Hey look at that, the GOP won its first vote!

Agree. That's why I said

Quote:

Can't be a public deal. McCarthy won't survive that. Needs to be a Biden, Klain, Jeffries backroom dealing.

My main premise is McCarthy is the best of the bad. If it turns out it's speaker McCarthy but beholden to Gaetz & crew, that would be much worse than just dealing with McCarthy without Gaetz & crew.

I actually agree the House should not be involved.

Hunter has been investigated for tax evasion, something was submitted back in Oct 22, but DOJ has not made a decision to charge Hunter yet.

I do want an investigation on the other stuff too. If not the House, then I'm good with a special counsel being appointed. But that probably won't happen and hence, the GOP doing the investigation

Sure, the Dems could have investigated Ivanka. I'd be okay with that. They decided to spend their time on other things.

Just barely.

I think it's obvious they paid off the clerk to close the vote too early.

What race?

I think if there had actually been someone running against him, there might have already been a Speaker selected. At the very least, we all would have had a better idea of where everyone stood. Since November, there is one option. McCarthy. McCarthy is desperate for the job. Unless someone else really does step up to take the job, McCarthy is going to continue to offer himself up as a plaything until they pick him.

So they'll run even more wackos that lose winnable general elections.

Adam Kinzinger has joined CNN as a Senior Political Commentator.

Not only that, it sounds like McCarthy has caved on everything. He is willing to give these guys whatever they ask at this point.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

One of the demands was "Any one member can eject the Speaker and start a new election." He's not going to outlast the lettuce from Liz Truss.

I wish I could sell this guy a car. I'd make a fortune.

Serious question: to what end? If it wasn't obvious before, I think the Jan 6th investigations demonstrated conclusively that congressional investigations no longer serve a purpose. It didn't move public opinion at all. What good does it do to spend money investigating something when nothing will be done about it? Let the agencies that have the power to prosecute do the investigating. Unless it's a prelude to a possible impeachment of a public official, Congress is just spinning it's wheels.

There was a time when it was useful of course, but I think it's clear that time has long since passed.

I feel like if there was something he did bad, it would have come out when Trump was in the White House. He had the full DOJ at his back. I mean the guy spent the last couple years trying to dig up dirt to the point he tried to extort a foreign ally.

It does sort of seem like they really want us all to see his cock for some reason though.

PredictIt has McCarthy back up over .50

I'm not sure if I missed some news.

Hunter Biden is a private citizen who likely made money trading off his family name.

Please tell me where the crime is and why it rises to the level of a congressional investigation?

Anyone who can't see all that would be is red meat for the base is naïve as hell.

I don't think its conclusive at all. I didn't find any post-election polls that said that Jan 6th investigations did or did not influence mid-terms. If you have a source, I would be interesting in reading about it.

538 did have a poll that said below. Lending credence that the long running Jan 6th investigations kept (or help keep) "polarization or extremism" pretty much top of mind.

Also, what's left as TBD is how this will or not impact Trump's 2024. And, of course, it's reassuring that we have all these documentation, eye witnesses etc. that recorded what happened for the history books and future generations.

So were the Jan 6 investigations worth it? Absolutely

Quote:

Inflation or increasing costs (29 percent) and political polarization or extremism (19 percent) were top of mind again, while abortion ranked third (12 percent).

If Joe/AG would direct the DOJ (or special counsel) to investigate Hunter beyond tax evasion & gun purchase, I'm all for it. Has it happened? Nope. Will it happen? I doubt it.

Arguably, Hunter's emails are just as real as contents in the Steele dossier. So if there was a Dem congressional investigation based on it (or significant parts of it), why not Hunter's emails. No doubt elements of GOP political theatre, definitely elements of political payback etc.

The criteria of "possible impeachment" may be the result of the investigation. Won't know unless its conducted.

*****

Let me summarize my understanding of the situation (feel free to correct).

