yes, this times 1000

Remember when two IRS whistleblowers came forward to charge that the Biden administration gave the president's son, Hunter Biden, special treatment in the tax investigation into his business affairs?

The two — Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler , both of whom were deeply involved in the Hunter Biden investigation — offered proof that the IRS had an open-and-shut case that Hunter Biden evaded taxes on large amounts of money he had made from foreign sources

But the U.S. Attorney's Office in Delaware, and the larger Justice Department, would not pursue it, and both men were removed from the case in retaliation for having the temerity to point out the inaction.

Shapley's and Ziegler's testimonies supported the Republican charge that Justice Department officials stifled and slow-walked the investigation. GOP agitation forced the U.S. attorney leading the inquiry, David Weiss, to seek special counsel status, giving him the freedom to resume the investigation.


https://www.washingtonexaminer...n-for-whistleblowers

American heroes and role models for govt employees. Think what a bunch of FBI agents could have done to bring out the truth

https://jonathanturley.org/202...s-of-legal-gluttony/

Five months ago, exasperated Biden defense counsel Chris Clark snapped at federal prosecutors to “just rip it up” after a plea bargain hit a snag in a hearing before Judge Maryellen Noreika. They did and, for the first time, Hunter could be facing a real chance for jail time.

The six misdemeanor charges and three felonies carry a potential sentence of 17 years for alleged tax evasion and filing a false return. It could have been worse. The Justice Department inexplicably allowed the statute of limitations to run on the most serious allegations involving payments from years going back to 2013. Those are mentioned in the narrative of the indictment but not charged as separate offenses.

None of this would have happened if Judge Noreika did not ask a very simple question about the plea agreement and a sweeping immunity provision buried in its language.

Noreika noticed that the deal seemed to give Hunter immunity for any crime going forward and asked the prosecutor if he had ever seen any agreement like this one. He honestly answered “no.”

It was later learned that there was a push within the Justice Department to have no charges at all brought against Hunter in an investigation that was heavily laden with special treatment, according to IRS whistleblowers.

The investigation by the House has shown how Hunter and his counsel allowed their appetite for special treatment to turn into a raging disorder. The Justice Department reportedly gave Hunter a “heads up” about planned searches and interviews, scuttling those efforts. Even though the Justice Department had an agreement to “toll the statute” to prevent the early charges from expiring, the Special Counsel just let them die without any rational reason.

In this “all-you-can-eat” legal Smorgasbord, it is little surprise that the Biden team would demand an unprecedented immunity deal and just two misdemeanors after years of tax evasion covering millions from insider trading.

After all, Attorney General Merrick Garland had refused the calls of many of us to appoint a Special Counsel to look into the corruption scandal. The scandal was capped off legally and the media was running cover for Hunter.

The laptop was falsely denounced as Russian disinformation and the media largely dismissed influence peddling claims. Whenever new allegations surfaced, the President and the media would literally run to the nearest ice cream shop to discuss the President’s favorite flavors.

In other words, why ask for a sweeping immunity deal? The answer was why not.

That all came crashing down when Judge Noreika just cleared her throat in court.

As the prosecutors struggled to explain the absurd immunity provision, the Biden legal team was obviously shocked at the notion that they might have to exercise portion control. After all, the President himself has declared “no one f**ks with a Biden.”

That is when they told the prosecutors to “just rip it up.” Those are the four most dangerous words that a criminal defendant could utter in a hearing on a plea deal. They could have immediately narrowed the immunity deal and even added a few misdemeanors to salvage the deal. Instead, they shredded their client.

What followed was performative and frankly a tad pathetic. To the thrill of some in the media, the Biden team promised to get aggressive with witnesses and critics. They started to make demands as if they still controlled events, including saying that they would only comply with a congressional subpoena on their own terms.

It won’t work. A bill has come due. While Garland is still protecting President Biden from a Special Counsel, Hunter Biden is going to have to face these alleged crimes and corruption. Even the media is now admitting that he was influence peddling, though maintaining a final line of defense for the president. The last defense is that it was corrupt, but merely illusory because it did not actually influence Joe Biden.

