Biden: 'willfully' commits Federal Crimes

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs After all, “we could never ‘single out’ any one individual

Everything is a conspiracy when you don't know how anything works.

The funny thing about the term, "Conspiracy Theory," is that "real Conspiracies" happen all the time. When two-or-more people get together to do something that is less-than-square with the Law, you have: "a Conspiracy." It's an everyday thing.

That's certainly true, sundialsvcs, but don't forget the importance and implications that begin with the basic requirement of "When two-or-more people get together.." . As that number goes up the odds of pulling off anything at all complicated go up BUT so do disproportionately the odds of the "less-than-square with the Law" conspiracy event being revealed.

Unless one is prepared to "silence" all the co-conspirators like Michael Corleone in fiction or like the JFK assassination in reality (which very likely benefited by both "physical intervention" and the threat implied by some of the highest, most powerful officials in existence) any such endeavor and the perpetrators will eventually be discovered... even if some of them get airports named after them.

One of the major contributors to success in conspiracy is, as Ayn Rand called it, "the sanction of the victim(s)". I watched an interesting video of interviews at Trump rallies in which the interviewer played an interesting bait-and-switch trick. The interviewees were asked to comment on events known to belong to Trump but told that Biden had done them, and only later, after the negative response, apologized as "misreading my notes" and then told they were actually done by Trump. It's surprising those people's heads didn't careen off on camera due to the G Forces of the 180 they all executed.

This cult of personality that apparently actually believes that Trump is an actual instrument of God, justifying everything, including some who say "He wants to be a dictator? Maybe we need a dictator," and "If he murdered someone on the steps of the White House, I'd be OK with that." is testament to unreasonable commitment to authoritarian power of the highest order bordering on hysterical blindness.

Here's a book by Joe Biden's longtime former stenographer Mike McCormick @JoeUnauthorized that reveals the alleged crimes committed by Joe Biden and why he believes Biden belongs in prison.

"Mike McCormick, ex-Biden stenographer, author
@JoeUnauthorized
My book 'The Case to Impeach and Imprison Joe Biden' now on Amazon or B&N is my eyewitness account w/EVIDENCE to impeach Biden and indict Obama & his WH crooks"
https://twitter.com/JoeUnauthorized

The truth is Biden was investigated for a number of alleged incidents and has received no indictments. Zero. Trump has four criminal indictments , and many charges. Trump will be the first former president in US history to be compelled to sit for a criminal trial in the next few days. He could theoretically become a convicted felon and go to jail.

Whoa! Mjolnir! Isn't that just a wee bit disingenuous calling Mike McCormick "Joe Biden's longtime former stenographer"? He was WHITE HOUSE press corp and stenographer for 16 years, and not only not just Biden's but a full-fledged MAGA Trump supporter.. but yeah he's prolly objective...NOT!

And Impeach Biden? Talk about whipping a dead horse. For well over a year MAGA Republicans kept shouting "Hunter Biden's laptop!....." and it ended right there as if that was enough for indictment. Well, it was enough to give Trump supporters yet another slogan to spout with zero substantive backing. It's just another evidentiary black hole not because of any hush hush squelch by "Leftists" but the abject failure of the very people who sought impeachment producing with a shred of evidence on Hunter Biden's laptop or anywhere else to support their empty backyard gossip claims.

I think I'm beginning to really see who you actually are despite your previous claim that your avatar name, Mjonir, was incidental and has no political and religious significance. It obviously does.

Originally Posted by enorbet ...I think I'm beginning to really see who you actually are despite your previous claim that your avatar name, Mjonir, was incidental and has no political and religious significance. It obviously does.

Lol, 3-1/2 years it took for you to hint at recanting your clumsy apology for trying and failing to link me to white nationalists. You lasted longer than my internal dialogue suggested to me at the time. [SARCASM]Congrats![/SARCASM]

Apparently he has some good things to say about Bill and Michelle. Six years, in the world of politics, with Biden as VP and Presidential puppet qualifies as long-term for me. I believe he was in Ukraine when Biden, as VP, threatened to withhold a Billion dollars in aid unless a special prosecutor investigating Hunter's ties to Burisma was fired:
Joe Biden: “I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not [f]ired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden recalled telling Poroshenko."

"In his own words, with video cameras rolling, he threatened Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in March 2016 that the Obama administration would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending the former Soviet republic toward insolvency, if it didn’t immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin." https://www.congress.gov/116/meeting...1211-SD067.pdf

https://www.amazon.com/Fifteen-Years.../dp/1733714626
"Fair-minded Americans will appreciate McCormick's portrayal of George W. Bush's compassionate genius, and George H.W. Bush's and Bill Clinton's grace, industry, and bipartisan cooperation in the saving of millions of lives in 2005, as well as his humorous anecdotes of Michelle Obama's zest for life, and Joe Biden's incessant bungling."


