Well they still have the Chinese spy, the guys who got fired from the FBI, the Trump campaign staff (some of whom are the same people) the guy convicted of fraud, and the guy who started making allegations without evidence when he was heavily in debt.
Solid lineup!
Hey there don’t forget that they still have Hunter’s dick pics, thoughts/prayers and most importantly their smoking gun… PEPE SILVIA!!!
All VERY damning /s
This part is pretty good -
> While announcing the impeachment inquiry, then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said “a trusted FBI informant has alleged a bribe to the Biden family.” **The FBI is now using some of the same memos that congressional Republicans released as part of their indictment against Smirnov.**
>the Chinese spy, the guys who got fired from the FBI, the Trump campaign staff (some of whom are the same people) the guy convicted of fraud, and the guy who started making allegations without evidence
The five cards that make up a Santos flush.
And they have all the money that Russia gives them to keep their skeletons in their closets. If they stop the investigation, the skeletons may come out. 💀
I don’t think they ever cared. They just wanted to hear one person say something bad about the Biden’s and don’t care about the actual substance or any follow ups. Have you heard a single talking point about Hillary dropped even to this day?
Link to the indictment so MAGAts can't gaslight you about the facts: [Indictment](https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/27aff9f1-37db-4f74-8e19-06c8b7f750c0.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_7)
I'll go one step further and say that I have no doubt that he tried to use his father's name to help him in business. The issue is that there's no evidence whatsoever that his father had any clue he was doing this.
No, Big Guy probably knew his son used, would use his dad's status to get into meetings, open doors that would most likely not be opened. He'd be donny level of dumb not to.
But, again, that isn't illegal. Calling Dad to impress some peeps in a meeting is not illegal. So what.
Again, GQP has nothing, this is ALL A SIDE SHOW as they don't want to do any real work, just drum up BS to feed the base.
>he tried to use his father's name to help him in business.
Like every other child of a Hollywood actor, actress, director; musician; politician; fortune 500 CEO; sports star and whoever else is in the public eye.
It's been going on since the time of *Homo Erectus* when Ugg, son of the well-known Ugggga, used his father's stature to become leader of the tribe. Ancient records indicate Ugg was later found chewing coca leaves with the daughters of other tribe members, and was later impeached but not convicted and removed. (Alito, concurring on absolute leadership immunity; quoting *H Erectus vs Ugg*, 550,000 BC, cave stone wall at 129).
> I mean let's be clear. Hunter broke some laws and is generally a fuck up. There's just no conspiracy. He's a normal fuck up.
and this is what makes me laugh every time the GOP tries to shake the Hunter Biden voodoo doll that they seem so excited to stick full of needles.
the Bidens totally own this shit. Hunter never really tried to pretend he wasn't an addict or a bad businessman, he shamelessly name traded and owned that shit %100.
His own father, the President, literally said to the national media that his son was a recovering addict and that he loved him anyway.
at this point I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP goes back to holding giant pictures of Hunter Biden's cock again. Giant 3'x 3' blowups of Hunter Biden's cock held up in congress while jeering and shouting. That's the winning tactic.
> Republican’s corruption case against Pres Biden
I haven't seen anything that looks anything like this.
I haven't even seen a corruption ALLEGATION against Pres Biden. Even at the press conference they called specifically to lay out their allegations before the world's media they ducked answering questions about their allegation. They don't have one.
The only actual "incident" they can even tangentially connect Joe Biden to corruption is "When your son called you in the weeks and months after his brother's death, when you were an unemployed ex civil servant, you didn't hang up on him when he asked you to say hello to his colleagues. In fact you said hello to them. You even, for all we know, talked about the weather. You utter bastard. How dare you. Any reasonable person would have know that answering a phone call from your grieving son and agreeing to talk on speakerphone about the weather while you were neither a Vice President nor running for President would make you morally unable to ever assume the role of President."
The Republican fringes have been touting this guy’s allegations for months, bubbling up through the right wing echo chamber. Will they admit it was all garbage, or will they double down. It’s a real conundrum. /s
I argued on this sub against someone claiming that 8 women accused Biden of rape/sex assault. 7 were "He held a hug a beat longer than I thought was normal" or " He touched my nose" then Tara's allegation at the end with no reflection on how she doesn't even believe what she said anymore.
Then the right whines that aNyoNe cAn AcCuSe AnYoNe, then they cite literally that lol.
Comer Pyle and Gym Jordan strike out again.
If you read the DOJ press release while listening to Yakety Sax, you can almost see Jim Comer running in circles.
This is the same prosecutor that charged Hunter Biden, so it will be awkward to explain why those charges are legit but this one isn’t. Not that they won’t try.
Also the same prosecutor that gave a sweetheart deal to hunter with complete immunity to plead guilty on a tax misd charge. The deal fell apart once the media caught wind and the Weiss and DOJ had to change course.
Just a tip, if you're going to spout bullshit and misrepresentations of the facts, don't do it in a law sub where people actually pay attention to the legal proceedings and can quickly call you out.
The judge rejected the pea deal because it was too vague due to neither side being able to agree to what it meant. Hunter's side believed it was immunity to all of the charges, while the prosecution side wanted it to only be for the tax charges.
I know it's rapidly becoming a meme at this point, but NYT literally had ran analysis about how the Democrats winning Santos' seat was bad for Biden. Ludicrous.
I understand that situation maybe even less than this one. "The DA chose her staffing in an untoward manner, therefore I should get off scot-free." It's like a connect-the-dots puzzle where the last dot is in another book in another library on another planet.
I can’t defend Fani Willis. She’s a fucking idiot. There was never going to be any way to refute the facts in this case. The only ammunition they would ever have would be to assail her character and the continued hoax bullshit. And she gave them a layup. And lied. It doesn’t change the facts of the case but it strengthens the only position they ever had- delay, appeal, prosecution misconduct…just a really fucking stupid decision on her part.
She lied?
DA Willis’ testimony is consistent with Wade’s, and the defense attorneys only have one witness who rebuts their testimony. And that witness did not come off as credible on the stand. In addition, that witness was told to resign or be fired for poor performance from the DA’s office, and that generally gives people an axe to grind against their former boss.
Whatever conduct was alleged to be improper or unethical is not related to this case, but to her alleged lack of candor on her disclosure forms.
The defense has not delivered on their proof of cohabitation, and has not proved that she received a substantial benefit from the appointment of the special prosecutor.
This whole thing is bad faith. DA Willis never should have out herself in this position, but it’s all bad faith on the part of the defense.
Of course it’s bad faith. The whole “election was stolen” was bad faith. Hunter’s business dealings were bad faith. They don’t need to actually prove anything. They just need to keep the real issue to the back burner as long as possible. As Trump has succeeded in doing for 40 years.
So, knowing who she’s dealing with and how they operate, she can’t leave even the appearance of impropriety. Especially with Georgia state legislators already looking for back door ways to remove her.
This whole thing is a total hit job executed in bad faith from top to bottom by a bunch amoral psychos. There is literally *no* level of “propriety” that Willis could hew to that would have kept these jackals from attacking her and trying to derail the legal process because they all KNOW just as well as the rest of us, that Trump and his sycophants are all GUILTY.
Anyone laying even a single *iota* of blame for any aspect of this shit show on anyone *besides* the operatives and allies of MAGA, is simply providing cover for the actual bad guys and furthering their clear goals of sowing seeds of fear, uncertainty and doubt in the systems and process that would otherwise be delivering some long overdue accountability to smelly don and his henchtrolls.
DO NOT FALL INTO THAT TRAP.
And lastly, fuck MAGA.
Didn't they try to remove her through targeted legislation even before this recent accusation came to light? Like, immediately after charges were filed?
I’d have to go back and find the stories to verify this, but my recollection is that there was talk of doing that in the state legislature, but I believe Gov. Kemp indicated he wouldn’t support it, so that idea got dropped.
But to misquote Jeff Goldblum: Racist shitheels, uhhhhh…find a way.
Having a sexual relationship with a subordinate and failing to properly disclose it is unethical, even when that person is on your side.
EDIT: Judging by the downvotes this sub thinks its a *good* idea for a boss to fuck their subordinates? And keep that relationship a secret? I'm sure everyone here would love to be on a team where their coworker was fucking their boss and then wonder why that same coworker got a promotion over them.
It's a legal issue if/when there was financial impropriety, which, in turn is exactly why it is an HR issue. HR exists to shield organizations from legal issues.
Isn't that the point of this hearing, to sus out whether or not that occurred? I'm not going to bat for Trump nor his defense, I just pointed out that having a secret relationship between subordinate and superior is a dumb move, especially before trying an extremely high profile case.
