Hunter Biden Tinfoil issues

[njbill]

Meanwhile no experience Jared has more than $3billion in a hedge fund within 6 months of leaving the WH. Only 1% from American sources. The rest from the middle east where he was working on something or other.

Reports are that even the Saudi trustees of the fund voted against giving Jared the money. Bone Saw overruled them. Payback for the arms deals Jared negotiated which he called the “Abraham Accords.”

[old salt]

Barr news today. Apparently he stopped an investigation

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/24/politics ... index.html

Meanwhile no experience Jared has more than $3billion in a hedge fund within 6 months of leaving the WH. Only 1% from American sources. The rest from the middle east where he was working on something or other.

That wasn't the investigation of Hunter.

That's investment capital, not payments to Kishner. His govt portfolio was to improve Arab-Israeli relations. He did so via the Abraham Accords. He continued that effort after leaving govt service by starting a private equity firm directing Arab nations sovereign wealth fund investment into Israeli, US & other start ups & acquisitions. A legit, transparent investment enterprise.

[old salt]

Meanwhile no experience Jared has more than $3billion in a hedge fund within 6 months of leaving the WH. Only 1% from American sources. The rest from the middle east where he was working on something or other.

Reports are that even the Saudi trustees of the fund voted against giving Jared the money. Bone Saw overruled them. Payback for the arms deals Jared negotiated which he called the “Abraham Accords.”

...MBS cousins still angry about their house arrest & reduction in their family allowances.

MBS is dragging Saudi Arabia into the 21st century. ...there will be casualties along the way.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2023/0 ... tl-vpx.cnn

[old salt]

I keep telling you -- I'm not playing your silly game. It's obvious you've never been a member of a large, multi-layered bureaucracy if you think the guy at the top can micro-manage every detail, especially when you have policy, guidelines, & potential leakers & whistle blowers watching your every move.

So where does this put your goalposts?

In THIS post, you're claiming that Barr and Garland can't possibly know what's happening with the Hunter investigation, because they're too busy.

That means that which Admin. we are dealing with---Trump or J Biden-----is immaterial to the investigation and prosecution.

So....we're back to you insisting that Weiss is 100% responsible for the case. Is that right?

Do I have it right this time?

Barr could not know what the investigation would yield after he left. Do you know if Weiss even proposed an indictment before Barr left office?. There was still plenty of time to indict within the SOL.

When the WB's met with Weiss & he told them he couldn't indict in CA & DC, he'd been working for Monaco & Garland for a year & a half, & the SOL's still had not run & he had been negotiating a SOL waiver.

I'm done arguing about why Barr did not act on what he did not know at the time & what had not happened yet.
He's now saying he still dies not know what was discovered, confirmed & happened after he left, but he wants to know.

[cradleandshoot]

I keep telling you -- I'm not playing your silly game. It's obvious you've never been a member of a large, multi-layered bureaucracy if you think the guy at the top can micro-manage every detail, especially when you have policy, guidelines, & potential leakers & whistle blowers watching your every move.

So where does this put your goalposts?

In THIS post, you're claiming that Barr and Garland can't possibly know what's happening with the Hunter investigation, because they're too busy.

That means that which Admin. we are dealing with---Trump or J Biden-----is immaterial to the investigation and prosecution.

So....we're back to you insisting that Weiss is 100% responsible for the case. Is that right?

Do I have it right this time?

Barr could not know what the investigation would yield after he left. Do you know if Weiss even proposed an indictment before Barr left office?. There was still plenty of time to indict within the SOL.

When the WB's met with Weiss & he told them he couldn't indict in CA & DC, he'd been working for Monaco & Garland for a year & a half, & the SOL's still had not run & he had been negotiating a SOL waiver.

I'm done arguing about why Barr did not act on what he did not know at the time & what had not happened yet.
He's now saying he still dies not know what was discovered, confirmed & happened after he left, but he wants to know.

And when he testified to that under oath a few of the regular suspects on this forum will have their questions answered. I'm guessing they won't like the answers.

[a fan]

I keep telling you -- I'm not playing your silly game. It's obvious you've never been a member of a large, multi-layered bureaucracy if you think the guy at the top can micro-manage every detail, especially when you have policy, guidelines, & potential leakers & whistle blowers watching your every move.

