Hunter won't do what Don Jr. and Ivanka did...why?

[konradv]

According to Joe they don't talk... I guess it best he keep that lie running eh ?

Bullshit

 

[beagle9]

He didn't. Monica came on to him.



You realize you had four grammatical errors in that sentence, right?

Clinton was the power holder, and was also under investigation for abusing that power in very damaging ways.

 

[DBA]

Or I just have a set of eyes and I can see that winters are a lot warmer than they were when I was growing up. I can see the melting icebergs and shrinking glaciers and dying coral reefs and say, "Gee, there must be something to that."

In the 60's and 70's scientists, and likely your eyes, saw a slight cooling that alarmed them. They have sense changed to the warming argument but decided to call it climate change to cover their butts. You are a fool, but I don't really care.

 

[beagle9]

O

There’s that problem of evidence, though. They haven’t got any, while Jack Smith has a ton.

Ohhhhh you mean Jack Smith has evidence like the evidence that Comer and Jordon has in which you all are denying to the last man standing eh ?

 

[JoeB131]

In the 60's and 70's scientists, and likely your eyes, saw a slight cooling that alarmed them. They have sense changed to the warming argument but decided to call it climate change to cover their butts. You are a fool, but I don't really care.

Actually, they saw nothing of the sort.

I would say educate yourself, but I'm sure you didn't learn about this at the Double Wide Home Skule.

The Discovery of Global Warming

A hypertext history of how scientists came to (partly) understand what people are doing to cause climate change. An abridged web version of Spencer R. Weart's book presented by the American Institute of Physics.

history.aip.org

 

[DBA]

Actually, they saw nothing of the sort.

I would say educate yourself, but I'm sure you didn't learn about this at the Double Wide Home Skule.

The Discovery of Global Warming

A hypertext history of how scientists came to (partly) understand what people are doing to cause climate change. An abridged web version of Spencer R. Weart's book presented by the American Institute of Physics.

history.aip.org

Hey idiot, I have physical National Geographic magazines that say otherwise. You have been duped.

 

[Rawley]

There’s that problem of evidence, though. They haven’t got any, while Jack Smith has a ton.

WOrd of advice, Konrad. You seem like one of the decent ones on the left here. DOn't repeat the Biden's patently absurd NO EVIDENCE talking point. It makes you sound like an ignorant partisan stooge. Repubs have 10 times the evidence that Dems had at this point in the Trump impeachment.

 

[DBA]

Repubs have 10 times the evidence that Dems had at this point in the Trump impeachment.

They simply can't wrap their heads around this fact.

 

[beagle9]

Actually, they saw nothing of the sort.

I would say educate yourself, but I'm sure you didn't learn about this at the Double Wide Home Skule.

The Discovery of Global Warming

A hypertext history of how scientists came to (partly) understand what people are doing to cause climate change. An abridged web version of Spencer R. Weart's book presented by the American Institute of Physics.

history.aip.org

And it will swing like it always does, unless you got some sort of proof that the earth will be thrown off of it's axis. Do you have proof of this up coming event ? Weather patterns change, and the earth has been warming and cooling since it's creation. Just buy you some security to match the climate, and shut up because you leftist can't control shite.

 

[beagle9]

They simply can't wrap their heads around this fact.

It's because they are sheep being led by their masters to the slaughter. They are no longer aloud to to think.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Actually, they saw nothing of the sort.

I would say educate yourself, but I'm sure you didn't learn about this at the Double Wide Home Skule.

The Discovery of Global Warming

A hypertext history of how scientists came to (partly) understand what people are doing to cause climate change. An abridged web version of Spencer R. Weart's book presented by the American Institute of Physics.

history.aip.org

You are in the wrong forum.

 

[HikerGuy83]

He didn't. Monica came on to him.



You realize you had four grammatical errors in that sentence, right?

Actually, he came on her blue dress.

 

[Rawley]

You don't seem to understand. He simply will not be forced to answer to Congress, specifically because his liberty is under direct threat of incarceration, if found guilty of actual charges against him presently in Federal Court. Testifying under (oath at this time) before congress at this time would be pretty much like a forced deposition to the court under oath, before the trial begins, forcing a closer insight given to actual prosecutors, as it would be under oath, and giving prosecutors an advantage never seen in Federal Court, on areas of interests as well as defense strategies of the accused.

I am afraid you have gotten all you are going to get out of Hunter directly until trial. Heck, he cannot even be forced to testify at his trial. Prosecution will have to win or lose on it's own work, as Hunter cannot be forced to testify.

Bullshit. The option was to show up to testify and plead the fifth, Telling Congress to go fuck themselves is a Federal crime. You are advocating that Biden's Justice Department treat him differently because he's the President's son That's fucked up

 

[JoeB131]

Hey idiot, I have physical National Geographic magazines that say otherwise. You have been duped.

So you bought it to look at the nudes?

Why, yes, a meticulously documented timeline of climate change theory is totally negated by a mass-market magazine written by an author with no credentials.

They simply can't wrap their heads around this fact.

Quanitty doesn't equal quality. Trump had a roomful of National Security professionals who heard him try to shake down the President of Ukraine

All you have so far is that Biden took naughty pictures of himself.

