Hunter Biden (2 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

    FullMonte

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Nov 14, 2019
    Messages
    1,470
    Reaction score
    2,556
    Age
    56
    Location
    Bossier City
    Offline
    Lost in all the news coverage about what's going on in the US right now is this bit of information.

    The Ukrainian government has completed an audit of thousands of case files related to Burisma. Ruslan Ryaboshapka (the prosecutor general), described by Zelenskiy as "100 percent my person" in the July phone call with president Trump said "I specifically asked prosecutors to check especially carefully those facts about Biden's alleged involvement. They answered that there was nothing of the kind."

    Not that anyone SHOULD be surprised to find out that Hunter Biden was not implicated in something that was done by the CEO of Burisma in his role as a government employee, that happened two years before Biden joined the board.

    www.theguardian.com

    Ukrainian prosecutors find no evidence against Hunter Biden

    Audit probed energy company Burisma, of which Biden was a board member from 2014-2019
    www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
     
    MT15 said:
    Well, I tend to give a lot less credence to a charge of some sort of corruption or conspiracy - remember his entire team would have had to be in on it - when there is no apparent motive.

    BTW, Barr didn’t appoint Mueller - that was Rosenstein.
    Click to expand...
    His entire team wasn't in on it. That's exactly why these two guys came forward.

    Correct, Rosenstein, not Barr. Too many names to try to keep up with in this whole mess...

    MT15 said:
    And no, Garland doesn’t have to be stupid - unless you consider playing everything straight and above board to be stupid. Garland isn’t really political - he‘s a former judge - and a damn good one. He would be someone I would trust to be impartial here. Weiss, I assume so, but I’m not sure about him. Biden is also trying to be hands off of the DOJ - in contrast to his predecessor who meddled in all sorts of DOJ business. Garland is probably the least political AG we’ve had in decades.
    Click to expand...
    LOL, I could say Biden is hands-off his presidency, but my conservative slip would be showing if I did. :hihi: Honestly, I'm really interested in seeing how this appointment plays out. I know what the R's will be saying, but like you, I don't know which way Weiss is going to run. I would rather see someone who everyone is happy with though, as was with Mueller.
    MT15 said:
    And yeah, the idea that the two IRS agents were in trouble isn’t totally substantiated, but it has been reported widely enough that I feel it’s pretty solid. They themselves describe being shut out of the investigation by their superiors - which lends itself to them being in some sort of trouble. So their careers were already upended before they came forward. Whether they were in trouble because of unauthorized leaks to the press or because of some mishandling of evidence, I don’t know. But I think it’s pretty solid to think they were in trouble for something.
    Click to expand...
    Eh, reported widely isn't really much. All the media outlets take whatever story is hot and regurgitate what the other media outlets are saying depedning on their political leanings. So, I don't put near as much stock in widely reported if it's still just a rumor.
     
    rajncajn said:
    Um, no, it's not beyond the scope of their responsibility. In fact, investigating international tax and financial crimes is literally Shapley's job description.
    Click to expand...
    Yes, as long as those acts remain within the realm US Treas. The crimes that Hunter being accused of exceeds that and they required the greater resources which lies within the DoJ, those two Departments would then work in conjunction to conduct their investigations.

    Either way, you are making claims that the whistleblowers, themselves, didn't make! I suggest you go back and listen/read to their testimonies yourself and not rely on whatever sources that led you believe your assertions.

    There were NO statute of limitations expirations, their blown whistle had to do with the Plea Deal and now that the deal does not exists, what do they have to offer? Mind you, this quote from their hearing:
    ZIEGLER: I would like to note that once the plea agreement is finally released, it may provide a greater understanding.
    Click to expand...
    He is basically saying that once he knows the actual details of the charges Biden has plead guilty to, his claims may turn out to be unwarranted.
     
    @MT15 Why did you suggest the other Hunter Biden shouldn't be used anymore? There was 85 pages worth of discussions and posts and you thought it was a good idea to switch to a thread that had 3 posts from 2020?

    Why is the other thread closed? What happened to make it necessary to close the other thread? It's not like yall even made a new thread for the special counsel.
     
    zztop said:
    apnews.com

    Attorney general appoints a special counsel in Hunter Biden probe, deepening investigation

    Attorney General Merrick Garland has appointed a special counsel in the Hunter Biden probe, deepening the investigation of the president’s son.
    apnews.com apnews.com
    Garland noted the “extraordinary circumstances” of the matter as he made the announcement at the Justice Department. He said that Weiss asked to be appointed to the position and told him that “in his judgment, his investigation has reached a stage at which he should continue his work as a special counsel.”
    Click to expand...
    The "extraordinary circumstances" are the DOJ getting caught trying to sneak in a blanket immunity deal into the pretrial diversion instead of the actual plea agreement. The same immunity deal that the prosecutors didn't give to the judge until right before the hearing started.

