At least two Republican DAs want to prosecute Bidens: Rep. James Comer

[busybee01]

How do you know?

You don't even know what crimes they will find yet. Comer can give them all the records that they need to at least get started.

They will not necessarily need to get subpoenas for everything. Freedom of Information Act will cover volumes. Easy to get cooperation when you are trying to stop a vicious crime family like the bidens.

Yes, and Republican prosecutors are just as capable of being creative like that. Anything that a national political figure does affects all 50 states. That's the whole point of the federal government. So they will come up with something , I assure you.

The only reason they haven't done it before is due to the unspoken gentleman's agreement that local prosecutors don't go after National political figures.

It was an incredibly stupid move on Bragg's part. To his credit he was very reluctant to do it, until fellow Democrats pushed him into it.

It was stupid because it is bound to lead to tit for tat. Can't blame the Republicans. If they don't respond, the Democrats will just keep doing this. Maybe this will lead to some kind of truce, some formalization of the prior unspoken agreement.

In my opinion the best strategy will be to go for an indictment of Joe Biden now and at the same time make a motion to delay the trial until Biden is out of the white house. Meanwhile, indict and jail Hunter Biden. Leak that Hunter is considering a deal to talk. That should make creepy Joe jumpy as a cat.

Bread and circuses . . .

Comer doesn't have jack shit or he would have leaked it already. He will not be able to get the financial records of Biden's family. He may be able to get the financial records of Joe Biden but the information is already widely known. There are no vicious crime families except for Trump.

Republican prosecutors cannot get creative. They do not have jurisdiction and no federal courts or states courts will allow this. If we follow this line of reasoning, the state of California can prosecute Ron DeSantis for crimes. The only reason that they haven't is because they are not able to legally do so.

Essentially you are talking about a criminal conspiracy against Joe Biden. Anyone who tries that will find himself in jail. Hunter Biden cannot be indicted and jailed. There is a word for that. It is called kidnapping.

 

[busybee01]

I just saw on Fox that House Republicans are going to invite testimony from Manhattan Crime Victims who are victims of criminals that Alvin Bragg has refused to prosecute. That will make a stark contrast to Bragg's enthusiasm for prosecuting a guy who supposedly wrote two false words in his own business records.

Not that Trump actually wrote the words, nor were they false, of course. The whole case is absurd.

Just a bunch of right wing nutjobs. You are the one who is absurd.

 

[dudmuck]

Tell me in your own words what the proof is. Unless you're too lazy.

Your own link states Trump pleaded not guilty so he's innocent until proven guilty.

Go ahead.

Bragg used the felony statute to charge Trump 34 times. The number of charges refers to 34 documents the grand jury found to have contained a "critical false statement" related to the payments. These documents include checks written to Michael Cohen, Donald Trump’s former lawyer, as payments for legal services over a nine-month period when Trump was running for president. Bragg said these payments were for nonbusiness reasons.

"Why did Donald Trump repeatedly make these false statements? The evidence will show that he did so to cover up crimes relating to the 2016 election," Bragg said in a press conference after the arraignment.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Comer doesn't have jack shit or he would have leaked it already. He will not be able to get the financial records of Biden's family. He may be able to get the financial records of Joe Biden but the information is already widely known. There are no vicious crime families except for Trump.

Republican prosecutors cannot get creative. They do not have jurisdiction and no federal courts or states courts will allow this. If we follow this line of reasoning, the state of California can prosecute Ron DeSantis for crimes. The only reason that they haven't is because they are not able to legally do so.

Essentially you are talking about a criminal conspiracy against Joe Biden. Anyone who tries that will find himself in jail. Hunter Biden cannot be indicted and jailed. There is a word for that. It is called kidnapping.

Wrong on all counts. As long g as they find a willing grand jury in a red state they can indict all the Biden's they want to.

The cases may be thrown out in federal court but so will Trump's indictment.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Just a bunch of right wing nutjobs. You are the one who is absurd.

Crime victims in Manhattan?