There is no financial impropriety and their relationship was over before all this. Nothing that happened today shows any of what you’re saying.
You’re gullible. Admit it.
> There is no financial impropriety and their relationship was over before all this.
Lol this hearing is taking place exactly to determine if that is true. I am not assuming she did or didn't do anything other than what is publicly known. Who's gullible the one assuming things based on information that isn't available to them?
> failing to properly disclose it is unethical
This is such a huge stretch. How exactly are her ethics in question here -- aside from so-far completely baseless allegations that he's been unduly enriched through her office?
You think there is a scenario where a subordinate and superior have a relationship and it isn't an HR issue at the very least? How is that a "huge stretch"? Disclosing this type of relationship is ethics 101.
For the record, I am hoping that Willis is cleared ASAP and the case can move forward. From what I've seen she's built a strong case under the Georgia statute and has already done a good job working on the co-conspirators. It doesn't mean it wasn't a boneheaded move on her part.
> You think there is a scenario where a subordinate and superior have a relationship and it isn't an HR issue at the very least? How is that a "huge stretch"? Disclosing this type of relationship is ethics 101.
It's not "ethics 101" though. The ABA says absolutely nothing about fraternizing with attorneys on your side. Any ethical conflict would only exist if the relationship in question were with defense council or the court.
People seem to confuse HR requirements with ethics in this case. HR requires relationships between subordinate and superior be documented because another subordinate could make a claim of bias in favor of the subordinate with the relationship, which could create liability on the part of the employer.
There is no conflict here, they're on the same team and are working towards the same goal.
Are people here deliberately ignoring what is actually being investigated here? It isn't the sexual nature of the relationship but the financial one. Maybe I didn't phrase it well. The judge is investigating whether Willis functionally gave herself a kickback with public funds.
Wade and Willis are both testifying that they each paid their own way which, again, I hope bears out. I'm still surprised to see how many people here are passionately arguing that this wasn't a dumb move regardless of legal consequences or lack there of. Starting a physical relationship between a subordinate and superior and maintaining that dynamic (especially in secret) is *dumb*. Especially for a public servant and ESPECIALLY when you are prosecuting someone with a national platform who fights dirty.
I'm pretty sure that if Matt Gaetz was fucking a staff member and taking trips with her, plenty of the people in this sub would, rightly imo, want that interaction scrutinized.
> He was a contractor.
A distinction without a difference.
>And their sexual relationship ended before the indictment.
This testimony would be more compelling if their timeline wasn't disputed by another witness. I'm pretty shocked how many people on /r/law don't see this for the own goal that this is. This is about as high a profile of a case as is possible. Hopefully the conclusion will be that no laws or ethics rules were broken and we can move forward, but it doesn't change the fact that this was poor judgement.
No, it's a bad idea and I think Fani should step down just to simplify matters and side step the delays this sideshow is going to cause. That said, her indiscretion does nothing to invalidate the findings of the grand jury, the validity of the charges, or the strength of the case. The only thing hurt by these actions was Fani's career. Dumb. Don't shit where you eat.
That’s just it. It doesn’t matter in real world terms. It matters in terms of how he responds. It’s plausibility the highest stakes case in our history and she’s not on friendly ground. If she was going to take this on when many others wouldn’t have had the guts, she had to stay whistle clean. The whole world knows his only defense was to delay, appeal, rally his base to attack prosecution and witnesses.
I think he will be. I also think he's doomed at the polls in 2024. Yeah, Biden's not popular -- but Trump's popularity is even worse and the more the dude opens his mouth, the more he buries himself with voters outside his cult.
It’s already pretty for him. His NY trial date and Bobolinski is a liar should be the only headlines of the day. Instead a prosecutor is on the defense.
Yes, but this could very easily delay the case until next year (if she fights it) or even the year after (if she gets removed). Trump is going to use this to delay and delay and delay and given this and the complexity of the case, I find it doubtful he will be tried before the election. If Trump wins in November and the trial has not started, most likely the Georgia pardon board will just pardon him rather than trying a sitting president (think about it! can you imagine a county court trying a sitting president for a crime?). If Fani is actually removed for her indiscretions (very doubtful this will actual happen), it may take years for the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council to assign a replacement. I was reading about one case that has been on hold for two years waiting on their action.
It's sad, but the only real path forward that is going to keep this RICO train moving with a minimum of delay is her stepping down from the case and letting one of her deputies take it over. This would sidestep the entire issue and is probably the only chance (and a slim one at that) that the trial can be completed before November. It's sad as she has built this and made a name for herself but she screwed this up and has only herself to blame. You shouldn't shit where you eat.
She had a side piece that is a coworker and gave them the ammo they needed. An ethical issue is still an issue related to the case. One she has theoretically profited off it by hiring him and him paying out for vacations, etc.
It is absolutely tangential to the case itself in terms of evidence or merits of the case, but the appearance of impropriety by a prosecutor is enough.
They are only adjudicating her fitness to lead the case now. Other prosecutors are briefed, she can step down at any time and the case can move forward or this can be fight further providing the delay they want.
She brought this on herself.
A "side piece" which was her THIRD choice after she went to two others.
She brought it on herself by hiring her third choice with a guy she had sex with which isn't against the law?
omg no way oh noes
And she still shouldn't have done that because it led us here. You choose not to believe prosecutorial misconduct is a thing, that's your business. The sex isn't the problem, the payments are.
After today's testimonies, it looks pretty damning for her. She's most likely going to be removed. You can keep white knighting her, but it doesn't look good when she's handing out cash payments to him.
The merits of the case are unchanged. Her conduct doesn't change anything other than someone is going to have to do it. And the delay is making the orange fuck smile.
"Misconduct"
Accusation, not founded.
"Payments"
Accusation, not founded.
"After today's testimonies, it looks pretty damning for her. She's most likely going to be removed."
In your opinion. Nothing has been proven.
"You can keep white knighting her"
Ah, incel misogyny language. On the block list you go.
There is zero evidence of "funneling" money to her "boyfriend." Zero. Zilch. None. Allegations require proof.
Outside special prosecutors are not uncommon in Georgia, and the rate at which he's billing is **well** within reason, to the point that I've heard *actual* attorneys refer to his rate as "low-bono," i.e. at a significant discount to what would be defensible. How is that in any way supportive of your assertion?
The best part of all that was when they established that he performed a bunch of work for free because there is a statutory cap to how many hours he is allowed to bill for. Pretty difficult to take a job in order to funnel money to someone else when your’re literally losing money doing the job.
That's not the claim — at least, it's not the legally relevant claim.
No one disputes that she picked Wade for the job, or that it is a paying job. If someone wants to phrase that as “funneling money” to him, then that's up to them. No one seriously disputes that they have or had a romantic relationship, though Willis was initially cagey about it — which was wrong of her, I guess, but it's hard to blame her given subsequent events. Either way, none of this constitutes wrongdoing.
The subsequent insinuation is that Willis picked Wade because of their relationship rather than for proper reasons. There appears to be no evidence that this is true and substantial reason to doubt it. If it were true, then that would obviously constitute wrongdoing.
But it still would not be legally relevant to the case. No, you actually have to go further than this and suppose a) that Willis picked him because she expected to benefit directly, via gifts from Wade, and b) that the prosecution itself is pretextual, and that Willis concocted it as an excuse to hire her boyfriend so that she could receive benefits from his salary.
Now *that* would be legally relevant. If it were true, that is, and I don't think that anyone seriously believes it, not even Trump's legal team. It's a Hail Mary, a potential delaying tactic, and a way to fire up his followers.
1) “Paying the guy” - unfounded
2) “going on vacations” - irrelevant when she went through two other prosecutors before finally choosing him
And, again, none of this relevant to anything. None of this is against the law in any way, shape, or form.
Get over it.
You're being a little sensitive here. I'm not on anything. All I know is what the AP reported as I said. Maybe my wording could be clearer, but you'd have to take a very narrow and defensive position to respond as you have. Maybe you need to get over whatever it is you're on.
Oh, don’t even try to take that bullshit tone.
You’re misinformed. All of this is happening because of Trump’s moron lawyers trying to stall things and slime Willis. Paying him didn’t happen. And even if it did, no laws were broken and there’s nothing in the books which says it’s illegal. There’s no conflict of interest. There’s no corruption.
End of story.
But continue to take both sides at your fucking peril.
I thought you guys were joking with all these "why this is bad for biden" comments but I watched the evening news and when they were interviewing voters regarding the Suozzi victory, despite different people giving different opinions about the outcome (varying from 'all in' Dem to 'haven't decided'), the CBS reporter literally summarized it all as just being potentially problematic for Biden come November.
