Hunter Biden Tinfoil issues

[MDlaxfan76]

Seriously a Fan. The IRS agents testified under oath. They also were smart enough to document their investigation. What they testified to is being denied by the DoJ. Henceforth my deduction is someone is lying here. IRS agents have gone all in and showed their hand. DoJ is still scratching their ass because they don't know if they should call. I always love a good poker analogy.

House won't call everyone, Cradle.

I just told you that the whistleblower's IRS (where they're used to operating alone)......was MERGED with the DoJTax division by Bill Barr.

And that this has never happened in their career before. Isn't it possible that these agents don't have the full story?

And again....these agents were in DC, and the DoJ was in Delaware. Not exactly conducive to smooth communication between Departments.



And again, this is all directed by Bill Barr.

So I'm back to the same question for you and the Forum: why do you think the House isn't calling Rettig, Barr, Wray, or any of the people these IRS agents worked for?

They don't want you to hear the whole story, obviously. It's Partisan hearing, just like Jan 6th, cradle.

Don't you want to hear from Barr? I do. So......where is he?

I'm on record for wanting to hear from everyone involved in this. The DoJ could make that happen anytime they choose. Why should it take a subpoena to make that happen?

DOJ?

Barr doesn't work for the DOJ. He doesn't take orders from them.

But apparently he has met with the Special Prosecutor with regard to the Trump case, he's written a book, and he's all over TV.

But he hasn't been invited or subpoenaed by the House to come in and talk about anything relevant to Hunter...note, he did testify to the Jan 6 committee.

The question is what the House Republicans are waiting for in asking Barr to come in re Hunter...assuming they think he actually would be helpful to their show...a fan is suggesting that it's obvious, to him at least, that Barr would NOT to be helpful to their show, perhaps even expose it as nearly all nonsense...

But the DoJ works for the American people, at least in theory. I've said repeatedly to bring Barr forward and let him testify. Despite your attempts to obfuscate the truth someone is lying here. The IRS agents testified to what they encountered during the course of their investigation. They clearly and meticulously documented conversations they had certain DoJ members during the course of their investigations. If you can possibly stay focused long enough MD it's time for these individual DoJ folks to testify under oath. You ain't interested in that happening? You should be if your interested in knowing who is lying.

jeebus H, cradle.

The HOUSE GOP has the subpoena power. They need only invite or subpoena Barr IF they want to hear from him under oath...

That's all a fan has been saying...BUT THEY DON"T WANT TO HEAR FROM HIM...

The DOJ does not have such power over Barr, there is no litigation at hand requiring his testimony, and they are not supposed to be in the business of political grandstanding...SO...they can't subpoena him...

So, they have nothing to act on here.

Now, if the Dept officials currently in office were refusing to come in and testify under oath to matters in which there is no longer a live case, totally different matter...I'd be right with you.

But that's simply NOT the situation here.

Please pay more attention to reality.
And call your congress critters on the Committee to Investigate Hunter Biden if you want to hear Barr under oath.

That's who could make it happen. And, heck, maybe they'll change their minds and think it's a good idea...

[ggait]

USAG Barr on 12/21/2020:

"I think to the extent that there's an investigation – I think that it's being handled responsibly and professionally currently within the department, and to this point I don't see a reason to appoint a special counsel and I have no plan to do so before I leave," Barr said at a Monday press conference, referring to the Biden probe.

The dude that was "responsibly and professionally" handling the HB case in 2020 is still handling the case now.

But the MAGAs just can't handle the truth. So they just keep circle jerking this:

"And so they beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past."

[Seacoaster(1)]

USAG Barr on 12/21/2020:

"I think to the extent that there's an investigation – I think that it's being handled responsibly and professionally currently within the department, and to this point I don't see a reason to appoint a special counsel and I have no plan to do so before I leave," Barr said at a Monday press conference, referring to the Biden probe.

The dude that was "responsibly and professionally" handling the HB case in 2020 is still handling the case now.

But the MAGAs just can't handle the truth. So they just keep circle jerking this:

"And so they beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past."

Something doesn't feel right about soiling FSF with this crowd. But, the quote fits.

[a fan]

USAG Barr on 12/21/2020:

"I think to the extent that there's an investigation – I think that it's being handled responsibly and professionally currently within the department, and to this point I don't see a reason to appoint a special counsel and I have no plan to do so before I leave," Barr said at a Monday press conference, referring to the Biden probe.

The dude that was "responsibly and professionally" handling the HB case in 2020 is still handling the case now.

But the MAGAs just can't handle the truth. So they just keep circle jerking this:

"And so they beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past."

Right...again, it's why I keep saying that in order for this conspiracy to work, Bill Barr needs to be "in on it".

And this is why the House isn't calling him.

[cradleandshoot]

USAG Barr on 12/21/2020:

"I think to the extent that there's an investigation – I think that it's being handled responsibly and professionally currently within the department, and to this point I don't see a reason to appoint a special counsel and I have no plan to do so before I leave," Barr said at a Monday press conference, referring to the Biden probe.

The dude that was "responsibly and professionally" handling the HB case in 2020 is still handling the case now.

But the MAGAs just can't handle the truth. So they just keep circle jerking this:

"And so they beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past."

Right...again, it's why I keep saying that in order for this conspiracy to work, Bill Barr needs to be "in on it".

And this is why the House isn't calling him.

