Re: Hunter Biden Tinfoil issues
Posted: Wed Jul 26, 2023 1:03 pm
Apparently gun charge goes away. Feds won't go after anything that was prior to 2000 I think I heard.
Same Party, Different House
https://fanlax.com/forum/
Apparently gun charge goes away. Feds won't go after anything that was prior to 2000 I think I heard.
You could be correct sparky. It is the gun charge magically going away which was pure BS in my opinion. Hunters lawyers will have to do some fancy footwork to change the mind of a very skeptical judge. There was an interesting answer from Weiss to a question from the judge. When the judge asked Weiss if the HB case was closed he answered that it was not but could not elaborate any further than that. What is that all about??jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 12:59 pm... don't get ahead of yourself spanky. News now reporting the two sides are coming to agreement on a new agreement which sounds more favorable to Hunter Biden. We'll see.cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 12:43 pmLet the whining from the FLP liberals begin. I feel bad for ggait and his brilliant legal mind. He excoriated me for suggesting such a thing would ever happen. Me thinks counselor ggait will have to come on this forum and chow down a heaping helping of crow.
There must be a lotta people over at the DOJ dropping a load in their pants right about now.
I think a reasonable solution would be for the judge to delay signing off on this agreement while she reviews it some more given recent events that effect the agreement.ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 1:05 pm Plea agreement is not dead at all.
There was a minor dispute between the lawyers about exactly what charges were/were not being settled. That dispute between the lawyers has been public knowledge for weeks. Totally appropriate for the judge to ask about that.
Somewhat surprising that the two sides did not have that wrinkle worked out in advance of the hearing today. But that matter was quickly resolved today.
And I see absolutely nothing in the reporting about Youth's BS suggestion that HB's lawyers impersonated the opposing counsel. Which was completely absurd from the get go. And now proven false. Youth -- you really shouldn't get your news from Jesse Waters!
PS -- the disagreement was about what charges were being settled. Typically that isn't any issue -- the agreement settles the charges that were filed (in this case tax and gun charges). The DE US Atty (you know the deep state Biden hack appointed by Trump) did not want to waive any other possible charges against Hunter. Like potential FARA violations. Hunter's counsel (doing his job zealously) wanted waiver/immunity for other potential charges.
The DE US Atty won that point. Which is strange, since all the MAGAs on here tell us he is totally in the tank for Hunter.
.. there may be something post 1999 / 2000 (I think) that is still being investigated. Which would be fair game. My take.cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 1:04 pmYou could be correct sparky. It is the gun charge magically going away which was pure BS in my opinion. Hunters lawyers will have to do some fancy footwork to change the mind of a very skeptical judge. There was an interesting answer from Weiss to a question from the judge. When the judge asked Weiss if the HB case was closed he answered that it was not but could not elaborate any further than that. What is that all about??jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 12:59 pm... don't get ahead of yourself spanky. News now reporting the two sides are coming to agreement on a new agreement which sounds more favorable to Hunter Biden. We'll see.cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 12:43 pmLet the whining from the FLP liberals begin. I feel bad for ggait and his brilliant legal mind. He excoriated me for suggesting such a thing would ever happen. Me thinks counselor ggait will have to come on this forum and chow down a heaping helping of crow.
There must be a lotta people over at the DOJ dropping a load in their pants right about now.
.... we all know L&W can not take an L on a a technicality error with the Court Clerk, that would be devastating to L&W. In the NYP article there are quotes from Bengel.... a play on words, a ploy to buy time, an accident, who knows; well, other than you of course. Do you like your crow prepared grilled or roasted?ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 1:05 pm Plea agreement is not dead at all.
There was a minor dispute between the lawyers about exactly what charges were/were not being settled. That dispute between the lawyers has been public knowledge for weeks. Totally appropriate for the judge to ask about that.
Somewhat surprising that the two sides did not have that wrinkle worked out in advance of the hearing today. But that matter was quickly resolved today.
And I see absolutely nothing in the reporting about Youth's preposterous BS suggestion that HB's lawyers impersonated the opposing counsel. Which was completely absurd from the get go. And now proven false. Youth -- you really shouldn't get your news from Jesse Waters!
PS -- the disagreement was about what charges were being settled. Typically that isn't any issue -- the agreement settles the charges that were filed (in this case tax and gun charges). The DE US Atty (you know the deep state Biden hack appointed by Trump) did not want to waive any other possible charges against Hunter. Like potential FARA violations. Hunter's counsel (doing his job zealously) wanted waiver/immunity for other potential charges.
The DE US Atty won that point. Which is strange, since all the MAGAs on here tell us he is totally in the tank for Hunter.
I'm sorry, did the judge even mention the alleged impersonation plot today? Did I miss that?.... we all know L&W can not take an L on a a technicality error with the Court Clerk, that would be devastating to L&W. In the NYP articlethere are quotes from Bengel.... a play on words, a ploy to buy time, an accident, who knows; well, other than you of course.
Very sloppy lawyering. Inexcusable.ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 1:05 pm Plea agreement is not dead at all.
There was a minor dispute between the lawyers about exactly what charges were/were not being settled. That dispute between the lawyers has been public knowledge for weeks. Totally appropriate for the judge to ask about that.
Somewhat surprising that the two sides did not have that wrinkle worked out in advance of the hearing today. But that matter was quickly resolved today.