1) There is no doubt it was Hunter's laptop. There is doubt on chain of custody and if things were inserted/changed but many emails have been verified
2) There is little doubt there were some emails re: influence peddling/dealings with China and Burisma. There were already reports of this before Hunter's laptop fiasco, the laptop just provided more evidence
3) There were other stuff that showed Hunter was a POS at that time. But not relevant

The question is whether Joe was aware of them (maybe) and, more importantly, if he profited somehow from those dealings (unlikely)

If Trump Loses In November, What Do You Think Happens Next
 

@lathum

But they’re saying it’s simply normal congressional oversight

You have to go by what they’re saying about it and you cannot draw conclusions from any other things said or done in the past. No assumptions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

McCarthy gave up more concessions to the holdouts last night.

Apparently hostage taking works when the hostage is the negotiator himself and he's a spineless buffoon.

I've been wrong on pretty much every prediction I've had about the GOP and its voters since 2016, so I have no idea which way this is going to go. But it seems like what happened is the radicals won/will win.

I hope he starts losing some moderates. All he's done is assure this will continue to be chaos when 1 member can take him down at any time, and then we're right back here. It's stupid.

I don't see it. I think they may peel back 10 or so with promises, but I think there are a core of at least 4 (Gaetz, Biggs, Good, and Rosendale) and probably more that aren't going to ever vote for him. I've said it before, but it doesn't bother a lot of these guys if we don't have a functioning government - they like being able to point out how the federal government doesn't work and they are in position to make it not work right now and they personally don't like/respect McCarthy.

Pretty much

They had possession of the laptop prior to the election. Trump had a lackey as head of the DOJ. Trump was desperately trying to eliminate Biden as a candidate. No charges came from the laptop. But a congressional investigation is going to turn up something new?

I'll add that Barr could have chosen a special council on his way out if he felt there was something there that would be squashed by the incoming administration and he chose not too. Additionally, in interviews since he's alluded to the fact that it was all just to damage Biden's election chances and he was frustrated that the media didn't cover the story enough.

0-7

Will McCarthy tie the Lions/Browns 0-16 season?

Gaetz with the first Trump vote.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

How can Trump be pissed at Gaetz now? Ha!

We all should've known this is where this fight was headed.

If keeping polarization or extremism at the top of people's minds reminded people to go out and ensure that those responsible for the polarization and extremism are returned to Congress, then no they were not worth it. Given the attacks on what is and is not written in history books and how it will the self esteem of certain grouos, I can almost guarantee my grandkids will not learn about the Jan 6th investigations in school.


Once we have reached a place where an argument for a congressional investigation into Hunter Biden's laptop is that the other party did an investigation into the Steele dossier, congressional investigations no longer a benefit to the general public. It is only useful for the sake of campaign ads during the next election cycle.

FWIW, the timeline for Hunter's laptop per below article. The article does report Isaacs as a conspiracist and Trump supporter. But I don't think he is lying about the sequence of events and reporting exchanges as he remembers them.

The Sordid Saga of Hunter Biden’s Laptop

1. April 2019 - Hunter drops of latop to Isaacs for repair
2. April + approx 90 days - Hunter has not returned or paid for repairs so the laptop becomes Isaac's property. He looks at the contents
3. Oct 2019 - Isaac's father Colonel Mac goes to FBI branch
4. Oct + few weeks later - FBI visits Isaac
5. Dec 2019 - FBI visits Isaac again and takes laptop (Isaacs has made backup copy)
6. Dec + few days later - Isaacs reports below quote. Take it FWIW
7. Dec + sometime later - Isaacs reaches out to Jim Jordan & Lindsey Graham but does not hear anything back
8. Aug 2020 - 9 months after FBI visit, Isaacs reached out to Guiliani & attorney

Quote:

Within a few days, he started to feel uneasy about the FBI. The agents called him up asking for assistance in getting access to the drive. Didn’t the FBI have its own tech support? He thought back to his conversation with the agents, especially a comment he recalled their making about his safety concerns, something to the effect of “Nothing happens to people who don’t talk about these things.” Was that a threat?

If this timeline and Isaacs recollection is true, the unanswered question is what did the FBI do with the laptop & contents during the period of Dec 2019 to Aug 2020. If the FBI was conducting investigations on the laptop before Guiliani got his hands on it, I've not found it reported (let me know if you find a link). Conspiracists will say FBI sympathizers suppressed the laptop but it could just as easily be FBI incompetence/inefficiencies during Covid.