 

[Dagosa]

While a few Republican DA's are hungry to get Biden, Hunter, et al., seems they are querying Comer for the dirt they can use to indict. Now we shall see if Comer's mouth is bigger than his plate. I suspect there's nothing on it to chew on, but it sure looks nice from a distance.

As my learned colleagues in academia are wont to say, the New York Post, founded by Alexander Hamilton, would not recognize what it has become. While it may not be a full-on tabloid, it bears all the hallmarks of one. Its appearance and style are reminiscent of the best of British tabloids, although it is not the kind of publication that garners awards for excellence in journalism. In fact, it has only managed to lay claim to one Pulitzer Prize, which is hardly an impressive record for any self-respecting journal of record. One might say that the NYPost exists somewhere between a serious news publication and a tabloid, but with its brazen and sensationalistic headlines, it sure looks like a tabloid to me. In the immortal words of that old adage, "if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck,....and you know the rest."

At least two Republican DAs want to prosecute Bidens: Rep. James Comer

House Oversight chairman says Republican prosecutors want to bring a case against the Bidens after Alvin Bragg charged Trump.

nypost.com

WASHINGTON — At least two local GOP prosecutors are looking at ways to charge President Biden and his family amid Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s prosecution of former President Donald Trump, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer revealed Wednesday.

“I had two calls yesterday, one from a county attorney in Kentucky and one from a county attorney in Tennessee,” Comer (R-Ky.) told “Fox & Friends.” “They were Republican, obviously, both states are heavily Republican. They want to know if there are ways they can go after the Bidens now.”

Comer is leading a House Republican investigation into Joe Biden’s role in his family’s international business dealings in countries such as China and Ukraine. The lawmaker’s staff recently reviewed Suspicious Activity Reports filed by banks to the Treasury Department regarding possible criminal activity by the Biden family.

Go for it. They also wanted to prosecute Hillary. With no evidence of any wrong doing, it will be tough.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Bragg used the felony statute to charge Trump 34 times. The number of charges refers to 34 documents the grand jury found to have contained a "critical false statement" related to the payments. These documents include checks written to Michael Cohen, Donald Trump’s former lawyer, as payments for legal services over a nine-month period when Trump was running for president. Bragg said these payments were for nonbusiness reasons.

He'll have to prove that. Non disclosure agreements are in no way illegal.

"Why did Donald Trump repeatedly make these false statements? The evidence will show that he did so to cover up crimes relating to the 2016 election," Bragg said in a press conference after the arraignment.

What crimes?

 

[struth]

No they cannot. It is very unlikely that Biden campaigned in either Kentucky or Tennessee.

hahaha yeah I am sure there were no campaign ads or signs in either state....geez....

Mrs. Biden Campaigns for Mr. Biden in Memphis​

Mrs. Biden Campaigns for Mr. Biden in Memphis

Jill Biden visited Memphis Sunday to rally voters behind her husband, Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden. The former Second Lady engaged with…

www.wknofm.org

of course they can...he did business in the state when he campaigned there. Do you guys even really believe the crap you type?

 

[Seymour Flops]

I get that Democrats are upset about this idea of local Republicans prosecuting the leader of their party and his corrupt relatives. But it was Democrats who decided to weaponize government.

Now you're learning that you don't control every government everywhere. I know that's not easy to hear, but that is what a federal democracy is all about.

 

[dudmuck]

He'll have to prove that. Non disclosure agreements are in no way illegal.

What crimes?

The crimes that Cohen went to jail for --> hush money payments were a contribution to the Trump campaign, exceeding the $2,800 limit.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The crimes that Cohen went to jail for --> hush money payments were a contribution to the Trump campaign, exceeding the $2,800 limit.

That is federal. Is Biden going to temporarily appoint Bragg federal prosecutor? Because all the other Federal prosecutors declined to prosecute such a bull corn case.

In what way was that a campaign contribution? By the way, and only a campaign contribution? Connect those dots for me please.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Weaponizing government is like using nuclear weapons. We would hope and pray that nobody would do it. The consequences could be far worse than simply losing and living to fight another day.

However if the other side shows
cheerful willingness to do it, then we would be stupid to agree not to. Democrats won't understand this until they realize the full import of that.

