Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1237743)

"Jim you can’t just find a laptop and suddenly accuse it’s owner of a crime. "

You accused Santos of a crime because someone you never heard of, accused him.

If someone's laptop has evidence of a crime, why can't you investigate them for that crime?

I'm not saying the Bidens committed a crime. But IF there's evidence of that on the laptop, why not investigate?

And how can it not bother you, that the FBI lied to all of us about it being Russian disinfomation? The FBI had the laptop in their possession, they'd have known in a day if it was phony or legit.

I'm not saying charge anyone with anything. But we should know what's on that laptop, and we should know what the FBI did, and why.

I wanted the Trump Russia investigation. I wanted to know what happened.

Similarly, I want to know what happened here. You seem afraid of finding out what happened. Gee, I wonder why?

The author I posted here, is someone who is respected by TIME magazine and Foxnews. So he's not a rabid partisan for either side. And he saw the documents that you and I haven't seen. And he said it's disturbing.

Let's have the hearings and find out the truth. If it's a nothingburger (and I hope it is), lets' declare that. If the Bidens or the FBI did anything wrong, let's find that out, too.

How long did we spend on the Trump Russia hoax? We can afford to spend a little energy here.

"But whether or not Joe and Hunter broke any laws, is nothing "

You're again exposed as a big fat liar. Because what I said was this:

"But whether or not Joe and Hunter broke any laws, is nothing compared to the FBI trying to influence the results of an election"

I didn't say the Bidens actions are "nothing". I said if they sold influence for money, that's nothing compared to our FBI working as operatives for the Democrat party. And it is, in fact, nothing compared to the federal government trying to influence an election.

"you don’t care about due process . You’re willing to investigate people and have them prove their innocence "

You've been eating low-IQ vitamins again, haven't you?

I want a hearing to find out the truth. That's exactly in keeping with due process.

YOU want to punish Santos based only on an allegation. THAT is contrary to due process. You wanted to punish Brett Kavanaugh based solely on an accusation (a ridiculous accusation). With Republicans, accused=guilty to you. You have shown us repeatedly that you believe exactly that.

You really, really stink at this.

You really humiliated yourself with that post. You deliberately cut off part of my sentence to make it look like I said something I never came close to saying, and people only do that when they know they can not respond to what was actually said. Then, you said that wanting an investigation is contrary to due process? That's exactly what due process is.

Shellenberger is a lifelong liberal. And he thinks we need to investigate the FBIs actions here.

But you know better. You, who are incapable of a nanosecond of impartiality.

Republican=bad, democrat=good, we get it already. And you call me a broken horse.

"not how it works"

Apparently it is how it works, because the hearings are coming.

Democrats HATE it when republicans play by the left's rules. You think only democrats are allowed to launch congressional hearings to attack their opponents? In what world does that make sense.

Nancy Pelosi kicked Republicans off house committees who she didn't like. That wasn't the way things were normally done, but that's what she did. And that was fine. So McCarthy did the same exact thing, and the left is going berserk, saying it's not fair.

To the left, "fair" means democrats fight with brass knuckles, republicans have to wear gloves. Trump put a stop to that.

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1237744)

Just by you trying to use santos as a victim of liberals attacks and this peach of a statement To the left, "fair" means democrats fight with brass knuckles, republicans have to wear gloves. Trump put a stop to that. shows how much of a ultra MAGA cult member we all knew you to be :1poke:

Originally Posted by Got Stripers (Post 1237760)

So let me understand the argument from the right. A warning about potentially erroneous information in a laptop of potentially questionable authenticity by the FBI, which potentially may have influence in an election is weaponizing the FBI for political reasons.

Yet in 2026 the FBI announces it will reopen the Hillary email investigation just ahead of the election, but I’m certain in the Jim and crappie man’s view that isn’t also weaponizing the FBI for the same political reasons by the timing of that announcement which did impact that election.

What’s the word for that, oh yeah hypocrisy.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1237753)

keep posting doctored quotes from
me wayne. stick with that. and keep
saying hat investigations of accusations, are contrary to due process. we should go right from accusation to sentencing, at least when the accused is a republican…

Originally Posted by Got Stripers (Post 1237763)

The Special Counsel indicted 34 people—seven U.S. nationals, 26 Russian nationals, and one Dutch national—and three Russian organizations. Now that's a hoax for sure Jim, keep that foil hat tight, otherwise your going to loose brain matter you can ill afford to loose.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1237762)

The FBI was in possession of Hunter's laptop. They had the laptop.
It's the FBI. They knew it was legit, they knew it wasn't Russian disinformation. They lied to big tech, in order to suppress the story, and it's hard to believe the timing (right before the election) is a coincidence.

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1237767)

and they always leave this statement out

Mueller wrote. “Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1237781)

There’s no real evidence the FBI misled anyone. Hunter had already been under investigation for several years which wasn’t disclosed. From the sworn testimony it looks like the FBI’s interest in a Russian hack and leak was 1) they did it en masse to help trump in 2016 and 2) they believed that Russia hacked Burisma when Hunter was there and they would use that in a similar manner. #dupedagain

Also, common sense. You have hundreds of right wing sites you know are going to run with the story. There’s no way the FBI could put a lid on it.