"The Case to Impeach and Imprison Joe Biden is author Mike McCormick’s eyewitness account from six years as Joe Biden’s White House stenographer, traveling with him to Ukraine and Honduras and many other countries." https://play.google.com/store/books/...EAAAQBAJ&pli=1

Today I had to buy new automobile tires and living in a small rural area there were only 2 choices within a 20 minute drive. Their prices and products varied little so I just went with the one across the street from grocery shopping. I had no problem with his huge "TRUMP" sign on his front-facing window. As we settled up he turned the conversation about money into Politics and quickly started talking about "the coming Civil War in America". Then he walked me over to a poster labelled "The Weaponization of The Fed".

Now it was really rather interesting (and not a little frightening) but in reality more of the same disinformation critical thinkers have come to expect from the empty slogan shouting MAGA lot. Initially Republicans, headed by Kevin McCarthy and Jim Jordan, formed the Committee "The United States House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government" which sought to investigate Dems "alleged abuses of federal authority, including collusion between federal agencies and private sector entities to suppress conservative viewpoints". In short it had nothing to do with actual weaponry.

Now though, as in this MAGA poster, "The Weaponization of The Fed", this has been entirely misrepresented to actual weapons purchases for some 30+ different agencies, including those like Public Health, with what is supposed to be dollar amounts in millions of dollars purported spent on arms. It's absolutely false as even any cursory web search will reveal to anyone interested in actual data.

As for you, mjolnir, I perceive you've posted enough recently that it's plain to see where you stand, and mostly it appears tenetaiveley in favor of Trump and passionately against Biden and any and all Democrats. You, Sir, are locked into Party Politics, not American Politics in my view but everyone can decide for themselves. The record is in print, right here.

“Our investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen,” the report said, but added that the evidence “does not establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

The above is a quote from Mr. Hur which makes no sense and contradicts itself. The investigation needs to uncover evidence and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the requirement in any criminal trial and it the job of the prosecutor to prove it and convince the jury. If the problem is that he doesn't have the evidence he should state that and if he has the evidence, the only reason to not prosecute would be that Hur did not feel capable of doing that. This is just an admission of his own ineptitude, incompetence. If he felt Biden was guilty, he should have prosecuted him and at least given it his best effort rather than make excuses and try to please both 'sides'.

I watched a good part of his testimony before Congress and he excelled at the CYA part.

Originally Posted by yancek “Our investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen,” the report said, but added that the evidence “does not establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” The above is a quote from Mr. Hur which makes no sense and contradicts itself.

The conversation is going around in circles now. Please see here for an explanation of some of the applicable legal concepts: https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/...-and-willfully

Originally Posted by yancek If the problem is that he doesn't have the evidence he should state that and if he has the evidence, the only reason to not prosecute would be that Hur did not feel capable of doing that. This is just an admission of his own ineptitude, incompetence.

It's easy for 'non-lawyers' to be confused by this. That Mr. Biden retained documents is not in question. What was in question was his intent. Yes, the investigators found evidence but in their opinion it was insufficient to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.

Originally Posted by yancek If he felt Biden was guilty, he should have prosecuted him and at least given it his best effort rather than make excuses and try to please both 'sides'.

No, it doesn't work that way. What you're proposing is akin to throwing spaghetti at the wall to see if any sticks.

It isn't enough to 'feel' that someone is guilty. You need evidence which proves your case beyond all reasonable doubt: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/standing

There can be ramifications where someone brings a case to court, knowing that they have insufficient evidence: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/frivolous

One thing which is obvious, particularly over the years since 2016, is that the infinite monkey theorem has been proven wrong. We can categorically state that a million monkeys bashing a million keyboards will definitely not recreate the works of Shakespeare. Instead, they will invent conspiracy theories and argue with lawyers about law, doctors about medicine, scientists about science and any other qualified professionals about their field of expertise.

It isn't enough to 'feel' that someone is guilty.

Perhaps I haven't explained myself thoroughly although from my previous post (quoted below) it should have been understood.

The investigation needs to uncover evidence and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the requirement in any criminal trial and it the job of the prosecutor to prove it and convince the jury.

The point isn't how the prosecutor 'feels' or whether Biden retained documents willfully but whether Hur had sufficient evidence to prosecute and convict him on whatever charges would be filed. So he either had evidence sufficient to convict or he did not. If there is not evidence sufficient to convict then it is not evidence but rumor or speculation. It is not possible to 'know' in the empirical sense whether a charge will be proven as required so the prosecutor can only go on his/her beliefs in the 'evidence available. I don't know the purpose of Mr. Hur's superfluous comments about Biden's age and mental acuity but certainly they were unusual and not relevant, whether true or not.

Your last link in the above post seems irrelevant as they are more akin to the Guliani/Eastman cases where they engaged in court cases they knew to be false which is not the case with Hur.

One does not need to be a lawyer to understand this since the ability to read along with the willingness to do so should suffice. Those of us who have worked in the criminal justice system and participated/testified in criminal court proceedings also gain insight and a better understanding of the process.