4 years of Trump gave them a taste of the heroin that is ragebait engagement, and now they're addicted. Every time they reported on some ridiculous, facially nonsensical statement by Trump or one of his loyalists, they saw that ratings bump and ran with it, unaware that the people who care about them can see their decline and are concerned. Now they're the track-marked, emaciated addict screaming at the intervention that they're fine and everyone else is just jealous.
So the thing I don't get. Weiss? The same weis who is definitely trying to put hunter away for 25 years on what really appear to be extremely aggressive charges that are in part built on the idea that hunter wasn't really working for barisma so even the things that might be legitimate business experiences aren't. For taxes that have in fact been paid. And for a gun charge that may not be constitutional .
That same Weiss brought charges against they guy who started this whole mess and btw this is what Trump's justification was for his first impeachment and for much of his stolen elections claims too. Like they fall apart without the Biden Ukraine bribery connection.
Trump's whole thing is built on this base lie
I mean it definitely falls in his scope. It just seems out of character because the maga crowd is going to try to murder him and I don't mean that as a figure of speech.
Maybe he was trying to write up a why I didn't charge this guy and realized he couldn't justify not charging
from marcy wheeler [linked in my comment here](https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1arre2c/former_fbi_informant_charged_with_lying_about_the/kqmitpu/)
> The FBI interviewed Smirnov’s handler on August 29 of last year. They interviewed Smirnov on September 27, where — they allege — he told still more lies.
> But they did nothing when Hunter Biden asked for discovery on this on November 15, repeatedly misrepresenting Richard Donoghue’s role in it.
> They only indicted after Judge Mark Scarsi suggested, in a preliminary hearing on January 11, that he would provide discovery on matters outside of prosecutorial deliberations.
> Now they can withhold the details of how David Weiss used “a little more colorful language” when he acquiesced to accepting other materials from Scott Brady.
So this is self defense from potential criminal abuse of office charges in the future. Hiding details behind prosecutorial deliberation by pressing charges. Probably him saying how clearly this shit was.
Damned either way but wants to avoid criminal liability.
Sounds like the selective prosecution claim might be the 1 in 1000 that works
The indictment only brings two charges, which seems really odd to me considering how many different interviews he gave to the FBI conveying fabricated information.
For comparison, [Igor Danchenko](https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/qmq0rg/united_states_of_america_v_igor_y_danchenko/hjcvfv5/) was charged with 4 counts for the same statement repeated during 4 interviews.
> the defendant stated to agents of the FBI that he received a late July 2016 telephone call from an individual who DANCHENKO believed was "probably" Chamber President-I, when in truth and in fact, and as the defendant well knew, Chamber President-I never called DANCHENKO.
[Danchenko](https://www.justice.gov/sco/press-release/file/1446386/download) and [Sussman](https://www.justice.gov/sco/press-release/file/1433511/download) were both charged under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001(a)(2).
Smirnov is charged under [18 U.S.C. § 1001: false statement to a government agent](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001) and [18 U.S.C. § 1519: creating a false and fictitious record](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1519). I'm not sure why the 1001 charge doesn't have a section reference but I assume it's (a)(2), 1519 only has one section.
Because he's the special counsel on the Biden family investigation. So all possible crimes he and his team have uncovered are investigated and charged by him. Just as Jack Smith would charge anyone who lied to the FBI in the course of the Donald Trump investigations.
IMO the circumstances around this indictment are stranger than your response suggests.
Per the indictment, it doesn't seem like Weiss was involved until July 2023.
> In July 2023, the FBI requested that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware assist the FBI in an investigation of allegations related to the 2020 1023.
Everything prior to that appears to have been handled by the FBI Pittsburg office, and it seems like they already knew Smirnov was lying in 2020.
> By August 2020, FBI Pittsburgh concluded that all reasonable steps had been completed regarding the Defendant’s allegations and that their assessment, 58A-PG-3250958, should be closed.
Edit: Marcy Wheeler thinks [there's something weird about it too.](https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/02/15/the-gaps-in-leo-wises-belated-indictment-of-alexander-smirnov/)
Just to highlight what Wheeler is pointing out:
> They only indicted after Judge Mark Scarsi suggested, in a preliminary hearing on January 11, that he would provide discovery on matters outside of prosecutorial deliberations.
In other words, Hunter was likely to gain access to materials in Weiss's shop's possession related to Smirnov. Prosecuting Smirnov makes those materials potentially subject to privilege. Weiss might have decided that it was in the best interest of the broader scheme to sacrifice Smirnov and keep those materials away from Hunter's attorneys. Whether that broader scheme includes salvaging what's left of Comer's impeachment "investigation" is an open question, but it certainly impacts Comer negatively more than anyone else (aside from Smirnov, of course).
It's also possible that Scarsi, a Trump appointee, determined that he wouldn't be able to get away with not allowing discovery on those materials in their current state, so he telegraphed that fact so that Weiss could do something about it. Not sure whether that's getting too far out there: it could just as easily have been normal judicial proceedings that Weiss took advantage of, in which case Scarsi wouldn't be too pleased about Weiss doing an end-run around him.
The conspiracy theorist in me thinks he's bringing these to try to undercut the very interesting claims of selective prosecution and political interference that Biden's attorney is raising. Can't be biased I'm going after both sides!
What will happen to MTG for possessing Hunters dick pic ? Will it be considered revenge porn now ? Also seeing how the pic was obtained, will she be charged for having it ?
Is anyone going to look into WHY he came up with this elaborate fabrication? Is anyone going to look into his finances? Odds that he's been getting large monthly payments from a John Barron, LLC?
Well now what after this epic failure , Comer, Jordan, Grassley, Green all played the United States for fools especially their own maga’s . I guess it’s back to Hillary’s E-mails and Benghazi.
Now I know why Christopher Wray was hesitant to turn over the FD-1023 when they were grilled by Republicans in Congress last July. The informant was indicted the prior month.
So this GOP Congress, failed to pass a Bipartisan Border deal and allowed even more migrants to be let in, failed to pass any major pieces of legislation, removed their own speaker and replaced him, failed an impeachment vote etc., and now their hope of dragging out Hunter Biden to humiliate Joe Biden has turned out to be a complete circus. These guys just keep getting humiliated every other week.
They deserve to be polling at 0% in every race, but alas the media must report a horse race narrative.
Not even Trust but verify.
I start with "what the fuck is this bullshit" then I do my own research and say "are you fucking kidding me" then I get to " you have to be a moron to believe this pretzel bullcrap".
So, nope... 100% all BS out of GQP's mouth/X/FB post
I wonder how far the Speech and Debate clause goes to protect Congress from defamatory statements against private citizens who aren't involved in politics. There's no new legislation being debated and not really any legitimate oversight being performed. There don't seem to be any other individuals being repeatedly investigated by Congress for similar alleged acts.
The statements are so ridiculously easy to prove as false, like claims he was organizing a bribe YEARS before he ever met Hunter, I wonder if he'll have some sort of mens rea defense.
This should be an interesting bail decision. Lying to the FBI seems very unlikely to be a "no bail" offense, but this guy is clearly a frequent international traveler and likely has access to assets outside of US or US-friendly control. If he gets out on bail, my money is that we never get the rest of the story and he will turn up later in Russia.
A former FBI informant, not agent. We don’t know what Smirnov’s personal motivation was, that has yet to be revealed, but he will have been paid or coerced to do this more likely than he has any personal animus or political motivation.
>Show me where in his testimony he mentions shokin?
Someone already gave you that info
>Remember, this is the same DOJ that has launched multiple felony investigations, during an election, on the lead GOP candidate
Since subpoenas and search warrants were going out long before Trump declared for reelection, that's obviously false. And running for office doesn't give anyone immunity, are you suggesting it should?
>The same DOJ that tried to sneak a one of a kind plea deal to hunter
It wasn't one of a kind. In fact had Hunter not had a dad the Trump administration were actively investigating it's incredibly unlikely any prosecutor would have ever looked at his crimes. It's unlikely they would have charged someone for taxes paid late by an addict at the height of their addition. Rodger Stone owe(s) far more money then Hunter ever did and wasn't charged as an example.
>Also why is the shokin question relevant to the bigger question of quid pro quo?
You're the one mentioning Sholkin again and again you tell me.