Bottom-line. Although the laptop was with the FBI for about a 10 months, it is not clear if the FBI had let higher ups know and/or if the contents were being investigated.

Not congressional investigation worthy but here are some potential crimes.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63166809

I'm willing to bet that my grandkids will learn about Jan 6th. It'll be in all the US history books.

I used Steele as an example of congressional investigations (just like the Hunter laptop). My rationale for supporting a Hunter investigation is under "Let me summarize"

(and also the timeline of events post just posted)

If Trump Loses In November, What Do You Think Happens Next
 

Deleted

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Isn't that the point? It serves two purposes - gives official credence to allegations (supported or not) against the other party and allows GOP to "both sides" the Trump and J6 impeachments/investigations. Trump and "insurrectionists" did nothing wrong, it was as much political as we're being now.

It minimizes all the actual crimes committed by muddying the water as a political/revenge thing as opposed to warranted investigation.

and if he committed crimes he should be treated like any other private citizen.

Polls such as this Monmouth one, which did before-and-after reactions. It's inconceivable that the hearings had more of an effect on the elections months later than they did in the immediate aftermath, as such things fade from the public mind rather than intensifying. The general 'I've made up my mind, don't confuse me with the facts' approach is very much on point here.

Jan. 6 Hearings Have No Impact on Opinion | Monmouth University Polling Institute | Monmouth University

On the 'polarization' bit, that is not necessarily connected to the hearings at all. I understand the line you are drawing between the two, I just think it is very speculative and far more likely that other items in the general news cycle, statements by candidates and coverage of them, interactions with other citizens drove that.

I never knew CSPAN got the broadcast rights to "Kevin Can F--- Himself".

If you believe there should be a congressional investigation into Hunter Biden then you're saying the most partisan attorney General in recent memory obstructed or buried the investigation.

FWIW, I find it hard to believe that Jan 6 did not change people's minds.

Couple notes:

1) The Monmouth poll methodology section said self-reported demographics below. I don't know the question/phrasing they used, but 45% Independent automatically brings questions of its validity.

26% Republican
45% Independent
29% Democrat

2) In this poll The Jan. 6 Hearings Hurt Trump With Independents. Will It Cost the GOP in November? - Morning Consult

Maybe our difference of opinion is I'm thinking more about the independents vs the entrenched Dems/Reps?

Graphic was too big, look in article and you'll see the graphic of how independents leaned towards Dems.

"Hey, this is going to be funny! Kevin Hern is a Kevin so I'm going to vote for him to own the ... RINOs!"

Maybe the Speakership should just be bullpen by committee. We're up to 4 GOP nominees now.

re: Barr being the most partisan AG in recent memory, see below link & quote.

Bill Barr claims he erupted at Trump when ex-president called him about Hunter Biden, new book says | Daily Mail Online

Note above was in Oct 2020 when the laptop came out. In my timeline recap above, the laptop was in FBI hands from Dec 2019 but the story broke only after Isaacs (who had given the laptop to FBI in 2019) reached out to Guiliani in Aug 2020.

My quote in my timeline post was:

Just read a really terrifying theory. If the GOP holds the House and a Dem wins the WH in 2024 they could pull this trick to refuse to certify the winner of the election.

I think that makes Kamala the president?

I'm honestly not sure what your point is here. Are you saying Barr wasn't partisan? That they hadn't looked i to rhe laptop?

Again, Barr could have assigned a special council on his way out and chose not too. He's spoken about the laptop in interviews and at no point has he suggested there was really anything to it. He has expressed frustration that the media didn't use the story to do more damage to Biden prior to the election.

If you look at the info we have you could easily come to the conclusion that the FBI sat on it until election time to maximize damage to Joe.

If there was anything to it Rudy could have taken it to all of the major newspapers or media companies. He specifically chose the NYP because he said he knew they wouldn't verify anything before they ran with the story.

Nope,at least not according to previous analysis of the situation I've seen.

The existing terms end, both offices are vacant ... and if you haven't certified the new President then you also haven't certified the new VP.

