No. of Recommendations: 8
bighairymike: I will acknowledge the liberals here are pretty well informed about political issues but when it comes to the average democrat voter, there is no mystery about why they vote as their [sic] told and don't hold any convictions of the [sic] own making. It's the news sources they rely on.
Well, yes, we democrats vote as we're told and hold no convictions of our own. But we do have to know the secret handshake in order to get our marching orders.
bighairymike: Three impactful stories for sure, certainly more impactful than potential corruption at the highest levels of goverment.[sic]
What potential corruption? President Biden had nothing to do with the investigation or with the plea agreement of his son. The whistleblowers said they felt the U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware, David Weiss was hamstrung. Weiss issued a statement that declared that was not true:
"I want to make clear that, as the Attorney General has stated, I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of the prosecution, consistent with federal law, the Principles of Federal Prosecution, and Departmental regulations."
The whistleblowers said they thought there was sufficient evidence to charge Hunter Biden with felonies. Prosecutors disagreed. Shapely was asked how often his recommendations for charges differed from prosecutor's final decision.
QUESTION: "Can you give us a percentage of how often you've said, 'We ought to charge someone,' and [the tax council] has said, 'No, that may not be a good idea?'"
SHAPELY: "A vast majority."
So Shapely admitted that his recommendations, more often than not, were rejected.
And what would you have the stations report? Investigators and prosecutors disagreed on charges? How is that news?
As far as the Grassley press release is concerned, again, where's the news?
Grassley was blabbing this on Fox News before releasing his press release and when asked if he had evidence of Biden wrongdoing said, "Well, there are allegations."
Umm, allegations are not evidence.
And the FBI informant was 'not able to provide any further opinion as to the veracity' of the claims, according to the FBI document.
So there's no evidence president Biden was involved in his son's work for the Ukrainian energy company or ever received any payments.
No evidence. Zero. Zilch.
And you do know that when he was Attorney General, Bill Barr received this information from Rudy Giuliani and assigned Pittsburgh US Attorney Scott Brady to investigate the allegations.
Again, there was no 'there' there. The accusations were so unreliable that Barr declined to pursue them.
CNN previously reported that the allegations in the 1023 surfaced years ago as Giuliani was sharing information with the Justice Department during the Trump administration. Then-Attorney General Bill Barr tapped former Pittsburgh US Attorney Scott Brady to oversee an FBI investigation into a variety of claims Giuliani provided the department.
Not only was there nothing there but republicans put intelligence assets at risk by disclosing the information after the FBI warned republicans against public disclosure.
'While not classified, these materials have significant law enforcement value and sensitivity, and should not be disclosed without authorization, as wider distribution could pose a risk of physical harm to FBI sources or others.'
So I guess there's the news: republicans putting intelligence assts' lives at risk.
On second thought, maybe that's not news. Republicans don't give a squat about national security.
Good night.