    What a forking joke. This is all about preventing Weiss from having to testify to Congres about the sweetheart deal he was giving Hunter and why he said he wasn't able to make the final decisions in private meeting, but in public he said the opposite.
     
    bdb13 said:
    Why now did Weiss feel his investigation was at this point and what's the actual effective difference now with this transition to a special counsel given that Weiss was already in charge of the investigation.. would be my two questions I think.
    Click to expand...
    He didn't. This is all about making sure Weiss couldn't be questioned by Congress about the sweetheart deal he got caught trying to give Hunter.

    A reporter asked Garland "If Weiss had the authorities he needed, why does he need to be a special counsel? Do you still have faith in U.S. Attorney Weiss after the [Hunter Biden] deal fell apart?"

    Garland walked away and didn't answer. That question by the reporter makes a good point. What's changed now that he needs to be a special counsel? Nothing other than more covering for Biden.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    Click to expand...


    88aa5a9708fe10faa3529b8420fc07aa.jpg
     
    MT15 said:
    But why? Why do they think this Trump appointee and life-long R is doing this? That’s what nobody has been able to tell me.
    Click to expand...
    This ridiculous talking point is repeated so often like it someone shows that Weiss couldn't be biased against a Republican.

    What you and others leave out is a US Attorney is selected based on the recommendation of the state's Senators. Delaware's Senators are both Democrats.
    MT15 said:
    I have read speculation (seems pretty firm) that these 2 guys got into trouble for leaking to the press about the investigation and were facing disciplinary action. So they decided to go this route, except I don’t think either one of them has officially been designated a whistleblower. What they are describing seems to me to be inter-departmental squabbling and sour grapes.
    Click to expand...
    They are both officially whistleblowers and followed all the proper whistleblower requirements.

    Who made that speculation and can you post a link? I'm sorry that sounds like partisan deflections without anymore information about who said it and what they said specifically.
    MT15 said:
    I also read some speculation, less firm IMO, that they are responsible for the fact that Weiss couldn’t charge some items because they mishandled evidence and violated Hunter‘s constitutional rights. So the evidence was tainted, which may be another reason they got into trouble.
    Click to expand...
    More anonymous speculation? Post who said that and what they said specifically. Otherwise, it's safe to ignore what you said.
     
    It's breathtaking how quickly MAGA has turned on this Trump appointed prosecutor.

    I don't know why anyone not named Donald Trump would want the support of MAGA. It is just a guarantee that you will get knives to the back at some point in the future.
     
    rajncajn said:
    Appointing Weiss allows him control of the investigation, him the ability to control the narrative and ultimately him the authority to bring charges and what charges to bring. The Republicans can do or say whatever they want, but whatever they say or do is just going to be blown off by anyone with a D by their name just like it already is. Weiss, as evidenced just by this thread, has already been given the trust of the Democratic voter. IF Weiss is really what the Republicans are accusing him of then this would be an absolute best-case scenario that would effectively guarantee a perfect outcome in both polling and legally.
    Click to expand...
    Weiss is trusted by Democrats because of the stupid talking points that he's a Republican( they leave out that US Attorneys are selected based off of the state's Senators and Delaware's are both Democrats) & because the corporate media tells them he is to be trusted.

    That same corporate media forgot to tell them that Weiss said in a meeting that he didn't have the final say on charging Hunter. This was documented in an email by one of the whistleblowers and his boss confirmed Weiss said that in a reply to that email. Weiss has been saying the opposite in public.

    They literally believe that Biden hasn't been involved in anything with Hunter's business deals because the corporate media gaslights them and they slurp it up.
     
    coldseat said:
    This was a dumb move by Garland and Weiss. It didn't require the appointment of a special council and nothing that's done will placate Republicans, which shouldn't have even been a consideration in the SC appointment.

    It will just turn into more political theater. They should have just let Republicans keep in seething with their fake investigation and on Fox News and closed out the case with the normal process.
    Click to expand...
    He was forced to appoint a special counsel due to all the shadiness going on with Hunter's plea deal. The Republicans have been asking for a special counsel for years. He didn't do it to placate Republicans.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    Weiss is trusted by Democrats because of the stupid talking points that he's a Republican( they leave out that US Attorneys are selected based off of the state's Senators and Delaware's are both Democrats) & because the corporate media tells them he is to be trusted.