If that vacancy persists past the dropdead date then it goes to line of succession, which begins at Speaker of the House ... with the tricky caveat that, if they assume the presidency, then they must resign their House seat (which is why no one believed Pelosi would accept the President seat on a temporary basis)

Thought they took a chunk out of that last week with the Electoral Count Reform Act. VP is ceremonial now and they need 20% of both chambers to object. They might get 45% from the House but only got 6 Senators in 2020.

This wouldn't ever get to a certification. The House wouldn't have a Speaker and so couldn't be in session. I'd expect enough people would form a coalition to get around this and elect a Speaker, but given the way the GOP works, who knows?

Barr is obviously partisan. Specific to the Hunter laptop, he is not near as partisan as you think he is (if you can believe his quote).

There is a gap between Dec 2019 and Aug 2020. The FBI had it during this time.

I do not know what the FBI was doing with it during this time period. The story broke in spite of the FBI. Guiliani broke the story in Oct 2020.

What I want to know or my points

(1) is the FBI actively investigating Hunter re: laptop and when did it start (2) when did Barr know about the laptop and contents (3) if Barr did not know about the laptop until Oct 2020, why?

I freely admit I do not know the answers to the 3 questions above. My cynical self would answer FBI did not start investigating until Oct 2020. Probably sat on the laptop since Dec 2019. May be because of some FBI anti-Trump sympathizers. Barr did not know until Oct 2020. If this true, then I want to know why.

The articles I found Barr talking about the laptop was after the story broke in Oct 2020. If this is wrong, please share the links. I do want to know when Barr knew about the laptop & contents.

I actually did not read this. I did read that he thought Biden lied during one of the debates and he was frustrated with that.

It's pretty clear that it was Isaac (the repair guy who owned the laptop after 90 days) reaching out to Guiliani that broke the story to the public. The FBI may have sat on the story, but they did not break the story to the public.

Can you provide the link where Guiliani said "wouldn't verify anything before they ran the story".

Regardless, the laptop is real. There is no real debate that some emails have been validated as true. There are some valid questions on chain of custody and emails/docs that have not yet been validated.

Here we go again. Fun

At least some votes are changing to different people

I'm still waiting for the New York Times headline: "Republicans fail to elect Speaker on 9th vote. Democrats in disarray.."

SMH


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A deal to lose by less!

NEW ���� source close to McCarthy has confirmed a deal is on the table

It will NOT be enough to take him over the line. Sources predicted could bring over 10-12 holdouts but that’s a guesstimate. Few details on contents. Includes one-member motion to vacate https://t.co/L8w9J71m5w

— Gram Slattery (@G_Slattery) January 5, 2023

To Brian's point, I invite you to go back in this thread almost two years ago to the day and take a look at things that you wanted answers to that had to come from a congressional investigation about January 6th. Most if not all of those answers have been provided by the January 6th committee.

And?

What is the best case scenario now that this investigation has happened is what? Especially when you consider how the forming of the committee and the hearings etc. all played out.

Why does it matter?

Here is a quote from one of our exchanges.


Everything is documented though a significant portion of the country don't believe what is documented. We know who called whom, we know the timeline, we know all the other failures. The final report is out. It is 845 pages long. Cool

Now what?

Trump has now been elevated to an official nomination by Gaetz.

They probably did nothing. The laptop has been passed around and seen by just about every major media outlet and right-wing group. If there was something illegal on it, they would have done something.

I guess I don't know what you expected the FBI to do. A stolen laptop was delivered to them which had passed through a bunch of incredibly shady people. They're a law enforcement agency. Unless there is a crime on the device, they either return the device or put it aside. They're not the National Enquirer.

They'll elect someone the minute the Saudis or Israelis need an arms deal approved.

One silver lining for McCarthy is that once the number of votes goes over 16, Matt Gaetz will probably lose interest.

— New York Times Pitchbot (@DougJBalloon) January 5, 2023

I was driving home during vote ... #9, I think? Anyway, who is the one vote McCarthy lost?

Pretty much everyone is in the same camp they were in prior to the whole charade.

Every major media outlet did not know about the laptop until Aug-Oct 2020. The FBI had the laptop in Dec 2019.


There was already an active investigation into Hunter for tax evasion and a gun purchase false statement. It included Delaware folks, IRS and FBI. See link below.

