Hunter Biden's Laptop

[cytg111]

what I find amusing about all of this is that, historically, it is always--without exception--the siblings/family of democratic presidents that are the black sheep, shady people trying to scam/fall into disreputable crowds and push the levers of access afforded by their family's status and that draw the ire of the opposition and zombie hoards of sycophantic followers; whereas when it comes to republican presidents, it is the president themselves that are the abject, unmistaken traitorous criminal shitheel that is doing the crime in front of everyone. Again: without exception.

The noise around the siblings always runs hotter and longer, whereas you can never get the so-called patriots within the Republican circus tent to ever call out their very unambiguous criminal elements for their vastly more serious, nation-threatening crimes.

It's really funny, isn't it?

This is all by design, of course, and why Goldwater and then Attwater were both prescient (the former) and so important for the cause (the latter): This situation was only made possible through the explicit recruitment of the evangelical class of know-nothing, belief-driven apocalyptic rabble that have a germline indoctrination that replaces fact/reality with belief-based systems. Become their Messiah, or the idea of their Messiah, and you have their fungus-controlled brains for generations. An army of lever-pulling, self-hating, self-destructive flesh bags that are perfectly happy to burn themselves down and everyone else with them, if you only promise them that pulling that lever the way that you want them to pull it will get them to their Jesus faster.

This is how they think, and it is the singular reason why we are where we are today. It's a slow process, and we are in the ~6 decades "results" stage of this strategy.

Indeed. And I think all you can do is to stay clean. Let the left hold each other actual accountable and understand that something entirely different is going on on the right, least not curtsey of right wing media and dark donor money.

Suppose you're this dude that only take up news from his social media feed, with a couple of pen strokes you are exclusively gonna get your reality nutrition from

1. Fox News articles
2. Rogan
3. Bongino report
4. Russel Brand
etc

Its not rocket science how you can arrive at some of that stuff. And believe it.

For all the times Rogan has mentioned Pelosi's stock trading "genius" husband, how many times has he addressed Trump's tax evasion or Kushner's billion dollar cashback from the saudi's or Ivanka's China dealings. It's 1000 to nil.
If all you hear is "Pelosi bad" ... its gonna settle. There is a reason Putin controls 98% of media in Russia. It's mind control.

Now I know at least one dude here who, at least states, that he cusses and berates people cause it's the only way he's ever seen anyone ever change an opinion. I mean that's the dumbest shit I've ever heard. Scream into someone's face makes them go "maybe this guy has a point?". That's a cop-out, an excuse cause kicking someone else makes you feel good about yourself. Maybe think about that.

Anyway, maybe less screaming? And if we have to do another round on Hunter Bidens Laptop in 6 months, so what?

 

[cytg111]

That was not the premise of the right wing red alert concerning the laptop. Was it not that laptop has proof of corruption by Joe Biden? That accusation has fallen flat.

Now the concern seems to be how people in the government handled the investigation which smells like goalpost moving.

100%. But all of that master plan narrative is a bit much to pin on cmcartman specifically. I think.

edit: Was just thinking about a concept of chess-politics, like, we can talk about one of my pieces if we can talk about one of yours. Then do rap battles, have a thread called "Hunter Biden" vs "Jared Kushner" or whatever. Sorry Ill see myself out.

 

[zinfamous]

Indeed. And I think all you can do is to stay clean. Let the left hold each other actual accountable and understand that something entirely different is going on on the right, least not curtsey of right wing media and dark donor money.

Suppose you're this dude that only take up news from his social media feed, with a couple of pen strokes you are exclusively gonna get your reality nutrition from

1. Fox News articles
2. Rogan
3. Bongino report
4. Russel Brand
etc

Its not rocket science how you can arrive at some of that stuff. And believe it.

