(09-14-2023 06:58 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  See the funny think about This charge is that it has nothing to do with influence peddling or tax evasion stuff that is ALOT closer to daddy.

Correct. This indictment was the result of the failed plea deal. GOP is fighting against a DEM pandering DOJ. There should be more indictments...

Quote:The development comes weeks after a plea deal between prosecutors and the Hunter Biden fell apart. The agreement would've allowed Hunter Biden to plead guilty to a pair of misdemeanor tax offenses and avoid prosecution on a felony gun charge by entering into a pretrial diversion program.

“Ironically, that's the one crime you can’t tie Joe Biden into," Rep. James Comer, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, told reporters in response to the indictment.

"The Justice Department's sweetheart plea deal fell apart after a federal judge refused to rubberstamp it," Comer added in a statement. "Mountains of evidence reveals that Hunter Biden likely committed several felonies and Americans expect the Justice Department to apply the law equally. Today's charges are a very small start, but unless U.S. Attorney Weiss investigates everyone involved in fraud schemes and influence peddling, it will be clear President Biden's DOJ is protecting Hunter Biden and the big guy."

House Republicans have criticized Weiss' investigation in the past, arguing Hunter Biden should be more aggressively prosecuted over his business dealings.

Comer said Republicans are looking for indictments related to "money laundering, violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, tax evasion, the list goes on and on."

Rep. Andy Biggs, a Republican hard-liner, claimed Thursday "more serious charges" will be coming Hunter Biden's way.

"These should not be the last charges Hunter Biden faces," Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., also wrote in a post to X.

Drops of Blood Money in the Water

(09-14-2023 02:58 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(09-14-2023 12:44 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Wild guess...he takes a plea deal and agrees to a 2-year diversion program that if he stays clean and completes, the charges will go away.

If the judge PERMITS it.. Bidenties thought that was going to happen last time and we remember what the judge did, right?

IIRC, the Biden team actually pulled out of the deal.

(09-14-2023 03:23 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-14-2023 01:09 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Did any meetings actually take place? Was any political activities discussed? Was any action taken by the government?

You're going to have to pay attention. I'm not going to spoon feed it to you.

The most obvious ones come from Devon Archer. He recounted dinner meetings with people that included Joe, and then millions of dollars being sent to Hunter and other Biden's. The Moscow Mayor is perhaps the most obvious one. They had dinner, she paid money and then was left off the government's 'sanctions' list. Burisma is another obvious one. Joe (as VP) BRAGGED about that one. They had a meeting... actions were extorted... Hunter and the Biden's got paid. There is a lot more...

I'm aware of all the allegations being thrown around from the RW echo chamber...many sourced back to a hard drive that is in no way pristine nor reliable for provable evidence. So no, I'm not going to pay much attention to those. Especially when any time one of the principles are asked for the actual evidence, they turn into a jabbering ninny.

I'm a visual person. So, show me the proof in a legal setting...or an impeachment proceeding...and I'll gladly look at it.

(09-14-2023 06:58 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  See the funny think about This charge is that it has nothing to do with influence peddling or tax evasion stuff that is ALOT closer to daddy.

This gun thing has nothing to do with daddy.

I bet this takes a long time to play out as well…. Divert and distract….

This was charged now because the 5-year SOL runs out next month. They had to charge this now.

You guys REALLY need to stop looking for all these conspiracy theories.

(09-15-2023 10:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-14-2023 06:58 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  See the funny think about This charge is that it has nothing to do with influence peddling or tax evasion stuff that is ALOT closer to daddy.

This gun thing has nothing to do with daddy.

I bet this takes a long time to play out as well…. Divert and distract….

This was charged now because the 5-year SOL runs out next month. They had to charge this now.

You guys REALLY need to stop looking for all these conspiracy theories.

What in my post was not factual?

(09-15-2023 10:34 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(09-15-2023 10:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-14-2023 06:58 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  See the funny think about This charge is that it has nothing to do with influence peddling or tax evasion stuff that is ALOT closer to daddy.

This gun thing has nothing to do with daddy.

I bet this takes a long time to play out as well…. Divert and distract….

This was charged now because the 5-year SOL runs out next month. They had to charge this now.

You guys REALLY need to stop looking for all these conspiracy theories.

What in my post was not factual?

You seemed to be implying that they only charged this now to divert and distract from something related to Joe Biden.

If that was not your intent, please accept my apologies.

Anyway, back to this gun charge.

Why is Hunter's right to own a firearm being infringed?

(09-15-2023 10:43 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Anyway, back to this gun charge.

Why is Hunter's right to own a firearm being infringed?

Wait a minute. Are Democrats now against "stricter gun laws"?

(09-15-2023 11:05 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(09-15-2023 10:43 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Anyway, back to this gun charge.

Why is Hunter's right to own a firearm being infringed?

Wait a minute. Are Democrats now against "stricter gun laws"?

Don't believe so, but if you believe the right shall not be infringed, drug addicts should be allowed to purchase guns, right?

Yes. I want the Wild Wild West back.