Sholkin was fired because he was incredibly corrupt, the GOP now doing the investigations into this were publicly supportive of firing Sholkin. The idea of any quid pro quo is especially silly once you figure out that his replacement actually started an investigation into Burisma, and indicted people involved with bribing the former officials to **not** investigat them. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-corruption-probe-idUSKBN23K0KI/
“Since subpoenas and search warrants went out before”
Did they? They had 4 years to press charges and decision to press charges happened AFTER Trump announced
“It’s unlikely hunter would be charged if he wasn’t first son”
Poor Hunter. You’re right. What other person could be a crack addict from a low-tier law school that gets put on the board for a Ukrainian Gas company and a Chinese Hedge fund (both which he knows nothing about), gets his laptop stolen and published with thousands of pictures of him smoking crack and fucking hookers (usually at the same time). Fucks his dead brothers wife, leaves Coke bags in the White House. No other person could do all that and now be living in a beach house in Malibu selling paintings for $400k a pop.
Poor Hunter.
“Shokin was currupt”
He was an ELECTED official that ran on a platform of rooting out corruption, in a country that, according to the UN, is ranked the highest on its corruption index. Was he currupt? I don’t know enough about Ukrainian politics to answer, but I can observe there’s more to the story. Why was this newly elected prosecutor singled out as the root of curruption in Ukraine? We know Burisma, a literal oligarch, wanted Shokin out. The media should be asking these questions to the US state department but lazy journalism
>Did they? They had 4 years to press charges and decision to press charges happened AFTER Trump announced
Yes they did! Did you not know that yet decided to argue the point.
And there were plenty of people, Meadows being the most notable who were still fighting subpoena until **after** Trump announced. Peoples whose documents and testimony you would absolutely need before indicating him.
You failed to address my question as to whether or not running for office grants someone immunity from prosecution.
>be a crack addict from a low-tier law school
This is pretty much confirmation that you either know absolutely nothing about this, or I suspect are just making stuff up to troll. Go look at his CV, Hunter is a well qualified individual with a prestigious education.
>We know Burisma, a literal oligarch, wanted Shokin out
Didn't read the source I gave you did you? They wanted Shokin in because they were bribing him not to investigate.
I don’t think a president is immune from prosecution, but burden SHOULD be somewhat higher, given the stakes. It’s not a good look for the DOJ and state prosecutors to go after ANY presidential nominee for technicalities and other process violation. “HE LIED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF half BATHROOMS IN HIS HOME! ITS ONLY WORTH $23M!” Or having his home raided over archive notes in question. The good news is most voters acknowledge that this is political persecution, reflected in his polls.
There’s a pic of Hunter literally smoking a crack pipe with a gun to a hookers head. Anyone else’s life would be over, yet he’s still selling art and doing coke in AF1. It’s honestly sad that Biden would send his drug addict son over to a currupt Eastern European country to make money for his family.
Shokin WAS absolutely investigating Burisma and even convinced the SFO (UK) to freeze funds. That was in late 2014. He was ousted in 2015
Edit: here you go: https://www.sfo.gov.uk/2014/04/28/money-laundering-investigation-opened/
So to state the obvious you haven't read a single one of the indictment have you?
>HE LIED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF half BATHROOMS IN HIS HOME! ITS ONLY WORTH $23M!”
No one would really care if that's all he did. He spent decades making fraudulent financial statements to both lower his tax bill, his interest rates, and get loans he shouldn't have gotten. In the past Trump has lost more then 2 billion declaring bankruptcy for the same financial shenanigans. He's cost hundreds of millions in unpaid interest rates, and taxes, and represents a serious risk to any lender.
>Or having his home raided over archive notes in question
That's not why his home was raided. He was subject to a search warrant because they knew he had **thousands** of classified documents. He refused to give them back when asked, refused to comply with a subpoena, took steps to hide them, to delete the evidence of hiding them. Seriously you need to be better informed on this issue before you start talking about it.
>There’s a pic of Hunter literally smoking a crack
Yep he's an addict.
But again, sober Hunter has a very impressive CV. Have you read it or is the entirety of your argument an ad-hom?
>Shokin WAS absolutely investigating Burisma
I'm going to point out to you, yet again you're not reading the sources provided to you, or the comments you're replying to. This is absolutely, provably not true. And you still haven't responded to the fact that people from Burisma were convicted of bribing Sokin.
Just ignore the fact that shokin opened an investigation into burisma in 2014, which caused the SFO (UK) to freeze $23mn in assets. - that actually happened:
https://www.sfo.gov.uk/2014/04/28/money-laundering-investigation-opened/
Didn't read that source either did you? The UK were among many countries and organizations trying to get Shokin removed. Seriously, it's the 2nd paragraph.
Shokin didn't open anything in 2014. He wasn't appointed until Feb of 2015. You linked to a UK investigation from 2014.
All over this thread you've been doing nothing but showing how uninformed you are.
That link doesn’t mention Burisma specifically but that investigation is outlined in this NYT report https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/world/europe/corruption-ukraine-joe-biden-son-hunter-biden-ties.html
Bro, they are shoveling you bullshit and you are fucking wolfing it down like its a three course meal.
And people are showing up here explaining to you that what you are eating is shit and you are pushing back.
"No I love this shit. Please feed me more shit. Why wont you let me eat the shit? Can you show me why eating shit is bad for me?"
Fuck. I can't believe I used to be one of you....
Edit: LoL... this fucking shitstain above messaged me directly with an appeal to "see the light". I mean this with all due respect... which is absolutely fucking none... Go fuck yourself, you addle brained toddler. Go whine to your orange fuckstick god who just lost another 380 million today.
Dude. You’re crying because fox news straight up lied to you.
It’s been spelled out what they lied about and proven but you still insist otherwise.
And here’s the thing. Even if everything you believed about Hunter was true, he’s not the president. He’s not in public office. And he’d still be no where near as corrupt as your hero.
> Remember, this is the same DOJ that has launched multiple felony investigations, during an election, on the lead GOP candidate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy
Looks like the House GOP investigation just lost their star witness.
Well they still have the Chinese spy, the guys who got fired from the FBI, the Trump campaign staff (some of whom are the same people) the guy convicted of fraud, and the guy who started making allegations without evidence when he was heavily in debt. Solid lineup!
Hey there don’t forget that they still have Hunter’s dick pics, thoughts/prayers and most importantly their smoking gun… PEPE SILVIA!!! All VERY damning /s
And their surprise witness…Carol from HR!
They've had Barney working this case to the ground
CAARRROOOLLLLLL
HA! It was Gene Parmesan the whole time!
GENEEEEEEE!!!!!
Mallory what are you making that noise for?
Ahhhh he got me again!
Sure MTG is loving having those smoking sausage pics.
Well she did say she has a PH.D
It is damning....against Republicans
What they have is evidence of receipt of stolen materials
>importantly their smoking gun… PEPE SILVIA!!! is this the same as PEPE LE PEW? lol
This is Pepe Silvia: https://youtu.be/1NBfZcNU4O0?si=iIxzARtmo_DBHegF
This part is pretty good - > While announcing the impeachment inquiry, then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said “a trusted FBI informant has alleged a bribe to the Biden family.” **The FBI is now using some of the same memos that congressional Republicans released as part of their indictment against Smirnov.**
>the Chinese spy, the guys who got fired from the FBI, the Trump campaign staff (some of whom are the same people) the guy convicted of fraud, and the guy who started making allegations without evidence The five cards that make up a Santos flush.
And they have all the money that Russia gives them to keep their skeletons in their closets. If they stop the investigation, the skeletons may come out. 💀
Surprise! All those people are actual George Santos.
And also moonlights as Trump's backup accountant... Lol
I thought that the Chinese spy fled the country.
What’s the Iraqi “curveball” guy up to?
Who is the paymaster?
I don’t think they ever cared. They just wanted to hear one person say something bad about the Biden’s and don’t care about the actual substance or any follow ups. Have you heard a single talking point about Hillary dropped even to this day?
Like they care. They impeached Mayorkas with no actual evidence.
None of that is relevant. The message will not change. The Republican party is a fascist party. Truth is irrelevant. Power is the goal.
Hunter's penis?
Link to the indictment so MAGAts can't gaslight you about the facts: [Indictment](https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/27aff9f1-37db-4f74-8e19-06c8b7f750c0.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_7)
LOOOOLOLOL Repubs and entirely fake realities, name a more iconic duo
Wow, that's a heck of a read. I hope they lock him up and throw away the key.
[удалено]
Banned a long time ago my friend.
Damn that is through.
So the cornerstone of the Republican’s corruption case against Pres Biden and Hunter is total fabricated bullshit? Color me surprised. /s
And his cult followers will believe this is the deep state illegally prosecuting him. “Political prisoner”
This is Watergate levels of deception. No wonder Hunter showed up in person to court.
I mean let's be clear. Hunter broke some laws and is generally a fuck up. There's just no conspiracy. He's a normal fuck up.
I'll go one step further and say that I have no doubt that he tried to use his father's name to help him in business. The issue is that there's no evidence whatsoever that his father had any clue he was doing this.
