LaxPower Back-Up Stick

ggait wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 12:53 pm Pretty nefarious of Barr and Weiss to slow walk the investigation in order to prop up joe and have him beat trump in 2020.

And then more so since they arrange for Weiss to stay on after the election as a Manchurian prosecutor.

Guess trump is right. It was rigged against him. By his own people.

Maybe Weiss sucks as a prosecutor. If so, blame Barr and trump for that.

... I am starting to hear more republiCONs saying exactly that.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 2:19 pm

ggait wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 12:53 pm Pretty nefarious of Barr and Weiss to slow walk the investigation in order to prop up joe and have him beat trump in 2020.

And then more so since they arrange for Weiss to stay on after the election as a Manchurian prosecutor.

Guess trump is right. It was rigged against him. By his own people.

Maybe Weiss sucks as a prosecutor. If so, blame Barr and trump for that.

... I am starting to hear more republiCONs saying exactly that.

I'm sorry, fellas, holding Barr responsible for anything is a no-no. Only Garland is responsible. Because "TeamTinFoil sez so"....and you can't argue with that sort of high-level, rock-solid logic.

And it's telling that we don't have a single Dem in the House smart enough to ask the WB"s------"wait...so the investigation started in 2018, right? Yet you didn't pull all the warrants needed to get access to the necessary financial documents to actually begin the actual IRS investigation until 2020? So.....I have to ask ya: What the heck were you doing for two years, if you weren't attempting to assess Hunter's tax liability for the years in question?"

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 11:25 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 10:48 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 9:05 am

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 7:27 am WHAT IF JOURNALISTS ACTUALLY READ [WHISTLEBLOWER] GARY SHAPLEY RATHER THAN PARROTING HIS TESTIMONY?

...Republicans relentlessly claimed that Hunter Biden was getting special treatment because the US Attorney investigating him, who wanted more leverage to force a plea deal, had been granted Special Counsel status — which should prove, instead, that DOJ was deploying extraordinary prosecutorial resources against a private citizen. Republicans relentlessly complained that Garland hadn’t interfered in Weiss’ investigation — at all! — to make him charge Hunter Biden more quickly or more aggressively when the entire point was he had agreed in his confirmation hearing not to interfere.

Republicans also repeated, over and over, two claims that Gary Shapley — the so-called whistleblower all these Republicans claim to trust implicitly — had already addressed in his notes. Those two claims are that David Weiss “let” statutes of limitation on the two Burisma years Republicans believe include the most corruption expire, and that he couldn’t get authority to charge Hunter in the venue — Los Angeles — where more recent tax years had venue.

Gary Shapley’s materials had always debunked the first claim: that Weiss “let” statutes of limitation expire.

Read on. The shameful GOP behavior in that "hearing" yesterday was typical republicon bullshirt.

..

Shapley took notes at these meetings. Are you saying Diss that he is lying? Maybe it is his notes that are lying to him? It is rather odd that the people contradicting what he said are all suffering from CRS. They can't DENY what he said, ala HRC they simply don't "recall" what was said. BTW Diss, I thought you had an infatuation with whistle blowers? That needs to be narrowed down to you are infatuated with certain whistle blowers.
Now it is the DemocRATs shoveling the BS. The game of politics is increasingly a dog eat dog business. The AG is about as popular today as a SCOTUS justice.

Poor dissss... so confused. He used to be infatuated with Glenn G too

Question for cradle and Tech.

If Weiss wasn't the charging officer Hunter Biden----how is it that Weiss charged, you know, Hunter Biden?

Think it over. Tech, feel free to pejoratively label simple, logical questions as "gotcha" questions.

Can you please explain what you are saying a Fan? Weiss was suppose to have the authority to charge Hunter, then he wasn't, then he was, then he wasn't and then he was and now he is the SC who now has all of the magical powers that he had all along but never had but he really had but was unaware that he had. Makes perfect sense if you don't think about it too hard. The beef these whistleblowers have testified to under oath my man is that their investigation was interfered with by someone higher up the food chain than Weiss. Are you saying they are lying? You are one of the individuals on this forum a Fan that I respect the most. I can honestly tell you I have NO freaking idea what you are trying to say. You have been harping about Barr ad nauseum. So let him testify and hopefully he assuages your concerns. My concerns are simple either the DoJ or the IRS agents are lying.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 3:21 pm The beef these whistleblowers have testified to under oath my man is that their investigation was interfered with by someone higher up the food chain than Weiss. Are you saying they are lying?

No. I'm saying listen to what they are telling you.

-they said the interference started with Bill Barr

-Bill Barr, as we now know, is the one who CHOSE to make it a joint FBI & DoJ operation in 2019, and put Weiss in charge, and HQ the whole thing out of the Delaware office. That was all Barr.

-the whistleblowers complained about this arrangement that they had never seen before. Usually, the IRS operated independently, and then hands off their work to the DoJ. Much like the FBI works

-they also complained that Barr made the HQ in Delaware instead of DC. And the reason they gave was that the Delaware offices were inexperienced with this sort of case....all the tax fraud institutional knowledge was in DC. Again, this choice is 100% on Barr.