So where does this put your goalposts?

In THIS post, you're claiming that Barr and Garland can't possibly know what's happening with the Hunter investigation, because they're too busy.

That means that which Admin. we are dealing with---Trump or J Biden-----is immaterial to the investigation and prosecution.

So....we're back to you insisting that Weiss is 100% responsible for the case. Is that right?

Do I have it right this time?

Barr could not know what the investigation would yield after he left. Do you know if Weiss even proposed an indictment before Barr left office?. There was still plenty of time to indict within the SOL.

When the WB's met with Weiss & he told them he couldn't indict in CA & DC, he'd been working for Monaco & Garland for a year & a half, & the SOL's still had not run & he had been negotiating a SOL waiver.

I'm done arguing about why Barr did not act on what he did not know at the time & what had not happened yet.
He's now saying he still dies not know what was discovered, confirmed & happened after he left, but he wants to know.

You didn't come even close to answering the question, which tells me you want to move the goalposts depending on the situation.

So I'll go with: you DO think that the AG pays plenty of attention to the key cases they are managing, and Barr knows what happened with the investigation when he was there, yet didn't direct it.

Barr didn't act because there was nothing to act on in the report. He told you all this indirectly.....if there was a felony committed by Hunter in Ukraine, Barr would be flipping out right now, and telling interviewers that there were big felonies that Weiss didn't prosecute.

What you are hanging your hat on, is that Weiss' team found absolutely nothing after 2 years of investigations, and then later, Weiss found a bunch of felonies....and is hiding these felonies from the public.

And so now we're starting year six of investigation. Hilarious. Maybe year ten is the winner, right?

In the end? I don't care, and would prefer that they investigate more, than investigate less.

[MDlaxfan76]

Seems to me that Barr and Weiss would have had the logical expectation that Weiss would be out of his job with the turnover in Administration, indeed that's the frequent normal course of business, especially with someone appointed under publicly partisan circumstances like Weiss was.

And if they perceived ANY risk of such, and felt that serious crimes had been committed that might not be pursued after they left, they'd have brought those indictments forward...but presumably only IF they had actual proof. I'm giving both Barr and Weiss the benefit of the doubt as being responsible public servants, or at least not wanting big egg on their faces...

Which it's pretty darn clear they didn't have such proof in 2020 after at least 2 years of looking...

So, I agree that it would have to mean that Weiss has been lying about not being interfered with, that he's complicit in a cover-up, if he actually NOW has adequate proof of these greater crimes and yet has not indicted them...5 years of investigation...

Is that possible??? Well, "you're saying there's a chance"...

Yup, really, really small, but hey the Deep State has big tentacles in these conspiracy theories.
Heck, he's probably a blood drinking pedophile too...there's a chance...

[MDlaxfan76]

I keep telling you -- I'm not playing your silly game. It's obvious you've never been a member of a large, multi-layered bureaucracy if you think the guy at the top can micro-manage every detail, especially when you have policy, guidelines, & potential leakers & whistle blowers watching your every move.

So where does this put your goalposts?

In THIS post, you're claiming that Barr and Garland can't possibly know what's happening with the Hunter investigation, because they're too busy.

That means that which Admin. we are dealing with---Trump or J Biden-----is immaterial to the investigation and prosecution.

So....we're back to you insisting that Weiss is 100% responsible for the case. Is that right?

Do I have it right this time?

Barr could not know what the investigation would yield after he left. Do you know if Weiss even proposed an indictment before Barr left office?. There was still plenty of time to indict within the SOL.

When the WB's met with Weiss & he told them he couldn't indict in CA & DC, he'd been working for Monaco & Garland for a year & a half, & the SOL's still had not run & he had been negotiating a SOL waiver.

I'm done arguing about why Barr did not act on what he did not know at the time & what had not happened yet.
He's now saying he still dies not know what was discovered, confirmed & happened after he left, but he wants to know.

And when he testified to that under oath a few of the regular suspects on this forum will have their questions answered. I'm guessing they won't like the answers.

Which "suspects" are you referring to?