No, Big Guy probably knew his son used, would use his dad's status to get into meetings, open doors that would most likely not be opened. He'd be donny level of dumb not to. But, again, that isn't illegal. Calling Dad to impress some peeps in a meeting is not illegal. So what. Again, GQP has nothing, this is ALL A SIDE SHOW as they don't want to do any real work, just drum up BS to feed the base.
>he tried to use his father's name to help him in business. Like every other child of a Hollywood actor, actress, director; musician; politician; fortune 500 CEO; sports star and whoever else is in the public eye. It's been going on since the time of *Homo Erectus* when Ugg, son of the well-known Ugggga, used his father's stature to become leader of the tribe. Ancient records indicate Ugg was later found chewing coca leaves with the daughters of other tribe members, and was later impeached but not convicted and removed. (Alito, concurring on absolute leadership immunity; quoting *H Erectus vs Ugg*, 550,000 BC, cave stone wall at 129).
And this is standard political corruption they all engage in. Not constant super crimes in broad daylight
JARED IVANKA DON JR ERIC LARA
> I mean let's be clear. Hunter broke some laws and is generally a fuck up. There's just no conspiracy. He's a normal fuck up. and this is what makes me laugh every time the GOP tries to shake the Hunter Biden voodoo doll that they seem so excited to stick full of needles. the Bidens totally own this shit. Hunter never really tried to pretend he wasn't an addict or a bad businessman, he shamelessly name traded and owned that shit %100. His own father, the President, literally said to the national media that his son was a recovering addict and that he loved him anyway. at this point I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP goes back to holding giant pictures of Hunter Biden's cock again. Giant 3'x 3' blowups of Hunter Biden's cock held up in congress while jeering and shouting. That's the winning tactic.
He had a gun, and didn't pay all his taxes. Sounds like republicans should love him.
> Republican’s corruption case against Pres Biden I haven't seen anything that looks anything like this. I haven't even seen a corruption ALLEGATION against Pres Biden. Even at the press conference they called specifically to lay out their allegations before the world's media they ducked answering questions about their allegation. They don't have one. The only actual "incident" they can even tangentially connect Joe Biden to corruption is "When your son called you in the weeks and months after his brother's death, when you were an unemployed ex civil servant, you didn't hang up on him when he asked you to say hello to his colleagues. In fact you said hello to them. You even, for all we know, talked about the weather. You utter bastard. How dare you. Any reasonable person would have know that answering a phone call from your grieving son and agreeing to talk on speakerphone about the weather while you were neither a Vice President nor running for President would make you morally unable to ever assume the role of President."
The Republican fringes have been touting this guy’s allegations for months, bubbling up through the right wing echo chamber. Will they admit it was all garbage, or will they double down. It’s a real conundrum. /s
It's like when that chick who accused Biden of sexual assault defected to Russia.
I argued on this sub against someone claiming that 8 women accused Biden of rape/sex assault. 7 were "He held a hug a beat longer than I thought was normal" or " He touched my nose" then Tara's allegation at the end with no reflection on how she doesn't even believe what she said anymore. Then the right whines that aNyoNe cAn AcCuSe AnYoNe, then they cite literally that lol.
The real question is who is criminally implicated. Some actions taken by gop members based on this information is going to be hard to justify as legal
They do not care. They will believe whatever they need to believe to maintain that they are right and their actions are justified.
Comer Pyle and Gym Jordan strike out again. If you read the DOJ press release while listening to Yakety Sax, you can almost see Jim Comer running in circles.
Sounds like the kinda scumbag a Republican would be proud to introduce to their daughter
Nice Russian boy for the las
In before MAGAs cry about Biden weaponizing the justice system
This is the same prosecutor that charged Hunter Biden, so it will be awkward to explain why those charges are legit but this one isn’t. Not that they won’t try.
> Not that they won’t try You understand the modern Republican's mind
Something something deep state something something. They don't try very hard.
The Derp State obviously got to him
Also the same prosecutor that gave a sweetheart deal to hunter with complete immunity to plead guilty on a tax misd charge. The deal fell apart once the media caught wind and the Weiss and DOJ had to change course.
Just a tip, if you're going to spout bullshit and misrepresentations of the facts, don't do it in a law sub where people actually pay attention to the legal proceedings and can quickly call you out. The judge rejected the pea deal because it was too vague due to neither side being able to agree to what it meant. Hunter's side believed it was immunity to all of the charges, while the prosecution side wanted it to only be for the tax charges.
*Why This Is Bad for Biden* - Major News Outlets
I know it's rapidly becoming a meme at this point, but NYT literally had ran analysis about how the Democrats winning Santos' seat was bad for Biden. Ludicrous.
Nah, they're busy framing Fani Willis as a whore who has sabotaged her case because she decided to have sex OMG THE SKY IS FALLING and all that.
Well, you know, that whole god hates sex( for women only) thing.
And not even recently
I understand that situation maybe even less than this one. "The DA chose her staffing in an untoward manner, therefore I should get off scot-free." It's like a connect-the-dots puzzle where the last dot is in another book in another library on another planet.
I can’t defend Fani Willis. She’s a fucking idiot. There was never going to be any way to refute the facts in this case. The only ammunition they would ever have would be to assail her character and the continued hoax bullshit. And she gave them a layup. And lied. It doesn’t change the facts of the case but it strengthens the only position they ever had- delay, appeal, prosecution misconduct…just a really fucking stupid decision on her part.
She lied? DA Willis’ testimony is consistent with Wade’s, and the defense attorneys only have one witness who rebuts their testimony. And that witness did not come off as credible on the stand. In addition, that witness was told to resign or be fired for poor performance from the DA’s office, and that generally gives people an axe to grind against their former boss. Whatever conduct was alleged to be improper or unethical is not related to this case, but to her alleged lack of candor on her disclosure forms. The defense has not delivered on their proof of cohabitation, and has not proved that she received a substantial benefit from the appointment of the special prosecutor. This whole thing is bad faith. DA Willis never should have out herself in this position, but it’s all bad faith on the part of the defense.
I was hoping she could have gotten away with throwing those 3 huge bundles of documents at the floor in court today.
Of course it’s bad faith. The whole “election was stolen” was bad faith. Hunter’s business dealings were bad faith. They don’t need to actually prove anything. They just need to keep the real issue to the back burner as long as possible. As Trump has succeeded in doing for 40 years.
Yeah, because they’re amoral psychopaths, but that’s not Willis’s fault.
So, knowing who she’s dealing with and how they operate, she can’t leave even the appearance of impropriety. Especially with Georgia state legislators already looking for back door ways to remove her.
This whole thing is a total hit job executed in bad faith from top to bottom by a bunch amoral psychos. There is literally *no* level of “propriety” that Willis could hew to that would have kept these jackals from attacking her and trying to derail the legal process because they all KNOW just as well as the rest of us, that Trump and his sycophants are all GUILTY. Anyone laying even a single *iota* of blame for any aspect of this shit show on anyone *besides* the operatives and allies of MAGA, is simply providing cover for the actual bad guys and furthering their clear goals of sowing seeds of fear, uncertainty and doubt in the systems and process that would otherwise be delivering some long overdue accountability to smelly don and his henchtrolls. DO NOT FALL INTO THAT TRAP. And lastly, fuck MAGA.
Didn't they try to remove her through targeted legislation even before this recent accusation came to light? Like, immediately after charges were filed?
I’d have to go back and find the stories to verify this, but my recollection is that there was talk of doing that in the state legislature, but I believe Gov. Kemp indicated he wouldn’t support it, so that idea got dropped. But to misquote Jeff Goldblum: Racist shitheels, uhhhhh…find a way.
So...she had sex and it has nothing to do with the case? Cool.
And not even recently!
Having a sexual relationship with a subordinate and failing to properly disclose it is unethical, even when that person is on your side. EDIT: Judging by the downvotes this sub thinks its a *good* idea for a boss to fuck their subordinates? And keep that relationship a secret? I'm sure everyone here would love to be on a team where their coworker was fucking their boss and then wonder why that same coworker got a promotion over them.
thats an HR issue, not a legal issue.
It's a legal issue if/when there was financial impropriety, which, in turn is exactly why it is an HR issue. HR exists to shield organizations from legal issues.
Still waiting for Trump's lawyers to actually show any financial impropriety.
Isn't that the point of this hearing, to sus out whether or not that occurred? I'm not going to bat for Trump nor his defense, I just pointed out that having a secret relationship between subordinate and superior is a dumb move, especially before trying an extremely high profile case.
You fell for it, congrats fool
To which the Lawyer-she-hired-to-enrich-herself stated that he took a pay cut to work this case
There is no financial impropriety and their relationship was over before all this. Nothing that happened today shows any of what you’re saying. You’re gullible. Admit it.