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1237781)

There’s no real evidence the FBI misled anyone. Hunter had already been under investigation for several years which wasn’t disclosed. From the sworn testimony it looks like the FBI’s interest in a Russian hack and leak was 1) they did it en masse to help trump in 2016 and 2) they believed that Russia hacked Burisma when Hunter was there and they would use that in a similar manner. #dupedagain

Also, common sense. You have hundreds of right wing sites you know are going to run with the story. There’s no way the FBI could put a lid on it.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1237786)

THe FBI had the laptop in its possession. The FBI knew whether or not it was a Russian hoax. What evidence did the FBI have, that it was russian disinformation.

getting fritter and facebook to bam something, is putting a lid on it. That’s where people are, his help them.

Der ich previously posted testimony from the Roth guy from twitter, he claims the fbi specifically mentioned the laptop. So if the FBI had no reason to believe the laptop was russian disinformation, but they told twitter and facebook it was, that’s misleading.

common sense

The author i posted is respected by both TIME magazine ( who called him “a hero of the environment”) and Foxnews. He saw the twitter files and says it’s disturbing.

You’re a completely, rabidly blind partisan who hasn’t seen what he has seen. Tell me why you’re more reliable than he is on this.

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1237784)

What Mueller wrote should indicate to you, that the purpose of the investigation is to make a conclusion. In order to make a conclusion, there must be substantial unequivocal evidence. If there is not such evidence, there is, at least in law, a presumption of innocence. If there is not sufficient evidence to indict, the matter is over for the counsel. There is no need for any comment on exoneration. That merely muddies the investigation and its purpose.

When there was not enough evidence to indict Trump for conspiracy, that was not "exoneration". It was the CONCLUSION that Trump was not indictable. He might, in reality, have committed the crime, but if that can't be proven, the matter is over. By law, Trump is presumed innocent. But if you want to feel, or think, or have the opinion, that he is guilty, that's your prerogative.

As for obstruction, the duty and process for Mueller is the same. He could not find unequivocal evidence that Trump could be indicted for obstruction. It wasn't his duty to "exonerate," it was his job to CONCLUDE if Trump was indictable. He couldn't.

Originally Posted by Got Stripers (Post 1237790)

Has nothing to do with the DOJ's position on not indicting a sitting president, nah no nah nothing.
\

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1237786)

THe FBI had the laptop in its possession. The FBI knew whether or not it was a Russian hoax. What evidence did the FBI have, that it was russian disinformation.

getting fritter and facebook to bam something, is putting a lid on it. That’s where people are, his help them.

Der ich previously posted testimony from the Roth guy from twitter, he claims the fbi specifically mentioned the laptop. So if the FBI had no reason to believe the laptop was russian disinformation, but they told twitter and facebook it was, that’s misleading.

common sense

The author i posted is respected by both TIME magazine ( who called him “a hero of the environment”) and Foxnews. He saw the twitter files and says it’s disturbing.

You’re a completely, rabidly blind partisan who hasn’t seen what he has seen. Tell me why you’re more reliable than he is on this.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1237787)

Because you’re a completely, rabidly blind partisan.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by spence (Post 1237799)

You’re not paying attention, and Roth said no such thing that I’ve seen.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1237803)

The real story about Hunter Biden is that the current president hasn't fired the FBI director, called it a hoax, or tried to obstruct the investigation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1237806)

What did you believe, or think, or feel, when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear the laptop was Russian mis or dis information?

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1237807)

Well, for one, just look at what happened after Hunter Biden left the White House. The Saudis, who claimed they had him in their pocket, gave him $2 billion. No, wait, that was Jared Kushner. Never mind.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1237809)

What did you believe, or think, or feel, about the laptop when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear that it was Russian mis or dis information?

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1237812)

Isn’t that the one Ghouliani and Bannon had?
I’d assume it’s as good as their evidence of election fraud.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1237814)

What did you believe, or think, or feel, about Hunters laptop when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear that it was Russian mis or dis information?

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1237819)

It wouldn’t surprise me a bit.
There's a lot of wild stuff that came out in the whole Trump-Russia saga, but I still can't get over how there's an email chain that literally says, "this is part of Russia and it's govt's support for Mr. Trump" and the son of the pres. replies, "if it's what you say I love it."

I think Trump would have given Putin Ukraine for it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1237833)

Hey all you computer geniuses, the physical laptop could be hunters, but the chain of custody there is no way that you can prove that the original hard drive hadn’t been replaced because they’re replaceable. Or re written

So yes the actual laptop the body screen key board could be hunters tracked by serial number and Apple ID.
But it all comes down to the hard drive and a court would be hard to accept anything on it. as probable cause to start an investigation or accept as evidence

A House committee are not bound by the rules of evidence and the GOPQ have no regard for evidence anyway or power to prosecute. Show it will be all in the window and rumors.