For all the times Rogan has mentioned Pelosi's stock trading "genius" husband, how many times has he addressed Trump's tax evasion or Kushner's billion dollar cashback from the saudi's or Ivanka's China dealings. It's 1000 to nil.
If all you hear is "Pelosi bad" ... its gonna settle. There is a reason Putin controls 98% of media in Russia. It's mind control.

Now I know at least one dude here who, at least states, that he cusses and berates people cause it's the only way he's ever seen anyone ever change an opinion. I mean that's the dumbest shit I've ever heard. Scream into someone's face makes them go "maybe this guy has a point?". That's a cop-out, an excuse cause kicking at someone else makes you feel good about yourself. Maybe think about that.

Anyway, maybe less screaming? And if we have to do another round on Hunter Bidens Laptop in 6 months, so what?

lol--recall how they only thing they could bring against Obama is that "Well, he's from Chicago, duh!"

They will absolutely never respond to the simple and thoroughly-documented fact that the Chicago Machine HATED Obama because he always refused to play ball. Daly? J Jackson? Sharpton? Blagojavich? All those folks distrusted and rejected candidate Obama. They were Clinton people then, and to do this day. Of course, these are the enemies of the Republicans (except Blagojavich...real nice guy. Trump sure seems to love him. wonder why?) Obama never wanted to play with their toys because he knew their game and when he said he was bringing a new way into town, he actually meant it.

Of course, they were quick to bend the knee once he buried Hilary. Granted, one of my biggest misgivings during that campaign and time is when he pretty much acquiesced to the Clinton corporate machine after winning the nom, particularly the silicon valley money printer, in order to gain the only viable access to DNC funding. I always felt that this compromised his platform and made him a pretty easy target for both the both-sides rightwingers and ultra-left of the party.

But this guy won over Chicago and the Dem party in spite of the Chicago machine, fully arrayed against him. You'll never see a single republican acknowledge this fact. Not one of them.

 

[emperus]

Read fully one transcript of one whistleblower and the minority Counsels(Dem) questioning on the 2nd. (Flight delay).

My take away.
-These witnesses wanted a super aggressive investigation of the Bidens (one mentioned that he thought some evidence might lead to Joe Biden).
- A lot of the conduct they were upset about happened during Bill Barr's tenure. Something you won't really hear reported.
-They were upset by things like:
The DOJ wouldn't let them surveil Hunter Biden once Biden became the Democratic nominee (that seemed nuts to me). Surveil him over a tax charge for what?
The DOJ wouldn't let him interview Joe Biden's grandchildren about whether Hunter paid their school fees. (What? Why not just call the school?)
And the DOJ wouldn't let him take investigative steps once Biden became the Dem nominee.
Also one of them seemed eager to add info that wasn't necessary. Hunter had prostitutes in his hotel room etc. etc.
They seemed like they wanted to use every avenue to prosecute Hunter Biden. Even going as far to challenge what Bill Barr's appointed DA did during Bill Barr's tenure. This whistleblower also seems like a tactic to inject into the public sphere things that they wouldn't have been able to have come out normally.

 

[NWRMidnight]

The file hasn't changed since it was added to the house website. I said "pg 119-127 of the pdf" if you didn't understand that's fine. The pdf hasn't changed and isn't going to get modified as it was tossed together with the transcription which had been labeled separately along with the exhibits. I'll agree to disagree and whatever. You're right I'm wrong, don't care.

I guess I'm going to lie about being done again.
This is the article you mentioned claiming it has a different timeline. https://nypost.com/2023/06/22/fbi-v...november-2019-irs-whistleblower-gary-shapley/
This is the quote you mentioned

" The FBI “verified” the authenticity of Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop in November 2019 and a federal computer expert assessed “it was not manipulated in any way,” IRS supervisory agent Gary Shapley told Congress "

This a quote in the same article farther down.