 

[dudmuck]

That is federal. Is Biden going to temporarily appoint brag a federal prosecutor? Because all the other Federal prosecutors declined to prosecute such a bull corn case.

In what way was that a campaign contribution?

the business records crimes are new york state crimes. Bragg appears to be betting that courts will go towards the idea that falsifying business records to conceal a federal crimes counts as making this state crime a felony.

 

[Rumpole]

If the ducks are in a row, why are so many Democrat legal experts ridiculing the case?

Which legal experts?

Maybe you know: according to Bragg's indictment, what is the secondary crime that makes falsification of records a felony?

the possible theories are outlined on the SOF, statement of facts.

He's beaten you every time so far. You think you finally got him?

Many famous criminals eluded authorities for years. They are clever. He's been indicted, and more indictments are likely to follow.

Don't like my posts don't read them.

I neither like nor dislike posts. I take what is written at face value. You cannot draw that inference from that statement. That you have, demonstrates you possess a furtive or cynical imagination.

Why? Are you seriously denying that the Biden's get millions from corrupt foreignors?

I have not seen actionable evidence of it. Please provide evidence. I will believe it when you provide evidence. Note that
Hunter Biden has been under investigation by David Weiss, US Attorney Delaware appointed as Special Counsel by Bill Barr (and left to finish the job by Joe Biden) to investigate Hunter Biden, Joe's own son, for some 3 plus years, without an indictment, and Hunter Biden doesn't strike me a clever like Trump is. This, to me, suggests that there isn't any actionable evidence.

Moreover, Rep. Comer is investigating the Bidens, and the Senate Judiciary Committee (the Grassley report) all are tall on rhetoric but short on evidence, and none have found anything that is actionable for a prosecutor. Mostly innuendo, non actionable emails, non actionable so - called 'evidence'. There are different levels of evidence, and when I say 'evidence' I want hard evidence, the kind that would be actionable for a prosecutor. For example, the email that says '10% for the big guy' is not hard evidence, it is not actionable for a prosecutor. The only thing that it could a predication for is merely for the writer of the email to be called into Congress or the FBI for questioning. What would happen next would depend on the testimony given.

Seems the investigation paid off if state prosecutors are ready to move ahead.

Which investigation?

Once the indictments are handed down we'll see the evidence as the jury does.

Yes.

Local partisan elected prosecutors have always had this power to prosecute national political figures of the other party.

They are empowered to empanel grand juries for crimes committed under their jurisdiction. Party or politics is irrelevant. To view otherwise is impugn the integrity of the US Justice system and is cynicism, and I reject it on that grounds.

Grand juries are noted for following the prosecutors lead in those one sided procedures.

That is true, but that is the system. The system doesn't allow for due process in a grand jury. Due process occurs at trial, where it belongs and where it matters.

Until now that didn't happen because both sides knew it would start a lengthy exchange of tot-for-tat.

There is no tit-for-tat, but it appears to be occurring with Congress in their 'committee for investigation of the weaponization of government' whose very title is based on assumption without evidence, and, in that sense, the committee, itself, is a tit-for-tat. There is no tit-for-tat prior to the committee, however.

Even Bragg knew that. He was reluctant to prosecute Donald Trump, but the other Dems pushed him into it. No coincidence their chosen kamikaze is black.

Bragg is a very methodical fellow. DA's take all the heat, so they have to be thorough. Bragg is elected, he ran a successful campaign, and that is democracy, nothing more, nothing less.

Overall, your point of view is consistent with that of a cynic, I reject cynicism, as cynicism begets nihilism, which leads to despair.

Cheers,
Rumpole

 

[Rumpole]

Go for it. They also wanted to prosecute Hillary. With no evidence of any wrong doing, it will be tough.

Well, there is a difference between Clinton and Trump; the former, they had no evidence, and the latter, they have much evidence.

 

[Seymour Flops]

the business records crimes are new york state crimes. Bragg appears to be betting that courts will go towards the idea that falsifying business records to conceal a federal crimes counts as making this state crime a felony.

