Hunter Biden laptop

[Joe Elliott]

But the Dems were able to use the legal system (with liberal judges) to illegally obtain the returns.

Really? You can obtain returns illegally by using the legal system?

Do you ever think before you write something as stupid as that?

If I can answer for Richard, the answer is no.

Or better yet, if a judge orders tax returns to be obtain, it is still illegal, if Richard believes it should be illegal. No matter what that judge or any judge says.

Martin, I hope this clears it up for you. It certainly doesn't for me.

. . .

At best, one can give the opinion that the judge was in error. But not that the judge acted illegally. Even if a higher court overrules him, the judge did not do anything illegal. He would have just made an error in his legal judgment.

. . .

Another point I would like to make, the tax returns were collected by authorized people, at the order of a judge.

It's not like laptop is analyzed by someone who is not a member of law enforcement, who was not authorized to act by some judge, whether rightly or in error, but was possessed by a shop owner who could have altered the laptop. Or asked the Russians to alter it for him. That should be no problem for a court trial, it should still be considered sterling evidence.

And yet using the tax returns is completely illegal. While using this laptop as evidence is totally above board.

[Richard Smith]

Trump (since 2016): I will gladly release my tax returns but I can't as they are under audit. As soon as the audit is over I will make them public (obviously I am paraphrasing)

Jan 6th Committee (2022): The record shows there never was an audit....

If anybody embarrasses Trump, it's Trump himself.

But the Dems were able to use the legal system (with liberal judges) to illegally obtain the returns.

Really? You can obtain returns illegally by using the legal system?

Do you ever think before you write something as stupid as that?

LOL.  Here in America (the country that pays for the defense of "Europe") there is a federal law that precludes the disclosure of tax returns for privacy reasons.  That is one of the reasons, for example, that the tax returns of even a double murderer named Lee Harvey Oswald have never been made public despite being the assassin of the US President.  But in the case of the actual President, the tax returns were obtained via a liberal judge and disclosed to the public for political reasons.  And what do we learn?  Trump was in compliance with the tax laws enacted by our corrupt Congress which often permit the wealthiest to pay no taxes.  Does anyone in the US voluntarily pay more taxes than they owe under our corrupt tax code?  Absolutely not.  Not Trump or anyone else.  This is the net result of years of litigation.

[Martin Weidmann]

LOL.  Here in America (the country that pays for the defense of "Europe") there is a federal law that precludes the disclosure of tax returns for privacy reasons.  That is one of the reasons, for example, that the tax returns of even a double murderer named Lee Harvey Oswald have never been made public despite being the assassin of the US President.  But in the case of the actual President, the tax returns were obtained via a liberal judge and disclosed to the public for political reasons.  And what do we learn?  Trump was in compliance with the tax laws enacted by our corrupt Congress which often permit the wealthiest to pay no taxes.  Does anyone in the US voluntarily pay more taxes than they owe under our corrupt tax code?  Absolutely not.  Not Trump or anyone else.  This is the net result of years of litigation.

What happened to you? Did somebody drop you on your head when you were a kid?

What will it take for a fanatic like you to ever understand that you are not part of the solution? You're not even part of the problem, you (and others like you) are the problem!

If there is a difference between people like you and extreme fanatics like the Taliban, I don't see it.

[Richard Smith]

Hunter needs a new lawyer since his current one just inadvertantely confirmed (not that there was any doubt) that the contents of the laptop are his:

“Backing up Mr. Biden’s files for any repair did not require Mr. Mac Isaac to review the contents of any such files,” a lawyer for Biden wrote. “Mr. Biden did not consent to Mr. Mac Isaac gaining access to the content of those files in April 2019 or at any other time.”

[Joe Elliott]

Hunter needs a new lawyer since his current one just inadvertantely confirmed (not that there was any doubt) that the contents of the laptop are his:

“Backing up Mr. Biden’s files for any repair did not require Mr. Mac Isaac to review the contents of any such files,” a lawyer for Biden wrote. “Mr. Biden did not consent to Mr. Mac Isaac gaining access to the content of those files in April 2019 or at any other time.”

But confirms that Mr. Mac Isaac had access to those files. And could have modified them. Or gotten someone else to modify them, and modify servers to make the files look legit. Someone like the Russians who would have the knowledge and means to do all of that.

It's one thing if the laptop was in continuous position of the FBI or the police. It's another thing if it was in possession of someone hostile to Biden and his father. I don't see how this doesn't destroy the value of this 'evidence'.

[Richard Smith]

But confirms that Mr. Mac Isaac had access to those files. And could have modified them. Or gotten someone else to modify them, and modify servers to make the files look legit. Someone like the Russians who would have the knowledge and means to do all of that.

It's one thing if the laptop was in continuous position of the FBI or the police. It's another thing if it was in possession of someone hostile to Biden and his father. I don't see how this doesn't destroy the value of this 'evidence'.

Using the time-honored JFK CTer tactic that someone "could" have altered the evidence?  It's possible.  There is no evidence, however, of such and presumably the FBI could figure out if a computer guy altered evidence.  He is not exactly Bill Gates.  But keep telling yourself that and ignoring the fact that the crack addicted son of the president was paid millions from several foreign sources including Russia and China.  And the "big guy" got a cut.  If this were Trump, he would be in a cage. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Using the time-honored JFK CTer tactic that someone "could" have altered the evidence?  It's possible.  There is no evidence, however, of such and presumably the FBI could figure out if a computer guy altered evidence.  He is not exactly Bill Gates.  But keep telling yourself that and ignoring the fact that the crack addicted son of the president was paid millions from several foreign sources including Russia and China.  And the "big guy" got a cut.  If this were Trump, he would be in a cage.

Why don't you just wait and see what is actually on the laptop. There has been all sorts of speculation but so far the investigation of the FBI (which has been going for a while now) seems to have yielded very little.