Will Hunter Biden be indicted? - Vox

So we have an active investigation of Hunter, which also includes the FBI. The FBI gets a laptop in Dec 2019 with some possible additional evidence and the FBI "probably did nothing" until Guiliani broke the story in Oct 2020?

Yeah, I want to know why.

Fair question. I think I know how I want to answer this but, unlike the Hunter laptop where I believe I know the basic facts & questions, this will take more thought (and I'm watching Andor).

I'll come back with my answer by Fri or Sat

Why do you think the American public needs to know? He is a private citizen. He has never held public office. Why should he be treated differently?

To answer your question directly, it is not about Hunter. It is about any possible Joe connections and any FBI wrong doing/incompetence.

For more details ...

My post #6815 has more context. But I'll repost the section below to answer your question


And then in a couple posts after, I did the timeline of events and said below bolded.

Probably because there was no crime committed or they couldn't prove whether the contents of the laptop was real because of chain of custody issues.

Do you think the FBI should be putting out statements for every private citizen who didn't commit a crime? Again, I don't understand what you want the FBI to do here.

Again, they're a law enforcement agency, not a tabloid newspaper.

Oh great, HoN Adria Arjona incoming

Oh BTW

Hot

Per the vox link I posted, the Feds do think there were crime(s) committed in their original investigation.

So they get a laptop with potentially more info and they choose not to investigate it?

And after the major media got their hands on the contents (after Oct 2020) they have validate many (not all) of the emails/documents. Just think if the FBI had started doing that in Dec 2019

If you want to know if Joe did anything wrong investigate him, however I am pretty certain you need evidence to start one, not start one in hopes of finding evidence.

There is zero justification for congress to open an investigation in to Hunter.

That being said I hope they do. The republicans are still too stupid to realize the American people aren't interested in revenge politics and pointless hearings. They can keep catering to the ever shrinking base.

Someone had a medical appt. Not sure who.

Unfortunately Hunters laptop emails/docs made reference to Joe. Not proven but it implies Joe may have known of Hunters deals. The question is how much and if Joe benefited from them.

So investigating Hunter is investigating Joe.

Ken Buck has a doctor appointment, I think.

The Vox link talks about some old tax crimes and lying on a gun permit application. Absolutely nothing to do with the laptop.

That laptop went through the hands of every media outlet and right-wing activist in the country. If there was something incriminating on it, don't you think they would have released it? Do you think Breitbart or Fox News who had access to the laptop decided to sit on an explosive story like that? What is it you think all these people are conspiring to hide from the public?

Are you suggesting that the FBI, a law enforcement agency that has skewed far-right since its inception and a DOJ stocked with Trump lackeys decided to cover up a crime to protect Joe Biden's kid? That seems logical to you?

I have yet to see any evidence of Biden being specifically named. All I have heard are alleged terms like "the big guy" and given the chain of custody with that laptop anything on there should be looked at dubiously at best.

It is revenge porn for the far right. Plain and simple. Nothing wrong with admitting you like porn though, just own it and don't act like it would actually accomplish anything.

Like I'm all for prosecuting rich, well-connected people so if Trump had him for crimes, it's a shame they didn't prosecute. But this feels more and more like people just want me to see his cock for some reason. Maybe a weird fetish.

Sure it did. The Vox article quote below indicates there was in investigation to money laundering and unregistered foreign agent. Foreign influence peddling and whether Joe was involved somehow is what the investigation should be about. The laptop contains emails/documentations that refers to this.

Quote:

According to the New York Times, a federal inquiry into whether Hunter had properly paid his taxes began back during the Obama administration, long before Hunter became a favorite target of Donald Trump’s allies. Then, in 2018, the tax inquiry became a broader criminal investigation into Hunter, conducted by the US attorney’s office in Delaware, examining possible money laundering and whether he was an unregistered foreign agent.

Your statement shows you are focused on after the media got access to the laptop & content which is circa Oct 2020 and later.

The question I have is what did the FBI do with the laptop and contents between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020. This was a time period when the media didn't know about the laptop. You said probably nothing. I say that's a problem because there was an ongoing investigation on Hunter already, there were related items (see my vox quote above) so they should have done something.

