Hunter Biden Tinfoil issues

[cradleandshoot]

Now that this epic failure is in the rearview mirror, when will the r's drop their other impeachment joke?

https://www.npr.org/2024/04/17/12453779 ... orkas-vote

"By doing what we just did, we have in effect, ignored the directions of the House, which were to have a trial," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell after senators killed the second article. "No evidence, no procedure. It's not a proud day in the history of the Senate."

Gotta admire the cajones (or idiocy) to make a statement like that. Considering how much he screwed the country over in a similar fashion on many occasions.

Mitch's understanding and public views on what is and is not constitutional or even right, depends on a single variable: who controls the Presidency, and the house of Congress in which the relevant function is at issue. He's completely brazen about it.

But his arrogant leadership style enabled him to save America from Garland being granted a lifetime seat on the SCOTUS. I'm guessing Mitch had the inside scoop about what a rat faced weasel Merrick Garland is. Garland will do just fine at the end of the day. When he is done corrupting the DoJ he will have a well paid legal eagle expert job over at CNN.

Nice bullet point regurgitation. Always a pleasure.

I'm just pointing out the obvious counselor. I'm sorry that upset your apple cart of wormy apples.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Now that this epic failure is in the rearview mirror, when will the r's drop their other impeachment joke?

https://www.npr.org/2024/04/17/12453779 ... orkas-vote

"By doing what we just did, we have in effect, ignored the directions of the House, which were to have a trial," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell after senators killed the second article. "No evidence, no procedure. It's not a proud day in the history of the Senate."

Gotta admire the cajones (or idiocy) to make a statement like that. Considering how much he screwed the country over in a similar fashion on many occasions.

Mitch's understanding and public views on what is and is not constitutional or even right, depends on a single variable: who controls the Presidency, and the house of Congress in which the relevant function is at issue. He's completely brazen about it.

But his arrogant leadership style enabled him to save America from Garland being granted a lifetime seat on the SCOTUS. I'm guessing Mitch had the inside scoop about what a rat faced weasel Merrick Garland is. Garland will do just fine at the end of the day. When he is done corrupting the DoJ he will have a well paid legal eagle expert job over at CNN.

Nice bullet point regurgitation. Always a pleasure.

I'm just pointing out the obvious counselor. I'm sorry that upset your apple cart of wormy apples.

Hah! You never really upset me. You (and YA) are my barometer(s) for how bullsh*t information makes its way into the dialogue.

[cradleandshoot]

Now that this epic failure is in the rearview mirror, when will the r's drop their other impeachment joke?

https://www.npr.org/2024/04/17/12453779 ... orkas-vote

"By doing what we just did, we have in effect, ignored the directions of the House, which were to have a trial," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell after senators killed the second article. "No evidence, no procedure. It's not a proud day in the history of the Senate."

Gotta admire the cajones (or idiocy) to make a statement like that. Considering how much he screwed the country over in a similar fashion on many occasions.

Mitch's understanding and public views on what is and is not constitutional or even right, depends on a single variable: who controls the Presidency, and the house of Congress in which the relevant function is at issue. He's completely brazen about it.

But his arrogant leadership style enabled him to save America from Garland being granted a lifetime seat on the SCOTUS. I'm guessing Mitch had the inside scoop about what a rat faced weasel Merrick Garland is. Garland will do just fine at the end of the day. When he is done corrupting the DoJ he will have a well paid legal eagle expert job over at CNN.

Nice bullet point regurgitation. Always a pleasure.

I'm just pointing out the obvious counselor. I'm sorry that upset your apple cart of wormy apples.

Hah! You never really upset me. You (and YA) are my barometer(s) for how bullsh*t information makes its way into the dialogue.

Ditto to that counselor...ditto. Who shovels more bullchit than a lawyer?

