Peter Andersen
Super Anarchist
- 1,213
- 276
fuck that. he made me alot of money!
Ever been to his place on Lake Winny?
That's money well spent!
Hunter Biden's Laptops
- Thread starter Ishmael
- Start date
Ever been to his place on Lake Winny?
That's money well spent!
Steam Flyer
Sophisticated Yet Humble
You really dwell in a fantasy world.
Romney's financial pirates didn't make any money for anybody but themselves.
Dog 2.0
Super Anarchist
- 4,897
- 783
"So now we have in hand documents that show just exactly how the Biden family was getting money from the Chinese Communist Party,” Rep Comer
www.bizpacreview.com
‘As bad as we thought’: James Comer says docs show ‘Biden family was getting money from CCP’
House Oversight Committee chair James Comer claimed Sunday on Fox News that he has evidence proving that President Joe Biden’s family has profited from the Chinese Communist […]
www.bizpacreview.com
Bus Driver
Bacon Quality Control Specialist
Comer? Really?
kent_island_sailor
Super Anarchist
Yeah - looks like a great place to get "news"
billy backstay
Backstay, never bought a suit, never went to Vegas
Bus Driver
Bacon Quality Control Specialist
This would be the same Comer who voted to repeal much of Frank-Dodd, and now is bitching about the collapse of SVB.
Sounds like we should call him "Gomer".
That said, I await his release of this "evidence".
Sounds like we should call him "Gomer".
That said, I await his release of this "evidence".
Don't hold your breath 😉
billy backstay
Backstay, never bought a suit, never went to Vegas
Article from very "reliable" Right Wing Nut Job media.......
Fox News (foxnews.com)
Wow, I go away for a couple of days and the inmates take over the asylum.
phillysailor
Super Anarchist
- 9,692
- 4,438
The reporting has revealed that the Biden crime family has done business, some with Chinese companies.
Oh, and Comer can prove there were bank transfers which “might be” or “could be” money laundering if there was only a crime and it was known who was giving them money.
Proving what it was will require getting Hunter on the stand and asking him about laptops, dick pics and drugs. This will help Americans understand why his father shouldn’t be allowed to pass infrastructure bills and raise taxes on enormous corporations.
Then the earth shattering article rehashed how Biden misplaced classified documents and his son smoked crack cocaine.
So it sounds like he needs to be impeached and investigated, pretty much in that order.
C’mon @Dog 2.0 you can now accuse Biden of money-laundering!! Because you have all the facts you need & someone else said it first.
Gotta flood the zone with shtick.
Oh, and Comer can prove there were bank transfers which “might be” or “could be” money laundering if there was only a crime and it was known who was giving them money.
Proving what it was will require getting Hunter on the stand and asking him about laptops, dick pics and drugs. This will help Americans understand why his father shouldn’t be allowed to pass infrastructure bills and raise taxes on enormous corporations.
Then the earth shattering article rehashed how Biden misplaced classified documents and his son smoked crack cocaine.
So it sounds like he needs to be impeached and investigated, pretty much in that order.
C’mon @Dog 2.0 you can now accuse Biden of money-laundering!! Because you have all the facts you need & someone else said it first.
Gotta flood the zone with shtick.
Last edited:
kent_island_sailor
Super Anarchist
Bus Driver
Bacon Quality Control Specialist
This name - Comer - keeps showing up. Now, he is claiming ignorance. Such bullshit.
Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., chair of the Oversight and Accountability Committee, made clear he had abandoned any investigation into the former president’s financial dealings — professing ignorance about the inquiry Democrats opened when they controlled the House — and was instead focusing on whether President Joe Biden and members of his family were involved in an influence-peddling scheme. “I honestly didn’t even know who or what Mazars was,” said Comer, who was the senior Republican on the oversight panel during the last Congress, while Democrats waged a lengthy legal fight over obtaining documents from the firm.
House Republicans Quietly Halt Inquiry Into Trump's Finances
Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., chair of the Oversight and Accountability Committee, made clear he had abandoned any investigation into the former president’s financial dealings — professing ignorance about the inquiry Democrats opened when they controlled the House — and was instead focusing on whether President Joe Biden and members of his family were involved in an influence-peddling scheme. “I honestly didn’t even know who or what Mazars was,” said Comer, who was the senior Republican on the oversight panel during the last Congress, while Democrats waged a lengthy legal fight over obtaining documents from the firm.
Per request.
Ex-intelligence officials challenge the Hunter Biden witch hunt
Right-wing House Republicans have left little doubt that they want to spend the bulk of their time and energy investigating phony conspiracies and made-up scandals. Their main obsession appears to be Hunter Biden, whose very name has become a buzzword in right-wing media. The contents of one of his laptops, revealed in 2020, have inspired a fantastical conspiracy theory that has been comprehensively debunkedby, among others, Asha Rangappa, a senior lecturer at Yale University’s Jackson School of Global Affairs and former FBI agent.
She persuasively applies a “a basic three-part formula” employed by psychologists who study conspiracy theories “for disentangling truth from fiction, one that activates the rational, analytical side, rather than the lizard, fight-or-flight side, of the brain.” Her takeaway: The conspiracy theorists have reached the “temper tantrum” stage of the Hunter Biden “scandal.”
Obviously, there is no legitimate basis for congressional “oversight” of the matter. And that brings us to the current faceoff between the Republican chairmen of the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees, on one side, and 50 or so former intelligence officials, on the other.
In October 2020, these officials crafted a statement that appeared in Politico alleging that appearance of the laptop and emails purporting to relate to Hunter Biden’s time on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma, “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”
As my Post colleague Glenn Kessler has explained, the statement’s claims — in contrast to news reports and Democrats’ description of the claims — were explicitly limited. “We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement — just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case,” the statement cautioned.
Nevertheless, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Intelligence Committee Chairman Michael R. Turner (R-Ohio) sent letters to the signatories, demanding all documents relating to the statement and directing the former officials to appear for transcribed interviews. If they don’t comply, they have been warned, subpoenas will be forthcoming.
Perhaps Republicans imagine the former intelligence officials were put up to signing the statement pointing the finger at Russia as part of a Democratic plot to mislead voters. (Talk about projection!) Whatever the reason for this GOP fishing expedition, it would be a dangerous threat to the First Amendment if Congress could haul in for questioning any private citizen (as the former officials were at the time) to explain an op-ed or open letter.
And, ironically, it would be an illegitimate and inappropriate use of congressional power — a weaponization of government — if every president’s family members and their associates and defenders could be summoned to testify about a made-up controversy.
Several of the signatories are represented by Mark Zaid, who provided me with a copy of a letter challenging the fishing expedition. In a response to the chairmen, Zaid notes that the power of Congress to exercise oversight is not “unbounded.” Citing the 2020 Trump v. Mazars Supreme Court case, Zaid explains that Congress needs a legitimate legislative purpose to demand compliance with a subpoena. And here, “no conceivable legislative purpose” exists, he says, only a “purely political, partisan exercise” that wastes taxpayer money.
Indeed, it is hard to divine any legislative purpose for a Republican-led, contorted investigation of the president’s son. But I cannot say the maneuver surprises me. House Republicans have continually boasted about their plans to investigate President Biden and his family, meddle in ongoing prosecutions and run interference for former president Donald Trump. Now, their admission is being turned against them.
It isn’t clear where this is going from here. Zaid says his clients have voluntarily agreed to produce documents. One signatory, Marc Polymeropoulos, who helped organize the former intelligence officials’ statement, has agreed to sit for an interview. However, should the committees issue formal subpoenas to others or demand the former officials reveal classified information about their past service (which is the basis for their opinions set out in the statement), the issue likely would head to the courts in the first substantial legal challenge to the House GOP’s conspiracy-driven inquests.
The last thing these right-wing congressmen likely would want is a court ruling that their three-ring circus lacks any legitimate legislative purpose and, therefore, cannot compel testimony or document production. A legal defeat for MAGA-inspired investigations (which to date have spectacularly flopped) would be the perfect denouement to Republicans’ inept efforts to harness congressional power for political gain.
If their power to hold hearings is neutered, the absence of a substantive House GOP mission would be laid bare. Republicans would be left to make wild accusations — such as bank failures are due to “wokeness” — advance a hugely unpopular agenda (restricting abortion, raising prescription drug prices) and reveal their disarray, as they have with the debt ceiling.
In standing up to congressmen bent on bullying and intimidating witnesses to score political points, the former intelligence officials will have performed a public service: revealing the feckless little men behind the curtain.