(09-15-2023 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-14-2023 03:23 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-14-2023 01:09 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Did any meetings actually take place? Was any political activities discussed? Was any action taken by the government?

You're going to have to pay attention. I'm not going to spoon feed it to you.

The most obvious ones come from Devon Archer. He recounted dinner meetings with people that included Joe, and then millions of dollars being sent to Hunter and other Biden's. The Moscow Mayor is perhaps the most obvious one. They had dinner, she paid money and then was left off the government's 'sanctions' list. Burisma is another obvious one. Joe (as VP) BRAGGED about that one. They had a meeting... actions were extorted... Hunter and the Biden's got paid. There is a lot more...

I'm aware of all the allegations being thrown around from the RW echo chamber...many sourced back to a hard drive that is in no way pristine nor reliable for provable evidence. So no, I'm not going to pay much attention to those. Especially when any time one of the principles are asked for the actual evidence, they turn into a jabbering ninny.

I'm a visual person. So, show me the proof in a legal setting...or an impeachment proceeding...and I'll gladly look at it.

You constantly say this with zero evidence. You can't call the laptop's content "not reliable" without something concrete to back it up. Show us the receipts.

Only we need receipts, Tom doesn't. Don't you understand the rules around here?

Several Republicans have came out and said they have not seen any there there that connected Joe Biden with his son's transactions. It is the very evil far right crowd that is pushing the narrative, and refused to take their heads out of their asses to see all the legal issues that Trump have for over 20 years now. How is it okay for Trump to avoid paying taxes and not go into prison, but when we avoid paying taxes? We wind up going to prison for tax evasion. There is a double standards there with rich fat jerks like Trump than the rest of us.

Jim Jordan Calls Hunter Biden Indictment a 'Face-Saving Exercise' for Biden's DOJ, Reveals Key Facts

Quote:If you think the Hunter Biden indictment on federal gun charges was a joke, you're not alone. If you also think the indictment was a travesty of justice, you're far from alone there, too,

Not only does House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) agree but he also said in an exclusive interview on Friday with Breitbart News that Thursday’s indictment of Joe Biden's crackhead son was a “face-saving exercise” for Attorney General Merrick Garland's embattled Department of Justice (DOJ).

Jordan dismissed the Biden indictment as a mere public relations move, saying of Biden's DOJ: "At some point, it's got to do something." And that "something," Jordan said, was intentional — with respect to indicting Hunter Biden on a single charge that didn't involve Joe Biden.

So they go with the one charge that has no links to the White House, the gun charge, and they announce it two days after the speaker announces that there’s an impeachment inquiry that’s been launched by the House of Representatives.

To Jordan's point, you'd have to be blind to not see the above. The "you," of course, refers to rational, objective Americans with even a modicum of intelligence.

In response to the nonsensical claims on the left that House Republicans have no factual or evidentiary basis on which to indict Joe Biden's son, Jordan again nailed it.

You got the ‘ten percent for the big guy,’ ’50 percent for pops,’ all the emails, you’ve got the WhatsApp messages, the shakedown message, you got ‘the brand is Joe Biden,’ you got all those things.

You got multiple times that [David] Weiss has changed his story, multiple Biden family members getting paid from multiple companies that are set up, all those facts.

Memo to Democrats:

Flip the script and pretend everything Jordan said above was instead in reference to Donald Trump and Trump Jr. Would you indict Trump Jr., if so? And would you also go after Trump Sr. — big time? The questions are rhetorical. Of course, you would.

“The central facts revolve around Burisma, because that tells the story,” Jordan said.

The four central facts are one, Hunter Biden was put on the board of Burisma and paid a boatload of money; two he wasn’t qualified to serve on the board of Burisma; three, Burisma asked him to weigh in with D.C. to help them with the prosecutor who was applying pressure to them, who was investigating them; four, Joe Biden goes to Ukraine, leverages American tax dollars to fire that prosecutor. Those are four central facts that are never going to change.

That fact pattern is consistent with what is in the 1023 form, that the confidential human source conveyed to the FBI, that Joe Biden took policy actions, [and] policy preferences were made, in exchange for money going to his family. That’s the central thing of this investigation. And oh, by the way, when Joe Biden fired the prosecutor, it was an abrupt change from the policy of the administration.

Every bit of it, true — but here's the thing:

I wonder if Jordan, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, and all Republicans who favor bringing down Joe Biden are ultimately shooting themselves — and the country — in the foot. I mean, why would the GOP not want Joe Biden to be the Democrats' 2024 standard-bearer?

The Bottom Line
There's little reason to believe that House Republicans won't present a more than credible case in pursuit of an impeachment of Joe Biden. There's also little evidence to suggest the Democrat-majority Senate would vote to impeach "the big guy."

The above said, one could argue that a House impeachment of America's 46th president might be a catch-22 conundrum for the GOP.

An impeachment, theoretically, could result in the removal of Joe Biden from the presidency, either through an unlikely conviction in the Senate, or the Democrat Party finding a way to pull the plug on Biden's reelection campaign. Justice served, but at what cost?

If I'm the 2024 Republican presidential nominee, I want Joe Biden. And I want him, bad.