Link please.

I'm a little surprised you can't just say "yes" or "no".

> By his own admission on video (which I posted here recently) Joe Biden incriminated himself in this clear crime!

I see, so you do believe it was a crime.  Why didn't you just say so?

I wonder what FOX has to say...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yY_N4d5xv8

[Source Convo](https://steemit.com/informationwar/@logiczombie/pzw5dk)

> In the Video, 

The video, which you have refused to reveal, so I am forced to reference this one,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY&feature=youtu.be&t=16

> Joe Biden confesses to a Quid Pro Quo, where he bragged that he used US Military assistance; as leverage to protect his Son from a criminal investigation.

He does no such thing.

Remember, FACTS ONLY,

He pressured Ukraine to remove an unqualified prosecutor who,

Ukraine’s parliament voted overwhelmingly to fire Viktor Shokin, ridding the beleaguered prosecutor’s office of a figure who is accused of blocking major cases against allies and influential figures and stymying moves to root out graft.

Mr Tombinski said the EU was also concerned about the resignation or dismissal of several “reform-oriented” prosecutors and reports that Mr Shokin’s office was investigating a “highly-respected” anti-corruption group – an obvious reference to Kiev’s Anti-Corruption Action Centre, which had fiercely criticised Mr Shokin.

In what appeared to be his last act before dismissal, Mr Shokin sacked his deputy, Davit Sakvarelidze, who had repeatedly called for his boss to be fired. [Source](https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/eu-hails-sacking-of-ukraine-s-prosecutor-viktor-shokin-1.2591190)

Among other issues, he was slow-walking the investigation into Zlochevsky and Burisma _**[the company you are so specifically concerned about]**_ – to the extent that Obama officials were considering launching their own criminal investigation into the company for possible money laundering. [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Shokin#Burisma_Holdings_and_the_Biden_family)

> HIS Words, not mine!

Your injection of, "to protect his Son from a criminal investigation" is pure OPINION.

These are YOUR WORDS, "to protect his Son from a criminal investigation".

Please use FACTS ONLY.

I honestly don't think Biden is worth the oxygen he consumes, but you really need to use FACTS ONLY.

> It s a crime to impede an investigation.

Are you talking about claiming blanket immunity in order to justify withholding evidence in an ongoing criminal investigation?

> It is a crime to use your office to provide income for your Son; 

I agree in principle, but can you reference the specific law?

Please use FACTS ONLY.

> by selling influence.

Are you talking about writing a letter requesting an ambassador be fired because someone contributed a ton of cash to your political campaign?

> It is illegal to threaten the withhold US Military aid, knowing full well that the country will be over run by the Russians without that aid.

I agree in principle, but can you reference the specific law?

Please use FACTS ONLY.

> It is illegal to secure loans, based on your father's government job; 

I agree in principle, but can you reference the specific law?

Please use FACTS ONLY.

> then use that money to invest in companies that are sanctioned.

Yes, it is illegal to invest in companies that have been listed as illegal to invest in.

Are you suggesting that _**Zlochevsky and Burisma**_ was under U.S. sanctions at the time that Hunter Biden became involved with them?

Please use FACTS ONLY.

> There are many more, so please select one. BUT use facts, not liberal talking points!

Please use FACTS ONLY.