I'd expect Barr to repeat under oath that there wasn't a big case to be made for Hunter's criminal acts beyond what Hunter has admitted to, no broad conspiracy, much less any involvement of Joe. No proof of such to justify an indictment that they felt could be proven in court.

Whether he wants to know if there's now a case to be made is immaterial to what he actually knows...which apparently is there was no case to be made, no crimes to indict.

It'll be interesting to hear from Weiss someday, but I wouldn't expect him to testify to Congress until after all potential litigation is finished.

[a fan]

I keep telling you -- I'm not playing your silly game. It's obvious you've never been a member of a large, multi-layered bureaucracy if you think the guy at the top can micro-manage every detail, especially when you have policy, guidelines, & potential leakers & whistle blowers watching your every move.

So where does this put your goalposts?

In THIS post, you're claiming that Barr and Garland can't possibly know what's happening with the Hunter investigation, because they're too busy.

That means that which Admin. we are dealing with---Trump or J Biden-----is immaterial to the investigation and prosecution.

So....we're back to you insisting that Weiss is 100% responsible for the case. Is that right?

Do I have it right this time?

Barr could not know what the investigation would yield after he left. Do you know if Weiss even proposed an indictment before Barr left office?. There was still plenty of time to indict within the SOL.

When the WB's met with Weiss & he told them he couldn't indict in CA & DC, he'd been working for Monaco & Garland for a year & a half, & the SOL's still had not run & he had been negotiating a SOL waiver.

I'm done arguing about why Barr did not act on what he did not know at the time & what had not happened yet.
He's now saying he still dies not know what was discovered, confirmed & happened after he left, but he wants to know.

And when he testified to that under oath a few of the regular suspects on this forum will have their questions answered. I'm guessing they won't like the answers.

In order for this to be true, this means that Weiss found big, juicy felonies on Hunter.....and buried them, risking his career to protect Hunter. And obviously, Weiss wouldn't be the only one who found these felonies.

That's it. That's your option, Cradle. Do you think Weiss and his team did that? He's a lifelong Republican, and Trump appointee.

Otherwise? They only complaint I see is that "they took too long" for the investigations. Which, as I keep telling Old Salt HURTS Joe Biden. The BEST outcome would have been to do all this in 2021....and this whole thing would be LONG GONE here in 2023, as the campaigns heat up. There is ZERO question on that count.

The TinFoil doesn't line up, Cradle. That's why I'm reacting like this------the accusations don't make logical sense.

[ggait]

Now that he’s a special counsel, Weiss is required to explain his charging decisions in a report that garland has pledged to make public.

Seems like Weiss is inviting extra visibility and transparency.

If Weiss was covering anything up, asking to be made an sc seems like the last thing you would want to do.

Maybe the deep state doesn’t know how cover ups are supposed to work?

[a fan]

Now that he’s a special counsel, Weiss is required to explain his charging decisions in a report that garland has pledged to make public.

Seems like Weiss is inviting extra visibility and transparency.

If Weiss was covering anything up, asking to be made an sc seems like the last thing you would want to do.

Maybe the deep state doesn’t know how cover ups are supposed to work?

I find the idea that ANYONE would jeopardize their career to save Hunter Biden a few dollars or jailtime utterly hilarious, let alone a Republican like Weiss.

None of these nonsense claims make a lick of sense. And every poster here wants Hunter to serve whatever sentence is right. It sucks that he had someone pay his tab, but unfortunately, that's not illegal. It's just gross, but we can't do anything about that.

[tech37]

Now that he’s a special counsel, Weiss is required to explain his charging decisions in a report that garland has pledged to make public.

Seems like Weiss is inviting extra visibility and transparency.

If Weiss was covering anything up, asking to be made an sc seems like the last thing you would want to do.

Maybe the deep state doesn’t know how cover ups are supposed to work?

I find the idea that ANYONE would jeopardize their career to save Hunter Biden a few dollars or jailtime utterly hilarious, let alone a Republican like Weiss.

None of these nonsense claims make a lick of sense. And every poster here wants Hunter to serve whatever sentence is right. It sucks that he had someone pay his tab, but unfortunately, that's not illegal. It's just gross, but we can't do anything about that.

"Republican like Weiss"? You keep saying it along with "Trump appointed" as if either matters. Ever hear of Never Trumpers? They're all Republicans a fan.

