The Hunter Impeachment, Day 1: For heaven's sake.. TRUMP appointed him!

You express exactly the ignorance in which the Committee to Weaponize Government relies on. But they're only going to find it in their own base. The informed portion of the electorate understands that Weiss was NOT appointed by Garland, and that a Special Prosecutor does NOT work for the President. Not even those they DO appoint.

Do you actually believe Robert Mueller worked for Trump?

 

You are the one who said it!

 

For the life of me, I cannot understand why this is somehow in doubt for you and others, but here you go...

 

You are missing a ton of context and facts. You're basing your opinion on no evidence or the chain of events that occurred. Let me help you out so when you create a new fantasy of you'll at least have some information to base it on.

1. The DoJ tipped off Hunter Biden that they had a warrant to retrieve documents, and those documents then disappeared.

2. The DOJ tipped off Hunter Biden about the IRS investigators coming for an investigative interview, and he avoided it. The IRS was then blocked completely from interviewing Hunter.

3. There was a mountain of evidence of overseas income that was not declared on his taxes. The DOJ and IRS were in agreement to bring charges, but Weiss slow-walked it and did not do so, according to numerous whistleblowers.

4. Whistleblowers and FBI witnesses say Weiss was blocked from bringing charges in DC and California.

Now that you have some facts, you try formulating a response not based on fantasies contrived out of thin air.

 

A special counsel is someone appointed outside of the DOJ to investigate. David Weiss is not that. His special counsel assignment does not comply with the law because he works within the DoJ, headed by Garland. It's a similar relationship ambassadors have with the Secretary of State. David Weiss doesn't call the President when he needs to speak with his superior. He calls Garland.

 

There is more and more circumstantial evidence coming out on a nearly daily basis. We know for sure that Joe Biden is not an honest person. He lies for no reason at all. Sounds to me like you are afraid for the republicans to investigate.

Who said anything about prosecuting?

 

'Hunter was paid at least $3 million over several years for board service that involved minimal work and no visible contribution to the enterprise other than access to his father. The board service began in 2014, when Joe was Vice President, and immediately after Joe was named “point man” for U.S. foreign policy in Ukraine. After a corruption investigation into Burisma in Ukraine began in 2015, Burisma’s number one corporate objective became ending that investigation.'

'On November 2, 2015 Burisma executive Vadym Pozharsky stated to Hunter Biden in an email that Burisma’s “ultimate purpose” was to “close down” “any cases/pursuits against Nikolay [i.e., Burisma chairman Mykola Zlochevsky] in Ukraine.” Then, according to the Congressional testimony of Hunter Biden’s partner and Burisma co-board member Devon Archer, after a Burisma board meeting in Dubai on December 4, 2015, Zlochevsky and Pozharsky stepped out with Hunter to “call Washington.”'

'A few days later Vice President Joe Biden traveled to Kyiv, and, as he himself has admitted on a widely-viewed videotape, threatened to withhold a billion dollars of U.S. aid to the country unless the prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. And the prosecutor was fired.'

'the prima facie case of all of the elements of bribery is right there. It is what they call a lay down.'

Biden's a filthy crook.

 

I assumed there was a purpose for all of this...so you admit its a waste of time?
Once again where is the presentation of facts, aka evidance?

 

This is how it works.

1. Suspicions.

2. Investigate.

3. Prosecute, if warranted.

 

Actually step one is a crime is committed...but dont let that lil detail derail this thread.

Sounds like the republicans started with speculate...and never moved past that.

 

Suspicions that a crime has been committed. What do you think the suspicions refer to?

 

Usually from a complaint, a victim...

 

You are confused, again. Crackhunter didn't withhold the $1B until they fired the Burisma prosecutor in exchange for $10M in bribes to the Biden Crime Family, Bribed Joe did.

Without the 'russian disinformation' lie by the corrupt FBI/CIA about the laptop that detailed the Biden Crime Family's International Bribery Operation, 10% of Biden's voters state that they would not have voted for Bribed Joe. Bribed Joe is only in office because the corrupt CIA/FBI rigged the election by lying to the American People, and Trump is on trial in 4 different states, on a hundred felonies, because he protested the rigged election. And they deliberately withheld the 2020 charges, so that the trial could fully engulf the 2024 election, that is, all these charges are their attempt to rig the 2024 election, too.

Don't think folks haven't noticed, it's not working. Bribed Joe is 12 points behind where he was in the previous cycle at this point, a number that tracks very closely to the 10% that were tricked into voting for him by the corrupt FBI/CIA rigging the election for Bribed Joe. And that's why the hail Mary, rig 2024 with a hundred charges isn't working, Trump's only 'crime' is protesting the election they rigged.

And the first impeachment, we all saw Bribed Joe brag about getting the prosecutor fired in exchange for the $10M in bribes. So it's all known, and advertised by the Bidens, Bribed Joe by bragging on video, Crackhead Hunter by trying to get his laptop fixed while in yet another blackout.

'This is a case where the prima facie case of a crime, and of a constitutionally enumerated impeachable offense, is right there in front of our eyes. And the crime in question is the main bribery statute.'

'It’s high time that everybody stopped calling Biden’s alleged wrongdoing by euphemisms like “influence peddling” or “foreign business dealings” — neither of which are terms specifically referencing an impeachable offense, let alone a crime. We should all start using the correct and obviously applicable constitutional and statutory term, which is “bribery.”'

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com...we-start-calling-it-what-it-is-namely-bribery

BRIBERY - BRIBED JOE IS FACING AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY FOR BRIBERY.

Look at all these Republicans tap dancing around this:

QUOTES FROM LINK

• From NBC News, May 10: “The Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee mounted more attacks Wednesday against President Joe Biden and his family, alleging that relatives of the president engaged in business with foreign nationals. . . .”
  
  
• From ABC News, September 14: “[O]n Capitol Hill, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy this week said he would initiate an impeachment inquiry against President Biden over his alleged role in his son's influence-peddling. . . .”
  
  
• From the New York Post, August 14: “The evidence that President Joe Biden benefited directly from son Hunter’s influence-peddling operation just keeps mounting.”
  
  
• From PBS, today: “Republicans — led by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy — have contended in recent weeks that Biden’s actions from his time as vice president show a “culture of corruption,” and that his son used the “Biden brand” to advance his business with foreign clients.”
  
  
• Or even from the House Oversight Committee itself, September 13: “There is mounting evidence that Joe Biden was involved in his family’s influence peddling schemes, including while he served as Vice President.”

END QUOTED SECTION - https://www.manhattancontrarian.com...we-start-calling-it-what-it-is-namely-bribery

It's not "influence peddling" it's BRIBERY.
It's not Crackhead Hunter, its Bribed Joe.

 

Not always. For example much of the fraud found in business is after someone gets suspicious and then they call in the auditors.

 

Yep, ie a complaint. A whistle blower, the bribed person snitches, funds are missing, etc.
Who or where is that in this instance?

 

Thats quite the speculation...

 

Liberal entities must have misled them. Once the talking points are set, the soldiers help spread the word.

 

Look at the news. If you don't want to believe there is reasons to be suspicious, then don't. In the meantime the republicans will be investigating. If you believe the republicans will find nothing, that is your right. Personally, I do not care one way or the other.

 

That's it right there! No need for the "or..." I'm basing my opinion on the lack of evidence. If after five years an investigator appointed by Trump to find dirt on Biden has no evidence, the most logical conclusion is that no evidence EXISTS.

As for your "or...", when no evidence is required, you can make ANY imaginary accusation. Problem for Weiss is that he can't charge anybody based on your fantasies.

And THIS is the only fact that came out form this session of this Committee for Republicans to Weaponize Government

 

Actually, it's

• banking records
• $21M in bribes
• Dozens of shell corporations to hide the money trail
• $Millions into Biden Family accounts, including grandchildren!
• Witness Testimony
• Whistle Blower Testimony
• Bribed Joe's Testimony of firing the prosecutor
• Crackhead Hunter losing the laptop, during a blackout, that details the Bribery Crime Family Business.

Now the House is demanding Crackhead Hunter and James Biden's personal banking records, as Crackhead Hunter testifies to his laptop that he "has been paying all of this family's bills" for years, and that Bribed Joe "demands half his income" and he documents the specific payment of Bribed Joe's expenses from his own accounts.

Meanwhile much of the Left chants "there is no evidence" as if it's a magic spell that will help Bribed Joe win his second rigged election. But folks aren't buying. There is too much evidence and no answers to such obvious questions such as: Why are Corrupt Foreign Oligarchs giving $Millions To Biden Grandchildren?

 

That's exactly what he IS. Please read my sig!

 

I didnt see any of that in the news, just their speculation.

 

4. You mean Gary Shapley. His testimony contradicts his personal handwritten notes. His supervisor’s testimony backs up the notes. Like all of the Committee’s witnesses they’ve either discredited themselves or provided testimony that contradicts the Committee’s narrative.

What the FBI and Weiss discovered is there has been so much political interference in this case that whatever evidence they might have had on Hunter is useless in court. For example, the laptop is laptopS. It’s been copied and passed around through so many political operatives.

I’m of the opinion Hunter’s going to skate because the shenanigans: attempt to drum up something to use against his father. It’s a lose/lose situation.

 

The former agent, who retired last year after more than 20 years with the agency, told investigators that he was frustrated over the decision by more senior officials to block the interview but didn't consider the outcome problematic.

"I wasn't aware of political interference, personally," the former agent said.

Republicans pointed to the testimony as evidence that the Justice Department intervened to delay the Hunter Biden probe, even though the events took place while Republican President Donald Trump was in office.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fo...e-interference-hunter-biden-probe-2023-08-14/

Top IRS official latest witness to dispute allegations from whistleblower on Hunter Biden tax case
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/20/poli...histleblower-hunter-biden-tax-case/index.html

US attorney leading Hunter Biden probe refutes whistleblowers’ politicization claims
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/10/poli...s-whistleblower-claim-hunter-biden/index.html

You might also benefit from reading...https://www.factcheck.org/2023/06/republican-claims-about-hunter-biden-offenses/

 

Well... good luck explaining to the American People why you impeach a President for lying for no reason at all.