So it makes perfect sense to me to see disagreements, back seat driving, and miscommunications. More to the point---these WB are used to having control over their cases. Barr took away this power, and gave it to Weiss in Delaware, and they're telling you that they didn't like that one bit. Makes sense to me, but I wouldn't call Barr corrupt for making that choice.

Regarding the "who had charging power".....this is irrelevant to the discussion. The R"s are pouncing on this because they want to make it look like Garland is calling all the shots, and he's throwing the case. And as I've explained multiple times, this is a dumb suggestion on its face.

Further, the fact that this dragged into 2023 is insane....and it KILLS Joe Biden to have this in constant public conversation during an election campaign. It HELPS Joe Biden to throw Hunter in prison. He would get to make a speech-----"no one is above the law", and his polling would soar, no question.

In summary, either Barr and Weiss and Wray are covering for Joe......or there's zero connection between Joe, Hunter, and Ukraine. That's the only part I care about. That's the serious stuff.

As for Hunter, he's got enough rich people covering for him....and THAT is why he's walking. I'd like nothing more that to see him go to Federal Prison as he would if he were you or I.....just as I'd wish Trump was put into Federal prison for Defrauding Charities....because you and I both know we'd be royally F'ed if we defrauded multiple charities for millions of dollars.

I hate that rich people like Hunter and Trump get passes. But there's no conspiracy here. I trust the folks at the FBi and DoJ to eventually do their jobs.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 11:25 am
Question for cradle and Tech.

If Weiss wasn't the charging officer Hunter Biden----how is it that Weiss charged, you know, Hunter Biden?

Think it over. Tech, feel free to pejoratively label simple, logical questions as "gotcha" questions.

You may have noticed I haven't weighed in on HB in some time. I'm sitting this out until something comes up worth commenting on, one way or the other. And I certainly don't have patience for your Ring Around the Rosie on this... sorry.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 3:41 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 3:21 pm The beef these whistleblowers have testified to under oath my man is that their investigation was interfered with by someone higher up the food chain than Weiss. Are you saying they are lying?

No. I'm saying listen to what they are telling you.

-they said the interference started with Bill Barr

-Bill Barr, as we now know, is the one who CHOSE to make it a joint FBI & DoJ operation in 2019, and put Weiss in charge, and HQ the whole thing out of the Delaware office. That was all Barr.

-the whistleblowers complained about this arrangement that they had never seen before. Usually, the IRS operated independently, and then hands off their work to the DoJ. Much like the FBI works

-they also complained that Barr made the HQ in Delaware instead of DC. And the reason they gave was that the Delaware offices were inexperienced with this sort of case....all the tax fraud institutional knowledge was in DC. Again, this choice is 100% on Barr.

So it makes perfect sense to me to see disagreements, back seat driving, and miscommunications. More to the point---these WB are used to having control over their cases. Barr took away this power, and gave it to Weiss in Delaware, and they're telling you that they didn't like that one bit. Makes sense to me, but I wouldn't call Barr corrupt for making that choice.

Regarding the "who had charging power".....this is irrelevant to the discussion. The R"s are pouncing on this because they want to make it look like Garland is calling all the shots, and he's throwing the case. And as I've explained multiple times, this is a dumb suggestion on its face.

Further, the fact that this dragged into 2023 is insane....and it KILLS Joe Biden to have this in constant public conversation during an election campaign. It HELPS Joe Biden to throw Hunter in prison. He would get to make a speech-----"no one is above the law", and his polling would soar, no question.

In summary, either Barr and Weiss and Wray are covering for Joe......or there's zero connection between Joe, Hunter, and Ukraine. That's the only part I care about. That's the serious stuff.

As for Hunter, he's got enough rich people covering for him....and THAT is why he's walking. I'd like nothing more that to see him go to Federal Prison as he would if he were you or I.....just as I'd wish Trump was put into Federal prison for Defrauding Charities....because you and I both know we'd be royally F'ed if we defrauded multiple charities for millions of dollars.

I hate that rich people like Hunter and Trump get passes. But there's no conspiracy here. I trust the folks at the FBi and DoJ to eventually do their jobs.

Again you lost me. Why the F**k would Bill Barr do a god damn thing to delay the investigation? He was dragged kicking and screaming into the job of AG. Jeff Sessions bailed out because he knew his boss was a psychopath. IMO if Bill Barr bailed out on the HB investigation he was astute enough to know that people like yourself would ream him a new a hole for inserting himself as AG into the 2020 election in favor of trump. Prosecuting Hunter would have been a political stunt to hurt Joe Bidens campaign for POTUS. Please don't take this comment the wrong way a Fan. I know you were a very good debater when you were in college. Was there ever a time in a debate when you realized your argument was being shot down? Did you stop digging the hole or did you reach for a bigger shovel? Barr will testify under oath, my hope is that his testimony will answer those doubts that you have. There is an outside chance you will then think it was Jeff Sessions doing the political dirty work. Every day that goes by makes me believe in this. Why would any sane person in our government today want to be Attorney General of the United States?