" “In October 2019, the FBI became aware that a repair shop had a laptop allegedly belonging to Hunter Biden and that the laptop might contain evidence of a crime. The FBI verified its authenticity in November of 2019 by matching the device number against Hunter Biden’s Apple iCloud ID,” Shapley said. "

This is from the exhibit 6 of the testimony skipping to item 12 of the timeline memo. John Paul is the computer repair shop owner. They asked him for a number from the laptop to determine whose it was. I guess they felt that was easier then sending a local agent to talk to him and pick it up.

12. 11/6/2019 - Josh Wilson called John Paul
a. Provided device number and FBI determined that the device was registered to Sportsman via apple ID account/iCloud account
b. Verification of device -

13. 11/7/2019- FBI interviewed John Paul at his residence

...skipped items that involve it getting it shipped and other misc crap

16 12/9/2019
a. Took property of laptop, external hard drive and cop of receipt
b. ***** provided copy of ***** and fbi receipt of property

...more skipped

20. FBI determined in order to do a full forensic review a replacement laptop had to be purchased so the hard drive could be installed, booted, and imaged.

... more skipped
explaining below is just referreing to an external hd

23. 1/6/2020 - forensic computer people at FBI started analysis
24. After forensics there were some initial emails about what computer analyst was seeing- many pictures with many body parts file names, and things similar to this.

....

35. 3/6/2020 - FBI received image of the laptop
...
43.
e. Lesley stated that the team trying to determine if anything was added to the computer by a third part which are allegations being made by people who are not the defendant in this case is not a priority, We have no reason to believe there is anything fabricated nefariously on the computer or hard drive. There are emails and other items that corroborate the items on the laptop and hard drive.


The only part of those statements in the testimony part of the pdf that is a statement by him is the "it was not manipulated in any way," which is from pg 109 transcript which is pdf 127
The New York Post falsely made it seem like it was a statement when they clearly used exhibit 6 as the basis for the other part of that quote. That statement they made in the post is nowhere in the transcript in any form other than exhibit 6. To my knowledge there is no statement outside the transcript saying that either. Your whole argument was the NY Post Statement refutes the timeline and I've told you three times now the New York Post article is F%## up. It's not something he said. They read exhibit 6 incorrectly (which he did write) and mashed it together with one quote he did say about the "it was not manipulated" It's confusing like I stated in my first response because they implied that happened at the same time. When you look at that first quote they're tossing "verified" in 2019 and "it was not manipulated in any way" together, those didn't happen at the same time.


Yes it doesn't verify the timeline isn't completely "made up" like you think. I find the idea that it is nuts since he's had a copy of it since 2020... but that's your opinion. However the NY Post article doesn't invalidate it. At this point I am done with that discussion. If you disagree you plain can't read.


I didn't post in this thread until a few days ago. The article was partly based on the Hunter Biden laptop. I"VE ONLY BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE IRS WHISTLEBLOWERS UNLESS I WAS ASKED REPEATED OTHER QUESTIONS. Yes, I should have just started a new thread. The transcript which I "find to be the holy grail" and the article I first posted are from two IRS whistleblowers which recently came forward to the House. They also happened to work closely with the FBI in the laptop investigation early on because one of the IRS cases was started before it was found. A second was started based on information from the laptop. They were merged together in early 2019 after the laptop info was given to them from the FBI into one case. I get why you can complain it's confusing but at the same you didn't follow the whole thread enough to notice all the other questions I had and the mess that made.

You also never commented on the question I answered that you had asked. If you have any holes to poke please do. Otherwise I consider it good enough.

Why do yo continue posting your stupidity for everyone to see? I already conceded that the news article wasn't accurate the way it was written, per the transcript you summitted. You are right, you didn't start posting in this thread until a few days ago, which up till that point, you barely posted anything in the past 16 years. So in the past few days, you have filled up the majority of the pages since with you arguing and peddling your bullshit, using manipulation in some cases, as well as ignoring much of what myself and others are telling you. You don't answer questions, you are just here to push your bullshit. You are nothing but a troll pushing the same thing over and over, which is why you are now on my ignore list. I should have done it sooner.