    That same corporate media forgot to tell them that Weiss said in a meeting that he didn't have the final say on charging Hunter. This was documented in an email by one of the whistleblowers and his boss confirmed Weiss said that in a reply to that email. Weiss has been saying the opposite in public.

    They literally believe that Biden hasn't been involved in anything with Hunter's business deals because the corporate media gaslights them and they slurp it up.
    Click to expand...


    Wait, you think Trump nominated Weiss to be a federal prosecutor because two Democratic Senators from Delaware told him to?
     
    bdb13 said:
    At worst they want to come out of this with people holding the view that Joe Biden is as corrupt as Trump heading into the 2024 election. And at best I'm sure they're still hoping to find illegal activity that they can tie directly back to Joe Biden.
    Click to expand...
    Politics 101. The Democrats did the same thing to Trump but on a much bigger scale.

    bdb13 said:
    But yeah, it's certainly political in nature and not for good of country.. for Comer to more or less dismiss the Kushner-Saudi deal as unethical but different because the deal transpired six months after Trump left office gives that away.
    Click to expand...
    Do you now feel Russiagate was polical after Durham revealed that Hillary created the Trump Russia collusion narrative?
    bdb13 said:
    Not to both sides it, but it is what it is, I think most of these things are usually more political in nature than anything else because our system is about winning elections and that's what politicians and parties are constantly are trying to do and there's usually little incentive to go after your own like you do the opposition.

    Not saying that as an absolute catch-all, there are exceptions and varying levels to it all.. but yeah, the purpose is to damage Biden as much as possible and we all know that.
    Click to expand...
    I agree. In almost every cade, polical considerations come first.
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    Yes, as long as those acts remain within the realm US Treas. The crimes that Hunter being accused of exceeds that and they required the greater resources which lies within the DoJ, those two Departments would then work in conjunction to conduct their investigations.
    Click to expand...
    They were working in conjunction with a Federal investigation.
    From the link that you just quoted:
    That investigation would subsequently be merged with a Delaware-based federal investigation of Mr Biden's finances that began in January 2019 and is headed by US Attorney for Delaware David Weiss.
    Click to expand...
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    Either way, you are making claims that the whistleblowers, themselves, didn't make! I suggest you go back and listen/read to their testimonies yourself and not rely on whatever sources that led you believe your assertions.
    Click to expand...
    I didn't say they, themselves made all those claims. I was telling MT what the overall accusations were, not just what the IRS agents claimed to have happened.
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    There were NO statute of limitations expirations, their blown whistle had to do with the Plea Deal and now that the deal does not exists, what do they have to offer? Mind you, this quote from their hearing:

    He is basically saying that once he knows the actual details of the charges Biden has plead guilty to, his claims may turn out to be unwarranted.
    Click to expand...
    Wrong again and this was in the quote that I posted earlier from the testimony, which you obviously did not read. I suggest you go back and listen/read to their testimonies yourself and not rely on whatever sources led you to believe your easily provable, factually incorrect assertions that were completely debunked before you even made them.
    www.newsweek.com

    Five key moments from Hunter Biden whistleblower hearing

    Testimony from the IRS employees about the government's handling of Hunter Biden's tax case provided several newsworthy moments.
    www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
    Shapley and Ziegler previously told Congress that prosecutors intentionally slowed the Hunter Biden investigation in order for the statute of limitations to run out on some of the earlier crimes he's been accused of committing.


    On Wednesday, Shapley said Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney Davis Weiss, who oversaw Hunter Biden's case, allowed the statute of limitations to expire on charges related to income he received while serving on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings.

    "In November of 2022, the statute of limitations was set to expire for the 2014 and 2015 charges in D.C., which included the 2014 felonies for the attempt to evade or defeat tax and fraud or false statement regarding Burisma income earned by Hunter Biden," Shapley said.

    He added, "The statute of limitations had been extended through a tolling agreement with Hunter Biden's defense counsel, and they were willing to extend it past 2022. Weiss allowed those to expire."
    Click to expand...
     
    UriUT said:
    I can't get past this false equivalency. By Trump's own actions and words, he warranted an investigation. He fired the fbi director that was investigating him. He obstructed per the Muller report. Yet the Dems, tried to slow roll what? What evidence has implicated Biden? The same hear-say that the Repubs objected? This victimhood is tiresome.
    Click to expand...
    After the illegal FISA spying, and everything the inspector general documented abou the FBI, it looks like Trump was right to fire Comey.

    Trump "obstructed" Mueller, but Mueller didn't charge Trump with obstruction and not a single obstruction charge was in the articles of impeach. How convenient.

    The Biden DOJ did slow walk the Hunter investigation. The statute of limitations has already ran out on two of the tax charges and he statute of limitations for the gun felony runs out on October 12th.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    Politics 101. The Democrats did the same thing to Trump but on a much bigger scale.


    Do you now feel Russiagate was polical after Durham revealed that Hillary created the Trump Russia collusion narrative?

    I agree. In almost every cade, polical considerations come first.
    Click to expand...

    I know it simply won't matter at this point, but this kind of revisionist history will always bother me.

    Myth: Mueller found “no collusion.”

    Response: Mueller spent almost 200 pages describing “numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign.” He found that “a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.” He also found that “a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations” against the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents.


    While Mueller was unable to establish a conspiracy between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians involved in this activity, he made it clear that “[a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.” In fact, Mueller also wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

    time.com

    These 11 Mueller Report Myths Just Won’t Die

    Here's why they're wrong
    time.com time.com

    Anyway, I expect any of the three, at least

    -you don't like the source
    -you respond back with numerous false narratives that must be true because they aren't from "corporate media"
    -Mueller is a RINO, Democratic shill, Deep State actor, blah, blah, blah...
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    The IRS agents testified to nothing! Their entire beef was based on a proposed plea deal that failed and the idea of Biden avoiding tax penalties that were already resolved/paid.


    Federal criminal investigation Hunter Biden focuses on his business dealings (Update: DOJ appoints special counsel)

    Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia and the widow of Yury Luzhkov, the former mayor of Moscow, Senate Republicans revealed in their report on the younger Biden’s work in Ukraine.Baturina is referenced in the 87-page report, which...
    madaboutpolitics.com madaboutpolitics.com

    Zeigler is blowing the whistle on the fact that Hunter and the DoJ agreed to a plea deal. He also recognizes the fact that his questions would become clearer once the full terms of the deal would be released.
    Click to expand...
    Says the guy who obviously didn't watch any of their testimonies. They were so credible that the Democrats spent most of their time talking about Trump.

    I see you keep hanging on to the line about Zeigler referencing the plea deal as if that discredits their testimonies.
     
    Incumbent said:
    I know it simply won't matter at this point, but this kind of revisionist history will always bother me.

    Myth: Mueller found “no collusion.”

    Response: Mueller spent almost 200 pages describing “numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign.” He found that “a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.” He also found that “a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations” against the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents.


    While Mueller was unable to establish a conspiracy between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians involved in this activity, he made it clear that “[a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.” In fact, Mueller also wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

    time.com

    These 11 Mueller Report Myths Just Won’t Die

    Here's why they're wrong
    time.com time.com

    Anyway, I expect any of the three, at least

    -you don't like the source
    -you respond back with numerous false narratives that must be true because they aren't from "corporate media"
    -Mueller is a RINO, Democratic shill, Deep State actor, blah, blah, blah...
    Click to expand...
    Let's go straight to the Mueller report:
    20230811_173112.jpg

    While Mueller was unable to establish a conspiracy between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians involved in this activity, he made it clear that “[a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.” In fact, Mueller also wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

    That's not how it works in the US Justice system. If they can't prove something it's meaningless if after the fact they claim that there was evidence of "those facts."

    That's sounds like weaselly lawyer talk to try to continue to Trump Collusion narrative when it didn't show what CNN & MSNBC had been telling yall for years.


    More from that article, Why didn't Mueller charge Trump with obstruction and why didn't the Democrats mention obstruction in the articles of impeachment?

    The president of the United States enjoys absolute immunity from many lawsuits while in office; it is legally untested whether they also enjoy criminal immunity from arrest or prosecution. Neither civil nor criminal immunity is explicitly granted in the Constitution or any federal statute.

    Presidential immunity in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org

    Clinton Intelligence Plan from the Durham report:

    Screenshot_20230811_180537_Gallery.jpg


    Screenshot_20230811_180624_Gallery.jpg


    I try to be specific when I reply and not use vague responses that don't address the issue like others here do often.

    It is ironic that you would post an article from 2 MSNBC legal analysts when MSNBC was the biggest purveyors of the Trump Russia collusion narrative.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom