Hunter Biden's Laptops

[Dog 2.0]

and, as you've been told before, without a verifiable chain of custody, you have bupkis.

Nonsense. We have verified information about Biden Inc. influence peddling operations. Now we are seeing the convergence of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal and the Joe Biden classified documents scandal. If your you point is that these hucksters will never see the inside of a court room, that's probably true.

 

[Steam Flyer]

I know Mueller did not conclude that Trump colluded with the Russians which is the only thing I have said about it.

Like you know the Earth is flat and Covid is a hoax.

...

and, as you've been told before, without a verifiable chain of custody, you have bupkis.

No, he's got the same thing he's always had... endlessly screeching "Democrat=BAD!!!" in different ways

 

[Clove Hitch]

It's not necessary to know the exact method used to verify the data to know that it can be done and was done?

I just verified that the laptop is actually one of your old laptops. You don't need to know how I verified that- just know that I did.

 

[Clove Hitch]

Nonsense. We have verified information about Biden Inc. influence peddling operations. Now we are seeing the convergence of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal and the Joe Biden classified documents scandal. If your you point is that these hucksters will never see the inside of a court room, that's probably true.

Is it illegal for a son or daughter of a president to try make money off their dad's name?

 

[Bus Driver]

In 972 you responded to my post 971 about the U of D documents.

Post #972? Really?

Anyway, it was Post #962 (what's 10 posts earlier, among friends?) and my question was about DOJ policy. It was not specific to the documents at U of D.

 

[Bus Driver]

Is it illegal for a son or daughter of a president to try make money off their dad's name?

"Interesting" question. Some might say it is "thought-provoking".

Can we expand that to include son-in-law?

 

[Dog 2.0]

Post #972? Really?

View attachment 571635

Anyway, it was Post #962 (what's 10 posts earlier, among friends?) and my question was about DOJ policy. It was not specific to the documents at U of D.

If Tom Cotton is to be believed DOJ has, when the defeated ex-president was under investigation, shared information about a subject under investigation with congress. I would expect DOJ policy to be the same under this administration.

Given that congress has oversight responsibilities it makes perfect sense that they should have the information necessary to conduct oversight. That seems to be a rare point of agreement between D and R in congress.

 

[Dog 2.0]

Is it illegal for a son or daughter of a president to try make money off their dad's name?

Only if they break the law doing it.

 

[Steam Flyer]

If Tom Cotton is to be believed...

he's no more "to be believed" than you are. The difference is that we -know- he gets paid to lie.

 

[tybee]

If Tom Cotton is to be believed...

I think i see one of your problems...

Steam beat me to it.

 

[veni vidi vici]

The knives are out!
It will be interesting if Xiden takes one of the options or is going down hard
Me thinks he’ll throw down his medical sympathy card and bow out.
The REAL question is the VP and how that plays out. I mean the VP that is appointed to president Harris who will become the next DNC presidential candidate. It damn sure won’t be Kamalalala, Pocahontas ?
Mother Buttedgeedge ?
Me thinks Buttedgeedge is the smokey room winner , at least he can walk and chew political gum
Kamalalala Bwhahaaa

 

[Grrr...]

Nonsense. We have verified information about Biden Inc. influence peddling operations. Now we are seeing the convergence of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal and the Joe Biden classified documents scandal. If your you point is that these hucksters will never see the inside of a court room, that's probably true.

Hahahahahahaha.

You are trying to tie so many unproven tenuous strings together. Of course, you never did half this much supposing and guessing with the last guy. I wonder how a judge would view your "convergence".

Bark. Bark. Bark.

 

[badlatitude]

Hunter Biden’s lawyers, in newly aggressive strategy, target his critics​

His attorneys have sent letters to prosecutors urging probes of Rudy Giuliani, Steve Bannon and others​

Hunter Biden’s lawyers, in a newly aggressive strategy, sent a series of blistering letters Wednesday to state and federal prosecutors urging criminal investigations into those who accessed and disseminated his personal data — and sent a separate letter threatening Fox News host Tucker Carlson with a defamation lawsuit.

The string of letters, which included criminal referrals and cease-and-desist missives aimed at critics and detractors, marked the start of a new and far more hard-hitting phase for the president’s son just as House Republicans prepare their own investigations into him.

Abbe Lowell, a recently hired lawyer whom Hunter Biden enlisted about a month ago, sent lengthy letters to the Department of Justice and Delaware’s attorney general requesting investigations into several key players who were involved in disseminating data from a laptop that Biden is said to have dropped off at a repair shop in Wilmington, Del.

Bryan M. Sullivan, another lawyer now representing Biden, sent a separate communication to Carlson and Fox News demanding that they correct falsehoods from his recent show, or risk a possible defamation lawsuit.
And in another letter, Lowell wrote to the Internal Revenue Service challenging the nonprofit status of Marco Polo, a group that is run by conservative activist Garett M. Ziegler. Lowell provided 36 pages as evidence that the group is engaging in political activity in violation of its nonprofit status.

Taken together, the actions represent the boldest and most aggressive moves to date from Hunter Biden, who has often heeded the advice of those who urged him not to make public waves. Those close to President Biden and the White House have preferred a more conservative approach, but some individuals around Hunter Biden have wanted to be more assertive in telling his side of the story and going more directly after his opponents.
“This marks a new approach by Hunter Biden and his team,” said one person familiar with his strategy, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss private plans. “He is not going to sit quietly by as questionable characters continue to violate his rights and media organizations peddling in lies try to defame him.”
The new strategy marks a calculated risk that it is better to forge a combative path, and take on Hunter Biden’s longtime critics, even if it means inviting more news coverage of a dark chapter in his life and draws additional attention to the trove of personal and embarrassing material included on a laptop that has been disseminated by his detractors.
In the letter related to the laptop, Hunter Biden’s lawyers are asking state and federal law enforcement agencies to investigate individuals who came into possession of the data that he purportedly dropped off in Delaware in April 2019. They claim that about a half-dozen people have violated various statutes, including by making public restricted private information; accessing and disseminating stolen property; and making false statements to Congress.
“The actions described above more than merit a full investigation and, depending on the resulting facts, may merit prosecution under various statutes,” the letter reads. “It is not a common thing for a private person and his counsel to seek someone else being investigated, but the actions and motives here require it.”

The letter is particularly focused on John Paul Mac Isaac, the computer repair shop owner who first received the material from Biden in April 2019. Mac Isaac has written a book and spoken at political events, and Biden’s lawyers point to inconsistencies in his account.
The letter also requests investigations into former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, who was given the material from Mac Isaac and later distributed it; Robert Costello, who is Giuliani’s lawyer and also received the material; and Stephen K. Bannon, who has also had the material and helped facilitate initial news stories about it.
Hunter Biden’s attorneys also name Jack Maxey, who provided the material to several news outlets, including The Washington Post, as well as Ziegler, who has uploaded data onto his website, and Yaacov Apelbaum, a former aide to Sen. Ron Johnson (D-Wis.) who Mac Isaac has said helped create a “forensic image” of the hard drive.
As the material has circulated among conservative activists and media organizations, it has fostered a debate about its authenticity. In filing the complaint, however, Biden’s lawyers seem to be conceding that some of the data Biden’s lawyers seem to be conceding that some of the data that has been made public is his private information, even as they say that other materials could have been later altered. They don’t state whether or not he did, in fact, drop off a laptop for repairs.
“These unlawful actions caused the widespread publication, manipulation, and exploitation of Mr. Biden’s most personal information,” Lowell writes in one of the letters.
Citing Mac Isaac’s admissions that he reviewed some of Hunter Biden’s financial information on the laptop, the lawyers say he had no authority or permission to do so.
“Backing up Mr. Biden’s files for any repair did not require Mr. Mac Isaac to review the contents of any such files,” Lowell writes. “Mr. Biden did not consent to Mr. Mac Isaac gaining access to the content of those files in April 2019 or at any other time.”
The letters also reveal that in December, another one of Hunter Biden’s attorneys — Chris Clark, a former federal prosecutor and New York-based partner at Latham & Watkins — sent a similar criminal referral focused solely on Mac Isaac to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.
The laptop has been the subject of intense scrutiny dating from stories that the New York Post published just before the 2020 election. At the time, The Washington Post repeatedly asked Giuliani and Bannon for a copy of the data to review, but the requests were rebuffed or ignored.
In June 2021, Maxey, who previously worked as a researcher for Bannon’s “War Room” podcast, delivered to The Washington Post a portable hard drive that he said contained the data. He said he had obtained it from Giuliani.
The Post asked two security experts to examine 217 gigabytes of data on the drive, and they found nearly 22,000 emails carrying cryptographic signatures that could be verified using technology that would be difficult for even the most sophisticated hackers to fake. The vast majority of the data — and most of the nearly 129,000 emails it contained — could not be verified, the security experts said.
Hunter Biden has said he is unsure if the laptop is his and he does not remember dropping it off, but he has conceded that his memory at the height of his drug addiction was not reliable. His allies also suggest that materials later made public may be a mix of materials obtained in various ways.
During the same period, Biden also left a laptop with Keith Ablow, a Massachusetts-based psychiatrist who has been close to Republican activist Roger Stone. That laptop was seized by agents who raided Ablow’s office in February 2020, and it was eventually returned to Hunter Biden.
Kevin Morris, one of Hunter Biden’s friends and associates, has been overseeing a forensic analysis of that laptop to determine if it was the basis of the hard drives that were later distributed by Trump allies.
Hunter Biden’s lawyers also claim that he has been defamed by Fox News, in a story that Carlson aired in which he falsely said that Hunter Biden had paid $50,000 in “rent” to his father, a scheme that he suggested was being used to funnel money from father to son.
But the reality, as deconstructed by The Washington Post Fact Checker, showed that Hunter Biden was actually paying $49,910 every three months for office space in Washington.
Some other outlets, including The Daily Caller, later updated and retracted their stories.

“We demand that you immediately retract these statements by spending a significant of amount of air-time on such retraction,” Sullivan wrote in the letter to Carlson and a Fox News attorney.
He demanded apologies from Carlson and other commentators — including Fox’s Sean Hannity — who have made similar claims, and requested Fox News to respond in writing by Thursday.
“If we do not receive this written confirmation, we will assume that you both are not interested in acting responsibly and professionally and willing to reverse its actual malice reporting,” Sullivan wrote.
Citing the potential for litigation, Sullivan also demanded that Fox News preserve all communications and documents related to the story.
In one twist of irony, Carlson and Biden have a long history and a one-time friendship. The Post wrote last year about how their families were friends, and how Tucker Carlson and his wife asked for Biden’s help in getting their son into Georgetown.
Carlson, during a phone interview for that article, said that he was once close with Biden, as he has stated on his show.
“Hunter Biden was my neighbor. Our wives were friends. I knew him well. I talked to him many times about addiction, something I know a lot about,” Carlson said. “And I’ve said that. I think that Hunter Biden is an addict and that’s why his life is falling apart, and I feel bad for him. I’ve said that many times, and I mean it.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/02/01/hunter-biden-lawyers-urge-investigation-of-critics/

 

[veni vidi vici]

Hunter Biden’s lawyers, in newly aggressive strategy, target his critics​

His attorneys have sent letters to prosecutors urging probes of Rudy Giuliani, Steve Bannon and others​

Hunter Biden’s lawyers, in a newly aggressive strategy, sent a series of blistering letters Wednesday to state and federal prosecutors urging criminal investigations into those who accessed and disseminated his personal data — and sent a separate letter threatening Fox News host Tucker Carlson with a defamation lawsuit.

The string of letters, which included criminal referrals and cease-and-desist missives aimed at critics and detractors, marked the start of a new and far more hard-hitting phase for the president’s son just as House Republicans prepare their own investigations into him.

Abbe Lowell, a recently hired lawyer whom Hunter Biden enlisted about a month ago, sent lengthy letters to the Department of Justice and Delaware’s attorney general requesting investigations into several key players who were involved in disseminating data from a laptop that Biden is said to have dropped off at a repair shop in Wilmington, Del.

Bryan M. Sullivan, another lawyer now representing Biden, sent a separate communication to Carlson and Fox News demanding that they correct falsehoods from his recent show, or risk a possible defamation lawsuit.
And in another letter, Lowell wrote to the Internal Revenue Service challenging the nonprofit status of Marco Polo, a group that is run by conservative activist Garett M. Ziegler. Lowell provided 36 pages as evidence that the group is engaging in political activity in violation of its nonprofit status.

Taken together, the actions represent the boldest and most aggressive moves to date from Hunter Biden, who has often heeded the advice of those who urged him not to make public waves. Those close to President Biden and the White House have preferred a more conservative approach, but some individuals around Hunter Biden have wanted to be more assertive in telling his side of the story and going more directly after his opponents.
“This marks a new approach by Hunter Biden and his team,” said one person familiar with his strategy, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss private plans. “He is not going to sit quietly by as questionable characters continue to violate his rights and media organizations peddling in lies try to defame him.”
The new strategy marks a calculated risk that it is better to forge a combative path, and take on Hunter Biden’s longtime critics, even if it means inviting more news coverage of a dark chapter in his life and draws additional attention to the trove of personal and embarrassing material included on a laptop that has been disseminated by his detractors.
In the letter related to the laptop, Hunter Biden’s lawyers are asking state and federal law enforcement agencies to investigate individuals who came into possession of the data that he purportedly dropped off in Delaware in April 2019. They claim that about a half-dozen people have violated various statutes, including by making public restricted private information; accessing and disseminating stolen property; and making false statements to Congress.
“The actions described above more than merit a full investigation and, depending on the resulting facts, may merit prosecution under various statutes,” the letter reads. “It is not a common thing for a private person and his counsel to seek someone else being investigated, but the actions and motives here require it.”

The letter is particularly focused on John Paul Mac Isaac, the computer repair shop owner who first received the material from Biden in April 2019. Mac Isaac has written a book and spoken at political events, and Biden’s lawyers point to inconsistencies in his account.
The letter also requests investigations into former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, who was given the material from Mac Isaac and later distributed it; Robert Costello, who is Giuliani’s lawyer and also received the material; and Stephen K. Bannon, who has also had the material and helped facilitate initial news stories about it.
Hunter Biden’s attorneys also name Jack Maxey, who provided the material to several news outlets, including The Washington Post, as well as Ziegler, who has uploaded data onto his website, and Yaacov Apelbaum, a former aide to Sen. Ron Johnson (D-Wis.) who Mac Isaac has said helped create a “forensic image” of the hard drive.
As the material has circulated among conservative activists and media organizations, it has fostered a debate about its authenticity. In filing the complaint, however, Biden’s lawyers seem to be conceding that some of the data Biden’s lawyers seem to be conceding that some of the data that has been made public is his private information, even as they say that other materials could have been later altered. They don’t state whether or not he did, in fact, drop off a laptop for repairs.
“These unlawful actions caused the widespread publication, manipulation, and exploitation of Mr. Biden’s most personal information,” Lowell writes in one of the letters.
Citing Mac Isaac’s admissions that he reviewed some of Hunter Biden’s financial information on the laptop, the lawyers say he had no authority or permission to do so.
“Backing up Mr. Biden’s files for any repair did not require Mr. Mac Isaac to review the contents of any such files,” Lowell writes. “Mr. Biden did not consent to Mr. Mac Isaac gaining access to the content of those files in April 2019 or at any other time.”
The letters also reveal that in December, another one of Hunter Biden’s attorneys — Chris Clark, a former federal prosecutor and New York-based partner at Latham & Watkins — sent a similar criminal referral focused solely on Mac Isaac to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.
The laptop has been the subject of intense scrutiny dating from stories that the New York Post published just before the 2020 election. At the time, The Washington Post repeatedly asked Giuliani and Bannon for a copy of the data to review, but the requests were rebuffed or ignored.
In June 2021, Maxey, who previously worked as a researcher for Bannon’s “War Room” podcast, delivered to The Washington Post a portable hard drive that he said contained the data. He said he had obtained it from Giuliani.
The Post asked two security experts to examine 217 gigabytes of data on the drive, and they found nearly 22,000 emails carrying cryptographic signatures that could be verified using technology that would be difficult for even the most sophisticated hackers to fake. The vast majority of the data — and most of the nearly 129,000 emails it contained — could not be verified, the security experts said.
Hunter Biden has said he is unsure if the laptop is his and he does not remember dropping it off, but he has conceded that his memory at the height of his drug addiction was not reliable. His allies also suggest that materials later made public may be a mix of materials obtained in various ways.
During the same period, Biden also left a laptop with Keith Ablow, a Massachusetts-based psychiatrist who has been close to Republican activist Roger Stone. That laptop was seized by agents who raided Ablow’s office in February 2020, and it was eventually returned to Hunter Biden.
Kevin Morris, one of Hunter Biden’s friends and associates, has been overseeing a forensic analysis of that laptop to determine if it was the basis of the hard drives that were later distributed by Trump allies.
Hunter Biden’s lawyers also claim that he has been defamed by Fox News, in a story that Carlson aired in which he falsely said that Hunter Biden had paid $50,000 in “rent” to his father, a scheme that he suggested was being used to funnel money from father to son.
But the reality, as deconstructed by The Washington Post Fact Checker, showed that Hunter Biden was actually paying $49,910 every three months for office space in Washington.
Some other outlets, including The Daily Caller, later updated and retracted their stories.

