Whistleblower accuses Biden of criminal conduct

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet McCarthy will allow the full democratic members of oversight (including the stock cheat, Golden) to ask questions of the contempt hearing starting Thursday.

That’s how committee’s work.
McCarthy could have appointed republicans to the j 6 committee. He chose not to.

Each side gets their picks, unless Comrade Pelosi says Nyet as per the j6 committee

Meanwhile, the irony of Raskin today is laughable

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So it seems to me at present that all we have is Comer (1) citing some unnamed whistle blower (2) who claims to have seen some alleged FBI document (3) which allegedly contains hearsay information about some conversation between as-of-yet unknown parties (4) in which they allege some kind of wrongdoing by Biden (5). So this isn't even second-hand hearsay that we have at present, we're not 2 steps removed, we're many more steps than that removed from any potential facts.

So I guess I'd agree Raskin is wrong in saying "second hand info" - at present it's much weaker than 2nd hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The Barr DOJ did in fact investigate this allegation even though it was based on second hand hearsay. Raskin has not criticized that decision at all. He’s pointing out that the investigation found the allegation was baseless.

The irony here is that republicans aren’t slamming Barr for investigating since, according to them when it comes to Trump, DOJ should not investigate any hearsay allegations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Barr DOJ did in fact investigate this allegation even though it was based on second hand hearsay. Raskin has not criticized that decision at all. He’s pointing out that the investigation found the allegation was baseless.

The irony here is that republicans aren’t slamming Barr for investigating since, according to them when it comes to Trump, DOJ should not investigate any hearsay allegations.

This was an investigation of Trumps political opponent by Trumps DOJ during the presidential race. Shouldn’t all of the republicans be outraged this happened? Where’s the outrage folks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Barr DOJ did in fact investigate this allegation even though it was based on second hand hearsay. Raskin has not criticized that decision at all. He’s pointing out that the investigation found the allegation was baseless.

The irony here is that republicans aren’t slamming Barr for investigating since, according to them when it comes to Trump, DOJ should not investigate any hearsay allegations.

When Raskin was pressed about the fbi saying it cant be released because of an 'ongoing investigation', he quickly said he wasn't there. Typical lwnj tactics

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Barr DOJ did in fact investigate this allegation even though it was based on second hand hearsay. Raskin has not criticized that decision at all. He’s pointing out that the investigation found the allegation was baseless.

The irony here is that republicans aren’t slamming Barr for investigating since, according to them when it comes to Trump, DOJ should not investigate any hearsay allegations.

When Raskin was pressed about the fbi saying it cant be released because of an 'ongoing investigation', he quickly said he wasn't there. Typical lwnj tactics

You clearly haven't actually listened to or comprehended Raskin's full statement. Regardless of which side of the debate you're on, regardless of whether or not there's an ongoing investigation, regardless of whether it's hearsay or not (which it is), regardless of whether an investigation is even merited (Barr said it wasn't), the POINT Raskin was making is that it would expose the identity of a confidential informant, which would greatly and further undermine what little trust and faith there remains in investigative agencies and bodies at this time. Who would ever want to be a confidential informant when Republicans are going to intentionally leak your name? That is still a very valid point, regardless of whether it's a crap investigation or not (and it is a crap investigation).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Raskin also said that the documents that WERE shared by the FBI which he was able to see did not in the remotest support some of Comer's claims, for example that Biden supposedly took a bribe from Romania. Raskin said that not a single document made available to him by Comer or by the FBI had any mention of Romania let alone the claimed bribe, whatsoever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Barr DOJ did in fact investigate this allegation even though it was based on second hand hearsay. Raskin has not criticized that decision at all. He’s pointing out that the investigation found the allegation was baseless.

The irony here is that republicans aren’t slamming Barr for investigating since, according to them when it comes to Trump, DOJ should not investigate any hearsay allegations.

This was an investigation of Trumps political opponent by Trumps DOJ during the presidential race. Shouldn’t all of the republicans be outraged this happened? Where’s the outrage folks?

+1000

We all remember quite well when the right wing carried on and on and on for months about "ThEy SPiEd oN TrUMp!!!!1!!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Barr DOJ did in fact investigate this allegation even though it was based on second hand hearsay. Raskin has not criticized that decision at all. He’s pointing out that the investigation found the allegation was baseless.

