To date, the only on the public record (in an interview, not testimony) statements are in favor of the allegations and evidence being true. The Biden’s have not public denied any of it. They, with the assistance of the media, simple delay and deflect.
The WSJ, while their own op-ed page was trying to make the story real, thoroughly broke down and discredited all aspects of this story. There is no tie to Joe Biden at all.
Why are you claiming otherwise with a straight face?
All they claimed was that there was no clear evidence in Bobulinski's text messages that Joe Biden was involved (though the "big guy" phrasing refering to Joe was not proved one way or the other).
It does not discredit the emails, nor Bobulinski's own testimony. It's actually just a pretty reasonable and reporting of the information they had available.
[1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/hunter-bidens-ex-business-partn...
Just say "no evidence".
> (though the "big guy" phrasing refering to Joe was not proved one way or the other).
Pizzagate all over again. "As long as some words mean other words than we have a full blown, fully-proven scandal!"
Again, you aren't fooling anyone that isn't volunteering to be fooled so their worldview can be protected. The definition of a waste of time.