• Blow-by-blow report on the collapse of the BooBoo plea deal

    From Tommy@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 21 15:37:34 2023
    ...by none other than the NEW YORK TIMES! https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/19/us/politics/inside-hunter-biden-plea-deal.html#:~:text=The%20Unraveling%20of%20a%20Plea,counsel%20status%2C%20a%20stunning%20reversal.
    This is a remarkably candid tome that pulls no punches, signaling an end of the honeymoon treatment of the Biden Crime Family by the lame-stream media. I could not find a single fault with their report.

    Startling is the revelation that Weiss wasn't going to charge BooBoo with ANYTHING until the IRS whistleblowers exposed the corruption.

    And it completely contradicts the Fool's claim that there was no immunity deal. And, YES, this deal, as written, was REJECTED by Judge Noreika.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Tommy on Mon Aug 21 18:44:35 2023
    On 2023-08-21 15:37, Tommy wrote:
    ...by none other than the NEW YORK TIMES! https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/19/us/politics/inside-hunter-biden-plea-deal.html#:~:text=The%20Unraveling%20of%20a%20Plea,counsel%20status%2C%20a%20stunning%20reversal.
    This is a remarkably candid tome that pulls no punches, signaling an end of the honeymoon treatment of the Biden Crime Family by the lame-stream media. I could not find a single fault with their report.

    Startling is the revelation that Weiss wasn't going to charge BooBoo with ANYTHING until the IRS whistleblowers exposed the corruption.

    And it completely contradicts the Fool's claim that there was no immunity deal. And, YES, this deal, as written, was REJECTED by Judge Noreika.

    1. I never claimed there was NO immunity deal.

    2. I presented absolute proof in the form of the DoJ writing that it was rejected by Hunter Biden.

    3. Isn't it convenient that the article is hidden behind a paywall...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tommy@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Aug 22 18:46:22 2023
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 6:51:03 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
    On 2023-08-21 15:37, Tommy wrote:
    ...by none other than the NEW YORK TIMES! https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/19/us/politics/inside-hunter-biden-plea-deal.html#:~:text=The%20Unraveling%20of%20a%20Plea,counsel%20status%2C%20a%20stunning%20reversal.
    This is a remarkably candid tome that pulls no punches, signaling an end of the honeymoon treatment of the Biden Crime Family by the lame-stream media. I could not find a single fault with their report.

    Startling is the revelation that Weiss wasn't going to charge BooBoo with ANYTHING until the IRS whistleblowers exposed the corruption.

    And it completely contradicts the Fool's claim that there was no immunity deal. And, YES, this deal, as written, was REJECTED by Judge Noreika.
    1. I never claimed there was NO immunity deal.

    Oh, yes YOU DID!


    2. I presented absolute proof in the form of the DoJ writing that it was rejected by Hunter Biden.

    YOU kept arguing that the deal WAS NOT rejected!!


    3. Isn't it convenient that the article is hidden behind a paywall...

    WHY???? Is it any LESS TRUE???????????

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Tommy on Tue Aug 22 19:35:04 2023
    On 2023-08-22 18:46, Tommy wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 6:51:03 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
    On 2023-08-21 15:37, Tommy wrote:
    ...by none other than the NEW YORK TIMES!
    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/19/us/politics/inside-hunter-biden-plea-deal.html#:~:text=The%20Unraveling%20of%20a%20Plea,counsel%20status%2C%20a%20stunning%20reversal.
    This is a remarkably candid tome that pulls no punches, signaling an end of the honeymoon treatment of the Biden Crime Family by the lame-stream media. I could not find a single fault with their report.

    Startling is the revelation that Weiss wasn't going to charge BooBoo with ANYTHING until the IRS whistleblowers exposed the corruption.

    And it completely contradicts the Fool's claim that there was no immunity deal. And, YES, this deal, as written, was REJECTED by Judge Noreika.
    1. I never claimed there was NO immunity deal.

    Oh, yes YOU DID!

    Nope. Sorry.



    2. I presented absolute proof in the form of the DoJ writing that it was
    rejected by Hunter Biden.

    YOU kept arguing that the deal WAS NOT rejected!!

    I argued that it wasn't rejected BY THE JUDGE.



    3. Isn't it convenient that the article is hidden behind a paywall...

    WHY???? Is it any LESS TRUE???????????

    I just find it convenient.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From -hh@21:1/5 to Alan on Wed Aug 23 04:36:00 2023
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 10:35:09 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
    On 2023-08-22 18:46, Tommy wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 6:51:03 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
    On 2023-08-21 15:37, Tommy wrote:
    ...by none other than the NEW YORK TIMES!
    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/19/us/politics/inside-hunter-biden-plea-deal.html#:~:text=The%20Unraveling%20of%20a%20Plea,counsel%20status%2C%20a%20stunning%20reversal.
    This is a remarkably candid tome that pulls no punches, signaling an end of the honeymoon treatment of the Biden Crime Family by the lame-stream media. I could not find a single fault with their report.

    Startling is the revelation that Weiss wasn't going to charge BooBoo with ANYTHING until the IRS whistleblowers exposed the corruption.

    And it completely contradicts the Fool's claim that there was no immunity deal. And, YES, this deal, as written, was REJECTED by Judge Noreika.
    1. I never claimed there was NO immunity deal.

    Oh, yes YOU DID!
    Nope. Sorry.


    2. I presented absolute proof in the form of the DoJ writing that it was >> rejected by Hunter Biden.

    YOU kept arguing that the deal WAS NOT rejected!!
    I argued that it wasn't rejected BY THE JUDGE.


    3. Isn't it convenient that the article is hidden behind a paywall...

    WHY???? Is it any LESS TRUE???????????

    I just find it convenient.

    Such as not noting Partisan meddling:

    “ The documents and interviews also show that the relationship between
    Mr. Biden’s legal team and Mr. Weiss’s office reached a breaking point at a crucial moment after one of his top deputies — who had become a target
    of the I.R.S. agents and Republican allies — left the team for reasons that remain unclear.”

    and:

    “ Earlier this year, The Times found, Mr. Weiss appeared willing to forgo any
    prosecution of Mr. Biden at all, and his office came close to agreeing to end the investigation without requiring a guilty plea on any charges. But the correspondence reveals that his position, relayed through his staff, changed in the spring, around the time a pair of I.R.S. officials on the case accused the
    Justice Department of hamstringing the investigation. Mr. Weiss suddenly demanded that Mr. Biden plead guilty to committing tax offenses.

    Now, the I.R.S. agents and their Republican allies say they believe the evidence
    they brought forward, at the precise time they did, played a role in influencing
    the outcome, a claim senior law enforcement officials dispute. While Mr. Biden’s
    legal team agrees that the I.R.S. agents affected the deal, his lawyers have contended
    to the Justice Department that by disclosing details about the investigation to
    Congress, they broke the law and should be prosecuted.”

    Golly, another instance of Republican-sponsored “whistleblowers” who broke the law?? /s

    -hh

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)