 

[pmv]

We have a major war (with the potential to escalate to a nuclear one), a massive cost-of-living-crisis, the still-lingering effects of a global pandemic, an increasing threat of unavoidable climate-change, and - over here - a recession looms as interest rates sky-rocket while inflation remains high (really no idea why the staggeringly-well-paid dudes at the Bank of England think increasing interest rates will achieve anything useful, given that this inflation is not caused by 'loose money' in the first place) and over there you have a Supreme Court that is blatantly corrupt and acting like a gang of Loius XVIs...

...and yet certain people keep obsessively banging on-and-on-and-on about some politically-irrelevant no-mark drug-user's laptop. Who the hell cares? It's an even less interesting story than that lost submarine. Doesn't even involve any interesting engineering issues.

Instead of posting pages-and-pages of guff about what some PDF says, can the lap-top obsessives not cut to the chase and just say, in simple English, what in God's name is supposed to be so important about this thing? What are you claiming is on it that is of any political significance?

 

[sandorski]

Hunter's Laptop is the distraction.

 

[cytg111]

Hunter's Laptop is the distraction.

Yup. What policies are the GOP running on again? Owning the libs and trans and then what?

 

[akugami]

Hunter's Laptop is the distraction.

And why not? They used it to much success with "her emails". If it worked once, why not again?

 

[cmcartman]

Read fully one transcript of one whistleblower and the minority Counsels(Dem) questioning on the 2nd. (Flight delay).

My take away.
-These witnesses wanted a super aggressive investigation of the Bidens (one mentioned that he thought some evidence might lead to Joe Biden).

I agree here and in the case of WB1- Shapley I felt a time or two that I could question his intentions. At the same time they worked in "The group, known as the International Tax and Financial Crimes group, or the ITFC, is comprised of 12 elite agents who were selected based on their experience and performance in the area of complex high-dollar international tax investigations." And WB2 stated "I was a public information officer previously in which I worked as a liaison with the IRS and the U.S. Attorney's Office, our law enforcement partners, and the media partners in helping get publicity for our tax cases. This collateral duty allowed me to get a whole different perspective of the why we do our job. If you have a successful criminal tax case and no one hears about it, was it really successful?" It kind of was their job to get big wins to show the outside what they do. I think a fair perspective could only come from someone who worked in the same department or had experience there.

- A lot of the conduct they were upset about happened during Bill Barr's tenure. Something you won't really hear reported.

I agree and it does raise a good question. It's possibly answered if you assume they (DoJ) were really not wanting to affect a candidate through his son and that's why things weren't moving as fast as they would have liked.

-They were upset by things like:
The DOJ wouldn't let them surveil Hunter Biden once Biden became the Democratic nominee (that seemed nuts to me). Surveil him over a tax charge for what?

WB2 "...And it's also to establish in this case, if there was Secret Service out front, if there was a protection detail. All those various things come into play." I'm not sure if it was after he was a nominee, but after Biden was president elect specifically on 12/8/2020, there were multiple interviews they wanted to do. The investigation was still secret, they didn't want to tip Hunter or anyone else that he was being investigated was the reason I got from it. He mentioned it here "If it's an interview that I need, the whole purpose of that was that we were trying to somewhat take people off guard, surprise, and get information from them."

The DOJ wouldn't let him interview Joe Biden's grandchildren about whether Hunter paid their school fees. (What? Why not just call the school?)

It was determine if they were if they were actually deductible or not apparently. WB 2 said He mentioned that "interviewing people to ask questions like that is normal if it's where the case leads." He also said "its treatment is pretty clear in the Tax Code one way or the other. ...So as a part of our cases -- you have to have a third party that comes in. And we can't just rely on that statement that, oh, it's not deductible. We have to actually call someone in, as a witness, to confirm what that's for".
So basically it takes more than him paying the school, they already know he did that from records and the return he filed.

And the DOJ wouldn't let him take investigative steps once Biden became the Dem nominee.