After Oct 2020, after the elections, there were media investigations done on the laptop. The chain of custody was identified as an issue but many emails/docs were validated and other emails/docs not validated. Google on "fox news hunter biden laptop" and you'll find plenty. And it is not surprising the left leaning major stations aren't pursuing it.


I'm not conceding FBI has skewed far-right. Sure at AG and Director level that may be the case. But underlings are all over. As evidenced by Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and let's not forget Trump's treatment of McCabe and Comey. Trump's path of destruction (and ending of mentor-mentee relationships) likely left a lot of disgruntled underlings.

So no, I doubt FBI was a monolithic far-right wing organization. And yes, I can easily believe some in the FBI wanted to limit damage to Joe (not Hunter specifically) to get back at Trump.

*****

I've been answering a lot of your questions. So let me ask you mine:

1) Between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020 (before media knew about the laptop & contents), you stated FBI probably did nothing because there was no reason to. I stated there was an ongoing investigation of Hunter at the same time. It was for related items (see my Vox quote above). Do you think it's reasonable for the FBI to not review the contents of the laptop, at least superficially, to see if there were any applicable evidence?

Because if they did, they would have found some evidence. Chain of custody is an issue but media has been able to validate some emails/docs through their research. Why shouldn't the FBI have done that?

After 6 years of trump they want to win the embarrassment game. This gives them the chance to say look how embarrassing this is, and its revenge for saying trump was an embarrassment.

I don't get the disconnect here. You're wondering why the FBI didn't act on evidence that nobody has determined to be criminal? Sure emails were validated as real emails from Hunter Biden, that certainly doesn't mean they were validated as evidence of crimes that nobody can seem to specify. Doesn't the fact that the FBI did nothing & that everyone else with this access to the same information couldn't actually reveal anything criminal speak for itself?

There's a lot of evidence out there beyond your "the big guy" if you google on it. Plenty has been reported but, I admit, none are what I would call near conclusive proof.

But is there smoke? For you, likely not. For me, yes enough to justify an investigation.

No, it should be a congressional investigation. But let me know when AG decides on a independent special counsel/prosecutor to oversee the case. Until then, the only recourse I see is the congressional investigation.

Let's have the investigation and figure it out. The most likely outcome IMO is (1) we find out that Hunter is a POS did something unethical and illegal (2) Joe helped out his son like any dad would do e.g. sure Hunter, use my name if you want. I'll even drop by for dinner at Ruth Chris to say shake hands (3) Biden did not financially or inappropriately benefit from Hunter's escapades.

So very hot

The FBI was being run by Wray, a staunch conservative and member of the Federalist Society. The DOJ was run by Bill Barr, another staunch conservative who's claim to fame was covering up Iran-Contra for his right-wing friends. Even Comey and McCabe were Republicans.


Who said they didn't review the contents of the laptop? I'm fairly certain that people at the FBI reviewed the laptop. They spent years trying to find any dirt they could on Biden and his family.

Like what? Post it for us. Show us the incriminating stuff that was found on the laptop.

I'm not sure I understand your question? When you say the FBI did not act on "evidence that nobody has determined to be criminal", I would counter it's the FBIs responsibility to see if the evidence was determined to be criminal? They had an active but separate investigation on Hunter even before they got the Hunter laptop, why wouldn't they investigate the laptop?

On your statement "emails were validated as real emails ... doesn't mean they were validated as evidence of crimes" indicates you are referring to Oct 2020 or later after the laptop became public. My question is what did the FBI do with the laptop & contents before from Dec 2019 to Oct 2020?

Again, not everyone had access to the laptop & contents until Oct 2020. The FBI had the laptop & content in Dec 2019. Why did the FBI do nothing during this 10 month period?

I think part of the confusion is the timeline of events. I'm just going to repost my timeline from an earlier post for reference.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - If Trump Loses In November, What Do You Think Happens Next

No question upper echelon were likely partisan hacks. Do you dispute that Trump probably made a lot of enemies in how he treated Comey and McCabe?


I thought you did?


If the FBI did review the content of the laptop & contents, they would have found some related evidence (see Vox article). I also want to know the answers to my questions below? I have honestly not been able to find answers

Fair question. And I'll post it.

But will ask you to answer my questions I asked you previously.

