Re: Vid of Biden admit bribe of Ukrainian Pres. to fire prosecutor investigating son

ps that is because the subpoena doesn't even exist? I guess we will never know because you can't produce it, and you are fine with just believing whatever you are told by people with a history of lying to the American people. It is a public record, a court document. If it exists you should have no trouble finding it.

Even if I could find the subpoena, how would you know it was real unless you were able to hold the physical document?. I guess you really will never know.

I would know it is real because #1 the government is hosting it as a public document, and most importantly #2 it has all the requirements a actionable subpoena would have. See examples:

This is an actual subpoena: https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/(70)%20Chaffetz%20Subpoena%20to%20Pagliano%2009-16-2016.pdf

This is NOT a subpoena: https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/2019-09-27.EEC%20Engel%20Schiff%20%20to%20Pompeo-%20State%20re%20Document%20Subpoena.pdf

here are the requirements for a subpoena to be actionable: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_45

Just admit it. The "real subpoena" doesn't exist. You should be able to produce it but you can't, hence all the excuses rather than just admitting you were lied to and you believed it without substantiation. If you are so sure PROVE ME WRONG. Find that subpoena and rub it in my face if you can!

How likely do you think it is that congress sent a letter that references "the enclosed subpoena" without enclosing a subpoena?

Will you assume that a subpoena was enclosed with the letter if a federal judge rules on it without any mention of whether or not the actual document was served?