Hunter Biden Tinfoil issues

[Typical Lax Dad]

For the life of me, I don’t understand how anyone doesn’t see that this is all it is….. the guy was a crack addict….the guy would smoke the crack of your a$$ when fiendin’….. Joe was in business with him and relying on him to run deals….sounds plausible…

It's simple. They're Republicans.

It's why they understood....with no trouble whatsoever....that the Jan 6th hearings run by those little D's was a political circus.

Yet they are unable to understand that these House hearings, run by the little R's, is the same circus.


This is how they keep us divided. Americans are unable to think clearly anymore.

Parents in prominent positions routinely risk it by going into business with their kids that are drug addicts and alcoholics….happens all the time. How else would Joe have survived this long in politics without being smart and using his kid as a front man. People should just ask friends and families in this situation what they would do….pretty certain they would tell you that they will rely on their oxy and meth addicted child to run deals for them.

[cradleandshoot]

For the life of me, I don’t understand how anyone doesn’t see that this is all it is….. the guy was a crack addict….the guy would smoke the crack of your a$$ when fiendin’….. Joe was in business with him and relying on him to run deals….sounds plausible…

It's simple. They're Republicans.

It's why they understood....with no trouble whatsoever....that the Jan 6th hearings run by those little D's was a political circus.

Yet they are unable to understand that these House hearings, run by the little R's, is the same circus.


This is how they keep us divided. Americans are unable to think clearly anymore.

To think clearly you need to have all of the facts. I don't think we are close to having all of the facts. Hell nobody even knows or will admit to knowing who " the big guy" is yet that name keeps popping up time and time again. Maybe the big guy is just a figment of everybody's imagination? The Keyser Soze of the entire scheme.
He exists everywhere and nowhere all at the same time.

[a fan]

Where we are at is the surface was hardly scratched in regards to the HB debacle. Much was not known and in dribs and drabs more information is coming to the surface. Do you want all of the truth to be known or are are you satisfied with the status quo? I'm fairly certain there are a number of players in this affair that a have vested interest in the truth never being known.

What I am telling you is that you're not going to get "the truth" in these Republican House hearings, Cradle.

Let me ask you, Tech, and OS this: would you expect to hear anything resembling the full truth if Nancy Pelosi was running this thing?

No, right? Well....there you go. You get it now.

[MDlaxfan76]

It's not an opinion, I'm disputing your claims of fact. You're telling me this "information" is new. It's not. It was gathered by the very people you are insisting are corrupt, in the very investigation you now think didn't happen.
Again, not "new" in a literal sense but new to the voting public. Literally taken, no nuance, absolute... classic a fan!

His point has been that the information was uncovered during the investigation, known to the prosecutor team, known to Weiss and Barr...and not considered probable cause.

Just what do you mean by "investigation"? Obviously one wasn't opened in a formal sense, was it?

......then you tell us what you think we think.

You continually confuse where your logic takes your claims with me telling you what you think. It is impossible, for example, for you to claim that the Weiss' investigation was stopped or slowed by Garland without Weiss's own compliance and corruption. You don't like that this is what your logic does, so you claim I'm telling you what you think. Sorry man, it's just basic logic.
Not sure where you're getting this. Are you simply making it up? I'm pretty sure both OS and I have mentioned that Weiss was probably following orders from Garland. I'm certain I have.

which means that you are claiming that Weiss has twice lied, in writing, to Congress...a felony.

Weiss has some explaining to do under oath. Maybe he didn't lie he may have just misremembered the facts. There seems to be a lot of misremembering going on from various agencies of the US government. I'm certain those agencies would be more than happy if certain facts remain misremembered forever. The HB debacle proves true just like in Watergate times. If you follow the money trail long enough and with persistence it will lead you to the truth. One thing is obvious. HB was payed a lot of money for a player with no experience and not that bright to boot. The only thing he brought to the table was his old man. His old man sure shows up a lot at those dinners and those conference calls. I guess they all wanted to chat about the weather, their grandkids and other mundane topics like that. It makes a lot of sense if you don't think about it logically and ask why or for what reason.
Weiss has some disturbing discrepancies to clear up. I wonder if his testimony will be behind closed doors or available for all Americans to see?

Again, you are implying that Weiss lied to Congress, twice, in writing.
Does he really need to explain anything, or has he already refuted the claim that he was interfered with?

Once the process is entirely over (and I don't think the GOP wants it to ever be over), I would expect that Weiss will explain, publicly, that whatever leads they had (leads aren't necessarily evidence that can be used in court) didn't pan out with hard, cold evidence of a crime.

Plenty of unseemly behavior by Hunter, no dispute to that, but nothing proving an actual bribe of Joe or a change in US policy as a result of some leverage, bribe or blackmail. No crime.

I just don't see any scenario where Weiss found a crime and didn't prosecute other than if he's lying to Congress and was actually interfered with...and that means a whole lot of other people are in on and the lie. And that goes against the character that these jobs typically attract...for all of them to be doing a cover-up is a tough sell to me.

As to why Joe communicated with his son, I don't think that's assailable as criminal unless there's testimony and it's corroborated with hard evidence that'll stand up in court that Joe actually asked for Hunter to be paid as a favor to Joe, even wink wink. All we've heard is that Hunter over sold his relationship and access, well beyond reality, according to his partner...and yeah, that's pretty sleazy. We can criticize Joe for either not realizing what was going on or turning a blind eye to it.

I can come up with some pretty fatherly excuses for doing so with a troubled son, whose more serious issues I was worried about...including suicide.

Back to Weiss...one of the core principles of prosecutors is to not discuss evidence or allegations they don't use in court and which therefore can be challenged in due process. So, I could see him, assuming he sticks to those principles, simply stating, repeatedly if necessary, that every lead or allegation he is presented by Congress critters, was followed up and either not found credible or couldn't be corroborated or was tainted by chain of custody issues. No crime to indict. I wouldn't expect him to offer an exoneration of Joe, much less Hunter, as that too would be inappropriate.

But right now he should tell the Congress critters to shove it and wait until he's finished with the prosecution of whatever crimes he actually decides to indict on...or finishes whatever plea agreement instead. He has Special Counsel status, so it's entirely up to him to finish the case...and when he's done so, he's required by statute to explain his decisions in writing to the AG...when that is done, he'll likely be called before Congress and unless there's some classified info involved, that hearing will very likely be in public.

Holy cow MD, you keep implying something I never said. There are discrepancies between what the WB documented over the course of their investigation. The most unusual was Weiss telling not only the 2 WB but another group of agents in a meeting the decision to prosecute HB was out of his hands. Weiss has since denied that and said he always had the authority to make the decision. Why do you think I keep harping on the fact someone is lying? You keep trying to spin a different scenario that the WBs were confused or misunderstood what Weiss was telling them. That is why I want to hear testimony from 3 people. Bill Barr, Merrick Garland and Weiss. The 2 whistleblowers I believe documented in their notes what Weiss told them in the aforementioned meeting. So Weiss will have the perfect opportunity to marry up what the agents remember him saying to them and what he claims he said. No matter how hard you try to twist it one side or the other is lying or guilty of some industrial strength misremembering. I'm going to reserve judgement until the 3 of them have testified and see then where the chips fall.

sheesh, do I need to pull up all the posts where you explicitly said that either Weiss or the WB's are lying, and mine where I said I don't think either have lied? You've now added the industrial strength misremembering as a caveat. I think they simply were looking for an explanation other than the flat, 'you ain't got the goods guys' that Weiss was undoubtedly trying to say to them. They said the issue started under Barr as AG, which means that their frustrations were longstanding...and Rettig was the IRS Commissioner throughout...none of them demanded more action. It's quite likely that what they heard was akin to "I can't take this to the court or to my bosses, this ain't enough...I'd love to do more, but this won't cut it with anyone" and extrapolated that to interference. Which Weiss has flat refuted.

Weiss has written to Congress twice refuting the claim that he was interfered with, told what to do by higher ups.

And if he's not telling the truth, lying that way to Congress would be a felony...going on TV and lying would not be, but doing so formally to Congress would be...and I'm big time from Missouri on that one.

While we're awaiting Weiss's conclusion of any prosecutions as SC and his formal report, give me an answer why the House GOP flacks haven't called Rettig, Wray and Barr? oops, they're likely to say there wasn't probable cause during their tenure, Barr through 2020, Rettig through '22, Wray still there (Wray might say he won't talk about it because it's in Weiss' court). But Rettig and Weiss could...why aren't you calling for that?

[a fan]

To think clearly you need to have all of the facts. I don't think we are close to having all of the facts.

"We" aren't. The FBI, DoJ, and IRS have had all of the facts for five years now, Cradle. All Run by Republicans. And you, Tech, and OS can't explain how it is that NONE of these agencies have opened a case on Joe. You guys just ignore this obvious point.

So either every one of those agencies that were run by Republicans are corrupt, or there's just nothing to charge Joe with.....



Let me put it another way.

If you want facts and "Truth"....why are you, Tech, and OS looking to the United States of America's House of Representatives for truth?

Do you all not get how.......I'm at a loss for words here.....INSANE it is to expect anything resembling the truth from the House?

[tech37]

If what you're saying is true, why doesn't Joe make an effort to clear his name/save his legacy? Since his outright lies re "never discussed business with my son" were blown up, he and the WH have been very quiet, no?

If he's innocent I'd think he'd want to prove that.

did he discuss business with his son?
I haven't seen that proven to be a lie...it would indeed be embarrassing if he did lie about that.

Amazing. Your partisan perception blinds you. Most reasonable, objective people, know the Big Guy is a big liar.

[tech37]

Attorney is dropping representation of Hunter Biden
Christopher Clark, a high-profile litigator, is withdrawing because he might be called to testify in the case, which appears headed for a criminaltrial.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/1 ... y-00111284

[Typical Lax Dad]

Attorney is dropping representation of Hunter Biden
Christopher Clark, a high-profile litigator, is withdrawing because he might be called to testify in the case, which appears headed for a criminaltrial.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/1 ... y-00111284

That’s good to hear. Hopefully we get to the bottom of Hunter Biden’s corruption so that the country can move forward.

[tech37]

Just what do you mean by "investigation"? Obviously one wasn't opened in a formal sense, was it?

Are you serious? If you are, this is why we are having problems....this is the smoking gun. You're coming in 99.9% of the way through the process, and think the investigation is just starting.
"smoking gun" ? Not just yet...

That's right, I'm just your average US citizen now finding out what information was suppressed, covered up, hidden, thanks to the efforts of the committee.

The IRS opened a formal investigation into Hunter Biden in 2018, tech. The IRS brought in the FBI shortly after that.
Thanks, I wasn't paying attention at that point. Did the MSM cover it?

Bill Barr came in in 2019, and merged the IRS and FBI case.....putting the FBI work in Delaware, and the IRS in DC.

Hunter was finally indicted after five years of investigating, which is longer than they took for 9/11 and the Mueller report COMBINED.

The House is now reading stuff to you, the public......that came from five years of investigations. And they're doing it in a way to maximize damage to the Biden Campaign.

And your reaction to this is: "boy, they really need to investigate this Hunter guy."
Right again, based on information/evidence no one has seen until now. I'm sure you're catching on a fan.

....do you see our disconnect now?

[Kismet]

If what you're saying is true, why doesn't Joe make an effort to clear his name/save his legacy? Since his outright lies re "never discussed business with my son" were blown up, he and the WH have been very quiet, no?

If he's innocent I'd think he'd want to prove that.

did he discuss business with his son?
I haven't seen that proven to be a lie...it would indeed be embarrassing if he did lie about that.

Amazing. Your partisan perception blinds you. Most reasonable, objective people know the Big Guy is a big liar.

as opposed to YOUR partisan perception? What be amazing would be for you to certainly speak for yourself and leave everybody else out of it.

[tech37]

If what you're saying is true, why doesn't Joe make an effort to clear his name/save his legacy? Since his outright lies re "never discussed business with my son" were blown up, he and the WH have been very quiet, no?

If he's innocent I'd think he'd want to prove that.

did he discuss business with his son?
I haven't seen that proven to be a lie...it would indeed be embarrassing if he did lie about that.

Amazing. Your partisan perception blinds you. Most reasonable, objective people know the Big Guy is a big liar.

as opposed to YOUR partisan perception? My advice would be to certainly speak for yourself and leave everybody else out of it.

Haha! I certainly wasn't including you kismet

Right, MY partisan perception when I want to see both Biden and Trump, out of the picture.

[Kismet]

Right, MY partisan perception when I want to see both Biden and Trump, out of the picture.

Good luck wit dat, tech

[a fan]

Bill Barr came in in 2019, and merged the IRS and FBI case.....putting the FBI work in Delaware, and the IRS in DC.

Hunter was finally indicted after five years of investigating, which is longer than they took for 9/11 and the Mueller report COMBINED.

The House is now reading stuff to you, the public......that came from five years of investigations. And they're doing it in a way to maximize damage to the Biden Campaign.

And your reaction to this is: "boy, they really need to investigate this Hunter guy."

Right again, based on information/evidence no one has seen until now. I'm sure you're catching on a fan.

Ok. So I have one simple question for you, Tech: who's going to do this investigation you want? The House can't.

So...who is it you think is going to run this investigation you want.

[a fan]

If what you're saying is true, why doesn't Joe make an effort to clear his name/save his legacy? Since his outright lies re "never discussed business with my son" were blown up, he and the WH have been very quiet, no?

If he's innocent I'd think he'd want to prove that.

did he discuss business with his son?
I haven't seen that proven to be a lie...it would indeed be embarrassing if he did lie about that.

Amazing. Your partisan perception blinds you. Most reasonable, objective people know the Big Guy is a big liar.

as opposed to YOUR partisan perception? My advice would be to certainly speak for yourself and leave everybody else out of it.

Haha! I certainly wasn't including you kismet

Right, MY partisan perception when I want to see both Biden and Trump, out of the picture.

You were OG complainer about the Deep State daring to investigate Trump, Tech. Do you think Kismet and others have forgotten?

[tech37]

I don't think anyone's thinking has been "flawed" since not enough is yet known. I think you and others have jumped to conclusions. One reason being, you can't/won't accept Barr's "a lot of red flags" that the public is just starting to learn about.

Yes, your thinking is flawed. The FBI, DoJ, and IRS turned Hunter's financial life upside down for five years Tech.
As mentioned, if my thinking is flawed, so what? It's a lacrosse board after all.

I don't care if they took 20 years, the public is hearing it now for the first time. And I'm sure there is more to come. That's probably flawed though.

And you are telling me here that you don't understand why I ask the question: knowing that these agencies worked on Hunter's finances for five years, why do you think not one of these agencies opened a case on Joe Biden?

I can't be any more clear. These agencies already investigated Barr's "red flags" tech.

So i ask again: do you understand what it means that a case has not been opened on Joe Biden after five years of investigating?
I understand that your absolute position on all of this may well be, flawed.

[tech37]

Bill Barr came in in 2019, and merged the IRS and FBI case.....putting the FBI work in Delaware, and the IRS in DC.

Hunter was finally indicted after five years of investigating, which is longer than they took for 9/11 and the Mueller report COMBINED.

The House is now reading stuff to you, the public......that came from five years of investigations. And they're doing it in a way to maximize damage to the Biden Campaign.

And your reaction to this is: "boy, they really need to investigate this Hunter guy."

Right again, based on information/evidence no one has seen until now. I'm sure you're catching on a fan.

Ok. So I have one simple question for you, Tech: who's going to do this investigation you want? The House can't.

So...who is it you think is going to run this investigation you want.

How bout an impeachment inquiry which would allow for more subpoena power for the committee? After all, "the truth shall set you free" a fan! What that could uncover could force Ol Joe to appoint his own "objective" SC to clear his name, save his legacy, if at all possible at this point.

[tech37]

If what you're saying is true, why doesn't Joe make an effort to clear his name/save his legacy? Since his outright lies re "never discussed business with my son" were blown up, he and the WH have been very quiet, no?

If he's innocent I'd think he'd want to prove that.

did he discuss business with his son?
I haven't seen that proven to be a lie...it would indeed be embarrassing if he did lie about that.

Amazing. Your partisan perception blinds you. Most reasonable, objective people know the Big Guy is a big liar.

as opposed to YOUR partisan perception? My advice would be to certainly speak for yourself and leave everybody else out of it.

Haha! I certainly wasn't including you kismet

Right, MY partisan perception when I want to see both Biden and Trump, out of the picture.

You were OG complainer about the Deep State daring to investigate Trump, Tech. Do you think Kismet and others have forgotten?

I've never used the term Deep State but I'm sure glad Comey and his crew are long gone. Except some do have a bad habit of turning up on CNN and/or Morning Mika.

[a fan]

As mentioned, if my thinking is flawed, so what? It's a lacrosse board after all.

You say you want a discussion. Back and forth, right? I learn stuff all the time from my fellow posters.

You don't, I guess. That's fine.

I don't care if they took 20 years, the public is hearing it now for the first time. And I'm sure there is more to come. That's probably flawed though.

So you want to change how our Republic operates. Hard pass from this voter.

Three different branches investigate something that happened 6-10 years ago.....each find nothing that warrants opening a case on Joe Biden. And you're here telling me you want to live in a country where that's not enough, you want more.

Move to Russia. Putin will be happy to give you what you want.

I find this amazing, coming from a guy who wouldn't stop complaining that US intel dared to investigate TrumpCampaign, who hired as their Campaign Manager, a man who worked for Putin to install his puppet in Ukraine. That made you upset.

And now here you are telling the forum that five years by Three Separate Federal Departments isn't enough for you?

Cool. You do you. Take the hypocrisy to 11, Spinal Tap would be proud!

I understand that your absolute position on all of this may well be, flawed.

No. My position tells YOU that Three Departments didn't find the probable cause you are claiming is there on Joe Biden for five years.

And this claim that Joe committed crimes is based on (drumroll) the exact information that the FBI, DoJ, and IRS were working on for the last five years.

Mueller only investigated Trump for two years. Based on Techs "new rules for America", we MUST reopen the case on Trump immediately, and blow another three years, minimum.

Yep. Your thinking is flawed.

[a fan]

If what you're saying is true, why doesn't Joe make an effort to clear his name/save his legacy? Since his outright lies re "never discussed business with my son" were blown up, he and the WH have been very quiet, no?

If he's innocent I'd think he'd want to prove that.

did he discuss business with his son?
I haven't seen that proven to be a lie...it would indeed be embarrassing if he did lie about that.

Amazing. Your partisan perception blinds you. Most reasonable, objective people know the Big Guy is a big liar.

as opposed to YOUR partisan perception? My advice would be to certainly speak for yourself and leave everybody else out of it.

Haha! I certainly wasn't including you kismet

Right, MY partisan perception when I want to see both Biden and Trump, out of the picture.

You were OG complainer about the Deep State daring to investigate Trump, Tech. Do you think Kismet and others have forgotten?

I've never used the term Deep State but I'm sure glad Comey and his crew are long gone.

Ah, so you DO remember your Deep State complaining.

So...why the hypocrisy? You should be on here, screaming about Hunter being treated unfairly in a five year long investigation by the Deep State, looking for dirt on a Republican political enemy.

And you're not. Because of course you aren't.

[a fan]

How bout an impeachment inquiry which would allow for more subpoena power for the committee? After all, "the truth shall set you free" a fan! What that could uncover could force Ol Joe to appoint his own "objective" SC to clear his name, save his legacy, if at all possible at this point.

Oh totally. Let's impeach a POTUS for something that the FBI, DoJ, and IRS couldn't find dirt on....and that happened 6-10 years ago. Make sense.


BTW......I want to make sure you're getting tone here----this is all in good fun, tech. You are welcome to your opinions, just as I am welcome to give you a hard time for them, and vice versa.

I hope you get that.