The irony here is that republicans aren’t slamming Barr for investigating since, according to them when it comes to Trump, DOJ should not investigate any hearsay allegations.

When Raskin was pressed about the fbi saying it cant be released because of an 'ongoing investigation', he quickly said he wasn't there. Typical lwnj tactics

Well, “Washington Plans an Aggressive War“ for certain

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Oh no someone has a Twitter account and now is a “journalist”. How do you people find these people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Barr DOJ did in fact investigate this allegation even though it was based on second hand hearsay. Raskin has not criticized that decision at all. He’s pointing out that the investigation found the allegation was baseless.

The irony here is that republicans aren’t slamming Barr for investigating since, according to them when it comes to Trump, DOJ should not investigate any hearsay allegations.

When Raskin was pressed about the fbi saying it cant be released because of an 'ongoing investigation', he quickly said he wasn't there. Typical lwnj tactics

You clearly haven't actually listened to or comprehended Raskin's full statement. Regardless of which side of the debate you're on, regardless of whether or not there's an ongoing investigation, regardless of whether it's hearsay or not (which it is), regardless of whether an investigation is even merited (Barr said it wasn't), the POINT Raskin was making is that it would expose the identity of a confidential informant, which would greatly and further undermine what little trust and faith there remains in investigative agencies and bodies at this time. Who would ever want to be a confidential informant when Republicans are going to intentionally leak your name? That is still a very valid point, regardless of whether it's a crap investigation or not (and it is a crap investigation).

Nice try AI... doesn't change the fact that the good lawyer Raskin deflected when pressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Barr DOJ did in fact investigate this allegation even though it was based on second hand hearsay. Raskin has not criticized that decision at all. He’s pointing out that the investigation found the allegation was baseless.

The irony here is that republicans aren’t slamming Barr for investigating since, according to them when it comes to Trump, DOJ should not investigate any hearsay allegations.

When Raskin was pressed about the fbi saying it cant be released because of an 'ongoing investigation', he quickly said he wasn't there. Typical lwnj tactics

You clearly haven't actually listened to or comprehended Raskin's full statement. Regardless of which side of the debate you're on, regardless of whether or not there's an ongoing investigation, regardless of whether it's hearsay or not (which it is), regardless of whether an investigation is even merited (Barr said it wasn't), the POINT Raskin was making is that it would expose the identity of a confidential informant, which would greatly and further undermine what little trust and faith there remains in investigative agencies and bodies at this time. Who would ever want to be a confidential informant when Republicans are going to intentionally leak your name? That is still a very valid point, regardless of whether it's a crap investigation or not (and it is a crap investigation).

Nice try AI... doesn't change the fact that the good lawyer Raskin deflected when pressed.

There is nothing to deflect. This is another made up controversy akin to emails, comet pizza and Seth Rich. When will you learn?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Barr DOJ did in fact investigate this allegation even though it was based on second hand hearsay. Raskin has not criticized that decision at all. He’s pointing out that the investigation found the allegation was baseless.

The irony here is that republicans aren’t slamming Barr for investigating since, according to them when it comes to Trump, DOJ should not investigate any hearsay allegations.

When Raskin was pressed about the fbi saying it cant be released because of an 'ongoing investigation', he quickly said he wasn't there. Typical lwnj tactics

You clearly haven't actually listened to or comprehended Raskin's full statement. Regardless of which side of the debate you're on, regardless of whether or not there's an ongoing investigation, regardless of whether it's hearsay or not (which it is), regardless of whether an investigation is even merited (Barr said it wasn't), the POINT Raskin was making is that it would expose the identity of a confidential informant, which would greatly and further undermine what little trust and faith there remains in investigative agencies and bodies at this time. Who would ever want to be a confidential informant when Republicans are going to intentionally leak your name? That is still a very valid point, regardless of whether it's a crap investigation or not (and it is a crap investigation).

Nice try AI... doesn't change the fact that the good lawyer Raskin deflected when pressed.

He did not deflect. He's saying he has not seen anything to support Comer's claims and even if there were something to support Comer's claims there would still need to be safeguards in how that evidence is handled. Raskin didn't leak any confidential sources during investigations of Trump either, did he. All the leaks came from Trump's own camp. Raskin on the other hand has been completely consistent.