The lesson for lawyers should be lasting: even if you can secure a massive sweetheart deal, you may want to exercise a modicum of portion control. That “all-you-can-eat” option may not be the best course for your client. The Justice Department was clearly willing to give Hunter anything that he demanded, but maybe you need to demand less. Sometimes it is better to go for the more limited a la carte option. Your client will consume less but he may be able to get up from the table. In other words, you need to be careful what you ask for . . . you just might get it

Mass shootings occur because people pick up kids off counters...ah, skip it.

https://twitter.com/RealJamesW.../1733336487419424768

^^^^^
Man, I was spellbound with that, He's a Churchill without a cigar, a Ghandi but with a worse haircut, a John Kennedy with his own dream. Just listening to this I feel more awesome than usual.

House Oversight Committee Chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY) said Friday on CNN’s “The Lead” that he believed Hunter Biden was indicted by federal prosecutor David Weiss on nine federal tax counts on Thursday to protect his father President Joe Biden.

Comer said, “What he got charged with, with that indictment last night, that had nothing to do with all of the so-called loans that the Bidens have taken. We’ve identified, it appears, with the president’s son and brother, over $14 million in loans where it doesn’t look like they made any payments on, principal or interest. And what point do those loans, if you’re not going to pay ’em back, become income?

Comer added, “So, we think this is just the tip of the iceberg. We think there’s many more crimes. and my concern is that Weiss may have indicted Hunter Biden to protect him from having to be deposed in the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday.”

Anchor Jake Tapper said, “Ah, yes, yes. He indicted him to protect him. Yess the classic rubric. He indicted him to protect him. I got it.”

Comer said, “Well, look, this whole thing Jake, you know, this whole thing’s been about a coverup. You know you’ve got two serious—

Tapper said, “That’s why he indicted him, to protect him? To cover it up?”

Comer said, “Look, you indict him on the least little thing, the gun charge and not paying taxes.”

Tapper said, “He’s facing like 17 additional years in prison. These are felonies.”

Comer said, “Yeah, but look at what he’s done. Anybody else in America would already be in prison. He may owe $7 or $8 million if the loans are fraudulent, a loan means you’ll pay it back. Look, at the end of the day, this money is coming from bad people around the world. Why are they paying Hunter Biden? We believe that it’s because they want a direct access to Joe Biden. I don’t think that any American would want a president that’s compromised to our biggest enemy in the world, China.”

https://www.breitbart.com/clip...o-protect-joe-biden/

^^^^. It’s pretty much a given that Ol Joe will pardon Hunter when he leaves the office. So, this begs the question if the charges Comer is suggesting are not added to the list against Mr. Biden, can the Republicans hold off until the. Ext administration to enact further charges? This would avoid double jeprody. Also pending if the Republicans still hold the majority in congress.

Raises the question.

But Biden can simply pardon Hunter for crimes that he hasn't been officially charged with yet too.

quote:

Originally posted by ugeesta:
It’s pretty much a given that Ol Joe will pardon Hunter when he leaves the office.
<snip>

Yes, for Federal criminal convictions. Maybe Gavin for CA criminal convictions?

^^^^^^^^
Biden did state he would not pardon Hunter. Probably does not remember

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
^^^^^^^^
Biden did state he would not pardon Hunter. Probably does not remember

Like he makes his own decisions. . .

He will be given a list of people to pardon, and he will scribble his name next to it.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
^^^^^^^^
Biden did state he would not pardon Hunter. Probably does not remember

He was lying of course.

Today at the Army vs Navy game. I don't know if it's AI created, but I enjoyed it.

https://twitter.com/GuntherEag...YjlLYzHMBR8V1EQ&s=19



.

quote:

Originally posted by Greymann:
Today at the Army vs Navy game. I don't know if it's AI created, but I enjoyed it.


.

You don't know? Of course it's faked. No way they're yelling that at an Army-Navy game.

But here, take this as consolation:

I love this pic




ETA: The original video by the way:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1733259355347144791

video at link

BIDEN: "Over a billion three hundred million trillion three hundred million dollars!"

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:

BIDEN: "Over a billion three hundred million trillion three hundred million dollars!"

That's a lot.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/11...n-charges/index.html


Hunter Biden asked a judge Monday to throw out his three-count felony gun indictment, which was filed earlier this year by special counsel David Weiss.

President Joe Biden’s embattled son is challenging the indictment on several fronts, including claims that the case violates his Second Amendment rights , and a separate argument that prosecutors are reneging on a previous pledge not to charge him with gun crimes.