.
WB #1 pg13/pdf 13
"As early as March 6th, 2020, I sent a sensitive case report up through my chain of command at IRS reporting that by mid-March the IRS would be ready to seek approval for physical search warrants in California, Arkansas, New York, and Washington, D.C. Special Agent drafted an April 1st, 2020, affidavit establishing probable cause for these physical search warrants. We also planned to conduct approximately contemporaneous interviews at that time. Yet, after former Vice President Joseph Biden became the presumptive Democratic nominee for President in early April 2020, career DOJ officials dragged their feet on the IRS taking these investigative steps. By June 2020, those same career officials were already delaying overt investigative actions. This was well before the typical 60- to 90-day period when DOJ would historically stand down before an election. It was apparent that DOJ was purposely slow-walking investigative actions in this matter. On a June 16th, 2020, call Special Agent and I had with our chain of command up to the Director of Field Operations, I pointed out that if normal procedures had been followed we already would have executed search warrants, conducted interviews, and served document requests. Nevertheless, my IRS chain of command decided we would defer to DOJ."

You can argue makes sense if you're in the window or even a little before. It's not going to hold water for the two years after he's elected. I know that was where they really seemed to feel like the investigation was stonewalled completely.

Covid was running wild then and I do agree that it could be because they were not wanting to disrupt the election. At the same time it was out of the normal time window and WB2 (paraphrased) mentioned he would have probably not felt like there was an issue then until he looking back on it all later. The problem is it was still secret, and even a few things that wouldn't have tipped them off weren't allowed. That makes no sense to me.

Also one of them seemed eager to add info that wasn't necessary. Hunter had prostitutes in his hotel room etc. etc.

I agree the first guy could easily be interpreted to be flinging crap in a few spots. And It was obvious some of the questions were explicitly asked to do just that. At the same time Hunter was literally deducting all these girls on his taxes. On one of his returns his CPA had to have him sign a statement basically telling the CPA they were legit deductions because he knew they weren't and wasn't going to take the responsibility for them. WB2 mentioned that somewhere, and how he'd never seen that ever before.

They seemed like they wanted to use every avenue to prosecute Hunter Biden. Even going as far to challenge what Bill Barr's appointed DA did during Bill Barr's tenure. This whistleblower also seems like a tactic to inject into the public sphere things that they wouldn't have been able to have come out normally.

I do think it's obvious the GOP is using it as an excuse to politically hurt Biden, that's also politics and the GOP unfortunately. At the same time they allegedly came forward because they tried to push the case and felt retaliated against later on. They seemed to have plausible reasons to feel that way from the testimony. WB2 seemed to have the most balanced testimony to me. I did feel that WB1 might have been out for him specifically because he was Hunter Biden in a couple of the responses. I'm curious though. Are you suggesting they came forward just to spread it themselves? I know if it was just WB1 I think I'd give the entire story a lot less credibility, with both It changes the calculus for me.

I appreciate someone from a different perspective spending the time to read through it. Trying to get any context out of a transcript like that is tiring and trying.

 

[Vic]

Hunter's Laptop is the distraction.

It's basically Biden's Billy Beer.

 

[emperus]

I agree here and in the case of WB1- Shapley I felt a time or two that I could question his intentions. At the same time they worked in "The group, known as the International Tax and Financial Crimes group, or the ITFC, is comprised of 12 elite agents who were selected based on their experience and performance in the area of complex high-dollar international tax investigations." And WB2 stated "I was a public information officer previously in which I worked as a liaison with the IRS and the U.S. Attorney's Office, our law enforcement partners, and the media partners in helping get publicity for our tax cases. This collateral duty allowed me to get a whole different perspective of the why we do our job. If you have a successful criminal tax case and no one hears about it, was it really successful?" It kind of was their job to get big wins to show the outside what they do. I think a fair perspective could only come from someone who worked in the same department or had experience there.

