by oldedude on October 22, 2022 9:54 am
I have said over and over again, if Hunter or Joe have done anything illegal, indict them, try them, convict them, and imprison them. Knock yourselves out.
Why is it that whenever the right thinks they have a slam dunk against an enemy, they never manage to get to any of those parts of the process?
This is the fight we've talked about at nauseum. It is the "enforcement arms that would not act. The same folks that would not act when they knew illegal evidence was being presented to federal judges.
"The former FBI special agent who allegedly suppressed negative information about Hunter Biden was also accused of flirting with a witness and concealing her sexual relationship with one of his agents when he was the lead investigator in a high-profile political corruption case that ended a congressman's career.
Today, Timothy Thibault, 55, is at the center of an escalating scandal after whistleblowers accused him of improper conduct during the investigation into Hunter Biden's laptop after it was dropped off at a computer repair store in Delaware.
As one of 13 special agents tasked with investigating the computer contents, Thibault is alleged to have miscategorized damaging evidence as 'disinformation' and attempted to 'close a stream' of derogatory information in the lead up to the 2020 elections."
These are a number of alleged ďintelligenceĒ officials who knowingly lied, deceived and misled the American people concerning Hunter Bidenís laptop and the incriminating evidence found on it in order to protect the current illegitimate occupant of the White House. The question we should all be asking ourselves is, when are we going to arrest and prosecute these criminals?
Mike Hayden, former CIA director, now analyst for CNN: Didnít respond.
Jim Clapper, former director of national intelligence, now CNN pundit: ďYes, I stand by the statement made AT THE TIME, and would call attention to its 5th paragraph. I think sounding such a cautionary note AT THE TIME was appropriate.Ē
Leon Panetta, former CIA director and defense secretary, now runs a public policy institute at California State University: Declined comment.
John Brennan, former CIA director, now analyst for NBC and MSNBC: Didnít respond.
Thomas Fingar, former National Intelligence Council chair, now teaches at Stanford University: Didnít respond.
Rick Ledgett, former National Security Agency deputy director, now a director at M&T Bank: Didnít respond.
John McLaughlin, former CIA acting director, now teaches at Johns Hopkins University: Didnít respond.
Michael Morell, former CIA acting director, now at George Mason University: Didnít respond.
Mike Vickers, former defense undersecretary for intelligence, now on board of BAE Systems: Didnít respond.
Doug Wise, former Defense Intelligence Agency deputy director, teaches at University of New Mexico: Didnít respond.
Nick Rasmussen, former National Counterterrorism Center director, now executive director, Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism: Didnít respond.
Russ Travers, former National Counterterrorism Center acting director: ďThe letter explicitly stated that we didnít know if the emails were genuine, but that we were concerned about Russian disinformation efforts. I spent 25 years as a Soviet/Russian analyst. Given the context of what the Russians were doing at the time (and continue to do ó Ukraine being just the latest example), I considered the cautionary warning to be prudent.Ē
Andy Liepman, former National Counterterrorism Center deputy director: ďAs far as I know I do [stand by the statement] but Iím kind of busy right now.Ē
John Moseman, former CIA chief of staff: Didnít respond.
Larry Pfeiffer, former CIA chief of staff, now senior advisor to The Chertoff Group:
Jeremy Bash, former CIA chief of staff, now analyst for NBC and MSNBC: Didnít respond.
Rodney Snyder, former CIA chief of staff: Didnít respond.
Glenn Gerstell, former National Security Agency general counsel: Didnít respond.
David Priess, former CIA analyst and manager: ďThank you for reaching out. I have no further comment at this time.Ē
Pam Purcilly, former CIA deputy director of analysis: Didnít respond.
Marc Polymeropoulos, former CIA senior operations officer: Didnít respond.
Chris Savos, former CIA senior operations officer: Didnít respond.
John Tullius, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didnít respond.
David A. Vanell, former CIA senior operations officer: Didnít respond.
Kristin Wood, former CIA senior intelligence officer, now non-resident fellow, Harvard: Didnít respond.
David Buckley, former CIA inspector general: Didnít respond.
Nada Bakos, former CIA analyst and targeting officer, now senior fellow, Foreign Policy Research Institute: Didnít respond.
Patty Brandmaier, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didnít respond.
James B. Bruce, former CIA senior intelligence office: Didnít respond.
David Cariens, former CIA intelligence analyst: Didnít respond.
Janice Cariens, former CIA operational support officer: Didnít respond.
Paul Kolbe, former CIA senior operations officer: Didnít respond.
Peter Corsell, former CIA analyst: Didnít respond.
Brett Davis, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didnít respond.
Roger Zane George, former national intelligence officer: Didnít respond.
Steven L. Hall, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didnít respond.
Kent Harrington, former national intelligence officer: Didnít respond.
Don Hepburn, former national security executive, now president of Boanerges Solutions LLC: ďMy position has not changed any. I believe the Russians made a huge effort to alter the course of the election . . . The Russians are masters of blending truth and fiction and making something feel incredibly real when itís not. Nothing I have seen really changes my opinion. I canít tell you what part is real and what part is fake, but the thesis still stands for me, that it was a media influence hit job.Ē
Timothy D. Kilbourn, former dean of CIAís Kent School of Intelligence Analysis: Didnít respond.