Ex-intelligence officials challenge the Hunter Biden witch hunt
Right-wing House Republicans have left little doubt that they want to spend the bulk of their time and energy investigating phony conspiracies and made-up scandals. Their main obsession appears to be Hunter Biden, whose very name has become a buzzword in right-wing media. The contents of one of his laptops, revealed in 2020, have inspired a fantastical conspiracy theory that has been comprehensively debunkedby, among others, Asha Rangappa, a senior lecturer at Yale University’s Jackson School of Global Affairs and former FBI agent.
She persuasively applies a “a basic three-part formula” employed by psychologists who study conspiracy theories “for disentangling truth from fiction, one that activates the rational, analytical side, rather than the lizard, fight-or-flight side, of the brain.” Her takeaway: The conspiracy theorists have reached the “temper tantrum” stage of the Hunter Biden “scandal.”
Obviously, there is no legitimate basis for congressional “oversight” of the matter. And that brings us to the current faceoff between the Republican chairmen of the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees, on one side, and 50 or so former intelligence officials, on the other.
In October 2020, these officials crafted a statement that appeared in Politico alleging that appearance of the laptop and emails purporting to relate to Hunter Biden’s time on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma, “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”
As my Post colleague Glenn Kessler has explained, the statement’s claims — in contrast to news reports and Democrats’ description of the claims — were explicitly limited. “We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement — just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case,” the statement cautioned.
Nevertheless, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Intelligence Committee Chairman Michael R. Turner (R-Ohio) sent letters to the signatories, demanding all documents relating to the statement and directing the former officials to appear for transcribed interviews. If they don’t comply, they have been warned, subpoenas will be forthcoming.
Perhaps Republicans imagine the former intelligence officials were put up to signing the statement pointing the finger at Russia as part of a Democratic plot to mislead voters. (Talk about projection!) Whatever the reason for this GOP fishing expedition, it would be a dangerous threat to the First Amendment if Congress could haul in for questioning any private citizen (as the former officials were at the time) to explain an op-ed or open letter.
And, ironically, it would be an illegitimate and inappropriate use of congressional power — a weaponization of government — if every president’s family members and their associates and defenders could be summoned to testify about a made-up controversy.
Several of the signatories are represented by Mark Zaid, who provided me with a copy of a letter challenging the fishing expedition. In a response to the chairmen, Zaid notes that the power of Congress to exercise oversight is not “unbounded.” Citing the 2020 Trump v. Mazars Supreme Court case, Zaid explains that Congress needs a legitimate legislative purpose to demand compliance with a subpoena. And here, “no conceivable legislative purpose” exists, he says, only a “purely political, partisan exercise” that wastes taxpayer money.
Indeed, it is hard to divine any legislative purpose for a Republican-led, contorted investigation of the president’s son. But I cannot say the maneuver surprises me. House Republicans have continually boasted about their plans to investigate President Biden and his family, meddle in ongoing prosecutions and run interference for former president Donald Trump. Now, their admission is being turned against them.
It isn’t clear where this is going from here. Zaid says his clients have voluntarily agreed to produce documents. One signatory, Marc Polymeropoulos, who helped organize the former intelligence officials’ statement, has agreed to sit for an interview. However, should the committees issue formal subpoenas to others or demand the former officials reveal classified information about their past service (which is the basis for their opinions set out in the statement), the issue likely would head to the courts in the first substantial legal challenge to the House GOP’s conspiracy-driven inquests.
The last thing these right-wing congressmen likely would want is a court ruling that their three-ring circus lacks any legitimate legislative purpose and, therefore, cannot compel testimony or document production. A legal defeat for MAGA-inspired investigations (which to date have spectacularly flopped) would be the perfect denouement to Republicans’ inept efforts to harness congressional power for political gain.
If their power to hold hearings is neutered, the absence of a substantive House GOP mission would be laid bare. Republicans would be left to make wild accusations — such as bank failures are due to “wokeness” — advance a hugely unpopular agenda (restricting abortion, raising prescription drug prices) and reveal their disarray, as they have with the debt ceiling.
In standing up to congressmen bent on bullying and intimidating witnesses to score political points, the former intelligence officials will have performed a public service: revealing the feckless little men behind the curtain.