I understand from your question back to me, there may have been some confusion and hopefully I've answered it. To restate my question:


And ...

That timeline does nothing to change my point (beside which you've already grudgingly admitted that the chain of custody is certainly not a matter of fact). Isaac and Giulliani and practically every single person in their orbit has had access to that data for at least 2 entire years now and nobody has been able to produce convincing evidence of a crime. Your question is "Well why didn't the FBI act on that non-evidence in the 2 years before"?

Matt Schlapp. It's always the ones you most expect it from.

I think the FBI should review the contents of a device they feel was part of a criminal investigation if they have the legal standing to do so.

Your question doesn't make much sense because it implies the FBI never looked at the laptop and there is zero evidence of that.

I read the headline: Herschel Walker Staffer: Matt Schlapp ‘Groped’ My Crotch




..but my brain entirely skipped over the very important word "staffer" and I thought Schlapp had groped Herschell himself & things were about to get REAL interesting

The GOP will differ on your assessment and definition of "convincing evidence". Just like the Steele dossier when the Dems had control of the House.

Non-evidence is kinda leading here. I don't concede that at all. I'll use possible evidence instead.

So yes, that is one of my questions. Why didn't the FBI, which already had an active investigation going on, review the contents of the laptop between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020.

And if they did, they would have found possible evidence related to their ongoing investigation. So why didn't they act on it.

What evidence was there to act on? It seems like they had a broad investigation into him and couldn't find anything to charge him with besides lying on a gun permit and paying his taxes late.

You keep talking about how this laptop has incriminating stuff on it. Can you post it like you said?

Why wouldn't the FBI had legal standing to investigate from Dec 2019 to Oct 2020 the contents of Hunter's laptop? They already had an active investigation going on?

I actually thought you said they "probably did nothing". So I was going off that.

I will. But I'm still waiting for you to answer my questions. Let me restate them

If you really didn't mean the bolded section (I quoted you elsewhere), please explain what you meant. Also, the second question there in bold.

and

Not to be an asshole, but why do you think those are even valid questions? The most simple and obvious answer is they did review every bit of that data and they are using any and everything pertinent as part of an investigation that is ongoing. Point me to literally any concrete evidence of why I or you should assume anything else.

The FBI should have done that and likely did.

I'm sure Trump has made enemies everywhere he has been. He's a pretty terrible person who treats people poorly.

He's either dumb or playing dumb. Can't really tell at this point.

You jumped into the middle of a conversation I was having with Rainman. See post #6882 for full context. I basically thought he said the FBI "probably did nothing" with the laptop & contents between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020. I challenged that and said why wouldn't they, they should have.

Let's go on the assumption they did review the contents during this period. I contend there is enough "possible" evidence to pursue. When the media got the laptop & contents in Oct 2020, they were the ones that did alot of the validation of emails, docs. If the FBI had already done their review, I think they should have provided what they knew then.

There is a gap, lack of info on what the FBI did with the contents of Hunter's laptop between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020. I can't find any information. If you can, please link it, it may resolve my questions. This lack of information for this time period makes me suspicious that FBI was either (1) trying to suppress the info (2) inefficient/ineffective because of Covid

You said they "probably did nothing" between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020. Was that a mistake or do you want to reword or did I misunderstand? A lot of my answers & statements in our back and forth was based on your answer which I took literally. So if I misunderstood, let me know now.


Okay. Good enough for me.

I think I answered his question.

It would be good if you answered all my questions.

I said "they probably did nothing" in regards to a prosecution or case against him. Genuinely didn't think anyone believed they got access to the laptop and just locked it in a closet for a year without looking. Guess I was wrong. The laptop appeared to be a bunch of boring business e-mails and if there was some smoking gun, guys like Giuliani would have been on TV showing us it.

Anyway, you seem to have the inside scoop on the crimes that laptop held which eluded the FBI, right-wing activists, and media outlets. Care to fill us in now?

Okay. So you believe FBI did review laptop & contents from Dec 2019 to Oct 2020 and did not find anything in the laptop that would have helped in their already ongoing investigation.

Okay, I'll answer your question shortly.

Yes, I've said that like a dozen times now. If they were pulling up old gun permit applications and tax records from a decade ago, they likely went through his personal laptop.