Ron Marks, former CIA officer: Didnít respond.
Jonna Hiestand Mendez, former CIA technical operations officer, now on board of the International Spy Museum: ďI donít have any comment. I would need a little more information.Ē
Emile Nakhleh, former director of CIAís Political Islam Strategic Analysis Program, now at University of New Mexico: ďI have not seen any information since then that would alter the decision behind signing the letter. Thatís all I can go into. The whole issue was highly politicized and I donít want to deal with that. I still stand by that letter.Ē
Gerald A. OíShea, former CIA senior operations officer: Didnít respond.
Nick Shapiro, former CIA deputy chief of staff and senior adviser to the director: Didnít respond.
John Sipher, former CIA senior operations officer: Declined to comment.
Stephen Slick, former National Security Council senior director for intelligence programs:
Cynthia Strand, former CIA deputy assistant director for global issues: Didnít respond.
Greg Tarbell, former CIA deputy executive director: Didnít respond.
David Terry, former National Intelligence Collection Board chairman: Couldnít be reached.
Greg Treverton, former National Intelligence Council chair, now senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies: ďIíll pass. I havenít followed the case recently.Ē
Winston Wiley, former CIA director of analysis: Couldnít be reached.
So according to Curt's theory, if you don't respond, you're guilty. Just like Ornato.
In late summer 2020, the mother of all October surprises emerged: an abandoned Hunter Biden laptop filled to the brim with information about Hunter's drug and sex addictions (scurrilous but arguably irrelevant to Joe) plus massive amounts of information about Hunter's shady business deals with America's geopolitical enemies, all of which he obtained thanks to the Biden family business (AKA Joe Biden using his office to sell out America). T he tech companies immediately censored the story, but, even more tellingly, the FBI claimed that the manifestly real material was, in fact, "disinformation." Now, though, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) says FBI whistleblowers have emerged to say that the FBI lied. Suh-prise, suh-prise, suh-prise, as Gomer Pyle would have said.
"The FBI is in possession of ďvoluminous evidenceĒ of ďpotential criminal conductĒ by President Joe Bidenís son Hunter Biden related to his overseas business dealings with China and Ukraine, according to new whistleblower disclosures.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who previously released whistleblower claims alleging that evidence on Hunter Bidenís criminality was wrongly labeled ďdisinformationĒ within the bureau, made the revelations in a Thursday letter obtained by the Washington Examiner. It was sent to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, and Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss ó who is running the criminal investigation into Hunter Biden.
The whistleblower allegations relate to Hunter, as well as James Biden, the president's brother, regarding the duoís dealings with the Chinese government-linked energy conglomerate CEFC China Energy. They also relate to the younger Bidenís work for Ukrainian gas giant Burisma Holdings. Grassley said his staff "reviewed the unclassified records" supporting the whistleblower claims.
ďBased on recent protected disclosures to my office, the FBI has within its possession significant, impactful, and voluminous evidence with respect to potential criminal conduct by Hunter Biden and James Biden,Ē Grassley said in the letter.
So long story short, the information is there, pedojoe and his swamp refuse to move on it. AND DOJ & FBI want to keep all the information in safe keeping for themselves.
by Curt_Anderson on October 22, 2022 11:38 am
I will address your points.
1. Was she told the truth. It may have been true that there was a confrontation in the SUV and that Trump wanted to go to the Capitol to take part in the insurrection but Ornato exaggerated and embellished the incident to impress a young woman. In his story Ornato sounds tough standing up to a president.
2. Was she paid (either financial gain, or to get a better job within the administration/ house membership. No evidence that Hutchinson received a financial gain or job offer because of her testimony. On the other hand, Tony Ornato quit the Secret Service to work for Trump.
3. Remember basic communications class? Sender=>message=>receiver=>message=> 3rd party=>message. It's that old game of telephone. Hutchinson was testifying to what she was told not that she witnessed events in the SUV. She said that she was was paraphrasing not quoting. I think you really understand the distinction. For example in a murder trial, a witness who didn't see a murder happen might be asked by the prosecutor, "what did the defendant say to you afterwards?" The witness responds, "He said 'I didn't mean to kill her'". Would you discount the witness testimony as hearsay?
All I'm asking for is for them to get people that actually witnessed what happened, NOT someone who heard from someone else. They could do have done this with all the pieces and parts she talked about.
As I said, Ornato and Engle wouldn't or didn't go under oath to refute Hutchinson even though they could have a notary public take their oral or written testimony. Plust there was some corroboration.
"Breaking news, a source telling CNN a Washington police officer who was in Trump's motorcade on Jan. 6 has corroborated details of the heated exchange Trump had with his Secret Service detail when he was told he could not go to the U.S. Capitol and he wanted to go," CNN's Erin Burnett reported.
"This development comes as a government watchdog reveals the Secret Service erased messages from the day of the insurrection ó after investigators asked for them," Burnett added.
by oldedude on October 23, 2022 7:56 am
Welcome to politics. Deal with it. You want a less than honorable system, this is part of it.