“We demand that you immediately retract these statements by spending a significant of amount of air-time on such retraction,” Sullivan wrote in the letter to Carlson and a Fox News attorney.
He demanded apologies from Carlson and other commentators — including Fox’s Sean Hannity — who have made similar claims, and requested Fox News to respond in writing by Thursday.
“If we do not receive this written confirmation, we will assume that you both are not interested in acting responsibly and professionally and willing to reverse its actual malice reporting,” Sullivan wrote.
Citing the potential for litigation, Sullivan also demanded that Fox News preserve all communications and documents related to the story.
In one twist of irony, Carlson and Biden have a long history and a one-time friendship. The Post wrote last year about how their families were friends, and how Tucker Carlson and his wife asked for Biden’s help in getting their son into Georgetown.
Carlson, during a phone interview for that article, said that he was once close with Biden, as he has stated on his show.
“Hunter Biden was my neighbor. Our wives were friends. I knew him well. I talked to him many times about addiction, something I know a lot about,” Carlson said. “And I’ve said that. I think that Hunter Biden is an addict and that’s why his life is falling apart, and I feel bad for him. I’ve said that many times, and I mean it.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/02/01/hunter-biden-lawyers-urge-investigation-of-critics/

Can you please cite from a credible news source!

 

[badlatitude]

Can you please cite from a credible news source!

The problem seems that you don't have the slightest concept of what credibility constitutes or what vehicle delivers it.

 

[Peter Andersen]

The computer repair shop owner that Hunty visited has a book out and he is currently doing the media tour. He is not blind, but says he has a visual impairment. He gives what sounds as a credible timeline of events and his apolitical motivations, with full details of how he tried to hand over the laptops (3), Doubtful any libtards here would actually bother to listen to a first hand account by their opposition. But any reasonable and competent impartial judge would certainly do so. I look forward to our favorite libtards, even the 'unfair bullshitters', listening to his account and giving an intelligent opinion. He looks forward to testifying under oath and getting on with his life. Or they can just be eternal internet dickheads.

 

[Bus Driver]

The problem seems that you don't have the slightest concept of what credibility constitutes or what vehicle delivers it.

He's fucking with you.

 

[badlatitude]

He's fucking with you.

I'm fucking right back.

 

[badlatitude]

The computer repair shop owner that Hunty visited has a book out and he is currently doing the media tour. He is not blind, but says he has a visual impairment. He gives what sounds as a credible timeline of events and his apolitical motivations, with full details of how he tried to hand over the laptops (3), Doubtful any libtards here would actually bother to listen to a first hand account by their opposition. But any reasonable and competent impartial judge would certainly do so. I look forward to our favorite libtards, even the 'unfair bullshitters', listening to his account and giving an intelligent opinion. He looks forward to testifying under oath and getting on with his life. Or they can just be eternal internet dickheads.

Legitimate computer repair stores adhere to a set of ethics. Normal repairmen do not explore a customer's computer unless they have been permitted, along with passwords. They do not examine files unless the file is corrupt and causing problems.

The repairman in Delaware contacted Rudy Giuliani. A normal repairman would have erased the hard drive and either keep the computer, or put it up for sale. the laptop belongs to the shop owner; after the customer fails to pick it up, the data does not and opens the store owner to lawsuits.

What happened, in this case, indicates the store owner has little to no integrity. There was no reason to contact Rudy Giuliani, who is unbelievable by normal people, during the 2016 election Giuliani maintained he had thousands of Hillary Clinton emails in his home and in the six years since has never produced even one email.

This whole story stinks.

 

[Steam Flyer]

The computer repair shop owner that Hunty visited has a book out and he is currently doing the media tour. He is not blind, but says he has a visual impairment. He gives what sounds as a credible timeline of events and his apolitical motivations, with full details of how he tried to hand over the laptops (3), Doubtful any libtards here would actually bother to listen to a first hand account by their opposition. But any reasonable and competent impartial judge would certainly do so. I look forward to our favorite libtards, even the 'unfair bullshitters', listening to his account and giving an intelligent opinion. He looks forward to testifying under oath and getting on with his life. Or they can just be eternal internet dickheads.

He could have "gotten on with his life" by repairing the computer and getting on with life. He's cashing in on the Rush/Cucker/RWNJ craze... making hay while the sun shines... and you think he's a noble public servant. Who's the sucker in this scenario?