The gun indictment stems from a revolver Hunter Biden purchased in October 2018 and possessed for less than two weeks. He’s accused of lying on a federal form when he swore that he wasn’t using or addicted to any illegal drugs – even though he was addicted to crack cocaine at the time. He’s also accused of illegally possessing the gun.

Hunter Biden’s lawyers have argued for months that part of their now-defunct deal with prosecutors is actually still valid and is supposed to block Weiss from filing gun charges.

The parties had struck two intertwined deals: a “plea agreement” in which Hunter Biden would plead guilty to two tax misdemeanors and a “diversion agreement” in which Weiss would drop a gun charge in two years if Hunter Biden stayed sober and out of trouble.

The tax plea deal imploded under scrutiny in July and never went into effect. The two parties signed the gun deal before the plea hearing – however, there was a line for the signature of a court probation officer, and that person never signed the paperwork. It’ll now be up to US District Judge Maryellen Noreika to decide whether it is legally binding.

“Neither the Court nor anyone else is a party to the (Diversion) Agreement,” Hunter Biden’s lawyers wrote in a court filing on Monday. “The Agreement need only be approved and executed by the parties to become effective, and that has occurred.”

Hunter Biden’s team said they also believe the “sweeping immunity” in that agreement should’ve blocked Weiss from bringing “the recently filed tax charges in California.”

Hunter Biden’s lawyers also argued that the case can’t move forward because there are fatal legal problems with how the special counsel was appointed. Similar arguments were raised during special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into then-President Donald Trump, and they were rejected.

Hunter Biden’s attorneys also argued that he is being unfairly prosecuted “for political reasons” and accused Weiss of caving to Republican pressure.

Did US Vice President's husband 'invent' the Hanukkah story?

Kamala Harris's husband posted picture of lighting Hanukkah candles with story of Maccabees' heroism. After being criticized that 'this is not the real Hanukkah story,' he deleted the post.

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/381815

Douglas Emhoff, husband of US Vice President Kamala Harris, posted a photo of him lighting Hanukkah candles together with his wife, with a post about the story of Hanukkah and the heroism of the Maccabees, but many users posted comments criticizing that, "this is not the real story of Hanukkah."

Following the criticism, Emhoff, who is Jewish, deleted the post. "The story of Hanukkah and the story of the Jewish people has always been one of hope and resilience. In the Hanukkah story, the Jewish people were forced into hiding," he wrote. "No one thought they would survive or that the few drops of oil they had would last. But they survived and the oil kept burning."

"During those eight days in hiding, they recited their prayers and continued their traditions, that’s why Hanukkah means dedication. It was during those dark nights that the Maccabees dedicated themselves to maintaining hope and faith in the oil, each other, and their Judaism, In these dark times, I think of that story."

However, shortly after the publication, many users began criticizing Emhoff, claiming that the details are not accurate and that it is not the true story of Hanukkah. The Israel Heritage Foundation published a tweet in which they wrote, "Disgraceful! No one in the US should ever need to hide their identity! Sorry, this is not what we expected from you! Every Jew in the USA will always be able to expose their identity."

A user named Talia Katz added in a tweet, "That's ... not the Hanukkah story." A user named Jack Posobiec added, "Doug Emhoff deleted this, which is not the story of Hanukkah, the Maccabean Revolt depicted in the Bible."

Jason Bedrick of The Heritage Foundation also criticized, "I’m really hoping the second gentleman left this to some hapless and uneducated intern who couldn’t be bothered to even check Wikipedia. Eight days of hiding? Yikes, man," he wrote.

Reprehensible but not a shock. The left is trying to rewrite history at every turn, why would Hanukkah be any different?

Do you think he’ll show?

“Republicans have threatened to begin the process of holding Hunter Biden in Contempt of Congress if he doesn't show up for his impeachment probe deposition at 9.30am on Wednesday. …”

DailyMail article:
https://mol.im/a/12859281

“The criminal offense of contempt of Congress sets the penalty at not less than one month nor more than twelve months in jail and a fine of not more than $100,000 or less than $100.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...ess%20than%20%24100.

(UnderProcedures/Statutory proceedings)

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

Do you think he’ll show?

Nope, he showed up to make a statement on camera, gave the GOP the proverbial middle finger and left.