Bingo. Gee, it sure is odd that you both understand my simple points with ease These two are gaslighting, and pretending I'm nutso...when in reality, my points have sunk in just fine.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 12:23 pmThis is a tactic similar to Donald and Rudy wanting Zelensky to announce, on TV, that the Bidens were being investigated. No interest in a credible investigation…..just wanted the idea of an investigation in the air so that it could be talked about “ad nauseam”…….wild speculation does enough damage.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 11:57 am tech, a fan keeps reminding us, correctly, that the whistleblowers' claim is that the slow down, the resistance to more aggressive investigation and prosecution, began during Barr's tenure...and continued into Garland's tenure.
Either they are lying (or Barr and Weiss are lying and are "in on" a cover-up) or they were simply wrong in their assessment of why the prosecutors were skeptical of their chances to establish probable cause, much less justification for prosecution. Both under Barr and under Garland...same prosecutor Weiss who says there was no interference...directly to Congress, a felony if he's lying to them.
The latter explanation, that they just didn't have sufficient strong credible evidence that wouldn't get tossed by any honest judge, makes the most sense to me, absent some proof they are lying.
Likewise, I assume Weiss is an honest prosecutor, and more likely than not motivated to prosecute big fish like Hunter and Joe if he could do so with confidence in court. So, I believe him when he says his prosecutorial decisions have been his own and he hasn't been interfered with, told what to do from higher ups.
That doesn't mean that we shouldn't be concerned about whether Weiss might be susceptible to "public" pressure from one or more quarters...certainly he was getting a ton of heat about his decision to enter into a plea deal...I'm a bit concerned that he pulled it because of that pressure, not because he hadn't actually agreed to the immunity that Hunter's team understood. At a minimum, I can see why he'd be concerned about the claims that he didn't have full prosecutorial discretion...the new arrangement assures that he will, as well as gives him the opportunity, indeed duty, to report in writing his findings and the basis for his decisions. And if that's the case, we'll see his rationale in due course.
Meanwhile, a fan's original challenge has been to ask why Comer and his House committee have NOT called Barr and IRS Commissioner Rettig to testify. Surely, they would have insight into what the IRS and DOJ knew and when they knew it, during their respective tenures. What is their assessment of the whistleblower's claims that the investigation was slow walked while they were in office?
The most obvious reason is that Comer et al don't actually want these guys under oath in a public forum, don't want to hear their answers to questions that press them.
They much prefer the allegations un-refuted.
i already told them why they aren't getting answers. It's because the House doesn't want to give them their answers. They want to let OS and Tech keep their TinFoilHats through the election season.
My favorite part of this entire conspiracy is the idiotic, moronic, drool-in-your-shoes claims that this mess that Barr and Weiss have handed us helps the Biden 2024 campaign.
No one is this freaking stupid, and certainly not tech and OS. They are full on gaslighting on this count, and know full well that with each passing day, Biden's election chances drop. Which, of course, is why the House has ZERO interest in clearing anything up. They want this to be like Benghazi...and will close the "investigation" in Nov 2024 if Biden loses.
But it will continue in 2025 if Biden wins. And every poster here knows it. Meanwhile? What's the plan for the Republican base.... working class, Tech and OS? Oh, that's right. The "plan" for the R party is more clickbait and feigned anger.
To quote Bill Barr: anger isn't a policy.