[Seacoaster(1)]

Now that this epic failure is in the rearview mirror, when will the r's drop their other impeachment joke?

https://www.npr.org/2024/04/17/12453779 ... orkas-vote

"By doing what we just did, we have in effect, ignored the directions of the House, which were to have a trial," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell after senators killed the second article. "No evidence, no procedure. It's not a proud day in the history of the Senate."

Gotta admire the cajones (or idiocy) to make a statement like that. Considering how much he screwed the country over in a similar fashion on many occasions.

Mitch's understanding and public views on what is and is not constitutional or even right, depends on a single variable: who controls the Presidency, and the house of Congress in which the relevant function is at issue. He's completely brazen about it.

But his arrogant leadership style enabled him to save America from Garland being granted a lifetime seat on the SCOTUS. I'm guessing Mitch had the inside scoop about what a rat faced weasel Merrick Garland is. Garland will do just fine at the end of the day. When he is done corrupting the DoJ he will have a well paid legal eagle expert job over at CNN.

Nice bullet point regurgitation. Always a pleasure.

I'm just pointing out the obvious counselor. I'm sorry that upset your apple cart of wormy apples.

Hah! You never really upset me. You (and YA) are my barometer(s) for how bullsh*t information makes its way into the dialogue.

Ditto to that counselor...ditto. Who shovels more bullchit than a lawyer?

YA.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Now that this epic failure is in the rearview mirror, when will the r's drop their other impeachment joke?

https://www.npr.org/2024/04/17/12453779 ... orkas-vote

"By doing what we just did, we have in effect, ignored the directions of the House, which were to have a trial," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell after senators killed the second article. "No evidence, no procedure. It's not a proud day in the history of the Senate."

Gotta admire the cajones (or idiocy) to make a statement like that. Considering how much he screwed the country over in a similar fashion on many occasions.

Mitch's understanding and public views on what is and is not constitutional or even right, depends on a single variable: who controls the Presidency, and the house of Congress in which the relevant function is at issue. He's completely brazen about it.

But his arrogant leadership style enabled him to save America from Garland being granted a lifetime seat on the SCOTUS. I'm guessing Mitch had the inside scoop about what a rat faced weasel Merrick Garland is. Garland will do just fine at the end of the day. When he is done corrupting the DoJ he will have a well paid legal eagle expert job over at CNN.

Nice bullet point regurgitation. Always a pleasure.

I'm just pointing out the obvious counselor. I'm sorry that upset your apple cart of wormy apples.

Hah! You never really upset me. You (and YA) are my barometer(s) for how bullsh*t information makes its way into the dialogue.

Ditto to that counselor...ditto. Who shovels more bullchit than a lawyer?

YA.

[youthathletics]

Hah! You never really upset me. You (and YA) are my barometer(s) for how bullsh*t information makes its way into the dialogue.

Ditto to that counselor...ditto. Who shovels more bullchit than a lawyer?

If cradle and I weren’t here, this place would have been dead a long time ago. All most of you do is fluff each others balls while taking pop shots at us. It’s like hanging around with a bunch kids at a slumber party jacked up on kool-aide and pop-rocks while talking about everyone not in the room. Wouldn’t trade it for anything….happy to keep you all on your toes and ‘in the know’ with what’s just around the corner. I’m the Slavoj Zizek of FanLax.

[cradleandshoot]

Hah! You never really upset me. You (and YA) are my barometer(s) for how bullsh*t information makes its way into the dialogue.

Ditto to that counselor...ditto. Who shovels more bullchit than a lawyer?

If cradle and I weren’t here, this place would have been dead a long time ago. All most of you do is fluff each others balls while taking pop shots at us. It’s like hanging around with a bunch kids at a slumber party jacked up on kool-aide and pop-rocks while talking about everyone not in the room. Wouldn’t trade it for anything….happy to keep you all on your toes and ‘in the know’ with what’s just around the corner. I’m the Slavoj Zizek of FanLax.

#1, it's a classic love/hate relationship. They love to hate us.

