Anonymous ID: d9a8e6 Jan. 10, 2024, 2:16 p.m. No.20221454   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1488 >>1497 >>1890

From notables:

>>20220951 (pb) Hunter Biden STORMS OUT of public hearing after weeks of BEGGING for one

 

Watched hours of testimony. Took that long to hear the relevant arguments among grandstanding.

 

Links to hearing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d10RhhXZ89Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pPPn8VT5BU

 

They came from Byron Donalds and Darrel Issa and Eric Burlison and chair James Comer and one guy whose name I forget.. Those who failed to bring forth the valid, relevant arguments did so due to reasons ranging from inability to recognize them to intentional distraction to not quite hitting the big point when trying.

 

  • Contempt is clear based on the governing rules. Witness is subpoenaed, has no claim to immunity, and fails to appear.

 

  • HB's side wants to skip closed door hearing (up to hundreds of hours) and only do public one (5 hrs). They say this is because fears that Republicans would leak are valid (like Schiff did, they don't say). They say Comer gave Hunter reason to believe he had the option when he went on radio. But Comer's statements are of debatable meaning and Hunter's interpretation of public statements are not what governs contempt determinations, it's the committee rules and legal precedent. The committee instead says Hunter thinks he's priveleged and can make up his own rules.

 

I say all the anti-contempt side are HB's lackeys and unhired defense team who make up twists and distractions and deflections and projections to muddy the waters to inspire anti-Trump sentiment int sympathy for HB, and provide reporters plausible article fodder, thus cementing themselves in history as people who defend the behavior on the laptop and work to hide Joe Biden's crimes rather than pro-America accountability and justice… but i digress…

 

  • The reason for the committee to demand a deposition behind closed doors rather than allow HB to get away with only open hearing is a) precedent is total. No one is allowed to do that ever, the whole reason to subpoena is the private deposition, with both sides attorneys. They try to project Schiff leaks on committee's investigation. b) HB wants public instead so his side can lie for 5 minutes at a time about it, as Burlison pointed out. And he can use all manner of tricks, including answering slowly, etc. He can employ Mueller/Clapper tactics, IOW. Public is more show.

 

  • The difference between HB being held in contempt, and what Jordan, Biggs, Bannon, et al did when they refused to show for the J6 committee is a) there is a clearly held standard / precedent for immunity for conversations with the president. Congress is not entitled to information from these conversations and b) J6 committee was illegitimate and subpoenas were therefore invalid (they'd argue ) (and previous J6 committee member statement even supports) this. Further, J6 committee ultimately chose not to try and enforce (IIUC)… R's would say that's because they had no authority, it was all illegitimate

 

  • This HB investigation has merit and relevance to questions about current sitting resident because evidence is substantive. Wires directly to Hunter from Chinese Government entity on record, bank statements.

 

Part 1

Anonymous ID: d9a8e6 Jan. 10, 2024, 2:17 p.m. No.20221461   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1497 >>1510

part 2

 

  • Trump properties receipt of monies from foreign dignitaries while in office is apples to oranges. Trump's brand provides a product/service, and the monies received are in exchange for that service. It is not as though donations beyond room and board cost have been received / evidenced. Bidet has no plausible explanation for what service his companies and shell companies provide - special favors is an obvious suspicion. Trump divested and gave operations to his sons, using a trust vehicle that won't benefit him until after office – almost all politicians do this to avoid charges of impropriety… (mirror?) … and profits have been returned to the Treasury. Bidet money is an order of magnitude greater, and appears to be direct and political and pay to play / quid pro quo / collusion stuff. Trump brand to my knowledge is not obligated to refuse monies from clients. I've seen no evidence that the receipt of monies from those who chose to stay at Trump hotels (even if intending to curry favor when they did so) have resulted in special treatment. Bidet is not a gray area - the laptop is much different - promises of special access, threats, and the public joe biden statement about firing the prosecutor in Ukraine.

 

Notes: Jamie Raskin was the chief scumbag apologist for Hunter Biden. A few in favor of the contempt charge / deposition of Hunter made the point of how embarrassing it must be to defend him. Should be - but the guy is good at what he does, and cognitive bias is strong. They just never break character. They never admit any wrongdoing and project. They mimic the outrage that is justified toward their client (which is how HB is being treated, like a client) and direct it at anyone who would dare question hookers and blow and spies and foreign dealings all being obvious to anyone who looks. And they act like Trump is worse - without a bit of shame. Children need to know how to identify these narcissistic sociopaths.

 

FYI I am a novice retard just watching, but I've done a lot of legal reading and research

 

tldr: hunter biden contempt trial is more priveleged behavior from untouchable crackhead and more gaslighting narcissism from his apologists in the Democrat party