I agree and it does raise a good question. It's possibly answered if you assume they (DoJ) were really not wanting to affect a candidate through his son and that's why things weren't moving as fast as they would have liked.

WB2 "...And it's also to establish in this case, if there was Secret Service out front, if there was a protection detail. All those various things come into play." I'm not sure if it was after he was a nominee, but after Biden was president elect specifically on 12/8/2020, there were multiple interviews they wanted to do. The investigation was still secret, they didn't want to tip Hunter or anyone else that he was being investigated was the reason I got from it. He mentioned it here "If it's an interview that I need, the whole purpose of that was that we were trying to somewhat take people off guard, surprise, and get information from them."

It was determine if they were if they were actually deductible or not apparently. WB 2 said He mentioned that "interviewing people to ask questions like that is normal if it's where the case leads." He also said "its treatment is pretty clear in the Tax Code one way or the other. ...So as a part of our cases -- you have to have a third party that comes in. And we can't just rely on that statement that, oh, it's not deductible. We have to actually call someone in, as a witness, to confirm what that's for".
So basically it takes more than him paying the school, they already know he did that from records and the return he filed.

.
WB #1 pg13/pdf 13
"As early as March 6th, 2020, I sent a sensitive case report up through my chain of command at IRS reporting that by mid-March the IRS would be ready to seek approval for physical search warrants in California, Arkansas, New York, and Washington, D.C. Special Agent drafted an April 1st, 2020, affidavit establishing probable cause for these physical search warrants. We also planned to conduct approximately contemporaneous interviews at that time. Yet, after former Vice President Joseph Biden became the presumptive Democratic nominee for President in early April 2020, career DOJ officials dragged their feet on the IRS taking these investigative steps. By June 2020, those same career officials were already delaying overt investigative actions. This was well before the typical 60- to 90-day period when DOJ would historically stand down before an election. It was apparent that DOJ was purposely slow-walking investigative actions in this matter. On a June 16th, 2020, call Special Agent and I had with our chain of command up to the Director of Field Operations, I pointed out that if normal procedures had been followed we already would have executed search warrants, conducted interviews, and served document requests. Nevertheless, my IRS chain of command decided we would defer to DOJ."

You can argue makes sense if you're in the window or even a little before. It's not going to hold water for the two years after he's elected. I know that was where they really seemed to feel like the investigation was stonewalled completely.

Covid was running wild then and I do agree that it could be because they were not wanting to disrupt the election. At the same time it was out of the normal time window and WB2 (paraphrased) mentioned he would have probably not felt like there was an issue then until he looking back on it all later. The problem is it was still secret, and even a few things that wouldn't have tipped them off weren't allowed. That makes no sense to me.

I agree the first guy could easily be interpreted to be flinging crap in a few spots. And It was obvious some of the questions were explicitly asked to do just that. At the same time Hunter was literally deducting all these girls on his taxes. On one of his returns his CPA had to have him sign a statement basically telling the CPA they were legit deductions because he knew they weren't and wasn't going to take the rap for them. WB2 mentioned that somewhere, and how he'd never seen that ever before.

I do think it's obvious the GOP is using it as an excuse to politically hurt Biden, that's also politics and the GOP unfortunately. At the same time they allegedly came forward because they tried to push the case and felt retaliated against later on. They seemed to have plausible reasons to feel that way from the testimony. WB2 seemed to have the most balanced testimony to me, I did feel that WB1 might have been out for him specifically because he was Hunter Biden in a couple of the responses. I'm curious though. Are you suggesting they came forward just to spread it themselves? I know if it was just WB1 I think I'd give the entire story a lot less credibility, with both It changes the calculus for me.

I appreciate someone from a different perspective spending the time to read through it. Trying to get any context out of a transcript like that is tiring and trying.

You're putting the best spin on everything. My reading of it was that they were trying to be more aggressive than Bill Barr's team. And the argument that it was different than any other case. Well, I'm not sure how many cases of Presidential candidates they've worked on.