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 7:27 am WHAT IF JOURNALISTS ACTUALLY READ [WHISTLEBLOWER] GARY SHAPLEY RATHER THAN PARROTING HIS TESTIMONY?

...Republicans relentlessly claimed that Hunter Biden was getting special treatment because the US Attorney investigating him, who wanted more leverage to force a plea deal, had been granted Special Counsel status — which should prove, instead, that DOJ was deploying extraordinary prosecutorial resources against a private citizen. Republicans relentlessly complained that Garland hadn’t interfered in Weiss’ investigation — at all! — to make him charge Hunter Biden more quickly or more aggressively when the entire point was he had agreed in his confirmation hearing not to interfere.

Republicans also repeated, over and over, two claims that Gary Shapley — the so-called whistleblower all these Republicans claim to trust implicitly — had already addressed in his notes. Those two claims are that David Weiss “let” statutes of limitation on the two Burisma years Republicans believe include the most corruption expire, and that he couldn’t get authority to charge Hunter in the venue — Los Angeles — where more recent tax years had venue.

Gary Shapley’s materials had always debunked the first claim: that Weiss “let” statutes of limitation expire.

Read on. The shameful GOP behavior in that "hearing" yesterday was typical republicon bullshirt.

..

So, as expected, the whole Saltine narrative turns out to be BS.

Weiss did not "let" the SOL expire. He decided, which is his job, not to charge those years.

Maybe Trump/Barr appointed a weak and stupid prosecutor to handle the HB case. Maybe Weiss sucks at his job. That may be what Shapley thinks.

But the facts are clear. Trump and Barr put Weiss on the job. And Weiss did that job.

No evidence at all that Biden or Garland did anything other than let Weiss keep on doing the job he already had.

tech37 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 4:21 pm You may have noticed I haven't weighed in on HB in some time

The reason I looped you in is that you did INDEED weigh in, just hours before my post. Check the date and time of your post.

"Quite some time"= you posted right before my post. Which is why I responded. Yet another illustration that what you THINK you are conveying, and what you ACTUALLY are conveying aren't anywhere close to the same thing. And in this case, you're denying you posted at all.

tech37 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 10:48 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 9:05 am

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 7:27 am WHAT IF JOURNALISTS ACTUALLY READ [WHISTLEBLOWER] GARY SHAPLEY RATHER THAN PARROTING HIS TESTIMONY?

...Republicans relentlessly claimed that Hunter Biden was getting special treatment because the US Attorney investigating him, who wanted more leverage to force a plea deal, had been granted Special Counsel status — which should prove, instead, that DOJ was deploying extraordinary prosecutorial resources against a private citizen. Republicans relentlessly complained that Garland hadn’t interfered in Weiss’ investigation — at all! — to make him charge Hunter Biden more quickly or more aggressively when the entire point was he had agreed in his confirmation hearing not to interfere.

Republicans also repeated, over and over, two claims that Gary Shapley — the so-called whistleblower all these Republicans claim to trust implicitly — had already addressed in his notes. Those two claims are that David Weiss “let” statutes of limitation on the two Burisma years Republicans believe include the most corruption expire, and that he couldn’t get authority to charge Hunter in the venue — Los Angeles — where more recent tax years had venue.

Gary Shapley’s materials had always debunked the first claim: that Weiss “let” statutes of limitation expire.

Read on. The shameful GOP behavior in that "hearing" yesterday was typical republicon bullshirt.

..

Shapley took notes at these meetings. Are you saying Diss that he is lying? Maybe it is his notes that are lying to him? It is rather odd that the people contradicting what he said are all suffering from CRS. They can't DENY what he said, ala HRC they simply don't "recall" what was said. BTW Diss, I thought you had an infatuation with whistle blowers? That needs to be narrowed down to you are infatuated with certain whistle blowers.
Now it is the DemocRATs shoveling the BS. The game of politics is increasingly a dog eat dog business. The AG is about as popular today as a SCOTUS justice.

Poor dissss... so confused. He used to be infatuated with Glenn G too

ggait wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 5:02 pm

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 7:27 am WHAT IF JOURNALISTS ACTUALLY READ [WHISTLEBLOWER] GARY SHAPLEY RATHER THAN PARROTING HIS TESTIMONY?

...Republicans relentlessly claimed that Hunter Biden was getting special treatment because the US Attorney investigating him, who wanted more leverage to force a plea deal, had been granted Special Counsel status — which should prove, instead, that DOJ was deploying extraordinary prosecutorial resources against a private citizen. Republicans relentlessly complained that Garland hadn’t interfered in Weiss’ investigation — at all! — to make him charge Hunter Biden more quickly or more aggressively when the entire point was he had agreed in his confirmation hearing not to interfere.