Which is incredibly weak. That's why so many Democrat Talking Heads Are expressing disappointment. This will be thrown out pretty quickly. The next court date is not till December for whatever idiotic reason. Trump will have plenty of time to get the Supreme Court to hold an emergency hearing before then. You may be aware, he knows some of them dudes.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Which legal experts?

the possible theories are outlined on the SOF, statement of facts.

Many famous criminals eluded authorities for years. They are clever. He's been indicted, and more indictments are likely to follow.

I neither like nor dislike posts. I take what is written at face value. You cannot draw that inference from that statement. That you have, demonstrates you possess a furtive or cynical imagination.

I have not seen actionable evidence of it. Please provide evidence. I will believe it when you provide evidence. Note that
Hunter Biden has been under investigation by David Weiss, US Attorney Delaware appointed as Special Counsel by Bill Barr (and left to finish the job by Joe Biden) to investigate Hunter Biden, Joe's own son, for some 3 plus years, without an indictment, and Hunter Biden doesn't strike me a clever like Trump is. This, to me, suggests that there isn't any actionable evidence.

Moreover, Rep. Comer is investigating the Bidens, and the Senate Judiciary Committee (the Grassley report) all are tall on rhetoric but short on evidence, and none have found anything that is actionable for a prosecutor. Mostly innuendo, non actionable emails, non actionable so - called 'evidence'. There are different levels of evidence, and when I say 'evidence' I want hard evidence, the kind that would be actionable for a prosecutor. For example, the email that says '10% for the big guy' is not hard evidence, it is not actionable for a prosecutor. The only thing that it could a predication for is merely for the writer of the email to be called into Congress or the FBI for questioning. What would happen next would depend on the testimony given.

Which investigation?

Yes.

They are empowered to empanel grand juries for crimes committed under their jurisdiction. Party or politics is irrelevant. To view otherwise is impugn the integrity of the US Justice system and is cynicism, and I reject it on that grounds.

That is true, but that is the system. The system doesn't allow for due process in a grand jury. Due process occurs at trial, where it belongs and where it matters.

There is no tit-for-tat, but it appears to be occurring with Congress in their 'committee for investigation of the weaponization of government' whose very title is based on assumption without evidence, and, in that sense, the committee, itself, is a tit-for-tat. There is no tit-for-tat prior to the committee, however.

Bragg is a very methodical fellow. DA's take all the heat, so they have to be thorough. Bragg is elected, he ran a successful campaign, and that is democracy, nothing more, nothing less.

Overall, your point of view is consistent with that of a cynic, I reject cynicism, as cynicism begets nihilism, which leads to despair.

Cheers,
Rumpole

So are you seriously denying that Brad did not want to prosecute this case, and was pressured into it by other Democrats?

If that story is false, it is a pretty elaborate hoax. Two of his senior prosecutors resigned over that, and one of them wrote a book about it.

 

[Rumpole]

I see countersuits for frivolous prosecution in the future, if this nonsense progresses.

Such a countersuit will be tossed out of court on frivolous grounds, there are tons of evidence against Trump

 

[Rumpole]

Try again Bragg is going after Trump on federal crimes.

No, the indictment lists 34 state crimes

Cheers,
Rumpole

 

[Rumpole]

So are you seriously denying that Brad did not want to prosecute this case, and was pressured into it by other Democrats?

Bragg campaigned on holding a famous criminal accountable, as DAs often do. THat that famous person was Trump, was not an arbitrary fact, it was based on the fact that he is listed as a non-indicted co-conspirator in a campaign finance crime. Out of the federal crime, he found 34 counts of a state crime, which can be enhanced to a felony, owing that they were designed to conceal the hush money payments, and there is the tax deception, as well.

If that story is false, it is a pretty elaborate hoax. Two of his senior prosecutors resigned over that, and one of them wrote a book about it.

Your statement is false.

Pomerantz and Dunne resigned over an entirely different evidentiary path and potential prosecution, their path was the evidence accumulated in the Trump Org indictment. Bragg decided to go after the filing falsifying documents misdemeanor enhanced to a felony because the 34 counts were designed to conceal the Daniel's hush money payments.