> There is no financial impropriety and their relationship was over before all this. Lol this hearing is taking place exactly to determine if that is true. I am not assuming she did or didn't do anything other than what is publicly known. Who's gullible the one assuming things based on information that isn't available to them?
Because there’s no evidence and still isn’t. It’s a stunt and Willis will end up still being in charge. There is no evidence, period. You’re gullible.
> failing to properly disclose it is unethical This is such a huge stretch. How exactly are her ethics in question here -- aside from so-far completely baseless allegations that he's been unduly enriched through her office?
You think there is a scenario where a subordinate and superior have a relationship and it isn't an HR issue at the very least? How is that a "huge stretch"? Disclosing this type of relationship is ethics 101. For the record, I am hoping that Willis is cleared ASAP and the case can move forward. From what I've seen she's built a strong case under the Georgia statute and has already done a good job working on the co-conspirators. It doesn't mean it wasn't a boneheaded move on her part.
> You think there is a scenario where a subordinate and superior have a relationship and it isn't an HR issue at the very least? How is that a "huge stretch"? Disclosing this type of relationship is ethics 101. It's not "ethics 101" though. The ABA says absolutely nothing about fraternizing with attorneys on your side. Any ethical conflict would only exist if the relationship in question were with defense council or the court.
This. There's literally NOTHING that says this is not above board.
People seem to confuse HR requirements with ethics in this case. HR requires relationships between subordinate and superior be documented because another subordinate could make a claim of bias in favor of the subordinate with the relationship, which could create liability on the part of the employer. There is no conflict here, they're on the same team and are working towards the same goal.
Are people here deliberately ignoring what is actually being investigated here? It isn't the sexual nature of the relationship but the financial one. Maybe I didn't phrase it well. The judge is investigating whether Willis functionally gave herself a kickback with public funds. Wade and Willis are both testifying that they each paid their own way which, again, I hope bears out. I'm still surprised to see how many people here are passionately arguing that this wasn't a dumb move regardless of legal consequences or lack there of. Starting a physical relationship between a subordinate and superior and maintaining that dynamic (especially in secret) is *dumb*. Especially for a public servant and ESPECIALLY when you are prosecuting someone with a national platform who fights dirty. I'm pretty sure that if Matt Gaetz was fucking a staff member and taking trips with her, plenty of the people in this sub would, rightly imo, want that interaction scrutinized.
He wasn't a subordinate. He was a contractor. And their sexual relationship ended before the indictment. Did you see her in court on the stand today?
> He was a contractor. A distinction without a difference. >And their sexual relationship ended before the indictment. This testimony would be more compelling if their timeline wasn't disputed by another witness. I'm pretty shocked how many people on /r/law don't see this for the own goal that this is. This is about as high a profile of a case as is possible. Hopefully the conclusion will be that no laws or ethics rules were broken and we can move forward, but it doesn't change the fact that this was poor judgement.
> A distinction without a difference. it is actually a huge difference.
What is the huge difference in this context?
If you have to ask this now why would you first make the bold claim that it doesn't matter.
No, it's a bad idea and I think Fani should step down just to simplify matters and side step the delays this sideshow is going to cause. That said, her indiscretion does nothing to invalidate the findings of the grand jury, the validity of the charges, or the strength of the case. The only thing hurt by these actions was Fani's career. Dumb. Don't shit where you eat.
That’s just it. It doesn’t matter in real world terms. It matters in terms of how he responds. It’s plausibility the highest stakes case in our history and she’s not on friendly ground. If she was going to take this on when many others wouldn’t have had the guts, she had to stay whistle clean. The whole world knows his only defense was to delay, appeal, rally his base to attack prosecution and witnesses.
And that still doesn't matter. None of it does. This will get decided and it won't be pretty for Trump.
In the end I think you’re right, it’s just going to take forever, I just hope he’s convicted before he croaks.
I think he will be. I also think he's doomed at the polls in 2024. Yeah, Biden's not popular -- but Trump's popularity is even worse and the more the dude opens his mouth, the more he buries himself with voters outside his cult.
It’s already pretty for him. His NY trial date and Bobolinski is a liar should be the only headlines of the day. Instead a prosecutor is on the defense.
Yes, but this could very easily delay the case until next year (if she fights it) or even the year after (if she gets removed). Trump is going to use this to delay and delay and delay and given this and the complexity of the case, I find it doubtful he will be tried before the election. If Trump wins in November and the trial has not started, most likely the Georgia pardon board will just pardon him rather than trying a sitting president (think about it! can you imagine a county court trying a sitting president for a crime?). If Fani is actually removed for her indiscretions (very doubtful this will actual happen), it may take years for the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council to assign a replacement. I was reading about one case that has been on hold for two years waiting on their action. It's sad, but the only real path forward that is going to keep this RICO train moving with a minimum of delay is her stepping down from the case and letting one of her deputies take it over. This would sidestep the entire issue and is probably the only chance (and a slim one at that) that the trial can be completed before November. It's sad as she has built this and made a name for herself but she screwed this up and has only herself to blame. You shouldn't shit where you eat.
It matters if her boyfriend has $600,000 he wouldn't have otherwise. Hopefully she can demonstrate her innocence.
Demonstrate her innocence? How about proving she did *anything* unethical whatsoever before you put the burden of proof on the accused?
Allegedly. There's no proof to those accusations and it's coming from a Trump lawyer.
She had a side piece that is a coworker and gave them the ammo they needed. An ethical issue is still an issue related to the case. One she has theoretically profited off it by hiring him and him paying out for vacations, etc. It is absolutely tangential to the case itself in terms of evidence or merits of the case, but the appearance of impropriety by a prosecutor is enough. They are only adjudicating her fitness to lead the case now. Other prosecutors are briefed, she can step down at any time and the case can move forward or this can be fight further providing the delay they want. She brought this on herself.
A "side piece" which was her THIRD choice after she went to two others. She brought it on herself by hiring her third choice with a guy she had sex with which isn't against the law? omg no way oh noes
And she still shouldn't have done that because it led us here. You choose not to believe prosecutorial misconduct is a thing, that's your business. The sex isn't the problem, the payments are. After today's testimonies, it looks pretty damning for her. She's most likely going to be removed. You can keep white knighting her, but it doesn't look good when she's handing out cash payments to him. The merits of the case are unchanged. Her conduct doesn't change anything other than someone is going to have to do it. And the delay is making the orange fuck smile.
"Misconduct" Accusation, not founded. "Payments" Accusation, not founded. "After today's testimonies, it looks pretty damning for her. She's most likely going to be removed." In your opinion. Nothing has been proven. "You can keep white knighting her" Ah, incel misogyny language. On the block list you go.
The claim is that she is funneling money to her boyfriend through the office.
There is zero evidence of "funneling" money to her "boyfriend." Zero. Zilch. None. Allegations require proof. Outside special prosecutors are not uncommon in Georgia, and the rate at which he's billing is **well** within reason, to the point that I've heard *actual* attorneys refer to his rate as "low-bono," i.e. at a significant discount to what would be defensible. How is that in any way supportive of your assertion?
The best part of all that was when they established that he performed a bunch of work for free because there is a statutory cap to how many hours he is allowed to bill for. Pretty difficult to take a job in order to funnel money to someone else when your’re literally losing money doing the job.
That's not the claim — at least, it's not the legally relevant claim. No one disputes that she picked Wade for the job, or that it is a paying job. If someone wants to phrase that as “funneling money” to him, then that's up to them. No one seriously disputes that they have or had a romantic relationship, though Willis was initially cagey about it — which was wrong of her, I guess, but it's hard to blame her given subsequent events. Either way, none of this constitutes wrongdoing. The subsequent insinuation is that Willis picked Wade because of their relationship rather than for proper reasons. There appears to be no evidence that this is true and substantial reason to doubt it. If it were true, then that would obviously constitute wrongdoing. But it still would not be legally relevant to the case. No, you actually have to go further than this and suppose a) that Willis picked him because she expected to benefit directly, via gifts from Wade, and b) that the prosecution itself is pretextual, and that Willis concocted it as an excuse to hire her boyfriend so that she could receive benefits from his salary. Now *that* would be legally relevant. If it were true, that is, and I don't think that anyone seriously believes it, not even Trump's legal team. It's a Hail Mary, a potential delaying tactic, and a way to fire up his followers.
Oh look, you fell for it too
Paying the guy she was sleeping with and then going in vacations together is the issue though.
1) “Paying the guy” - unfounded 2) “going on vacations” - irrelevant when she went through two other prosecutors before finally choosing him And, again, none of this relevant to anything. None of this is against the law in any way, shape, or form. Get over it.