[dislaxxic]

WAPO GIVES BILL BARR PLATFORM TO ATTACK JOE BIDEN WITHOUT MENTIONING BARR’S ROLE IN FRAMING BIDEN

Bill Barr’s decision to set up a side channel to funnel dirt collected by Donald Trump’s lawyer on Trump’s opponent’s son to prosecutors already investigating Hunter Biden led directly to Joe Biden being framed. And it remains unexplained how Scott Brady came to find the lead — or whether it has anything to do with DOJ’s reported closure of an investigation into Mykola Zlochevsky in this same period.

At this point, Barr’s role in setting up a side channel that led to Biden being framed ought to be included in all discussions of his animus to Biden or his decision to back Trump. All the more so given that Jerry Nadler referred Scott Brady to at least DOJ IG for investigation of the way he misled Congress about his vetting corroborating Smirnov’s claims. After all, such an investigation may lead to places that scrutinize Barr’s own actions.

Sure Barr is going to back Republicans over Joe Biden, the guy he helped frame. But if the investigation into how that side channel ended up framing Biden gets very far, Barr may have far more self-interested reasons in ending Democratic control of DOJ.

Yes, that's right. Billy Barr FRAMED...attempted to frame, that is...Joe and Hunter Biden. That much is now MORE than clear.

Like the "perfect phone call" to Zelenskyy, republicans just want to start rumors and then run them as far as possible...for purely political purposes. Dishonest, duplicitous numbnuts.

When they're found out, just leave it to their lemmings to mindlessly perpetuate the ruse...for the benefit of their low-information voters.

..

[old salt]

WAPO GIVES BILL BARR PLATFORM TO ATTACK JOE BIDEN WITHOUT MENTIONING BARR’S ROLE IN FRAMING BIDEN

Bill Barr’s decision to set up a side channel to funnel dirt collected by Donald Trump’s lawyer on Trump’s opponent’s son to prosecutors already investigating Hunter Biden led directly to Joe Biden being framed. And it remains unexplained how Scott Brady came to find the lead — or whether it has anything to do with DOJ’s reported closure of an investigation into Mykola Zlochevsky in this same period.

At this point, Barr’s role in setting up a side channel that led to Biden being framed ought to be included in all discussions of his animus to Biden or his decision to back Trump. All the more so given that Jerry Nadler referred Scott Brady to at least DOJ IG for investigation of the way he misled Congress about his vetting corroborating Smirnov’s claims. After all, such an investigation may lead to places that scrutinize Barr’s own actions.

Sure Barr is going to back Republicans over Joe Biden, the guy he helped frame. But if the investigation into how that side channel ended up framing Biden gets very far, Barr may have far more self-interested reasons in ending Democratic control of DOJ.

Yes, that's right. Billy Barr FRAMED...attempted to frame, that is...Joe and Hunter Biden. That much is now MORE than clear.

Like the "perfect phone call" to Zelenskyy, republicans just want to start rumors and then run them as far as possible...for purely political purposes. Dishonest, duplicitous numbnuts.

When they're found out, just leave it to their lemmings to mindlessly perpetuate the ruse...for the benefit of their low-information voters.

That push to review what is now known as the Smirnov allegation resulted in David Weiss reneging on the plea deal he made with Hunter Biden and chasing the Smirnov allegation, only to discover Smirnov made it all up.

Hunter's plea deal blew up because of the Judge in DE, despite Weiss attempting to slip it by. Barr had nothing to do with it.

[dislaxxic]

Hunter's plea deal blew up because of the Judge in DE, despite Weiss attempting to slip it by. Barr had nothing to do with it.

Au Contraire, Old Saltine.

This, from someone who understands this issue WAY more clearly than you do:

MARYELLEN NOREIKA NEVER ANSWERED MARK SCARSI’S QUESTION

As I laid out in this post, Judge Maryellen Noreika’s opinion denying Hunter Biden’s bid for immunity under his diversion agreement provided new insight on the nature of her intervention at the July 26, 2023 plea hearing, and her attempt to refashion that intervention after the fact. Among other things, I showed:

- Judge Noreika provided several indications that she knew, during the hearing, that Probation head Margaret Bray had refused to sign the diversion agreement before the hearing. Given the logistics as described by AUSA Benjamin Wallace, her knowledge of that fact almost certainly had to come from conversations between Bray and Noreika in advance of the plea hearing, and as such, Bray’s refusal to sign the agreement may amount to proxy refusal from Judge Noreika, who was not a party to the agreement.

- Bray’s discussion with Wallace (which, if Bray refused to sign the diversion agreement at Noreika’s direction, would amount to ex parte communication between the judge and prosecution) created information asymmetry in the hearing. When Leo Wise made comments about the diversion only going into effect once Bray (or Noreika, as he once misspoke) signed it, Hunter’s team had no way to know that that discussion was only happening because of Bray’s earlier refusal. When Wallace piped up to affirm Judge Noreika’s question about the clause under which she should review the plea, Hunter’s team had no way of knowing that his assent may have reflected ex parte knowledge of Noreika’s concerns about how the plea and diversion agreements worked together.

- Contrary to her portrayal of the hearing in her opinion, Noreika’s intervention in the diversion agreement preceded the moment when Leo Wise “appeared to revoke” the deal. The deal collapsed, temporally at least, first because of her intervention and only subsequently because her intervention gave Wise opportunity to renege on the scope of the immunity agreement.
Judge Noreika still claims to have a veto over the substance of the diversion agreement, a contract to which she is not a party.

- After intervening based on a claim that Hunter’s immunity wasn’t as broad as he understood, her opinion ruled that even though none of the parties to the diversion agreement disputes that it would cover at least gun, tax, and drug crimes, she nevertheless ruled the immunity grant was too uncertain to be applicable to gun, tax, and drug crimes.

Given the assertions and omissions in Noreika’s opinion, Hunter Biden may have a plausible argument that she did precisely what she claimed she feared: unconstitutionally intervened in a prosecutorial decision that David Weiss had already committed himself to.[Emphasis, Dis']

Noreika’s opinion puts her actions that day at issue, every bit as much as Weiss’ subsequent actions are.

That makes the disparate treatment that Judge Noreika and Judge Scarsi gave to Hunter’s selective and vindictive prosecution claim important.

..

[old salt]

Hunter's plea deal blew up because of the Judge in DE, despite Weiss attempting to slip it by. Barr had nothing to do with it.

Au Contraire, Old Saltine.

This, from someone who understands this issue WAY more clearly than you do:

MARYELLEN NOREIKA NEVER ANSWERED MARK SCARSI’S QUESTION

As I laid out in this post, Judge Maryellen Noreika’s opinion denying Hunter Biden’s bid for immunity under his diversion agreement provided new insight on the nature of her intervention at the July 26, 2023 plea hearing, and her attempt to refashion that intervention after the fact. Among other things, I showed:

- Judge Noreika provided several indications that she knew, during the hearing, that Probation head Margaret Bray had refused to sign the diversion agreement before the hearing. Given the logistics as described by AUSA Benjamin Wallace, her knowledge of that fact almost certainly had to come from conversations between Bray and Noreika in advance of the plea hearing, and as such, Bray’s refusal to sign the agreement may amount to proxy refusal from Judge Noreika, who was not a party to the agreement.

- Bray’s discussion with Wallace (which, if Bray refused to sign the diversion agreement at Noreika’s direction, would amount to ex parte communication between the judge and prosecution) created information asymmetry in the hearing. When Leo Wise made comments about the diversion only going into effect once Bray (or Noreika, as he once misspoke) signed it, Hunter’s team had no way to know that that discussion was only happening because of Bray’s earlier refusal. When Wallace piped up to affirm Judge Noreika’s question about the clause under which she should review the plea, Hunter’s team had no way of knowing that his assent may have reflected ex parte knowledge of Noreika’s concerns about how the plea and diversion agreements worked together.

