what you just said amongst many
Saved - February 14, 2024 at 2:05 AM

@CortesSteve - Steve Cortes

Tony Bobulinski is patriot. He was right then and is still right today. I recorded this video on October 22, 2020, and I stand by every word of it. Joe Biden sold out America to our most dangerous enemy — the Chinese Communist Party. https://t.co/9UlUjVOUxx

Video Transcript AI Summary
Joe Biden is accused of selling out America to the Chinese Communist Party by Tony Bobolinski, a former business partner of the Biden family. Bobolinski, a navy veteran and Democrat, claims to have firsthand knowledge of a company formed to collect money from the Beijing regime. He confirms that the "big guy" mentioned in an email refers to Joe Biden. According to Bobolinski, Biden is accused of being a traitor and a criminal who betrayed the country to the CCP.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Joe Biden sold out America to our most dangerous enemy, the Chinese Communist Party. Another bombshell report from the New York Post provides the firsthand on the record account of Tony Babolinski, a former business partner of the Biden family and head of the company formed to collect dirty money from the Beijing regime. Bobolinski is a navy veteran and a Democrat with no political acts to grind. As a patriot, he felt compelled to tell the truth to America. Here is his quote. What I am outlining is fact. I know it is fact because I lived it. I am the CEO of Sinahawk Holdings, which was a partnership between the Chinese operating through CEFC chairman Yi and the Biden family. He continues, quote, the reference to the big guy in that much publicized May 13, 2017 email is, in fact, a reference to Joe Biden. Bobolinski confirms Fox News' unnamed sources that Joe Biden is a traitor, a criminal, and he sold out our country to the CCP.
View Full Interactive Feed