 

[White 6]

Bullshit. The option was to show up to testify and plead the fiifth, Telling COngress to fuck themselves is a Federal crime. You are advocating that Biden's Justice Department treat him differently because he's the President's son That's fucked up

No. Of course not. He will end up testifying. Our real legal system, just does not place that kind of jeopardy on an actual defendant facing actual filed federal charges in court. So, you will get to hear from him, just not while he is facing actual trial jeopardy. I have no problem with taking the 5th as an answer, but that also looks bad in the papers and in front of jurors before trial in a high profile court case. He probably listened to his lawyers, as well as graduating from a fairly highly rated law school, himself. He knows he will not be forced to give testimony prejudicial to his own legal case, and that is really the only thing they could and would be wanting, as it would also be fruit for their attempt to impeach is dad. So, with his refusal, the committee is forced to take it to actual court, to get action, as they have no enforcement mechanism of their own. He, in turn, would get to appeal, and undoubtedly remain free while the appeal works it's way, not that Congress would be likely to win, when taking it to Federal Court, in the first place, for reasons stated. It is just a losing proposition for the committee, and an error by another group of Republican lawyers. The ineptitude of Republican lawyers is really starting bug me, never realizing how stupid. I am actually evaluating looking at somebody else to have a relationship with, if I ever have a weapons charge, if forced to defend a possible action, considering the constant string of defeats and losses by Republican lawyers. It is often, as if they never studied or had to actually deal with the law. If I am ever in trouble personally, I want the real deal instead of somebody that can make nice pleas to the news media, but might not be worth a shit in actual court.

 

[mudwhistle]

You don't seem to understand. He simply will not be forced to answer to Congress, specifically because his liberty is under direct threat of incarceration, if found guilty of actual charges against him presently in Federal Court. Testifying under (oath at this time) before congress at this time would be pretty much like a forced deposition to the court under oath, before the trial begins, forcing a closer insight given to actual prosecutors, as it would be under oath, and giving prosecutors an advantage never seen in Federal Court, on areas of interests as well as defense strategies of the accused.

I am afraid you have gotten all you are going to get out of Hunter directly until trial. Heck, he cannot even be forced to testify at his trial. Prosecution will have to win or lose on it's own work, as Hunter cannot be forced to testify.

So it's okay now to refuse to answer to congress?
That means when the Democrats take back the House anyone they try to force to testify or face questioning can tell them to take a flying-fck, correct? That means that you just removed one of the number one functions of congress, meaning oversight of the Executive Branch.

Two can play this game.

The fact that he can plead the fifth never crossed your mind?

The purpose for this investigation is to flesh out proof for a possible impeachment of his father. If they refuse to cooperate then that creates suspicion that they have something to hide. The reason Hunter refuses to answer to congress is because he knows they have all the proof they need to refer charges to the DOJ for prosecution of himself and his father. He doesn't want to be put into a position of perjuring himself.

 

[White 6]

So it's okay now to refuse to answer to congress?
That means when the Democrats take back the House anyone they try to force to testify or face questioning can tell them to take a flying-fck, correct? That means that you just removed one of the number one functions of congress, meaning oversight of the Executive Branch.

Two can play this game.

The fact that he can plead the fifth never crossed your mind?

The purpose for this investigation is to flesh out proof for a possible impeachment of his father. If they refuse to cooperate then that creates suspicion that they have something to hide. The reason Hunter refuses to answer to congress is because he knows they have all the proof they need to refer charges to the DOJ for prosecution of himself and his father. He doesn't want to be put into a position of perjuring himself.

In certain circumstances, it always has been, such as in this case, due to whether the circumstance lets you get away with it, as is the case here.

 

[mudwhistle]

In certain circumstances, it always has been, such as in this case, due to whether the circumstance lets you get away with it, as is the case here.

Yes.....only the guilty can get away with it if they're a Democrat and in the good graces of the Donors.

 

[Rawley]

No. Of course not. He will end up testifying. Our real legal system, just does not place that kind of jeopardy on an actual defendant facing actual filed federal charges in court. So, you will get to hear from him, just not while he is facing actual trial jeopardy. I have no problem with taking the 5th as an answer, but that also looks bad in the papers and in front of jurors before trial in a high profile court case. He probably listened to his lawyers, as well as graduating from a fairly highly rated law school, himself. He knows he will not be forced to give testimony prejudicial to his own legal case, and that is really the only thing they could and would be wanting, as it would also be fruit for their attempt to impeach is dad. So, with his refusal, the committee is forced to take it to actual court, to get action, as they have no enforcement mechanism of their own. He, in turn, would get to appeal, and undoubtedly remain free while the appeal works it's way, not that Congress would be likely to win, when taking it to Federal Court, in the first place, for reasons stated. It is just a losing proposition for the committee, and an error by another group of Republican lawyers. The ineptitude of Republican lawyers is really starting bug me, never realizing how stupid. I am actually evaluating looking at somebody else to have a relationship with, if I ever have a weapons charge, if forced to defend a possible action, considering the constant string of defeats and losses by Republican lawyers. It is often, as if they never studied or had to actually deal with the law. If I am ever in trouble personally, I want the real deal instead of somebody that can make nice pleas to the news media, but might not be worth a shit in actual court.

??? It's a huge win for the Committee and Republicans. They refer it to Garland and if he sits on it for more than a month, the corruption of the Biden administration is writ large. Garland's corruption will be part of every Republican's campaign from now until the election.

Incredibly stupid move by his attorney. Monumentally stupid.

 

[White 6]

Yes.....only the guilty can get away with it if they're a Democrat and in the good graces of the Donors.

Is there another situation from history, where somebody in Congress wanted to question somebody that was actually facing Federal Charges with a court date projected, and facing serious jail time on the charges, with those issues being exactly what Congress wanted to question the witness about, before their scheduled trial.
If you have something, put it out here, the trial reference and the legal decision in the appellate that forced the testimony prior to trial. I can't think of any, certainly not in modern times.