- Contrary to her portrayal of the hearing in her opinion, Noreika’s intervention in the diversion agreement preceded the moment when Leo Wise “appeared to revoke” the deal. The deal collapsed, temporally at least, first because of her intervention and only subsequently because her intervention gave Wise opportunity to renege on the scope of the immunity agreement.
Judge Noreika still claims to have a veto over the substance of the diversion agreement, a contract to which she is not a party.

- After intervening based on a claim that Hunter’s immunity wasn’t as broad as he understood, her opinion ruled that even though none of the parties to the diversion agreement disputes that it would cover at least gun, tax, and drug crimes, she nevertheless ruled the immunity grant was too uncertain to be applicable to gun, tax, and drug crimes.

Given the assertions and omissions in Noreika’s opinion, Hunter Biden may have a plausible argument that she did precisely what she claimed she feared: unconstitutionally intervened in a prosecutorial decision that David Weiss had already committed himself to.[Emphasis, Dis']

Noreika’s opinion puts her actions that day at issue, every bit as much as Weiss’ subsequent actions are.

That makes the disparate treatment that Judge Noreika and Judge Scarsi gave to Hunter’s selective and vindictive prosecution claim important.

..

OK. The Judge blew up the plea deal because she knew that the Probation division head did not agree to enforce the plea deal.
You just added why the Judge blew up the plea deal & confirmed that Weiss tried to slip it by the Judge without the Probation division's concurrence to enforce it. The Judge said she denied the plea deal because the Court could not enforce it -- that's the Probation division's job.
What does that have to do with Barr ?

[dislaxxic]

Details are important, and so is the timeline. As PMM explains - AGAIN - in the "Barr Framed Biden" post you've already read...

...in January 2020, Bill Barr ordered Scott Brady to conduct a side review of the dirt Rudy Giuliani collected from Russian spies and others. Via still unexplained circumstances, that side channel resulted in a claim from Alexander Smirnov being shared first with Brady, and then with Hunter Biden prosecutor David Weiss, a claim that Joe Biden had accepted a bribe from Burisma. After having received the lead in 2020 and not pursued it, Weiss revisited it after Barr made public comments last summer, as Republicans in Congress were chasing the claim.

That push to review what is now known as the Smirnov allegation resulted in David Weiss reneging on the plea deal he made with Hunter Biden and chasing the Smirnov allegation, only to discover Smirnov made it all up.

A long piece on Smirnov described the side channel, though did not mention that Brady claimed to have verified precisely the travel details that Weiss alleges debunk Smirnov’s claims.

And a piece from Devlin Barrett [WAPO], listed as a contributor to this story, wrote a piece that obscured rather than highlighted the insanity behind Weiss’ decision to renege on the scope of the plea deal he made with Hunter to chase Smirnov’s allegations anew (Devlin did not mention Barr’s role in pitching the allegation in both 2020 and 2023).

In the "Barr public comments" article linked above, you will read a bunch of hooey about what Billy Barr had to say about Jamie Raskin calling out his BS. Remember, that at the time of the writing of the linked article, Comer, Grassley and many other GOP loons were still relying heavily of Smirnov's pernicious lies.

Barr SET UP the Scott Brady review that led to Smirnov setting off the said loons in Congress about a bunch of non-existent bribery.

Yeah, THIS Scott Brady...

WASHINGTON, D.C.—House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) today urged Attorney General Merrick Garland and Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz to investigate former U.S. Attorney Scott Brady for providing false or misleading testimony to the Committee during a transcribed interview on October 23, 2023.

In the letter to Garland and Horowitz, Nadler writes:

“During his October 23, 2023, transcribed interview before the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Brady repeatedly testified that he had vetted and found credible statements made by a confidential human source (CHS), now identified as Alexander Smirnov. Of course, on February 14, 2024, a federal grand jury in the Central District of California indicted Alexander Smirnov for making a false statement to the FBI and creating a false and fictitious record. Given what we now know about Mr. Smirnov, it seems unlikely that Mr. Brady actually verified any of the information Mr. Smirnov provided to the FBI. Mr. Brady’s testimony to the contrary does not appear to be a mere misstatement—his comments were deliberate, repeated, and detailed.