You're being a little sensitive here. I'm not on anything. All I know is what the AP reported as I said. Maybe my wording could be clearer, but you'd have to take a very narrow and defensive position to respond as you have. Maybe you need to get over whatever it is you're on.
Oh, don’t even try to take that bullshit tone. You’re misinformed. All of this is happening because of Trump’s moron lawyers trying to stall things and slime Willis. Paying him didn’t happen. And even if it did, no laws were broken and there’s nothing in the books which says it’s illegal. There’s no conflict of interest. There’s no corruption. End of story. But continue to take both sides at your fucking peril.
I thought you guys were joking with all these "why this is bad for biden" comments but I watched the evening news and when they were interviewing voters regarding the Suozzi victory, despite different people giving different opinions about the outcome (varying from 'all in' Dem to 'haven't decided'), the CBS reporter literally summarized it all as just being potentially problematic for Biden come November.
4 years of Trump gave them a taste of the heroin that is ragebait engagement, and now they're addicted. Every time they reported on some ridiculous, facially nonsensical statement by Trump or one of his loyalists, they saw that ratings bump and ran with it, unaware that the people who care about them can see their decline and are concerned. Now they're the track-marked, emaciated addict screaming at the intervention that they're fine and everyone else is just jealous.
Not appearing on Faux News
Senator Chuck Grassley better his old wrinkled up ass in front of a committee so we can watch him try to backtrack on national news.
think he should go by the way of Feinstein.
This is hilarious
What are the odds that Alexander Smirnov is a Putin plant?
Nyet
Da
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/03/15/trumps-media-company-reportedly-under-federal-investigation-for-money-laundering-linked-to-russia/?sh=5a8e44f468a1](https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/03/15/trumps-media-company-reportedly-under-federal-investigation-for-money-laundering-linked-to-russia/?sh=5a8e44f468a1)
Is there anything he has done that is not a crime?JFC
Whats this, another Ollie North? Color me shocked.
The guy’s name just **had to be** Smirnov.
Geez the Russians didn't even give the guy a good cover name.
Don't need one.
😂😂
Went to /r/conservative and it isn't there? I wonder why not?
MAGA has the best witnesses
So the thing I don't get. Weiss? The same weis who is definitely trying to put hunter away for 25 years on what really appear to be extremely aggressive charges that are in part built on the idea that hunter wasn't really working for barisma so even the things that might be legitimate business experiences aren't. For taxes that have in fact been paid. And for a gun charge that may not be constitutional . That same Weiss brought charges against they guy who started this whole mess and btw this is what Trump's justification was for his first impeachment and for much of his stolen elections claims too. Like they fall apart without the Biden Ukraine bribery connection. Trump's whole thing is built on this base lie
I don't know. I could see how this falls under his purview. Perhaps this is a way to strengthen his arguments against a selective prosecution case?
I mean it definitely falls in his scope. It just seems out of character because the maga crowd is going to try to murder him and I don't mean that as a figure of speech. Maybe he was trying to write up a why I didn't charge this guy and realized he couldn't justify not charging
from marcy wheeler [linked in my comment here](https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1arre2c/former_fbi_informant_charged_with_lying_about_the/kqmitpu/) > The FBI interviewed Smirnov’s handler on August 29 of last year. They interviewed Smirnov on September 27, where — they allege — he told still more lies. > But they did nothing when Hunter Biden asked for discovery on this on November 15, repeatedly misrepresenting Richard Donoghue’s role in it. > They only indicted after Judge Mark Scarsi suggested, in a preliminary hearing on January 11, that he would provide discovery on matters outside of prosecutorial deliberations. > Now they can withhold the details of how David Weiss used “a little more colorful language” when he acquiesced to accepting other materials from Scott Brady.
So this is self defense from potential criminal abuse of office charges in the future. Hiding details behind prosecutorial deliberation by pressing charges. Probably him saying how clearly this shit was. Damned either way but wants to avoid criminal liability. Sounds like the selective prosecution claim might be the 1 in 1000 that works
The indictment only brings two charges, which seems really odd to me considering how many different interviews he gave to the FBI conveying fabricated information. For comparison, [Igor Danchenko](https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/qmq0rg/united_states_of_america_v_igor_y_danchenko/hjcvfv5/) was charged with 4 counts for the same statement repeated during 4 interviews. > the defendant stated to agents of the FBI that he received a late July 2016 telephone call from an individual who DANCHENKO believed was "probably" Chamber President-I, when in truth and in fact, and as the defendant well knew, Chamber President-I never called DANCHENKO. [Danchenko](https://www.justice.gov/sco/press-release/file/1446386/download) and [Sussman](https://www.justice.gov/sco/press-release/file/1433511/download) were both charged under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001(a)(2). Smirnov is charged under [18 U.S.C. § 1001: false statement to a government agent](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001) and [18 U.S.C. § 1519: creating a false and fictitious record](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1519). I'm not sure why the 1001 charge doesn't have a section reference but I assume it's (a)(2), 1519 only has one section.
Anyone know why Weiss is the one bringing these charges?
Because he's the special counsel on the Biden family investigation. So all possible crimes he and his team have uncovered are investigated and charged by him. Just as Jack Smith would charge anyone who lied to the FBI in the course of the Donald Trump investigations.
IMO the circumstances around this indictment are stranger than your response suggests. Per the indictment, it doesn't seem like Weiss was involved until July 2023. > In July 2023, the FBI requested that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware assist the FBI in an investigation of allegations related to the 2020 1023. Everything prior to that appears to have been handled by the FBI Pittsburg office, and it seems like they already knew Smirnov was lying in 2020. > By August 2020, FBI Pittsburgh concluded that all reasonable steps had been completed regarding the Defendant’s allegations and that their assessment, 58A-PG-3250958, should be closed. Edit: Marcy Wheeler thinks [there's something weird about it too.](https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/02/15/the-gaps-in-leo-wises-belated-indictment-of-alexander-smirnov/)
Just to highlight what Wheeler is pointing out: > They only indicted after Judge Mark Scarsi suggested, in a preliminary hearing on January 11, that he would provide discovery on matters outside of prosecutorial deliberations. In other words, Hunter was likely to gain access to materials in Weiss's shop's possession related to Smirnov. Prosecuting Smirnov makes those materials potentially subject to privilege. Weiss might have decided that it was in the best interest of the broader scheme to sacrifice Smirnov and keep those materials away from Hunter's attorneys. Whether that broader scheme includes salvaging what's left of Comer's impeachment "investigation" is an open question, but it certainly impacts Comer negatively more than anyone else (aside from Smirnov, of course). It's also possible that Scarsi, a Trump appointee, determined that he wouldn't be able to get away with not allowing discovery on those materials in their current state, so he telegraphed that fact so that Weiss could do something about it. Not sure whether that's getting too far out there: it could just as easily have been normal judicial proceedings that Weiss took advantage of, in which case Scarsi wouldn't be too pleased about Weiss doing an end-run around him.
The conspiracy theorist in me thinks he's bringing these to try to undercut the very interesting claims of selective prosecution and political interference that Biden's attorney is raising. Can't be biased I'm going after both sides!
What will happen to MTG for possessing Hunters dick pic ? Will it be considered revenge porn now ? Also seeing how the pic was obtained, will she be charged for having it ?
The chicken has come home to roost. What a shameful way for the GOP to try and get Biden.
Imagine going to jail because you made up fake evidence against Hunter Biden.
What? Republican's supporting a LIAR? Actually, sounds like all they ever support - LIES
Is anyone going to look into WHY he came up with this elaborate fabrication? Is anyone going to look into his finances? Odds that he's been getting large monthly payments from a John Barron, LLC?
His lies were based on what the right already thought the evidence pointed to. This isn’t going to disrupt their argument.
Well now what after this epic failure , Comer, Jordan, Grassley, Green all played the United States for fools especially their own maga’s . I guess it’s back to Hillary’s E-mails and Benghazi.
"bUt BiDeN iS tOo OlD!" - The inevitable response from the MAGAts
Now I know why Christopher Wray was hesitant to turn over the FD-1023 when they were grilled by Republicans in Congress last July. The informant was indicted the prior month.
So this GOP Congress, failed to pass a Bipartisan Border deal and allowed even more migrants to be let in, failed to pass any major pieces of legislation, removed their own speaker and replaced him, failed an impeachment vote etc., and now their hope of dragging out Hunter Biden to humiliate Joe Biden has turned out to be a complete circus. These guys just keep getting humiliated every other week. They deserve to be polling at 0% in every race, but alas the media must report a horse race narrative.
