old salt wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2023 12:16 pm
a fan wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2023 12:07 pm
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2023 11:31 am
a fan wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2023 11:27 am
old salt wrote: ↑Fri Jul 21, 2023 11:22 am
Because it was based on IRS investigations of multiple tax years. Have you ever been involved in a dispute with the IRS ? It can take years to sort out, even when there's no criminality charged.
Great. Now we're back to the claims of "foot dragging" are lies from IRS agents who should know about your claim that "it can take years to sort out, even when there's no criminality charged".
They're on the stand, telling everyone that you you're lying, OS, and that they've never seen "slow walking" like this.
Again, we can do this all day, RRR. These are political games, trying desperately to find ways of magically skipping over any blame of the Trump administration, and landing perfectly on blaming Biden. I'm tired of this silly nonsense.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
That's right. And you, naturally, think that applies to me, and not you.
These are Trump guys, OS. Trump's handpicked guys running both the FBI and the IRS for the entirety of Hunter's investigation.
You wanna blame them? Go right ahead. There's your conspiracy. Is Wray or Retting whistleblowing the DoJ?
Call me when they do. In the meantime, these IRS agents on the stand are claiming you're wrong, and two years is plenty of time for an indictment.
Trump guys ? The Whistle blowers ? The DC & CA US Atty's ? The DE Asst US Atty ? You're not paying attention.
"whistle blowers" no, we don't know for sure their politics. But not political appointees.
But head of IRS and FBI and DOJ were all Trump appointees as of 2020, as were the DC and CA US attorneys, and the Delaware assistant Us attorney. ALL Trump appointees.
And, none of them are claiming that there was political interference preventing an indictment of Hunter in 2020, nor thereafter.
Including the current (Trump appointed) FBI and IRS head and the DE US attorney. None.
Just some investigators who grew frustrated with prosecutors (Trump appointed) who said the evidence they could credibly take to court was insufficient to have a strong confidence of successful prosecution. Happens every day of the week that investigators think they see a crime that prosecutors say they need stronger proof of before they will indict.
Yup, frustrating. What did Weiss actually say in that meeting?
Well, we know the investigators got at least one piece wrong, as Weiss says he was not ever asking for the sort of status Garland decided to do with Jack Smith, taking the DOJ entirely out of the loop, but rather a different status...but decided not to pursue it as he felt he had sufficient powers and no interference.
So, the investigators "misheard" that one...did they also "mishear" this sense that Weiss was being prevented by higher ups from extending the investigation further (after 4 years of investigation)? Was that something Weiss actually wanted to do? Weiss says no...and Weiss is the Trump appointed prosecutor purposely placed to prosecute Hunter...and who Biden/Garland didn't replace under their own authority to switch out US Attorneys..gave him full authority to make charging decisions.
Sure sounds immensely more plausible that the case was concluded to Weiss' satisfaction, given the actual evidence, and not under political pressure from Garland/Biden, etc.