The House is going to have to call him eventually. I think Bill Barr said, reading between the lines, the optics of indicting HB would have looked and been reported as a purely political prosecution against Trump's challenger. IMO Barr determined to screw all this garbage, I'll let the new AG take care of this I'm done. Bill Barr stated on Meet the Press yesterday he will testify if he is given a subpoena. Time to make it happen. The facts are still very plain and simple. I've said it a number of times, somebody is lying. The only thing nobody knows is who the liars are.

[cradleandshoot]

Seriously a Fan. The IRS agents testified under oath. They also were smart enough to document their investigation. What they testified to is being denied by the DoJ. Henceforth my deduction is someone is lying here. IRS agents have gone all in and showed their hand. DoJ is still scratching their ass because they don't know if they should call. I always love a good poker analogy.

House won't call everyone, Cradle.

I just told you that the whistleblower's IRS (where they're used to operating alone)......was MERGED with the DoJTax division by Bill Barr.

And that this has never happened in their career before. Isn't it possible that these agents don't have the full story?

And again....these agents were in DC, and the DoJ was in Delaware. Not exactly conducive to smooth communication between Departments.



And again, this is all directed by Bill Barr.

So I'm back to the same question for you and the Forum: why do you think the House isn't calling Rettig, Barr, Wray, or any of the people these IRS agents worked for?

They don't want you to hear the whole story, obviously. It's Partisan hearing, just like Jan 6th, cradle.

Don't you want to hear from Barr? I do. So......where is he?

I'm on record for wanting to hear from everyone involved in this. The DoJ could make that happen anytime they choose. Why should it take a subpoena to make that happen?

DOJ?

Barr doesn't work for the DOJ. He doesn't take orders from them.

But apparently he has met with the Special Prosecutor with regard to the Trump case, he's written a book, and he's all over TV.

But he hasn't been invited or subpoenaed by the House to come in and talk about anything relevant to Hunter...note, he did testify to the Jan 6 committee.

The question is what the House Republicans are waiting for in asking Barr to come in re Hunter...assuming they think he actually would be helpful to their show...a fan is suggesting that it's obvious, to him at least, that Barr would NOT to be helpful to their show, perhaps even expose it as nearly all nonsense...

But the DoJ works for the American people, at least in theory. I've said repeatedly to bring Barr forward and let him testify. Despite your attempts to obfuscate the truth someone is lying here. The IRS agents testified to what they encountered during the course of their investigation. They clearly and meticulously documented conversations they had certain DoJ members during the course of their investigations. If you can possibly stay focused long enough MD it's time for these individual DoJ folks to testify under oath. You ain't interested in that happening? You should be if your interested in knowing who is lying.

jeebus H, cradle.

The HOUSE GOP has the subpoena power. They need only invite or subpoena Barr IF they want to hear from him under oath...

That's all a fan has been saying...BUT THEY DON"T WANT TO HEAR FROM HIM...

The DOJ does not have such power over Barr, there is no litigation at hand requiring his testimony, and they are not supposed to be in the business of political grandstanding...SO...they can't subpoena him...

So, they have nothing to act on here.

Now, if the Dept officials currently in office were refusing to come in and testify under oath to matters in which there is no longer a live case, totally different matter...I'd be right with you.

But that's simply NOT the situation here.

Please pay more attention to reality.
And call your congress critters on the Committee to Investigate Hunter Biden if you want to hear Barr under oath.

That's who could make it happen. And, heck, maybe they'll change their minds and think it's a good idea...

I live in the state of New York. My Congress critter is a Democrat. Beejeebus MD, the committee may not WANT to but they know they HAVE too. Bill Barr said on Face the Nation yesterday he will testify. Nobody effing knows what Barr will say until he says it. My point remains unchanged MD a point you keep tapdancing around...Either these 2 IRS agents are jerking everybody's chain or there are folks over at the DoJ are not being honest. I would like to know WHO is doing the lying? IMO this committee needs to bring in every swinging Richard that was a part of the HB investigation and let them testify under oath. Someone is lying here MD and you don't appear to be all that fired up to find out who is lying. IMO Weiss is the person who has the ability to clarify the discrepancies going on here. There are a bunch of them.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Seriously a Fan. The IRS agents testified under oath. They also were smart enough to document their investigation. What they testified to is being denied by the DoJ. Henceforth my deduction is someone is lying here. IRS agents have gone all in and showed their hand. DoJ is still scratching their ass because they don't know if they should call. I always love a good poker analogy.

House won't call everyone, Cradle.

I just told you that the whistleblower's IRS (where they're used to operating alone)......was MERGED with the DoJTax division by Bill Barr.

And that this has never happened in their career before. Isn't it possible that these agents don't have the full story?

And again....these agents were in DC, and the DoJ was in Delaware. Not exactly conducive to smooth communication between Departments.



And again, this is all directed by Bill Barr.

So I'm back to the same question for you and the Forum: why do you think the House isn't calling Rettig, Barr, Wray, or any of the people these IRS agents worked for?

They don't want you to hear the whole story, obviously. It's Partisan hearing, just like Jan 6th, cradle.

Don't you want to hear from Barr? I do. So......where is he?

I'm on record for wanting to hear from everyone involved in this. The DoJ could make that happen anytime they choose. Why should it take a subpoena to make that happen?

DOJ?

Barr doesn't work for the DOJ. He doesn't take orders from them.

But apparently he has met with the Special Prosecutor with regard to the Trump case, he's written a book, and he's all over TV.

But he hasn't been invited or subpoenaed by the House to come in and talk about anything relevant to Hunter...note, he did testify to the Jan 6 committee.

The question is what the House Republicans are waiting for in asking Barr to come in re Hunter...assuming they think he actually would be helpful to their show...a fan is suggesting that it's obvious, to him at least, that Barr would NOT to be helpful to their show, perhaps even expose it as nearly all nonsense...

But the DoJ works for the American people, at least in theory. I've said repeatedly to bring Barr forward and let him testify. Despite your attempts to obfuscate the truth someone is lying here. The IRS agents testified to what they encountered during the course of their investigation. They clearly and meticulously documented conversations they had certain DoJ members during the course of their investigations. If you can possibly stay focused long enough MD it's time for these individual DoJ folks to testify under oath. You ain't interested in that happening? You should be if your interested in knowing who is lying.

jeebus H, cradle.

The HOUSE GOP has the subpoena power. They need only invite or subpoena Barr IF they want to hear from him under oath...

That's all a fan has been saying...BUT THEY DON"T WANT TO HEAR FROM HIM...

The DOJ does not have such power over Barr, there is no litigation at hand requiring his testimony, and they are not supposed to be in the business of political grandstanding...SO...they can't subpoena him...

So, they have nothing to act on here.

Now, if the Dept officials currently in office were refusing to come in and testify under oath to matters in which there is no longer a live case, totally different matter...I'd be right with you.

But that's simply NOT the situation here.

Please pay more attention to reality.
And call your congress critters on the Committee to Investigate Hunter Biden if you want to hear Barr under oath.

That's who could make it happen. And, heck, maybe they'll change their minds and think it's a good idea...

I live in the state of New York. My Congress critter is a Democrat. Beejeebus MD, the committee may not WANT to but they know they HAVE too. Bill Barr said on Face the Nation yesterday he will testify. Nobody effing knows what Barr will say until he says it. My point remains unchanged MD a point you keep tapdancing around...Either these 2 IRS agents are jerking everybody's chain or there are folks over at the DoJ are not being honest. I would like to know WHO is doing the lying? IMO this committee needs to bring in every swinging Richard that was a part of the HB investigation and let them testify under oath. Someone is lying here MD and you don't appear to be all that fired up to find out who is lying. IMO Weiss is the person who has the ability to clarify the discrepancies going on here. There are a bunch of them.

[MDlaxfan76]

Seriously a Fan. The IRS agents testified under oath. They also were smart enough to document their investigation. What they testified to is being denied by the DoJ. Henceforth my deduction is someone is lying here. IRS agents have gone all in and showed their hand. DoJ is still scratching their ass because they don't know if they should call. I always love a good poker analogy.

House won't call everyone, Cradle.

I just told you that the whistleblower's IRS (where they're used to operating alone)......was MERGED with the DoJTax division by Bill Barr.

And that this has never happened in their career before. Isn't it possible that these agents don't have the full story?

And again....these agents were in DC, and the DoJ was in Delaware. Not exactly conducive to smooth communication between Departments.



And again, this is all directed by Bill Barr.

So I'm back to the same question for you and the Forum: why do you think the House isn't calling Rettig, Barr, Wray, or any of the people these IRS agents worked for?

They don't want you to hear the whole story, obviously. It's Partisan hearing, just like Jan 6th, cradle.

Don't you want to hear from Barr? I do. So......where is he?

I'm on record for wanting to hear from everyone involved in this. The DoJ could make that happen anytime they choose. Why should it take a subpoena to make that happen?

DOJ?

Barr doesn't work for the DOJ. He doesn't take orders from them.

But apparently he has met with the Special Prosecutor with regard to the Trump case, he's written a book, and he's all over TV.

But he hasn't been invited or subpoenaed by the House to come in and talk about anything relevant to Hunter...note, he did testify to the Jan 6 committee.

The question is what the House Republicans are waiting for in asking Barr to come in re Hunter...assuming they think he actually would be helpful to their show...a fan is suggesting that it's obvious, to him at least, that Barr would NOT to be helpful to their show, perhaps even expose it as nearly all nonsense...

But the DoJ works for the American people, at least in theory. I've said repeatedly to bring Barr forward and let him testify. Despite your attempts to obfuscate the truth someone is lying here. The IRS agents testified to what they encountered during the course of their investigation. They clearly and meticulously documented conversations they had certain DoJ members during the course of their investigations. If you can possibly stay focused long enough MD it's time for these individual DoJ folks to testify under oath. You ain't interested in that happening? You should be if your interested in knowing who is lying.

jeebus H, cradle.

The HOUSE GOP has the subpoena power. They need only invite or subpoena Barr IF they want to hear from him under oath...

That's all a fan has been saying...BUT THEY DON"T WANT TO HEAR FROM HIM...

The DOJ does not have such power over Barr, there is no litigation at hand requiring his testimony, and they are not supposed to be in the business of political grandstanding...SO...they can't subpoena him...

So, they have nothing to act on here.

Now, if the Dept officials currently in office were refusing to come in and testify under oath to matters in which there is no longer a live case, totally different matter...I'd be right with you.

But that's simply NOT the situation here.

Please pay more attention to reality.
And call your congress critters on the Committee to Investigate Hunter Biden if you want to hear Barr under oath.

That's who could make it happen. And, heck, maybe they'll change their minds and think it's a good idea...

I live in the state of New York. My Congress critter is a Democrat. Beejeebus MD, the committee may not WANT to but they know they HAVE too. Bill Barr said on Face the Nation yesterday he will testify. Nobody effing knows what Barr will say until he says it. My point remains unchanged MD a point you keep tapdancing around...Either these 2 IRS agents are jerking everybody's chain or there are folks over at the DoJ are not being honest. I would like to know WHO is doing the lying? IMO this committee needs to bring in every swinging Richard that was a part of the HB investigation and let them testify under oath. Someone is lying here MD and you don't appear to be all that fired up to find out who is lying. IMO Weiss is the person who has the ability to clarify the discrepancies going on here. There are a bunch of them.

Yes, Weiss can clear up the "discrepancies". And I would fully expect that he will do so when he's finished with this process of investigating and prosecution.

We thought that might be quite shortly, but the judge threw a monkey wrench into it by pushing them on the question of whether the plea agreement was truly locked down 100% and whether she had the authority to decide whether Hunter, in the future, had violated his probation.

From what I can glean, the second aspect is likely to throw that back into the executive branch and Hunter's going to need to swallow that it could be a vindictive new Admin which doesn't care at all about truth, just revenge. It would worry the heck out of me if I were him, but I'm not sure he has a choice. We'll see on that front, shortly.

the other part is whether the plea includes, or not, potential prosecution of crimes not yet fully investigated, or not even known...or whether this plea will cover all past misdeeds.

If it doesn't, and there's an actual ongoing investigation, then I would expect Weiss to refuse to talk to Congress about that ongoing investigation until over...that will be frustrating to you, no doubt, but that's what should happen if there's actually a live investigation.

Note that any point, the Biden Admin, through Garland, could have told Weiss it's over, or fired him, but they've left these decisions up to him. They could fire him now...but they haven't...my surmise is that they're choosing to stay hands off.

One thing I disagree with you about is your insistence that someone must be "lying". The IRS agents say they think they heard something they interpreted through their lens...Weiss says that interpretation is wrong...doesn't mean either is lying.

The more plausible explanation of the "discrepancies" (much better descriptor than 'lying') is that they misinterpreted Weiss, looking for an explanation as to why he wasn't willing to be more aggressive before 2020 and after 2020 that made sense to them other than they didn't have sufficient evidence, in Weiss' opinion, to justify more aggressive action.

Barr was talking about testifying in the case against Trump. He's previously testified to the Jan 6 Committee under oath, and he's met with the prosecution in this case as well. He's been pretty explicit in his book, and in the testimony we've seen he's very blunt. And he's currently being blunt on various news shows now...he'll undoubtedly be a strong witness for the prosecution in that case.

As to the Hunter matter, he comes across to me as more evasive...the newest thing I heard about why he didn't appoint a Special Prosecutor in the Hunter case before he left was that he didn't see any conflict of interest existing while he was there and he didn't think it fair to take that action, left it to the next AG of the Biden Admin (the acting AG pre Jan 21 didn't do it either). He said he thought that Garland should have appointed an SC...but obviously Garland felt there was sufficient separation and lack of conflict as he left in place the Trump appointed US Attorney handling it. Again, Weiss was the Trump appointee...and Garland had every right to get a new one. But Barr said he was looking forward to hearing Weiss at some point on his decision process...but post end of it.

But truly, if you have any desire to complain to someone about this, look at who the GOP Congress critters are on the relevant committees (you needn't be a constituent) and call and complain...the calls are logged and counted on each issue, regardless of whether a constituent or not...though they do note that difference. Start with Comer. Tell him you want to hear Brr under oath in front of their committee...side wager, they won't call him...

[cradleandshoot]

Seriously a Fan. The IRS agents testified under oath. They also were smart enough to document their investigation. What they testified to is being denied by the DoJ. Henceforth my deduction is someone is lying here. IRS agents have gone all in and showed their hand. DoJ is still scratching their ass because they don't know if they should call. I always love a good poker analogy.

House won't call everyone, Cradle.

I just told you that the whistleblower's IRS (where they're used to operating alone)......was MERGED with the DoJTax division by Bill Barr.

And that this has never happened in their career before. Isn't it possible that these agents don't have the full story?

And again....these agents were in DC, and the DoJ was in Delaware. Not exactly conducive to smooth communication between Departments.



And again, this is all directed by Bill Barr.

So I'm back to the same question for you and the Forum: why do you think the House isn't calling Rettig, Barr, Wray, or any of the people these IRS agents worked for?

They don't want you to hear the whole story, obviously. It's Partisan hearing, just like Jan 6th, cradle.

Don't you want to hear from Barr? I do. So......where is he?

I'm on record for wanting to hear from everyone involved in this. The DoJ could make that happen anytime they choose. Why should it take a subpoena to make that happen?

DOJ?

Barr doesn't work for the DOJ. He doesn't take orders from them.

But apparently he has met with the Special Prosecutor with regard to the Trump case, he's written a book, and he's all over TV.

But he hasn't been invited or subpoenaed by the House to come in and talk about anything relevant to Hunter...note, he did testify to the Jan 6 committee.

The question is what the House Republicans are waiting for in asking Barr to come in re Hunter...assuming they think he actually would be helpful to their show...a fan is suggesting that it's obvious, to him at least, that Barr would NOT to be helpful to their show, perhaps even expose it as nearly all nonsense...

But the DoJ works for the American people, at least in theory. I've said repeatedly to bring Barr forward and let him testify. Despite your attempts to obfuscate the truth someone is lying here. The IRS agents testified to what they encountered during the course of their investigation. They clearly and meticulously documented conversations they had certain DoJ members during the course of their investigations. If you can possibly stay focused long enough MD it's time for these individual DoJ folks to testify under oath. You ain't interested in that happening? You should be if your interested in knowing who is lying.

jeebus H, cradle.

The HOUSE GOP has the subpoena power. They need only invite or subpoena Barr IF they want to hear from him under oath...

That's all a fan has been saying...BUT THEY DON"T WANT TO HEAR FROM HIM...

The DOJ does not have such power over Barr, there is no litigation at hand requiring his testimony, and they are not supposed to be in the business of political grandstanding...SO...they can't subpoena him...

So, they have nothing to act on here.

Now, if the Dept officials currently in office were refusing to come in and testify under oath to matters in which there is no longer a live case, totally different matter...I'd be right with you.

But that's simply NOT the situation here.

Please pay more attention to reality.
And call your congress critters on the Committee to Investigate Hunter Biden if you want to hear Barr under oath.

That's who could make it happen. And, heck, maybe they'll change their minds and think it's a good idea...

I live in the state of New York. My Congress critter is a Democrat. Beejeebus MD, the committee may not WANT to but they know they HAVE too. Bill Barr said on Face the Nation yesterday he will testify. Nobody effing knows what Barr will say until he says it. My point remains unchanged MD a point you keep tapdancing around...Either these 2 IRS agents are jerking everybody's chain or there are folks over at the DoJ are not being honest. I would like to know WHO is doing the lying? IMO this committee needs to bring in every swinging Richard that was a part of the HB investigation and let them testify under oath. Someone is lying here MD and you don't appear to be all that fired up to find out who is lying. IMO Weiss is the person who has the ability to clarify the discrepancies going on here. There are a bunch of them.

Yes, Weiss can clear up the "discrepancies". And I would fully expect that he will do so when he's finished with this process of investigating and prosecution.

We thought that might be quite shortly, but the judge threw a monkey wrench into it by pushing them on the question of whether the plea agreement was truly locked down 100% and whether she had the authority to decide whether Hunter, in the future, had violated his probation.

From what I can glean, the second aspect is likely to throw that back into the executive branch and Hunter's going to need to swallow that it could be a vindictive new Admin which doesn't care at all about truth, just revenge. It would worry the heck out of me if I were him, but I'm not sure he has a choice. We'll see on that front, shortly.

the other part is whether the plea includes, or not, potential prosecution of crimes not yet fully investigated, or not even known...or whether this plea will cover all past misdeeds.

If it doesn't, and there's an actual ongoing investigation, then I would expect Weiss to refuse to talk to Congress about that ongoing investigation until over...that will be frustrating to you, no doubt, but that's what should happen if there's actually a live investigation.

Note that any point, the Biden Admin, through Garland, could have told Weiss it's over, or fired him, but they've left these decisions up to him. They could fire him now...but they haven't...my surmise is that they're choosing to stay hands off.

One thing I disagree with you about is your insistence that someone must be "lying". The IRS agents say they think they heard something they interpreted through their lens...Weiss says that interpretation is wrong...doesn't mean either is lying.

The more plausible explanation of the "discrepancies" (much better descriptor than 'lying') is that they misinterpreted Weiss, looking for an explanation as to why he wasn't willing to be more aggressive before 2020 and after 2020 that made sense to them other than they didn't have sufficient evidence, in Weiss' opinion, to justify more aggressive action.

Barr was talking about testifying in the case against Trump. He's previously testified to the Jan 6 Committee under oath, and he's met with the prosecution in this case as well. He's been pretty explicit in his book, and in the testimony we've seen he's very blunt. And he's currently being blunt on various news shows now...he'll undoubtedly be a strong witness for the prosecution in that case.

As to the Hunter matter, he comes across to me as more evasive...the newest thing I heard about why he didn't appoint a Special Prosecutor in the Hunter case before he left was that he didn't see any conflict of interest existing while he was there and he didn't think it fair to take that action, left it to the next AG of the Biden Admin (the acting AG pre Jan 21 didn't do it either). He said he thought that Garland should have appointed an SC...but obviously Garland felt there was sufficient separation and lack of conflict as he left in place the Trump appointed US Attorney handling it. Again, Weiss was the Trump appointee...and Garland had every right to get a new one. But Barr said he was looking forward to hearing Weiss at some point on his decision process...but post end of it.

But truly, if you have any desire to complain to someone about this, look at who the GOP Congress critters are on the relevant committees (you needn't be a constituent) and call and complain...the calls are logged and counted on each issue, regardless of whether a constituent or not...though they do note that difference. Start with Comer. Tell him you want to hear Brr under oath in front of their committee...side wager, they won't call him...

From my understanding, and I could be wrong, these 2 agents were very thorough in documenting conversations and the nuts and bolts of how this investigation played out. They know the names of and documented their concerns over a period of time. The DoJ should be more than happy to bring forward these DoJ individuals in question to clarify this obvious difference of opinion. The one thing both agents were very clear about was they believed the tax violations against HB were of a felony nature. They were over ruled by DoJ. All these individuals need do is explain why they chose to not accept the recommendations of these 2 agents. Unless of course it's possible this entire kerfuffle was just a huge misunderstanding? Hell, not even the gun charge was serious enough to warrant he be convicted as a felon. You of all people with your strong stand on guns should be upset by that? The shadiest part of this deal was HB being granted immunity from any ongoing investigations. HBs lawyers snuck that one in the fine print.

[ggait]

[/quote]
Something doesn't feel right about soiling FSF with this crowd. But, the quote fits.
[/quote]

The MAGAs believe in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter—tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther. . . . And then one fine morning—

[cradleandshoot]

On a different tangent, why did Burisma want HB on their board?? It isn't because of any expertise or special knowledge of the energy business. Matter of fact the head of Burisma stated his dog was smarter than HB. I don't doubt that fact for a minute. What possible reason would the folks at Burisma want a dumbass like HB? I've tried and tried but I can't think of any reason they would have any use for a turnip like HB. It just doesn't make any sense. I can't figure it out for the life of me. Those 83 thousand dollar a month do nothing positions are not easy to come by. It just bothers me wondering why Burisma would pay HB that kind of bling. I guess we will never know?

[MDlaxfan76]

Seriously a Fan. The IRS agents testified under oath. They also were smart enough to document their investigation. What they testified to is being denied by the DoJ. Henceforth my deduction is someone is lying here. IRS agents have gone all in and showed their hand. DoJ is still scratching their ass because they don't know if they should call. I always love a good poker analogy.

House won't call everyone, Cradle.

I just told you that the whistleblower's IRS (where they're used to operating alone)......was MERGED with the DoJTax division by Bill Barr.

And that this has never happened in their career before. Isn't it possible that these agents don't have the full story?

And again....these agents were in DC, and the DoJ was in Delaware. Not exactly conducive to smooth communication between Departments.



And again, this is all directed by Bill Barr.

So I'm back to the same question for you and the Forum: why do you think the House isn't calling Rettig, Barr, Wray, or any of the people these IRS agents worked for?

They don't want you to hear the whole story, obviously. It's Partisan hearing, just like Jan 6th, cradle.

Don't you want to hear from Barr? I do. So......where is he?

I'm on record for wanting to hear from everyone involved in this. The DoJ could make that happen anytime they choose. Why should it take a subpoena to make that happen?

DOJ?

Barr doesn't work for the DOJ. He doesn't take orders from them.

But apparently he has met with the Special Prosecutor with regard to the Trump case, he's written a book, and he's all over TV.

But he hasn't been invited or subpoenaed by the House to come in and talk about anything relevant to Hunter...note, he did testify to the Jan 6 committee.

The question is what the House Republicans are waiting for in asking Barr to come in re Hunter...assuming they think he actually would be helpful to their show...a fan is suggesting that it's obvious, to him at least, that Barr would NOT to be helpful to their show, perhaps even expose it as nearly all nonsense...

But the DoJ works for the American people, at least in theory. I've said repeatedly to bring Barr forward and let him testify. Despite your attempts to obfuscate the truth someone is lying here. The IRS agents testified to what they encountered during the course of their investigation. They clearly and meticulously documented conversations they had certain DoJ members during the course of their investigations. If you can possibly stay focused long enough MD it's time for these individual DoJ folks to testify under oath. You ain't interested in that happening? You should be if your interested in knowing who is lying.

jeebus H, cradle.

The HOUSE GOP has the subpoena power. They need only invite or subpoena Barr IF they want to hear from him under oath...

That's all a fan has been saying...BUT THEY DON"T WANT TO HEAR FROM HIM...

The DOJ does not have such power over Barr, there is no litigation at hand requiring his testimony, and they are not supposed to be in the business of political grandstanding...SO...they can't subpoena him...

So, they have nothing to act on here.

Now, if the Dept officials currently in office were refusing to come in and testify under oath to matters in which there is no longer a live case, totally different matter...I'd be right with you.

But that's simply NOT the situation here.

Please pay more attention to reality.
And call your congress critters on the Committee to Investigate Hunter Biden if you want to hear Barr under oath.

That's who could make it happen. And, heck, maybe they'll change their minds and think it's a good idea...

I live in the state of New York. My Congress critter is a Democrat. Beejeebus MD, the committee may not WANT to but they know they HAVE too. Bill Barr said on Face the Nation yesterday he will testify. Nobody effing knows what Barr will say until he says it. My point remains unchanged MD a point you keep tapdancing around...Either these 2 IRS agents are jerking everybody's chain or there are folks over at the DoJ are not being honest. I would like to know WHO is doing the lying? IMO this committee needs to bring in every swinging Richard that was a part of the HB investigation and let them testify under oath. Someone is lying here MD and you don't appear to be all that fired up to find out who is lying. IMO Weiss is the person who has the ability to clarify the discrepancies going on here. There are a bunch of them.

Yes, Weiss can clear up the "discrepancies". And I would fully expect that he will do so when he's finished with this process of investigating and prosecution.

We thought that might be quite shortly, but the judge threw a monkey wrench into it by pushing them on the question of whether the plea agreement was truly locked down 100% and whether she had the authority to decide whether Hunter, in the future, had violated his probation.

From what I can glean, the second aspect is likely to throw that back into the executive branch and Hunter's going to need to swallow that it could be a vindictive new Admin which doesn't care at all about truth, just revenge. It would worry the heck out of me if I were him, but I'm not sure he has a choice. We'll see on that front, shortly.

the other part is whether the plea includes, or not, potential prosecution of crimes not yet fully investigated, or not even known...or whether this plea will cover all past misdeeds.

If it doesn't, and there's an actual ongoing investigation, then I would expect Weiss to refuse to talk to Congress about that ongoing investigation until over...that will be frustrating to you, no doubt, but that's what should happen if there's actually a live investigation.

Note that any point, the Biden Admin, through Garland, could have told Weiss it's over, or fired him, but they've left these decisions up to him. They could fire him now...but they haven't...my surmise is that they're choosing to stay hands off.

One thing I disagree with you about is your insistence that someone must be "lying". The IRS agents say they think they heard something they interpreted through their lens...Weiss says that interpretation is wrong...doesn't mean either is lying.

The more plausible explanation of the "discrepancies" (much better descriptor than 'lying') is that they misinterpreted Weiss, looking for an explanation as to why he wasn't willing to be more aggressive before 2020 and after 2020 that made sense to them other than they didn't have sufficient evidence, in Weiss' opinion, to justify more aggressive action.

Barr was talking about testifying in the case against Trump. He's previously testified to the Jan 6 Committee under oath, and he's met with the prosecution in this case as well. He's been pretty explicit in his book, and in the testimony we've seen he's very blunt. And he's currently being blunt on various news shows now...he'll undoubtedly be a strong witness for the prosecution in that case.

As to the Hunter matter, he comes across to me as more evasive...the newest thing I heard about why he didn't appoint a Special Prosecutor in the Hunter case before he left was that he didn't see any conflict of interest existing while he was there and he didn't think it fair to take that action, left it to the next AG of the Biden Admin (the acting AG pre Jan 21 didn't do it either). He said he thought that Garland should have appointed an SC...but obviously Garland felt there was sufficient separation and lack of conflict as he left in place the Trump appointed US Attorney handling it. Again, Weiss was the Trump appointee...and Garland had every right to get a new one. But Barr said he was looking forward to hearing Weiss at some point on his decision process...but post end of it.

But truly, if you have any desire to complain to someone about this, look at who the GOP Congress critters are on the relevant committees (you needn't be a constituent) and call and complain...the calls are logged and counted on each issue, regardless of whether a constituent or not...though they do note that difference. Start with Comer. Tell him you want to hear Brr under oath in front of their committee...side wager, they won't call him...

From my understanding, and I could be wrong, these 2 agents were very thorough in documenting conversations and the nuts and bolts of how this investigation played out. They know the names of and documented their concerns over a period of time. The DoJ should be more than happy to bring forward these DoJ individuals in question to clarify this obvious difference of opinion. The one thing both agents were very clear about was they believed the tax violations against HB were of a felony nature. They were over ruled by DoJ. All these individuals need do is explain why they chose to not accept the recommendations of these 2 agents. Unless of course it's possible this entire kerfuffle was just a huge misunderstanding? Hell, not even the gun charge was serious enough to warrant he be convicted as a felon. You of all people with your strong stand on guns should be upset by that? The shadiest part of this deal was HB being granted immunity from any ongoing investigations. HBs lawyers snuck that one in the fine print.

cradle, these guys testified to the Congressional committee, and quite to the contrary, they apparently had very little other than their opinions to show and tell with. Sure, they thought that there was a there, there...but it was Weiss who overruled them not "DOJ". And he's said that it was his decision, not a higher up. Remember, this is the US Attorney that Trump appointed and who Barr says was doing a good job.

Charges get plead out. These were (but might be back in play). It's a judgment call as to how hard to go at a prosecution and whether to accept a plea...a negotiation that avoids a trial, the time and expense and whatever risks come with a trial in order to get to resolution both sides can accept.

If I had to guess, it would be that Weiss felt that Hunter was sufficiently chagrined and remorseful about his behavior, had made restitution, and that probation with the threat of felony was an acceptable outcome. He would have weighed his assessment of ongoing risk to the public in coming to that conclusion. And he would have weighed whether more could be actually proven, independent of the laptop that is "poisoned" by custody issues.

But he seems to want to hold onto the possibility of other charges if evidence was to materialize that made that a slam dunk case...most of the current "evidence" is likely inadmissible due to custody issues with the laptop etc...they likely have tried to develop independent evidence, but 'poisoned tree' is a hurdle in court.

Hunter and his attorneys seem to have been surprised that the prosecutor wants to hold that open...and I can understand why Hunter would badly want a shield against a revenge driven new Admin...the prospective incoming MAGA folks led by Der Leader have made it eminently clear as to their intentions...hell, some talk about executing the Bidens... gotta take them seriously at this point.

Did Weiss change his mind about it, given all the pressure coming from Congress? Or did he never intend that to be part of the deal...I sure don't know, but they'll likely work it out. I suspect Hunter will just have to grit his teeth and hope Trump or any other MAGA type is defeated.

[MDlaxfan76]

actually, I think one would have to be dumber than the dog not to understand what they got out of it, cradle.

The Biden name was a useful "brand" to add to their board as they worked to clean up their reputation as an energy company in corrupt league with Russian oligarchs. There was a major overhaul in personnel to weed out the Russian influence and this was a clumsy way to signal that effort underway.

And I do think that Hunter actually knew people, knew how to get to people in DC, should they need help. Not for Hunter's own expertise, simply his capability to access the expertise of others in DC.

That could be re-stated in various ways, but I don't think there was anything more nefarious involved than that. Makes total sense.

Now, that Hunter handsomely profited from this, without any other value, given Joe's actual responsibilities and profile, is indeed sleazy.

But not illegal, and no basis to assume that Joe profited from it (which probably would be illegal)...unless there actually is such evidence never previously discovered...but I very much doubt it.

[OCanada]

On the sleaze scale which is higher: Biden making “money for nothing but the chicks are free” or directing more than 600MM of taxpayer money to your business, using family connections to receive $1.8 billion to get you out of a crumbling real estate deal in NYC, stealing donations given for children’s cancer and defrauding students at your U with your kids?