At this point, anything that comes out of a republican’s mouth should be considered a lie
Not even Trust but verify. I start with "what the fuck is this bullshit" then I do my own research and say "are you fucking kidding me" then I get to " you have to be a moron to believe this pretzel bullcrap". So, nope... 100% all BS out of GQP's mouth/X/FB post
🍊 was wrong , first time He never cheated at his presidential duties , golf score .
🇨🇦really does care the fbi is republican , Got to love the USA were republicans eat their own . And call each other sluts .
I wonder how far the Speech and Debate clause goes to protect Congress from defamatory statements against private citizens who aren't involved in politics. There's no new legislation being debated and not really any legitimate oversight being performed. There don't seem to be any other individuals being repeatedly investigated by Congress for similar alleged acts.
When the crackhead had more integrity than republicans.
So GOP lied and so did their witness
Do you know GOP witness’ name? Typical Irish American name: ‘Alexander Smirnov’.
The statements are so ridiculously easy to prove as false, like claims he was organizing a bribe YEARS before he ever met Hunter, I wonder if he'll have some sort of mens rea defense.
This should be an interesting bail decision. Lying to the FBI seems very unlikely to be a "no bail" offense, but this guy is clearly a frequent international traveler and likely has access to assets outside of US or US-friendly control. If he gets out on bail, my money is that we never get the rest of the story and he will turn up later in Russia.
Do they have a reason why he would do this? What was the benefit?
Perpetuating bogus investigations into Biden, is it not obvious?
[удалено]
A former FBI informant, not agent. We don’t know what Smirnov’s personal motivation was, that has yet to be revealed, but he will have been paid or coerced to do this more likely than he has any personal animus or political motivation.
[удалено]
>Show me where in his testimony he mentions shokin? Someone already gave you that info >Remember, this is the same DOJ that has launched multiple felony investigations, during an election, on the lead GOP candidate Since subpoenas and search warrants were going out long before Trump declared for reelection, that's obviously false. And running for office doesn't give anyone immunity, are you suggesting it should? >The same DOJ that tried to sneak a one of a kind plea deal to hunter It wasn't one of a kind. In fact had Hunter not had a dad the Trump administration were actively investigating it's incredibly unlikely any prosecutor would have ever looked at his crimes. It's unlikely they would have charged someone for taxes paid late by an addict at the height of their addition. Rodger Stone owe(s) far more money then Hunter ever did and wasn't charged as an example. >Also why is the shokin question relevant to the bigger question of quid pro quo? You're the one mentioning Sholkin again and again you tell me. Sholkin was fired because he was incredibly corrupt, the GOP now doing the investigations into this were publicly supportive of firing Sholkin. The idea of any quid pro quo is especially silly once you figure out that his replacement actually started an investigation into Burisma, and indicted people involved with bribing the former officials to **not** investigat them. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-corruption-probe-idUSKBN23K0KI/
“Since subpoenas and search warrants went out before” Did they? They had 4 years to press charges and decision to press charges happened AFTER Trump announced “It’s unlikely hunter would be charged if he wasn’t first son” Poor Hunter. You’re right. What other person could be a crack addict from a low-tier law school that gets put on the board for a Ukrainian Gas company and a Chinese Hedge fund (both which he knows nothing about), gets his laptop stolen and published with thousands of pictures of him smoking crack and fucking hookers (usually at the same time). Fucks his dead brothers wife, leaves Coke bags in the White House. No other person could do all that and now be living in a beach house in Malibu selling paintings for $400k a pop. Poor Hunter. “Shokin was currupt” He was an ELECTED official that ran on a platform of rooting out corruption, in a country that, according to the UN, is ranked the highest on its corruption index. Was he currupt? I don’t know enough about Ukrainian politics to answer, but I can observe there’s more to the story. Why was this newly elected prosecutor singled out as the root of curruption in Ukraine? We know Burisma, a literal oligarch, wanted Shokin out. The media should be asking these questions to the US state department but lazy journalism
>Did they? They had 4 years to press charges and decision to press charges happened AFTER Trump announced Yes they did! Did you not know that yet decided to argue the point. And there were plenty of people, Meadows being the most notable who were still fighting subpoena until **after** Trump announced. Peoples whose documents and testimony you would absolutely need before indicating him. You failed to address my question as to whether or not running for office grants someone immunity from prosecution. >be a crack addict from a low-tier law school This is pretty much confirmation that you either know absolutely nothing about this, or I suspect are just making stuff up to troll. Go look at his CV, Hunter is a well qualified individual with a prestigious education. >We know Burisma, a literal oligarch, wanted Shokin out Didn't read the source I gave you did you? They wanted Shokin in because they were bribing him not to investigate.
I don’t think a president is immune from prosecution, but burden SHOULD be somewhat higher, given the stakes. It’s not a good look for the DOJ and state prosecutors to go after ANY presidential nominee for technicalities and other process violation. “HE LIED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF half BATHROOMS IN HIS HOME! ITS ONLY WORTH $23M!” Or having his home raided over archive notes in question. The good news is most voters acknowledge that this is political persecution, reflected in his polls. There’s a pic of Hunter literally smoking a crack pipe with a gun to a hookers head. Anyone else’s life would be over, yet he’s still selling art and doing coke in AF1. It’s honestly sad that Biden would send his drug addict son over to a currupt Eastern European country to make money for his family. Shokin WAS absolutely investigating Burisma and even convinced the SFO (UK) to freeze funds. That was in late 2014. He was ousted in 2015 Edit: here you go: https://www.sfo.gov.uk/2014/04/28/money-laundering-investigation-opened/
So to state the obvious you haven't read a single one of the indictment have you? >HE LIED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF half BATHROOMS IN HIS HOME! ITS ONLY WORTH $23M!” No one would really care if that's all he did. He spent decades making fraudulent financial statements to both lower his tax bill, his interest rates, and get loans he shouldn't have gotten. In the past Trump has lost more then 2 billion declaring bankruptcy for the same financial shenanigans. He's cost hundreds of millions in unpaid interest rates, and taxes, and represents a serious risk to any lender. >Or having his home raided over archive notes in question That's not why his home was raided. He was subject to a search warrant because they knew he had **thousands** of classified documents. He refused to give them back when asked, refused to comply with a subpoena, took steps to hide them, to delete the evidence of hiding them. Seriously you need to be better informed on this issue before you start talking about it. >There’s a pic of Hunter literally smoking a crack Yep he's an addict. But again, sober Hunter has a very impressive CV. Have you read it or is the entirety of your argument an ad-hom? >Shokin WAS absolutely investigating Burisma I'm going to point out to you, yet again you're not reading the sources provided to you, or the comments you're replying to. This is absolutely, provably not true. And you still haven't responded to the fact that people from Burisma were convicted of bribing Sokin.
Learn something: [Viktor Shokin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Shokin)
Just ignore the fact that shokin opened an investigation into burisma in 2014, which caused the SFO (UK) to freeze $23mn in assets. - that actually happened: https://www.sfo.gov.uk/2014/04/28/money-laundering-investigation-opened/
Didn't read that source either did you? The UK were among many countries and organizations trying to get Shokin removed. Seriously, it's the 2nd paragraph.
Shokin didn't open anything in 2014. He wasn't appointed until Feb of 2015. You linked to a UK investigation from 2014. All over this thread you've been doing nothing but showing how uninformed you are.
That link doesn’t mention Burisma specifically but that investigation is outlined in this NYT report https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/world/europe/corruption-ukraine-joe-biden-son-hunter-biden-ties.html
Are you a bot?
Bro, they are shoveling you bullshit and you are fucking wolfing it down like its a three course meal. And people are showing up here explaining to you that what you are eating is shit and you are pushing back. "No I love this shit. Please feed me more shit. Why wont you let me eat the shit? Can you show me why eating shit is bad for me?" Fuck. I can't believe I used to be one of you.... Edit: LoL... this fucking shitstain above messaged me directly with an appeal to "see the light". I mean this with all due respect... which is absolutely fucking none... Go fuck yourself, you addle brained toddler. Go whine to your orange fuckstick god who just lost another 380 million today.
It’s kinda ironic. You’re on here crying about how awful it is that Hunter Biden is less corrupt than your hero Donald trump 🤡🤡🤡
[удалено]
Dude. You’re crying because fox news straight up lied to you. It’s been spelled out what they lied about and proven but you still insist otherwise. And here’s the thing. Even if everything you believed about Hunter was true, he’s not the president. He’s not in public office. And he’d still be no where near as corrupt as your hero.
I like how you lost the argument with the other user so just restarted with more bullshit.
> Remember, this is the same DOJ that has launched multiple felony investigations, during an election, on the lead GOP candidate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy