Hunter Biden

[Mazdatruck]

Trump stole classified documents when vacating the Presidency and they didn't even care about that.

Is the entire US intelligence service trying to cover that up a week before a critical election?

Did the US's biggest communications network conspire to supress discussion about it?

[JLives]

Trump stole classified documents when vacating the Presidency and they didn't even care about that.

Is the entire US intelligence service trying to cover that up a week before a critical election?

Did the US's biggest communications network conspire to supress discussion about it?

The entire intelligence service or some people in it? And the socail networks made their own decisions internally. It was far from ordered.

Here's one for you. Is what Trump did a bad thing? Do you care?

[rustled]

Eventually, despite the circus, a significant portion of the American public will connect the dots between Hunter, Joe, and Ukraine - and the FBI's efforts to ensure the evidence on Hunter's laptop didn't impede Joe from assuming the role of POTUS.

Just a conspiracy thought: maybe the FBI's handling of Hillary's email information just before an election gave the FBI pause not to do it again if there was anything nefarious with Biden?? Let the best man win this time without outside influence. Just perhaps?

It's interesting to me that discussion of Hunter Biden's emails is being shoved aside with "Hillary's email".

No democracy can function when those tasked with investigating serious political wrongdoing are withholding evidence of serious wrongdoing by a potential presidential nominee, under the guise of "let the best man win". In reality, this could never result in an election free from inappropriate influence: there's obviously inappropriate influence when the FBI is influencing elections.

Objecting to influence from outside the country while allowing significant influence from inside the country is how the US ends up with a political establishment serving the political establishment. NOT a democracy.

[rustled]

Yep, if there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt the said lap top stayed in Hunter's chain of possession so no one else could plant material and any damaging contents can be fact checked and verified, pretty sure that would be SOP, and after all that pretty standard investigation stuff, if Hunter and Joe were found to be guilty of some criminal code infraction in a court, then they do the time.

Are they still pushing the "planted evidence" narrative? Goodness!

Until then, I guess the repubs and the public have to deal with dick-pics for now.

We can ignore the salacious distractions (not our circus, not our monkeys), and focus on the content of the emails.

We certainly don't have to allow ourselves to be led by the nose and manipulated by those who profit when the public chooses the salacious over the significant:

The FBI interfered in the 2020 election to suppress evidence on Hunter Biden's laptop implicating the now-sitting president in serious influence international wrongdoing.

[Pappywinkle]

The FBI interfered in the 2020 election to suppress evidence on Hunter Biden's laptop implicating the now-sitting president in serious influence international wrongdoing.

Are they're still pushing the "FBI interfered" narrative? Goodness!

[seewood]

It's interesting to me that discussion of Hunter Biden's emails is being shoved aside with "Hillary's email".

All I'm doing is thinking the FBI did not want to influence the outcome of a presidential election like they did when releasing info on Clinton's emails. Right or wrong, I think that is what they did.
Now the election is over, let the FBI bring forth any information that is proven criminal in nature.
Governments all over the world are full of contradictions, and many are rife with corruption. Canada is no different in that regard.
But, because others do it really is not a reason we or American government can do it. We express outrage until the next news cycle comes around and a new outrage exists. Its never ending.

Regarding Hunters laptop again, if there is nefarious information on it and it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then bring it forward.
If the FBI is still collaborating sources and fact checking, say so.
Personally, if there was any information on that lap top that was proven true prior to the election, I'm glad it was not brought to the fore, another term of Trump would have sunk the States further into the mire. But, bring it out now if the FBI has a case against Joe, or even Hunter so people can sleep at night.

[rustled]

It's interesting to me that discussion of Hunter Biden's emails is being shoved aside with "Hillary's email".

All I'm doing is thinking the FBI did not want to influence the outcome of a presidential election like they did when releasing info on Clinton's emails. Right or wrong, I think that is what they did.

If that's the case, why did they not disclose they had evidence of significant wrongdoing prior to Joe Biden winning the nomination?

Any other Democrat could have run in the election.

Let's think this through. Why did the political establishment need Joe Biden - not any other presidential nominee - to win the nomination?

[rustled]

Now the election is over, let the FBI bring forth any information that is proven criminal in nature.

They've had since the 2020 election.

Again, let's think this through.

[rustled]

If the FBI is still collaborating sources and fact checking, say so.

Instead, they've been busy hushing it up.

Why?

[Grandviewadvent]

Withholding information or searches is influencing elections.

The FBI shouldn't be bothered when elections happen.

[rustled]

Personally, if there was any information on that lap top that was proven true prior to the election, I'm glad it was not brought to the fore, another term of Trump would have sunk the States further into the mire. But, bring it out now if the FBI has a case against Joe, or even Hunter so people can sleep at night.

That's not how any legitimate democracy functions, though.

Being glad the FBI protected a specific Democrat during the nominee process, and then throughout not one but two election cycles, shows no respect for democracy. Let's get back to the nitty gritty, though:

Any other Democrat presidential nominee could have run against Trump. Why did it have to be Joe Biden, the nominee whose son's laptop has evidence of significant political wrongdoing involving Ukraine?

[seewood]

Are they still pushing the "planted evidence" narrative? Goodness!

Has it been proven that this has not happened? It is an absolute fact that any nefarious information is in fact true and loaded by Hunter?
In my later years I am slowly learning that never assume or use the word " probably" as in my younger years it has caused much embarrassment. Besides my wife uses it and I have to correct her about assuming before facts are out.

Look, what I want to hear from the FBI and no one else, is that the contents on the laptop are true and loaded by Hunter himself and the computer never lost the chain of possession from Hunter.
Have we heard that yet? or are we assuming everything on the lap top is Hunter's?

If there is illegal activity, and can proven in a court beyond a reasonable doubt, then prosecute. Simple really. Trump will be prosecuted I suspect before long, so should Joe if he transgressed any laws, before or during his time in politics. Same as Hunter, prosecute if the law can prove beyond a reasonable doubt he is guilty of any transgressions of the law.

[rustled]

Are they still pushing the "planted evidence" narrative? Goodness!

Has it been proven that this has not happened? It is an absolute fact that any nefarious information is in fact true and loaded by Hunter?

Great questions! They've had three years to determine whether or not those were Hunter Biden's emails, and haven't been tampered with.

Instead of keeping the public informed about how the investigation is progressing, they've been sitting on it.

Through the Democrats' presidential nomination process, AND two election cycles.

[rustled]

Look, what I want to hear from the FBI and no one else, is that the contents on the laptop are true and loaded by Hunter himself and the computer never lost the chain of possession from Hunter.

Have we heard that yet? or are we assuming everything on the lap top is Hunter's?[/quote]
After three years, why are members of the public still asking these questions?

Why aren't we hearing anything directly from the FBI?

[rustled]

If there is illegal activity, and can proven in a court beyond a reasonable doubt, then prosecute. Simple really. Trump will be prosecuted I suspect before long, so should Joe if he transgressed any laws, before or during his time in politics. Same as Hunter, prosecute if the law can prove beyond a reasonable doubt he is guilty of any transgressions of the law.

Sidestepping the suppression of evidence won't make it go away.

The law doesn't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt before the prosecution takes over. That's not how it works for anyone else. So why set the goalposts for prosecution at "beyond a reasonable doubt" for Biden? Whether or not to prosecute Biden should depend on the same level of evidence it does for everyone else.

Whether or not to investigate should always depend on the evidence available.

Whether or not to announce an investigation and keep the public informed should never depend on which party is implicated in the wrongdoing. Prior to an election, the public has a vested interest in knowing there's evidence of wrongdoing, and how the investigation is proceeding.

The public isn't served by keeping that information from the public. Who is?

Which brings us back to: Why was the evidence on Hunter Biden's laptop given this much protection from scrutiny even before his father was the Democrat nominee, and why did the protection from scrutiny extend for three years, and through two US federal election cycles?