Hunter Biden (1 Viewer)

[FullMonte]

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.

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

 

[SaintForLife]

In a sworn affidavit in May, Shapley declared:

During a recurring prosecution team conference call in or around late August 2021, Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Lesley Wolf told the team that she and DOJ Tax Attorney Jack Morgan had recently returned from the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where they had been summoned to discuss Kevin Morris.

AUSA Wolf stated that they were provided a classified briefing in relation to Mr. Morris and as a result we could no longer pursue him as a witness. Investigators probed AUSA Wolf, but since her briefing was classified and she was apparently sanitizing it to an unclassified form to share over an open phone line, she did not elaborate with more information. She reiterated more than once that they were summoned to the CIA in Langley concerning Mr. Morris, and that because of the information provided there, he could not be a witness for the investigation. AUSA Wolf proudly referenced a CIA mug and stated that she purchased some CIA “swag” at the gift shop while she was there.

It is unclear how the CIA became aware that Mr. Morris was a potential witness in the Hunter Biden investigation and why agents were not told about the meeting in advance or invited to participate. It is a deviation of normal investigative processes for prosecutors to exclude investigators from substantive meetings such as this.

 

[MT15]

SFL if you want to be taken seriously you will need to come with better information and credible sources. You do indeed post garbage, and we’re all tired of even looking at it.

 

[DaveXA]

In a sworn affidavit in May, Shapley declared:

During a recurring prosecution team conference call in or around late August 2021, Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Lesley Wolf told the team that she and DOJ Tax Attorney Jack Morgan had recently returned from the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where they had been summoned to discuss Kevin Morris.

AUSA Wolf stated that they were provided a classified briefing in relation to Mr. Morris and as a result we could no longer pursue him as a witness. Investigators probed AUSA Wolf, but since her briefing was classified and she was apparently sanitizing it to an unclassified form to share over an open phone line, she did not elaborate with more information. She reiterated more than once that they were summoned to the CIA in Langley concerning Mr. Morris, and that because of the information provided there, he could not be a witness for the investigation. AUSA Wolf proudly referenced a CIA mug and stated that she purchased some CIA “swag” at the gift shop while she was there.

It is unclear how the CIA became aware that Mr. Morris was a potential witness in the Hunter Biden investigation and why agents were not told about the meeting in advance or invited to participate. It is a deviation of normal investigative processes for prosecutors to exclude investigators from substantive meetings such as this.

Keep posting the same nonsense from the same ignorant social media dummies, and this is what you get. It's a cycle on continuous repeat. Ever wonder why nothing ever comes of these speculative, and that's being generous, posts? Wake me up when there's a conviction or someone actually goes to jail.

 

[SaintForLife]

SFL if you want to be taken seriously you will need to come with better information and credible sources. You do indeed post garbage, and we’re all tired of even looking at it.

I don't want to be considered credible to you. I have no interest in being a discredited neocon which are your favorite sources.

 

[DaveXA]

I don't want to be considered credible to you. I have no interest in being a discredited neocon which are your favorite sources.

So...a discredited Trumper...I like that better.

 

[FullMonte]

In a sworn affidavit in May, Shapley declared:

During a recurring prosecution team conference call in or around late August 2021, Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Lesley Wolf told the team that she and DOJ Tax Attorney Jack Morgan had recently returned from the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where they had been summoned to discuss Kevin Morris.

AUSA Wolf stated that they were provided a classified briefing in relation to Mr. Morris and as a result we could no longer pursue him as a witness. Investigators probed AUSA Wolf, but since her briefing was classified and she was apparently sanitizing it to an unclassified form to share over an open phone line, she did not elaborate with more information. She reiterated more than once that they were summoned to the CIA in Langley concerning Mr. Morris, and that because of the information provided there, he could not be a witness for the investigation. AUSA Wolf proudly referenced a CIA mug and stated that she purchased some CIA “swag” at the gift shop while she was there.

It is unclear how the CIA became aware that Mr. Morris was a potential witness in the Hunter Biden investigation and why agents were not told about the meeting in advance or invited to participate. It is a deviation of normal investigative processes for prosecutors to exclude investigators from substantive meetings such as this.

What, specifically, did the CIA tell AUSA Wolfe and Jack Morgan about Mr. Morris is it, that you believe, was false.....Or, more accurately, what did they tell these two individuals about Mr. Morris that leads you to believe that they should still be able to pursue him as a potential witness?

 

[MT15]

I don't want to be considered credible to you. I have no interest in being a discredited neocon which are your favorite sources.

You should then be happy to hear that you are in no danger whatsoever of ever being considered credible on here. By me and a lot of other people. Most of us are reality based.

 

[SaintForLife]

What, specifically, did the CIA tell AUSA Wolfe and Jack Morgan about Mr. Morris is it, that you believe, was false.....Or, more accurately, what did they tell these two individuals about Mr. Morris that leads you to believe that they should still be able to pursue him as a potential witness?

Where did I say anything about something being false? We don't know what the CIA told Wolfe because the IRS whistleblower asked for the same briefing and was denied and Wolfe wouldn't say why the CIA said to not interview Morris.

The issue is the freaking CIA interfering in the Hunter investigation. The CIA isn't supposed to be involved in domestic affairs, but they definitely are.

 

[SaintForLife]

You should then be happy to hear that you are in no danger whatsoever of ever being considered credible on here. By me and a lot of other people. Most of us are reality based.

Considering you consider the discredited corporate media credible, I take that as a badge of honor. Congress is the only thing that has lower trust than the media and it's only Democrats who largely trust the media.

 

[SaintForLife]

The guy who tried to give Hunter an unprecedented immunity deal before the judge called him out has confirmed the laptop is real and the Democrat talking points have been complete BS:

Prosecutors plan to use Hunter Biden's infamous laptop as evidence in an upcoming trial to help them prove that the president's son unlawfully obtained a firearm in 2018.

Special counsel David Weiss wrote Wednesday that "the defendant's laptop is real (it will be introduced as a trial exhibit) and it contains significant evidence of the defendant's guilt."

Attorneys for Hunter Biden had previously attempted to preclude the laptop as evidence, arguing that they have "numerous reasons to believe the data had been alteredimpulses compromised before investigators obtained the electronic material."

But in his response on Wednesday, Weiss claimed that Biden "has not provided any evidence or information that shows that his laptop contains false information, and the government's evidence shows the opposite."

"Any argument that suggests his laptop is not authentic would be inappropriate because there is no foundation for such questioning, and it risks creating juror confusion about the evidence actually at issue in this case," Weiss wrote.

Special counsel plans to use infamous laptop as evidence in Hunter Biden's firearm trial

Prosecutors say they plan to use Hunter Biden's infamous laptop as evidence in his upcoming firearm trial, while a judge has delayed his tax trial until September.

abcnews-go-com.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[bird]

And?

 

[MT15]

The guy who tried to give Hunter an unprecedented immunity deal before the judge called him out has confirmed the laptop is real and the Democrat talking points have been complete BS:

Prosecutors plan to use Hunter Biden's infamous laptop as evidence in an upcoming trial to help them prove that the president's son unlawfully obtained a firearm in 2018.

Special counsel David Weiss wrote Wednesday that "the defendant's laptop is real (it will be introduced as a trial exhibit) and it contains significant evidence of the defendant's guilt."

Attorneys for Hunter Biden had previously attempted to preclude the laptop as evidence, arguing that they have "numerous reasons to believe the data had been alteredimpulses compromised before investigators obtained the electronic material."

But in his response on Wednesday, Weiss claimed that Biden "has not provided any evidence or information that shows that his laptop contains false information, and the government's evidence shows the opposite."

"Any argument that suggests his laptop is not authentic would be inappropriate because there is no foundation for such questioning, and it risks creating juror confusion about the evidence actually at issue in this case," Weiss wrote.

Special counsel plans to use infamous laptop as evidence in Hunter Biden's firearm trial

Prosecutors say they plan to use Hunter Biden's infamous laptop as evidence in his upcoming firearm trial, while a judge has delayed his tax trial until September.

abcnews-go-com.cdn.ampproject.org

All he says is that the laptop contains evidence that Hunter bought a firearm. That’s it.

Also, let’s see if Hunter’s team can provide evidence that it has been altered. Not going on Weiss’ word about anything considering the nature of this prosecution, and his tax prosecution as well.

Remember this entire prosecution is manufactured in the sense that nobody ever gets charged for this “crime” of lying on a gun application unless a crime is committed with the gun. Just like nobody gets prosecuted for tax evasion like this if they pay up with all penalties once it is uncovered.

Also, the gun shop (or whoever sold it to him) falsified the application themselves, and have not been charged. Weiss is a bad actor here.

 

[FullMonte]

Where did I say anything about something being false? We don't know what the CIA told Wolfe because the IRS whistleblower asked for the same briefing and was denied and Wolfe wouldn't say why the CIA said to not interview Morris.

The issue is the freaking CIA interfering in the Hunter investigation. The CIA isn't supposed to be involved in domestic affairs, but they definitely are.

See, the second half of your post is why I asked the question.

You say the CIA is interfering in the Hunter investigation? But you don’t know they they are doing that at all. You don’t know what they told the AUSA, so you don’t know if they are interfering or not.

It’s entirely possible that they explained that information the potential witness had was compromised, or that it was obtained by methods that are not credible, or any number of other things that would make the witness useless and could potentially damage a human source of intelligence information.

 

[SaintForLife]

See, the second half of your post is why I asked the question.

You say the CIA is interfering in the Hunter investigation? But you don’t know they they are doing that at all. You don’t know what they told the AUSA, so you don’t know if they are interfering or not.

It’s entirely possible that they explained that information the potential witness had was compromised, or that it was obtained by methods that are not credible, or any number of other things that would make the witness useless and could potentially damage a human source of intelligence information.

Well I said it because the IRS whistleblower said it happened in a affidavit. Are you claiming his statement wasn't true? If so what are you basing that on?

We do know the CIA interfered by telling the prosecutor that she couldn't interview Hunter's sugar brother based on the affidavit. If the CIA is preventing the prosecutor from interviewing someone, it's without a doubt interfering in an investigation.

Personally, no I don't know that but we know that based on the affidavit. You haven't offered up anything that would cause us to question the IRS whistleblowers statement.

The CIA isn't supposed to be involved in domestic affairs and it's obvious that they are. What's even worse is interfering in the investigation of the President's son.

If the CIA stepped in to protect Trump or his sons in an investigation, yall would have a 2000 page thread on it already and it would be leading the nightly news for weeks.

 

[bird]

Well I said it because the IRS whistleblower said it happened in a affidavit. Are you claiming his statement wasn't true? If so what are you basing that on?

We do know the CIA interfered by telling the prosecutor that she couldn't interview Hunter's sugar brother based on the affidavit. If the CIA is preventing the prosecutor from interviewing someone, it's without a doubt interfering in an investigation.

Personally, no I don't know that but we know that based on the affidavit. You haven't offered up anything that would cause us to question the IRS whistleblowers statement.

The CIA isn't supposed to be involved in domestic affairs and it's obvious that they are. What's even worse is interfering in the investigation of the President's son.

If the CIA stepped in to protect Trump or his sons in an investigation, yall would have a 2000 page thread on it already and it would be leading the nightly news for weeks.

Exercise the same outrage for Jared’s 2 billion and Ivanka‘s trademarks.

None of the Hunter Biden schlitz has been proven to be anything. Yet you persist because your false god demands it.

 

[FullMonte]

Well I said it because the IRS whistleblower said it happened in a affidavit. Are you claiming his statement wasn't true? If so what are you basing that on?

We do know the CIA interfered by telling the prosecutor that she couldn't interview Hunter's sugar brother based on the affidavit. If the CIA is preventing the prosecutor from interviewing someone, it's without a doubt interfering in an investigation.

Personally, no I don't know that but we know that based on the affidavit. You haven't offered up anything that would cause us to question the IRS whistleblowers statement.

The CIA isn't supposed to be involved in domestic affairs and it's obvious that they are. What's even worse is interfering in the investigation of the President's son.

If the CIA stepped in to protect Trump or his sons in an investigation, yall would have a 2000 page thread on it already and it would be leading the nightly news for weeks.

And therein is exactly my point. You are so convinced that this is some nefarious plot to protect Hunter Biden from something that he is almost certainly going to be convicted of, yet you have ZERO idea of what the CIA said, or their reasoning behind it.

Here's what we do know (well, here is what I know based solely on what you posted). The AUSA met with CIA officials, and was briefed on matters, and then was not able to pursue this individual as a witness. So, what is your theory? Is it that they had this meeting, and the CIA simply said, "No, you can't talk to him"? Or, do you think they actually briefed her on information that is classified?

Has she said anything at all to indicate that she was skeptical of the reasoning the CIA gave her as to why they didn't want her pursuing this witness?

If not, what's your theory then? That she's in on the plot to protect Hunter, yet she is also talking about the clandestine meeting she had with the CIA officials to protect him? Why would she even talk about it? Why not simply move on?

 

[MT15]

None of what he believes makes a lick of sense at all.

 

[MT15]

The CIA isn't supposed to be involved in domestic affairs and it's obvious that they are.

No, it is not.