And "saving Hunter" is not the end. Protecting Joe is.

[ggait]

And "saving Hunter" is not the end. Protecting Joe is.

Weiss asking to be made an SC would be the last thing Weiss would want to do if his aim was to protect Joe.

So tell me why Weiss would ask for that? And why Garland would agree?

Can you even come up with one lame conspiracy theory explaining that move?

I'm all ears 37.

[cradleandshoot]

I keep telling you -- I'm not playing your silly game. It's obvious you've never been a member of a large, multi-layered bureaucracy if you think the guy at the top can micro-manage every detail, especially when you have policy, guidelines, & potential leakers & whistle blowers watching your every move.

So where does this put your goalposts?

In THIS post, you're claiming that Barr and Garland can't possibly know what's happening with the Hunter investigation, because they're too busy.

That means that which Admin. we are dealing with---Trump or J Biden-----is immaterial to the investigation and prosecution.

So....we're back to you insisting that Weiss is 100% responsible for the case. Is that right?

Do I have it right this time?

Barr could not know what the investigation would yield after he left. Do you know if Weiss even proposed an indictment before Barr left office?. There was still plenty of time to indict within the SOL.

When the WB's met with Weiss & he told them he couldn't indict in CA & DC, he'd been working for Monaco & Garland for a year & a half, & the SOL's still had not run & he had been negotiating a SOL waiver.

I'm done arguing about why Barr did not act on what he did not know at the time & what had not happened yet.
He's now saying he still dies not know what was discovered, confirmed & happened after he left, but he wants to know.

And when he testified to that under oath a few of the regular suspects on this forum will have their questions answered. I'm guessing they won't like the answers.

In order for this to be true, this means that Weiss found big, juicy felonies on Hunter.....and buried them, risking his career to protect Hunter. And obviously, Weiss wouldn't be the only one who found these felonies.

That's it. That's your option, Cradle. Do you think Weiss and his team did that? He's a lifelong Republican, and Trump appointee.

Otherwise? They only complaint I see is that "they took too long" for the investigations. Which, as I keep telling Old Salt HURTS Joe Biden. The BEST outcome would have been to do all this in 2021....and this whole thing would be LONG GONE here in 2023, as the campaigns heat up. There is ZERO question on that count.

The TinFoil doesn't line up, Cradle. That's why I'm reacting like this------the accusations don't make logical sense.

What is unknown is who was in charge of what when the baton was passed from Barr to Garland. The only honest way to get that answer would be Barr and Garland sitting next to each other answering questions to both of them at the same time. What is unknown is why the recommendations from the investigating IRS agents were basically chitcanned. I don't give a chit which AG was responsible at this time everybody is pointing the finger at somebody else.

[cradleandshoot]

And "saving Hunter" is not the end. Protecting Joe is.

Weiss asking to be made an SC would be the last thing Weiss would want to do if his aim was to protect Joe.

So tell me why Weiss would ask for that? And why Garland would agree?

Can you even come up with one lame conspiracy theory explaining that move?

I'm all ears 37.

Weiss could always say screw this, I don't want the job, my work is done here. Is Weiss required to accept the title?? Kinda odd because Garland said he already had the authority of a SC without actually having it.

[NattyBohChamps04]

Why does Joe need protecting? We all know you can't indict a sitting President!

[MDlaxfan76]

Now that he’s a special counsel, Weiss is required to explain his charging decisions in a report that garland has pledged to make public.

Seems like Weiss is inviting extra visibility and transparency.

If Weiss was covering anything up, asking to be made an sc seems like the last thing you would want to do.

Maybe the deep state doesn’t know how cover ups are supposed to work?

I find the idea that ANYONE would jeopardize their career to save Hunter Biden a few dollars or jailtime utterly hilarious, let alone a Republican like Weiss.

None of these nonsense claims make a lick of sense. And every poster here wants Hunter to serve whatever sentence is right. It sucks that he had someone pay his tab, but unfortunately, that's not illegal. It's just gross, but we can't do anything about that.

"Republican like Weiss"? You keep saying it along with "Trump appointed" as if either matters. Ever hear of Never Trumpers? They're all Republicans a fan.