Republicans also repeated, over and over, two claims that Gary Shapley — the so-called whistleblower all these Republicans claim to trust implicitly — had already addressed in his notes. Those two claims are that David Weiss “let” statutes of limitation on the two Burisma years Republicans believe include the most corruption expire, and that he couldn’t get authority to charge Hunter in the venue — Los Angeles — where more recent tax years had venue.

Gary Shapley’s materials had always debunked the first claim: that Weiss “let” statutes of limitation expire.

Read on. The shameful GOP behavior in that "hearing" yesterday was typical republicon bullshirt.

..

So, as expected, the whole Saltine narrative turns out to be BS.

Weiss did not "let" the SOL expire. He decided, which is his job, not to charge those years.

Maybe Trump/Barr appointed a weak and stupid prosecutor to handle the HB case. Maybe Weiss sucks at his job. That may be what Shapley thinks.

But the facts are clear. Trump and Barr put Weiss on the job. And Weiss did that job.

No evidence at all that Biden or Garland did anything other than let Weiss keep on doing the job he already had.

No evidence either counselor that HB was getting paid 83 thousand a month from Burisma. You also mocked me when I mentioned that. I'm starting to think you have a masochistic tendency that drives you to be wrong.

ggait wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 5:02 pm

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 7:27 am WHAT IF JOURNALISTS ACTUALLY READ [WHISTLEBLOWER] GARY SHAPLEY RATHER THAN PARROTING HIS TESTIMONY?

...Republicans relentlessly claimed that Hunter Biden was getting special treatment because the US Attorney investigating him, who wanted more leverage to force a plea deal, had been granted Special Counsel status — which should prove, instead, that DOJ was deploying extraordinary prosecutorial resources against a private citizen. Republicans relentlessly complained that Garland hadn’t interfered in Weiss’ investigation — at all! — to make him charge Hunter Biden more quickly or more aggressively when the entire point was he had agreed in his confirmation hearing not to interfere.

Republicans also repeated, over and over, two claims that Gary Shapley — the so-called whistleblower all these Republicans claim to trust implicitly — had already addressed in his notes. Those two claims are that David Weiss “let” statutes of limitation on the two Burisma years Republicans believe include the most corruption expire, and that he couldn’t get authority to charge Hunter in the venue — Los Angeles — where more recent tax years had venue.

Gary Shapley’s materials had always debunked the first claim: that Weiss “let” statutes of limitation expire.

Read on. The shameful GOP behavior in that "hearing" yesterday was typical republicon bullshirt.

..

So, as expected, the whole Saltine narrative turns out to be BS.

Weiss did not "let" the SOL expire. He decided, which is his job, not to charge those years.

Maybe Trump/Barr appointed a weak and stupid prosecutor to handle the HB case. Maybe Weiss sucks at his job. That may be what Shapley thinks.

But the facts are clear. Trump and Barr put Weiss on the job. And Weiss did that job.

No evidence at all that Biden or Garland did anything other than let Weiss keep on doing the job he already had.

WHOO Boy, the point of PMM's post sailed SOO far over CradleTech's head that, like, WOOOOSH!

I think it must mostly come from dwelling largely in the MAGAt bubble, you know that place where the only :truth" comes from the addled 77-year old orange cheeto's "brain"...

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 4:33 pm Again you lost me. Why the F**k would Bill Barr do a god damn thing to delay the investigation?

I didn't say he did it intentionally.

Look at what I posted, and read carefully about the WB's complaints. 100% of the complaints from the WB hail from the decision Barr made to make the IRS guys subservient to the DoJ guys in 2019, and have Weiss run the investigation in DC.

They didn't like that, and that's why they are complaing.

ANY complaints you have should be directed at Barr:

-why did you make this a joint DoJ-IRS operation?
-why did you make Delaware the HQ and not DC, as the WB's preferred?
-why did you make Weiss in charge of the entire investigation, which forced the IRS to run everything through Weiss?


Does that explain it now? I'm not saying that Bill Barr did anything intentionally. I'm telling you that the WB"s complaints are all a result of Barr's choices. See above, and my other last post.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 5:09 pm

tech37 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 4:21 pm You may have noticed I haven't weighed in on HB in some time

The reason I looped you in is that you did INDEED weigh in, just hours before my post. Check the date and time of your post.

"Quite some time"= you posted right before my post. Which is why I responded. Yet another illustration that what you THINK you are conveying, and what you ACTUALLY are conveying aren't anywhere close to the same thing. And in this case, you're denying you posted at all.

tech37 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 10:48 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 9:05 am

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 7:27 am WHAT IF JOURNALISTS ACTUALLY READ [WHISTLEBLOWER] GARY SHAPLEY RATHER THAN PARROTING HIS TESTIMONY?

...Republicans relentlessly claimed that Hunter Biden was getting special treatment because the US Attorney investigating him, who wanted more leverage to force a plea deal, had been granted Special Counsel status — which should prove, instead, that DOJ was deploying extraordinary prosecutorial resources against a private citizen. Republicans relentlessly complained that Garland hadn’t interfered in Weiss’ investigation — at all! — to make him charge Hunter Biden more quickly or more aggressively when the entire point was he had agreed in his confirmation hearing not to interfere.

Republicans also repeated, over and over, two claims that Gary Shapley — the so-called whistleblower all these Republicans claim to trust implicitly — had already addressed in his notes. Those two claims are that David Weiss “let” statutes of limitation on the two Burisma years Republicans believe include the most corruption expire, and that he couldn’t get authority to charge Hunter in the venue — Los Angeles — where more recent tax years had venue.

Gary Shapley’s materials had always debunked the first claim: that Weiss “let” statutes of limitation expire.

Read on. The shameful GOP behavior in that "hearing" yesterday was typical republicon bullshirt.

..

Shapley took notes at these meetings. Are you saying Diss that he is lying? Maybe it is his notes that are lying to him? It is rather odd that the people contradicting what he said are all suffering from CRS. They can't DENY what he said, ala HRC they simply don't "recall" what was said. BTW Diss, I thought you had an infatuation with whistle blowers? That needs to be narrowed down to you are infatuated with certain whistle blowers.
Now it is the DemocRATs shoveling the BS. The game of politics is increasingly a dog eat dog business. The AG is about as popular today as a SCOTUS justice.

Poor dissss... so confused. He used to be infatuated with Glenn G too

And has absolutely (since you're an absolutist) nothing to do with HB, as stated.

tech37 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 7:39 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 5:09 pm

tech37 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 4:21 pm You may have noticed I haven't weighed in on HB in some time

The reason I looped you in is that you did INDEED weigh in, just hours before my post. Check the date and time of your post.

"Quite some time"= you posted right before my post. Which is why I responded. Yet another illustration that what you THINK you are conveying, and what you ACTUALLY are conveying aren't anywhere close to the same thing. And in this case, you're denying you posted at all.

tech37 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 10:48 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 9:05 am

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 7:27 am WHAT IF JOURNALISTS ACTUALLY READ [WHISTLEBLOWER] GARY SHAPLEY RATHER THAN PARROTING HIS TESTIMONY?

...Republicans relentlessly claimed that Hunter Biden was getting special treatment because the US Attorney investigating him, who wanted more leverage to force a plea deal, had been granted Special Counsel status — which should prove, instead, that DOJ was deploying extraordinary prosecutorial resources against a private citizen. Republicans relentlessly complained that Garland hadn’t interfered in Weiss’ investigation — at all! — to make him charge Hunter Biden more quickly or more aggressively when the entire point was he had agreed in his confirmation hearing not to interfere.

Republicans also repeated, over and over, two claims that Gary Shapley — the so-called whistleblower all these Republicans claim to trust implicitly — had already addressed in his notes. Those two claims are that David Weiss “let” statutes of limitation on the two Burisma years Republicans believe include the most corruption expire, and that he couldn’t get authority to charge Hunter in the venue — Los Angeles — where more recent tax years had venue.

Gary Shapley’s materials had always debunked the first claim: that Weiss “let” statutes of limitation expire.

Read on. The shameful GOP behavior in that "hearing" yesterday was typical republicon bullshirt.

..

Shapley took notes at these meetings. Are you saying Diss that he is lying? Maybe it is his notes that are lying to him? It is rather odd that the people contradicting what he said are all suffering from CRS. They can't DENY what he said, ala HRC they simply don't "recall" what was said. BTW Diss, I thought you had an infatuation with whistle blowers? That needs to be narrowed down to you are infatuated with certain whistle blowers.
Now it is the DemocRATs shoveling the BS. The game of politics is increasingly a dog eat dog business. The AG is about as popular today as a SCOTUS justice.

Poor dissss... so confused. He used to be infatuated with Glenn G too

And has absolutely (since you're an absolutist) nothing to do with HB, as stated.

Right. Dis makes a post about the Hunter Biden case. You read his post about the Hunter Biden case, and call him "confused", and quoted the post.....that was about the Hunter case.

Find someone else to play this game with....... I have no idea why you keep doing this, taking us round and round......

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 11:57 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 6:02 am Do you expect a day to day tick tock of what the IRS was doing in their investigation ? Do you think that Barr, Wray & Rettig should have demanded evidence & indictments before the investigators built a case that would support them ?

Build a case that would support them? Are you telling me that Barr launched a joint IRS-DoJ investigation into Hunter Biden WITHOUT all the probable cause already in place?

This wasn't a murder investigation, OS. It was an idiot who didn't file taxes for two years. Add in a quick google search, you'd find a AP Story from 2014 that States...

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. Vice President Joe Biden’s visit Saturday to support Ukraine’s fragile democracy came soon after his youngest son was hired by a private Ukrainian company that promotes energy independence from Moscow.

Yet that company leases natural gas fields in the breakaway Russian-backed state of Crimea and is owned by a former government minister with ties to Ukraine’s ousted pro-Russian president.

The hiring of Hunter Biden, 44, by Burisma Holdings Limited in April was approved by the company’s owner, a former senior minister and political ally of Viktor Yanukovych, the exiled Ukrainian president.

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-eu ... 577fc5937f


So you're telling me after seeing he got that job that was announced to the entire planet....and didn't file taxes for two years....the IRS doesn't have probable cause to pull his bank records? Buffalo Bagels.

Riddle me this: if there was no probable cause to investigate....why was this massive investigation moved to Bill Barr's control in 2019?

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 6:02 am Do you think the IRS had nothing to investigate before the warrants they requested in Apr 2020 ?

Great. Tell me what they were doing. How do you investigate and prove tax fraud without examining the accused's financial records?

But let's pretend you think this makes sense for a moment. If the IRS and DoJ didn't even get a look at Hunter's finances until summer/fall of 2020....now it makes sense that it took another two years to indict. Because the investigation didn't REALLY begin until they had a look at Hunter's finances.

And you, naturally, don't want to think about anything that ruins your conclusion that this is a conspiracy of the highest order.

And remember this post:

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:22 pm It's not just influence peddling. How did it impact our foreign policy when Biden was VP then President ?
What about FARA, compared to Manafort, Gates, Craig & Flynn ?

If you're REALLY worried about this.....why the F are you giving the IRS and DoJ a pass for taking so freaking long just to pull warrants and look at financial records......that three years later, Joe Biden was now in office?

You honestly don't see the problem here, OS? What if there WERE financial ties between Hunter and Joe and Ukraine. And the IRS and DoJ diddled around so long that Joe is now in office. That's a pretty bad outcome for America, don't you think?

It's makes ZERO sense that you're defending this, OS.

You are just babbling now. You still haven't told me which search warrants you are referring to as the basis for your rants. You keep telling me that I posted about them. The only warrant denied that I could find was when DE AUSA Lindsey Wolf declined the request for a warrant to search Hunter's residence in Biden's guest house based on the juice not being worth the squeeze. There was no indication that request rose above Wolf's level, let alone all the way to Barr. Shapley referenced a warrant to search Hunter's VA storage unit in which Wolf tipped off Hunter's lawyers in advance -- yet they got that warrant. Shapley made ref to other evidence he had discovered via search warrants. Ziegler responded to a Congressman's questions that they had used multiple electronic search warrants. You are erecting a strawman based on search warrant approvals, in which you can cite no specifics to support it.

If you fail to file your taxes, it does not immediately trigger a criminal investigation, especially if you file for extensions for future years. That's why the SOL for Hunter's 2014 & 2015 tax liability was extended, based on his filing for an extension for 2016. Legally, that represented his intent to file & pay his tax liability. His accountant/lawyer reps were in touch with the IRS, working to resolve the issue. The IRS did not do a criminal referral to DoJ until Hunter failed to file for 2017 & 2018, & he still had not resolved his liability for previous years, & the SOL for earlier years under investigation was not close to expiration.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 9:38 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 11:57 am

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 6:02 am Do you expect a day to day tick tock of what the IRS was doing in their investigation ? Do you think that Barr, Wray & Rettig should have demanded evidence & indictments before the investigators built a case that would support them ?

Build a case that would support them? Are you telling me that Barr launched a joint IRS-DoJ investigation into Hunter Biden WITHOUT all the probable cause already in place?

This wasn't a murder investigation, OS. It was an idiot who didn't file taxes for two years. Add in a quick google search, you'd find a AP Story from 2014 that States...

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. Vice President Joe Biden’s visit Saturday to support Ukraine’s fragile democracy came soon after his youngest son was hired by a private Ukrainian company that promotes energy independence from Moscow.

Yet that company leases natural gas fields in the breakaway Russian-backed state of Crimea and is owned by a former government minister with ties to Ukraine’s ousted pro-Russian president.

The hiring of Hunter Biden, 44, by Burisma Holdings Limited in April was approved by the company’s owner, a former senior minister and political ally of Viktor Yanukovych, the exiled Ukrainian president.

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-eu ... 577fc5937f


So you're telling me after seeing he got that job that was announced to the entire planet....and didn't file taxes for two years....the IRS doesn't have probable cause to pull his bank records? Buffalo Bagels.

Riddle me this: if there was no probable cause to investigate....why was this massive investigation moved to Bill Barr's control in 2019?

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 6:02 am Do you think the IRS had nothing to investigate before the warrants they requested in Apr 2020 ?

Great. Tell me what they were doing. How do you investigate and prove tax fraud without examining the accused's financial records?

But let's pretend you think this makes sense for a moment. If the IRS and DoJ didn't even get a look at Hunter's finances until summer/fall of 2020....now it makes sense that it took another two years to indict. Because the investigation didn't REALLY begin until they had a look at Hunter's finances.

And you, naturally, don't want to think about anything that ruins your conclusion that this is a conspiracy of the highest order.

And remember this post:

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:22 pm It's not just influence peddling. How did it impact our foreign policy when Biden was VP then President ?
What about FARA, compared to Manafort, Gates, Craig & Flynn ?

If you're REALLY worried about this.....why the F are you giving the IRS and DoJ a pass for taking so freaking long just to pull warrants and look at financial records......that three years later, Joe Biden was now in office?

You honestly don't see the problem here, OS? What if there WERE financial ties between Hunter and Joe and Ukraine. And the IRS and DoJ diddled around so long that Joe is now in office. That's a pretty bad outcome for America, don't you think?

It's makes ZERO sense that you're defending this, OS.

You are just babbling now. You still haven't told me which search warrants you are referring to as the basis for your rants. You keep telling me that I posted about them. The only warrant denied that I could find was when DE AUSA Lindsey Wolf declined the request for a warrant to search Hunter's residence in Biden's guest house based on the juice not being worth the squeeze. There was no indication that request rose above Wolf's level, let alone all the way to Barr. Shapley referenced a warrant to search Hunter's VA storage unit in which Wolf tipped off Hunter's lawyers in advance -- yet they got that warrant. Shapley made ref to other evidence he had discovered via search warrants. Ziegler responded to a Congressman's questions that they had used multiple electronic search warrants. You are erecting a strawman based on search warrant approvals, in which you can cite no specifics to support it.

If you fail to file your taxes, it does not immediately trigger a criminal investigation, especially if you file for extensions for future years. That's why the SOL for Hunter's 2014 & 2015 tax liability was extended, based on his filing for an extension for 2016. Legally, that represented his intent to file & pay his tax liability. His accountant/lawyer reps were in touch with the IRS, working to resolve the issue. The IRS did not do a criminal referral to DoJ until Hunter failed to file for 2017 & 2018, & he still had not resolved his liability for previous years, & the SOL for earlier years under investigation was not close to expiration.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 9:38 pm You are just babbling now. You still haven't told me which search warrants you are referring to as the basis for your rants. You keep telling me that I posted about them.

This is the second freaking time I have handed you YOUR OWN FREAKING CITATION. And when I post this AGAIN: you come back with "warrants? What Warrants are you talking about".

You ready to pay attention? Great. Here's your citation. Again. THESE are the warrants that I'm referring to....again.

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Sep 21, 2023 4:23 am The warrants weren't ready until Apr 2020
https://newrepublic.com/post/174474/sta ... department

“You said that warrants were ready as soon as April 2020 to begin searching for records...."



Do you understand that this means that the IRS had not pulled any warrants for Hunter's bank records until AFTER April of 2020.

Get it?

Im telling you that the IRS did nothing---zippo----for two full years after the investigation started in 2018.

How do you run an IRS investigation into tax fraud....with not one single financial record from Hunter????? You can't. So the ACTUAL investigation didn't start until 2020.....having done a big fat nothing for two years. Two years letting the SOL's get closer to expiring.

Get it?

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 10:39 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 9:38 pm You are just babbling now. You still haven't told me which search warrants you are referring to as the basis for your rants. You keep telling me that I posted about them.

This is the second freaking time I have handed you YOUR OWN FREAKING CITATION. And when I post this AGAIN: you come back with "warrants? What Warrants are you talking about".

You ready to pay attention? Great. Here's your citation. Again. THESE are the warrants that I'm referring to....again.

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Sep 21, 2023 4:23 am The warrants weren't ready until Apr 2020
https://newrepublic.com/post/174474/sta ... department

“You said that warrants were ready as soon as April 2020 to begin searching for records...."



Do you understand that this means that the IRS had not pulled any warrants for Hunter's bank records until AFTER April of 2020.

Get it?

Im telling you that the IRS did nothing---zippo----for two full years after the investigation started in 2018.

How do you run an IRS investigation into tax fraud....with not one single financial record from Hunter????? You can't. So the ACTUAL investigation didn't start until 2020.....having done a big fat nothing for two years. Two years letting the SOL's get closer to expiring.

Get it?

How do you know it was two full years ? What date did the DoJ criminal investigation begin ?
Did nothing, zippo ? You don't know what the IRS & the DoJ tax division had to work with before the warrants were ready.
They'd been working with Hunter's accountant & lawyer.
This wasn't like Xfire Hurricane where the FBI just sent the Steele Dossier to the FISC & slam, bam, got a bunch of FISA warrants.
These were criminal warrants to go after the son of a former VP & the then current front runner for the Dem nomination -- they had to be airtight.
I should not have cited the New Republic. They're like you. They don't specify which warrants.
They take a small scrap of information, in isolation, & build a diversionary strawman around it, like the Congressman they quoted did.
My point in posting from tNR was = it took the IRS & DoJ until Apr 2020 before they had enough evidence to go for whatever warrants tNR was referncing. Neither you nor I know how & why it took until then.
I do know that the IRS WB's confronted Weiss in Oct 2022, before the SOLs ran & he allowed them to expire.
That's the WHY I want answered. All the rest is just irrelevant, diversionary conjecture.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 11:42 pm How do you know it was two full years ? What date did the DoJ criminal investigation begin ?

Asked and answered YEARS ago. We're on page 140, OS.

2020. Exact date not given. The WB's said that the warrants were FINALLY ready in April of 2020. Which means they were pulled after that date.....but, as you know, the WB's said there were delays.....obviously for several months, or the WB's wouldn't complain. No rational person complains if the warrants are ready after 2 years of getting them "ready" ( )....and then flips out if they're not pulled in a few weeks.

So that puts us, rationally, into the summer of 2020 or later. Naturally, the House didn't ask when they were actually pulled, in an investigation into why this stuff took so much time. Right. Learning how long it took to get things done is unimportant.

Naturally, the reason the House doesn't ask these questions is the same reason that you don't care: all you care about is blaming Garland. The rest is Sound and Fury....signifying nothing. And as always, you don't understand that your entire way of thinking about this betrays what you REALLY want, not what you're PRETENDING to want......the timeline is immaterial to you to the point where you call it a strawman to discuss how long it took to get stuff done. It's hilarious. You can't even PRETEND to care about the timeline.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 11:42 pm Did nothing, zippo ? You don't know what the IRS & the DoJ tax division had to work with before the warrants were ready.

Sure we do. Again, the same freaking transcript quotations YOU cited told us that the IRS didn't have one shred of Hunter's financial records because they hadn't pulled warrants to get them yet. The WB told you that, OS. If you're going to feign concern over this case, at a bare minimum, read your own citations. Seems like that's not a lot to ask.

old salt wrote: ↑Fri Sep 22, 2023 11:42 pm They take a small scrap of information, in isolation, & build a diversionary strawman around it, like the Congressman they quoted did.
My point in posting from tNR was = it took the IRS & DoJ until Apr 2020 before they had enough evidence to go for whatever warrants tNR was referncing. Neither you nor I know how & why it took until then.

Diversionary strawman??? YOU are the one asking why the F this case took so long.

And when I point out how it took two freaking years just to pull the warrants? You call it a strawman.

Old Salt. FFS. No one is this stupid. You and I are discussing how long it took to get Hunter indicted. That's it. I'm not discussing anything else. I've learned that you and tech use the word "strawman" when I make a simple, simple logical point.

And my point here is this: if YOU, Old Salt thinks it makes perfect sense that it took two full years just to get "warrants ready"....it stands to reason that it would:

1. take another year to execute the warrants, and collect evidence. And find that they need more warrants, and pull them, and get that evidence.

2. this now takes us into summer 2021. Now Weiss has all the pertinent evidence, yeah? Great. So let's keep using Old Salt's logic.

3. Weiss can now finally have a look at what he has, starting in summer of 2021. Old Salt has told us it makes PERFECT sense it took two years just to pull warrants. Wouldn't it also follow that Weiss should be allowed this same span of time to get his case together, and to indict Hunter?

4. Congratulations, it's now summer of 2023, giving Weiss two years to get his case together.

5. You have now gotten your answer as to why Weiss let the SOL's expire: if it takes two years to get warrants? It makes sense that it would take two years to build a case after Weiss had all his evidence together.

6. You're welcome. No strawmen. No diversions. The ENTIRE conversation is answering OS's question: why did it take so long that the SOL's expired. And we answered that question using YOUR expectations of expediency.

No evidence either counselor that HB was getting paid 83 thousand a month from Burisma. You also mocked me when I mentioned that. I'm starting to think you have a masochistic tendency that drives you to be wrong.

What the heck you talking about MAGA moron?

Everyone, including me (proof below) has been saying forever that Hunter's Burisma gig was total BS.

So do us a favor and spare us your rando BS garbage posts. AMF loser.

Post by ggait » Wed Aug 31, 2022 6:52 pm

Hunter got paid $1M cash annually as an outside director at Burisma. That's sleazy AF. For reference, the average director comp in the S&P 500 is $300k with only about $100k in cash. So about what you'd expect for a coke head with serious financial/tax problems and a famous dad. If it is illegal, lock him up. But it likely is perfectly legal. And just not that unusual.

I just don't understand why the MAGA folks and other cranks on here think that a Trump appointee would repeatedly lie (as they insist he has) about not being pressured or impeded in his investigation and prosecution decisions by Biden appointees.

Just doesn't make sense. Certainly not for partisan reasons.

Ok, so one guy says he heard him say something implying otherwise in a meeting...fine, but why would the prosecutor be assumed to be lying when he denies again and again, to Congress, in writing (a felony) if the truth was that he'd indeed been pressured?

and why would others in the same meeting testify under oath they didn't hear what the one guy says he heard (or thought he heard)? Are they lying? Or were they ALL not listening?

Or did the one guy simply misunderstand? Was he so eager to hear a different plan of action that he 'heard' that prosecutor was being pressured, rather than that the prosecutor felt he couldn't make the case based upon the weak evidence he had, that he wanted more first? Does any investigator like being told the evidence is insufficient to prosecute?

The one guy has been described by colleagues that suggest he's super zealous, dogged, but often over his skis...(my words)

So, maybe we're in Q-like territory, the prosector fears for his life or is secretly part of the blood drinking pedophiles that rule the world?