To underscore this, it was Bill Barr's justice department that they are claiming slow walked this before the election. That in itself seems preposterous.

Also they had issues with the case during Bill Barr's tenure. And they didn't advance their concerns. Being a right wing hero is lucrative these days.

And to be honest I read WB2's testimony fully and just read the minority parts of WB1. I didn't think WB2 was balanced. He made some unnecessary comments about Hunter Biden as well. He also made some inferences that didn't seem warranted. Like Biden actually was sitting next to Hunter in that text, vs. Hunter lying about it.

 

[ElFenix]

Yup. What policies are the GOP running on again? Owning the libs and trans and then what?

handing government largess to billionaires.

 

[Brovane]

I like his explanation of the Hunter Biden Plea Deal, makes much more sense to me than all the previous noise from the news.

Why Everyone Hates the Hunter Biden Plea Deal

 

[emperus]

What I was saying about using the whistleblower to disseminate information. I hope the Justice department is investigating Shapley over this.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fz4p57KWIAIdLNv?format=png&name=large

 

[fskimospy]

If anyone’s interested in a former AUSA’s opinion on this you can listen to Popehat discuss it here: (it’s something like the last 15 minutes or so)

I'm a Legitimate Person

Rudy gets a goat scream; Bedminster never got raided; IRS whistleblower says Hunter Biden got undue protection

www.serioustrouble.show

Basically his points are that investigators of all stripes don’t know the law that well and are often more aggressive than the US attorneys themselves. He also shares my major skepticism that Biden was able to turn a Trump appointed attorney into his political lackey and got him to lie to congress on Biden’s behalf.

To me the second part is what sinks it. Unless you can explain why a Trump US attorney is risking prison to give Hunter Biden a break you have a major problem.

 

[akugami]

If anyone’s interested in a former AUSA’s opinion on this you can listen to Popehat discuss it here: (it’s something like the last 15 minutes or so)

I'm a Legitimate Person

Rudy gets a goat scream; Bedminster never got raided; IRS whistleblower says Hunter Biden got undue protection

www.serioustrouble.show

Basically his points are that investigators of all stripes don’t know the law that well and are often more aggressive than the US attorneys themselves. He also shares my major skepticism that Biden was able to turn a Trump appointed attorney into his political lackey and got him to lie to congress on Biden’s behalf.

To me the second part is what sinks it. Unless you can explain why a Trump US attorney is risking prison to give Hunter Biden a break you have a major problem.

Simple. The assumption is everyone is as corrupt as you are.

Trump, and the GQP, authorized pardons for all the criminals working for them, such as Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, and Steve Bannon.

If they can do it, so can someone else. Remember, in their minds, everyone is as corrupt as they are. Every accusation is a confession.

 

[hal2kilo]

Simple. The assumption is everyone is as corrupt as you are.

Trump, and the GQP, authorized pardons for all the criminals working for them, such as Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, and Steve Bannon.

If they can do it, so can someone else. Remember, in their minds, everyone is as corrupt as they are. Every accusation is a confession.

Remember, every accusation is a confession (aka projection).

 

[fskimospy]

Weiss tells Congress that he never requested special counsel status.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1678428224382959617

Looks like either the whistleblowers had no idea what they were talking about or were lying.

 

[fskimospy]

LOL - now one of their lawyers is saying it doesn't matter if what they said was true or not.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1678440317622669313

 

[Roger Wilco]

Lol

 

[akugami]

Damn...Dark Brandon strikes again.

 

[HomerJS]

I know we are not allowed to post without comment but….

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Damn...Dark Brandon strikes again.

I know we are not allowed to post without comment but….

/end thread no more needs to be said

 

[MrSquished]

Look another both sideser constantly full of shit while pushing a far right narrative with easily debunked claims. Just another piece of shitstain on humanity.

Color me surprised. It's a never-ending supply.