The investigation into Hunter Biden began in 2018, Unrelated to his laptop But for taxes
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1237833)

Hey all you computer geniuses, the physical laptop could be hunters, but the chain of custody there is no way that you can prove that the original hard drive hadn’t been replaced because they’re replaceable. Or re written

So yes the actual laptop the body screen key board could be hunters tracked by serial number and Apple ID.
But it all comes down to the hard drive and a court would be hard to accept anything on it. as probable cause to start an investigation or accept as evidence

A House committee are not bound by the rules of evidence and the GOPQ have no regard for evidence anyway or power to prosecute. Show it will be all in the window and rumors.

The investigation into Hunter Biden began in 2018, Unrelated to his laptop But for taxes
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1237821)

Not sure how to parse all that in relation to my question. Are you saying that the framing of the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation influenced you into believing that it was?

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1237846)

Did you believe, or think, or feel, that Hunters laptop content was Russian disinformation when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear that it was?

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1237849)

No, I’m saying the Trump organization’s history of working with Russia did.
The Russian oligarchy made Donald Trump.
I believe Trump’s not only a 5-decade Russian asset,he married his 1st of 2 Soviet-born brides in 1977,at which time the KGB opened a file on him and that’d be when they started compiling Kompromat,like the “golden showers” thing and funneling money to him to launder. It’s probably not only true,but far worse than we know.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1237840)

im guessing the fbi can tell if it’s the original hard drive. but on top
of everything else, now you’re a tech expert.

First, you said everything on the laptop was harmless, not i docstuve of any wrongdoing. Are you saying. Hunters political
opponents replaced the hard drive with one that had nothing incriminating?

WDMSO: there’s nothing incriminating on the laptop. And if there is, the GOP put it there!!

wayne, take off the to. foil hat for one second and think. consider what you know about hunter biden. Would it really be surprising to you, if he did things he wasn’t supposed to, for millions of dollars?

you’re taking talking points from Joy Behar now?

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1237852)

Are you saying that Inteligence characterizing the laptop as Russian disinformation had no influence on your believing it? That the first thing that came to your mind when the story was released and before intel saying it was, was that it was "Russian disinformation"? And that your notions of various circumstances that were suggestive to you and for you were probable was what convinced you, whether or not the lap top story was characterized as Russian disinformation by Intel?

Does that "suggest" to you that, just maybe, since all your notions about Trump and Russia proved to be wrong in regard to the laptop, and proved to be unprovable or just wrong about stuff for which Mueller could not find sufficient evidence, that maybe you shouldn't be so certain about Trump being some sort of Russian agent. And that Intel was either lying, or not so smart or reliable? That all your railings against Trump might be some degree of over the top?

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1237853)

WDMSO: there’s nothing incriminating on the laptop. And if there is, the GOP put it there!!

Sorry Jim no tinfoil hat seems again you’re unabashedly think Rudy would never do such a think. And please keep ignoring the law. If there was a criminal activity to be found Rudy and the gop contaminated the entire crime scene.
If you had any Common sense you’d understand that . And making money off your family name isn’t a crime ..
not paying your taxes is . funny the gop claims the irs is coming for your money so we must defund them.

Yet the only credible crime hunter may have committed is tax fraud.

Maybe the IRS shouldn’t investigate Hunter by gop standards
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1237851)

Hunters laptop content was Russian disinformation Makes some sense haven’t seen anything yet to disprove that possibility

Why does it make sense if there is no proof that it is? And several of its emails have been verified by forensic experts. And early on, the DOJ said it was not Russian Disinformation.

There’s no intelligence source who specifically said the laptop was Russian disinformation.

I didn't say Intel specifically said it was, but that it characterized it as such, i.e. had all the earmarks of Russian disinformation. Which effectively cripples it--actually serves to "debunk" it in the eyes of many.

he memo to all social media companies was look out for the possibility of Russian disinformation

And it was known by those who wrote the memo that the laptop story was about to be broken, so the news media, and social media were primed by them to view it as Russian disinformation. And so treated it as such, either debunking it or suppressing it. The release of the Twitter files has shown how it was primed to block it.

Still waiting on what you feel is on the hard drive and what will it prove

I have no feelings about what is on the Hard drive. I was not even disgusted with the supposedly disturbing photos on it.

You should read the article I linked
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1237858)

Trump was involved with Russia long before he was a politician.
Mueller did not investigate Trumps finances.

Donald Trump asked for help from Russia. Putin obliged him with the stolen emails.

Then Trump used that help every single day in the final month, knowing it was Russian help. It was the focus of his campaign.

How is this not a criminal conspiracy?

So now you believe the tale fed to Matt Taibbi by Elon Musk

And claim Democrats & the media manufactured the Trump/Russia scandal

Or read the GOP CONTROLLED SENATE COMMITTEE REPORT

Which details a conspiracy between a Russian intelligence officer & Trump campaign chairman Manafort

Or the fact that Robert Mueller found that Paul Manafort had been repeatedly tampered with by Trump agents so that he wouldn’t reveal any information to the FBI about Trump, and that in compensation for this Trump gave him a presidential pardon in full view of the American public?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1237851)

Hunters laptop content was Russian disinformation Makes some sense haven’t seen anything yet to disprove that possibility

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device