And I see absolutely nothing in the reporting about Youth's preposterous BS suggestion that HB's lawyers impersonated the opposing counsel. Which was completely absurd from the get go. And now proven false. Youth -- you really shouldn't get your news from Jesse Waters!
PS -- the disagreement was about what charges were being settled. Typically that isn't any issue -- the agreement settles the charges that were filed (in this case tax and gun charges). The DE US Atty (you know the deep state Biden hack appointed by Trump) did not want to waive any other possible charges against Hunter. Like potential FARA violations. Hunter's counsel (doing his job zealously) wanted waiver/immunity for other potential charges.
The DE US Atty won that point. Which is strange, since all the MAGAs on here tell us he is totally in the tank for Hunter.
--- my take, no crow given court's reaction (non-reaction).ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 1:52 pmI'm sorry, did the judge even mention the alleged impersonation plot today? Did I miss that?.... we all know L&W can not take an L on a a technicality error with the Court Clerk, that would be devastating to L&W. In the NYP articlethere are quotes from Bengel.... a play on words, a ploy to buy time, an accident, who knows; well, other than you of course.
If the judge thought there was anything there, dontcha think she would have said something? Anything? Bueller? Bueller?
Please get back to me with any facts indicating the judge thinks there is anything at all to your bogus claims.
At least I cite to National Review. Are you really relying on the NY Post to back up tour BS?
Couldn't find anything on NewsMax?
Probably not malpractice. More likely both sides being zealously aggressive. This question has been in open dispute between Clark and Weiss for weeks. Clark was on one of the Sunday shows talking about it a few weeks ago. As is often the case, parties only resolve stuff when on the courthouse steps (in this case, actually in front of the judge).I suspect (do not know) that the lawyers on both sides interpreted that differently. Prosecutors don’t think more serious charges are likely but won’t commit to that until their investigation is formally concluded. Hunter Biden’s lawyers on the other hand, apparently thought that meant no further charges would be brought.
Funny how I provide facts and you crap on the cite, which was one of the only ones that included actual quotes from the legal teams. You must love working traffic court cases.ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 1:52 pmI'm sorry, did the judge even mention the alleged impersonation plot today? Did I miss that?.... we all know L&W can not take an L on a a technicality error with the Court Clerk, that would be devastating to L&W. In the NYP articlethere are quotes from Bengel.... a play on words, a ploy to buy time, an accident, who knows; well, other than you of course.
If the judge thought there was anything there, dontcha think she would have said something? Anything? Bueller? Bueller?
Please get back to me with any facts indicating the judge thinks there is anything at all to your bogus claims.
At least I cite to National Review. Are you really relying on the NY Post to back up tour BS?
Couldn't find anything on NewsMax?
Did the judge mention your nefarious alleged impersonation scheme or not today?Funny how I provide facts and you crap on the cite, which was one of the only ones that included actual quotes from the legal teams. You must love working traffic court cases.
That does not mean shenanigans did not happen...both can be true. And the judge is not going to sidetrack the case on plea day....she already knows the two sides are trying to eff with her.ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 2:07 pmDid the judge mention your nefarious alleged impersonation scheme or not today?Funny how I provide facts and you crap on the cite, which was one of the only ones that included actual quotes from the legal teams. You must love working traffic court cases.
Yes or no answer would be fine.
And please be sure to get back to us if the judge ever mentions the alleged impersonation or pursues sanctions against LW down the road.
Thx.
Did the judge ask you for your opinion? I don't think so scooter... every lawyer worth his/her salt is now coming out of the woodwork to express a legal opinion. I wonder how long it will take before this judge will no longer be able to dine out at a restaurant without a group of FLP hecklers getting in her grill?ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 2:07 pmDid the judge mention your nefarious alleged impersonation scheme or not today?Funny how I provide facts and you crap on the cite, which was one of the only ones that included actual quotes from the legal teams. You must love working traffic court cases.
Yes or no answer would be fine.
And please be sure to get back to us if the judge ever mentions the alleged impersonation or pursues sanctions against LW down the road.
Thx.
+1youthathletics wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 2:23 pmThat does not mean shenanigans did not happen...both can be true. And the judge is not going to sidetrack the case on plea day....she already knows the two sides are trying to eff with her.ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 2:07 pmDid the judge mention your nefarious alleged impersonation scheme or not today?Funny how I provide facts and you crap on the cite, which was one of the only ones that included actual quotes from the legal teams. You must love working traffic court cases.
Yes or no answer would be fine.
And please be sure to get back to us if the judge ever mentions the alleged impersonation or pursues sanctions against LW down the road.
Thx.
Again, this sounds like a routine court appearance and final negotiation of the plea deal. Your ability, YA, to transform the ordinary workings of the court and justice systems into bizarre conspiracies is kind of special.youthathletics wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 2:23 pmThat does not mean shenanigans did not happen...both can be true. And the judge is not going to sidetrack the case on plea day....she already knows the two sides are trying to eff with her.ggait wrote: ↑Wed Jul 26, 2023 2:07 pmDid the judge mention your nefarious alleged impersonation scheme or not today?Funny how I provide facts and you crap on the cite, which was one of the only ones that included actual quotes from the legal teams. You must love working traffic court cases.
Yes or no answer would be fine.
And please be sure to get back to us if the judge ever mentions the alleged impersonation or pursues sanctions against LW down the road.
Thx.