And "saving Hunter" is not the end. Protecting Joe is.

So...Weiss has all along secretly been a "Never Trumper", and the Trump folks and Trump himself blew it when they appointed him and not some MAGA type, Biden and Dem hater, like them?

That's your theory? Barr too???

And hey, not just that, Weiss is secretly "Protecting Joe"???

And he drinks the blood of children?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Why does Joe need protecting? We all know you can't indict a sitting President!

Deep State is afterJoe and Hunter!

[old salt]

I keep telling you -- I'm not playing your silly game. It's obvious you've never been a member of a large, multi-layered bureaucracy if you think the guy at the top can micro-manage every detail, especially when you have policy, guidelines, & potential leakers & whistle blowers watching your every move.

So where does this put your goalposts?

In THIS post, you're claiming that Barr and Garland can't possibly know what's happening with the Hunter investigation, because they're too busy.

That means that which Admin. we are dealing with---Trump or J Biden-----is immaterial to the investigation and prosecution.

So....we're back to you insisting that Weiss is 100% responsible for the case. Is that right?

Do I have it right this time?

Barr could not know what the investigation would yield after he left. Do you know if Weiss even proposed an indictment before Barr left office?. There was still plenty of time to indict within the SOL.

When the WB's met with Weiss & he told them he couldn't indict in CA & DC, he'd been working for Monaco & Garland for a year & a half, & the SOL's still had not run & he had been negotiating a SOL waiver.

I'm done arguing about why Barr did not act on what he did not know at the time & what had not happened yet.
He's now saying he still dies not know what was discovered, confirmed & happened after he left, but he wants to know.

You didn't come even close to answering the question, which tells me you want to move the goalposts depending on the situation.

So I'll go with: you DO think that the AG pays plenty of attention to the key cases they are managing, and Barr knows what happened with the investigation when he was there, yet didn't direct it.

Barr didn't act because there was nothing to act on in the report. He told you all this indirectly.....if there was a felony committed by Hunter in Ukraine, Barr would be flipping out right now, and telling interviewers that there were big felonies that Weiss didn't prosecute.

What you are hanging your hat on, is that Weiss' team found absolutely nothing after 2 years of investigations, and then later, Weiss found a bunch of felonies....and is hiding these felonies from the public.

And so now we're starting year six of investigation. Hilarious. Maybe year ten is the winner, right?

In the end? I don't care, and would prefer that they investigate more, than investigate less.

I tend to believe the IRS Whistleblowers. Do you ? To me, they're the most credible.
They put it all on the line coming forward. Everything to lose, nothing to gain.

They clearly wanted to bring felony charges. Shapley testified that Weiss was getting orders on how to proceed from the Garland DoJ.

To me, that's more convincing than your uninformed speculation on why Barr didn't direct Weiss to indict before the election & campaign when he felt that the investigation was not yet complete & there was still plenty of time remaining on the SOL.

[a fan]

"Republican like Weiss"? You keep saying it along with "Trump appointed" as if either matters. Ever hear of Never Trumpers? They're all Republicans a fan.

You're not going through the logic, Tech. If you did, you'd see how absurd these claims are:

- Trump himself appointed (drumroll) someone who you are now claiming hates him, and is a never Trumper. This opinion is based on (drumroll) nothing.

- Trump's appointee, Weiss ,came across major felonies on Hunter----knowing he's not the only one on his legal team----and buried these felonies from the public, putting his own freedom on the line to (snicker) protect Hunter from these massive felonies.

-In order for this to happen, Barr has to be""in on it", OR, Barr found nothing from his 2 year investigation INCLUDING the FINISHED DoJ investigation into everything Ukraine, which was on Barr's desk in Aug of 2020. Pick one.

And "saving Hunter" is not the end. Protecting Joe is.

Now you're on the hook for explaining why they didn't end the case in 2021, when no one cared, and three years for the election.

Can you explain that? If they're "covering for Joe", in what world would they take five years to investigate a run of the mill IRS case with the defendant hiding overseas earnings?

If your answer to both is "I don't know", you understand why I'm making fun. The logic doesn't work, and NO ONE can come up with these magic felonies that Hunter (or Joe) committed.