[tech37]

On the sleaze scale which is higher: Biden making “money for nothing but the chicks are free” or directing more than 600MM of taxpayer money to your business, using family connections to receive $1.8 billion to get you out of a crumbling real estate deal in NYC, stealing donations given for children’s cancer and defrauding students at your U with your kids?

You're whataboutism is correct ocanada... someone should absolutely pay for those things if found guilty.

But let's not forget, Biden was supposed to be better, more honest, more transparent... I think he ran on that. Perhaps he is all those things. We'll see as the investigations continue.

[a fan]

On the sleaze scale which is higher: Biden making “money for nothing but the chicks are free” or directing more than 600MM of taxpayer money to your business, using family connections to receive $1.8 billion to get you out of a crumbling real estate deal in NYC, stealing donations given for children’s cancer and defrauding students at your U with your kids?

You're whataboutism is correct ocanada... someone should absolutely pay for those things if found guilty.

But let's not forget, Biden was supposed to be better, more honest, more transparent... I think he ran on that.

Every President runs on that. Drain the swamp ring a bell?

If Biden was honest, he would have threatened Burisma that he'd make their lives miserable if they didn't fire Hunter. It's INSANE that he got a job halfway around the world "coincidentally" while Daddy was focusing his work in the same country while Joe was VP.

It's 100% legal, no question. But I'm sick of these low standards for our leaders.

[Typical Lax Dad]

On the sleaze scale which is higher: Biden making “money for nothing but the chicks are free” or directing more than 600MM of taxpayer money to your business, using family connections to receive $1.8 billion to get you out of a crumbling real estate deal in NYC, stealing donations given for children’s cancer and defrauding students at your U with your kids?

You're whataboutism is correct ocanada... someone should absolutely pay for those things if found guilty.

But let's not forget, Biden was supposed to be better, more honest, more transparent... I think he ran on that. Perhaps he is all those things. We'll see as the investigations continue.

If found guilty, Biden should pay for those things.

[SCLaxAttack]

On the sleaze scale which is higher: Biden making “money for nothing but the chicks are free” or directing more than 600MM of taxpayer money to your business, using family connections to receive $1.8 billion to get you out of a crumbling real estate deal in NYC, stealing donations given for children’s cancer and defrauding students at your U with your kids?

You're whataboutism is correct ocanada... someone should absolutely pay for those things if found guilty.

But let's not forget, Biden was supposed to be better, more honest, more transparent... I think he ran on that.

Every President runs on that. Drain the swamp ring a bell?

If Biden was honest, he would have threatened Burisma that he'd make their lives miserable if they didn't fire Hunter. It's INSANE that he got a job halfway around the world "coincidentally" while Daddy was focusing his work in the same country while Joe was VP.

It's 100% legal, no question. But I'm sick of these low standards for our leaders.

It's called lobbying, and as soon as they leave office they get on the gravy train.

[cradleandshoot]

actually, I think one would have to be dumber than the dog not to understand what they got out of it, cradle.

The Biden name was a useful "brand" to add to their board as they worked to clean up their reputation as an energy company in corrupt league with Russian oligarchs. There was a major overhaul in personnel to weed out the Russian influence and this was a clumsy way to signal that effort underway.

And I do think that Hunter actually knew people, knew how to get to people in DC, should they need help. Not for Hunter's own expertise, simply his capability to access the expertise of others in DC.

That could be re-stated in various ways, but I don't think there was anything more nefarious involved than that. Makes total sense.

Now, that Hunter handsomely profited from this, without any other value, given Joe's actual responsibilities and profile, is indeed sleazy.

But not illegal, and no basis to assume that Joe profited from it (which probably would be illegal)...unless there actually is such evidence never previously discovered...but I very much doubt it.

Some days I really need a good laugh. Thank you for providing it with this post. The Biden Brand was the only thing for sale. Sleazy but not illegal. GMAFB. FTR there MD, any chance this Burisma scam might be one of the things Sleazeball Hunter is trying to get immunity from? I mean nobody knows what the FBI might be investigating? Whatever it is HB is trying to insulate himself from it. Who knows MD? Maybe sleazy and illegal?

[Kismet]

actually, I think one would have to be dumber than the dog not to understand what they got out of it, cradle.

The Biden name was a useful "brand" to add to their board as they worked to clean up their reputation as an energy company in corrupt league with Russian oligarchs. There was a major overhaul in personnel to weed out the Russian influence and this was a clumsy way to signal that effort underway.

And I do think that Hunter actually knew people, knew how to get to people in DC, should they need help. Not for Hunter's own expertise, simply his capability to access the expertise of others in DC.

That could be re-stated in various ways, but I don't think there was anything more nefarious involved than that. Makes total sense.

Now, that Hunter handsomely profited from this, without any other value, given Joe's actual responsibilities and profile, is indeed sleazy.

But not illegal, and no basis to assume that Joe profited from it (which probably would be illegal)...unless there actually is such evidence never previously discovered...but I very much doubt it.

Some days I really need a good laugh. Thank you for providing it with this post. The Biden Brand was the only thing for sale. Sleazy but not illegal. GMAFB. FTR there MD, any chance this Burisma scam might be one of the things Sleazeball Hunter is trying to get immunity from? I mean nobody knows what the FBI might be investigating? Whatever it is HB is trying to insulate himself from it. Who knows MD? Maybe sleazy and illegal?

So you must be LIVID over the Orange Fatso criminal allegations, right?