“Mr. Brady’s testimony before the Committee also sheds light on a much broader pattern of misconduct. During his interview, Mr. Brady stated that he directed the FBI to conduct the June 2020 interview with Mr. Smirnov, who is alleged to have ties to Russian intelligence, despite reluctance from FBI agents handling the matter. If true, then Mr. Brady appears to have been part of a deliberate attempt to launder foreign disinformation through the Department of Justice.”

..

[old salt]

Details are important, and so is the timeline. As PMM explains - AGAIN - in the "Barr Framed Biden" post you've already read...

...in January 2020, Bill Barr ordered Scott Brady to conduct a side review of the dirt Rudy Giuliani collected from Russian spies and others. Via still unexplained circumstances, that side channel resulted in a claim from Alexander Smirnov being shared first with Brady, and then with Hunter Biden prosecutor David Weiss, a claim that Joe Biden had accepted a bribe from Burisma. After having received the lead in 2020 and not pursued it, Weiss revisited it after Barr made public comments last summer, as Republicans in Congress were chasing the claim.

That push to review what is now known as the Smirnov allegation resulted in David Weiss reneging on the plea deal he made with Hunter Biden and chasing the Smirnov allegation, only to discover Smirnov made it all up.

A long piece on Smirnov described the side channel, though did not mention that Brady claimed to have verified precisely the travel details that Weiss alleges debunk Smirnov’s claims.

And a piece from Devlin Barrett [WAPO], listed as a contributor to this story, wrote a piece that obscured rather than highlighted the insanity behind Weiss’ decision to renege on the scope of the plea deal he made with Hunter to chase Smirnov’s allegations anew (Devlin did not mention Barr’s role in pitching the allegation in both 2020 and 2023).

In the "Barr public comments" article linked above, you will read a bunch of hooey about what Billy Barr had to say about Jamie Raskin calling out his BS. Remember, that at the time of the writing of the linked article, Comer, Grassley and many other GOP loons were still relying heavily of Smirnov's pernicious lies.

Barr SET UP the Scott Brady review that led to Smirnov setting off the said loons in Congress about a bunch of non-existent bribery.

Yeah, THIS Scott Brady...

WASHINGTON, D.C.—House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) today urged Attorney General Merrick Garland and Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz to investigate former U.S. Attorney Scott Brady for providing false or misleading testimony to the Committee during a transcribed interview on October 23, 2023.

In the letter to Garland and Horowitz, Nadler writes:

“During his October 23, 2023, transcribed interview before the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Brady repeatedly testified that he had vetted and found credible statements made by a confidential human source (CHS), now identified as Alexander Smirnov. Of course, on February 14, 2024, a federal grand jury in the Central District of California indicted Alexander Smirnov for making a false statement to the FBI and creating a false and fictitious record. Given what we now know about Mr. Smirnov, it seems unlikely that Mr. Brady actually verified any of the information Mr. Smirnov provided to the FBI. Mr. Brady’s testimony to the contrary does not appear to be a mere misstatement—his comments were deliberate, repeated, and detailed.

“Mr. Brady’s testimony before the Committee also sheds light on a much broader pattern of misconduct. During his interview, Mr. Brady stated that he directed the FBI to conduct the June 2020 interview with Mr. Smirnov, who is alleged to have ties to Russian intelligence, despite reluctance from FBI agents handling the matter. If true, then Mr. Brady appears to have been part of a deliberate attempt to launder foreign disinformation through the Department of Justice.”

..

Instead of reposting PMM's incomprehensible & irrelevant conspiracy theories, plz just explain in a few of your own words what any of this had to do with the plea deal on the gun charges which was on offer @ July 26, 2023 when presented to the Court.
Weiss didn't renege on the plea deal. The Judge would not accept it.