The Hunter Biden Thread

#4,676
#4,676
hog88 said:
No, I haven't been to TX. Beautiful state, can't wait to go back some day.
Click to expand...

AM64 said:
OK. Who are you, and what have you done with hog? Maybe the tale about being fed to the fish was actually not
humor.
Click to expand...


Don't let him fool you. He really misses these 102 degree days. We also have all of this clean air in such close proximity to the refineries. It's amazing!
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#4,679
#4,679
85SugarVol said:
I don’t either. CPA on here with some views, though.
Jail time is just blood lust.

Oh it looks super slimy.
Click to expand...
lawgator1 said:
Had his last name been Jones he'd pay the back taxes and penalties and not face charges
Click to expand...

Not going to put his **** out there, but there was a lawyer in Chattanooga who only got sued for an unpaid bill of about 400,000. It made the news because he was a municipal court judge at the time.
 
#4,680
#4,680
lawgator1 said:
Had his last name been Jones he'd pay the back taxes and penalties and not face charges
Click to expand...

Willful evasion from a high net worth taxpayer (from a convicted felon over multiple years) is a whole lot different than errors of ignorance or inability to pay that cause most individual tax issues...
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#4,681
#4,681
RockyTop85 said:
I don’t think it was a politically motivated witch hunt, but don’t have a good frame of reference for tax crimes and falsified gun applications to know whether he got a sweetheart deal.

It’s non-violent so jail time seems excessive, his problems have been made sufficiently public that the notoriety of a felony conviction adds little, prohibiting gun ownership for a crack head with poor impulse control seems like a valid reason to stick with a felony.

Pleading down charges for the sitting president’s son looks slimy.
Click to expand...

Given this was the 17 and 18 returns for Hunter and the timing of the tax liens filed, I would not be shocked at all if someone from the Trump WH suggested the IRS to look at Hunter in 19 or 20. I'd actually be shocked if they didnt.

The other question is how long did he willfully file evasive returns. The cynic in me thinks he got corrupted long before 2017...
 
#4,682
#4,682
Septic said:
VIOLATION OF 18 U.S. CODE § 1001
The crime of making a false statement is governed by 18 U.S. Code § 1001. According to the statute, a violation includes anyone that willfully and knowingly:

  1. falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
  2. makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
  3. makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry.
In other words, there are three broad ways to violate this statute. The first is to conceal a material fact through fraud. This can occur without a person directly lying to the FBI. For example, handing over written documents after secretly removing an incriminating one could count as a violation of the statute.

The second prong of the statute relates directly to false statements. It is unlawful to make any materially false or fraudulent statement or representation. This goes beyond a direct lie and also covers indirectly misrepresenting the truth.

Finally, the third section covers non-verbal acts that are covered by the statute. These include providing the FBI with any forced or false document knowing it includes a materially false statement.




It came to be when Donny willingly and knowingly instructed his attorney's to make a false attestation that he'd handed back over all of the classified documents as required by the law.
Click to expand...

I found that easily enough, and I understand how it makes life easier for the FBI. My point is that I don't see how it's legal under the constitution. It's also interesting when the law was originated (1863 under virtual martial law, revised in 1918, 1934, and 1948 - periods of particularly heavy handed federal power due to events) I guess the only saving grace is the 5th Amendment which says in part

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Click to expand...

Note the part about "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" and civil forfeiture law discussed in another thread.

Do you really think that someone can just refuse to answer questions and that not be seen as prejudicial? Or that in asking leading questions requiring a yes/no that a person can be tricked into a lie? Remember the famous "Are you still beating your wife?"
 
#4,683
#4,683
Front-Cover-62123.jpg
 
#4,685
#4,685
AM64 said:
I found that easily enough, and I understand how it makes life easier for the FBI. My point is that I don't see how it's legal under the constitution. It's also interesting when the law was originated (1863 under virtual martial law, revised in 1918, 1934, and 1948 - periods of particularly heavy handed federal power due to events) I guess the only saving grace is the 5th Amendment which says in part



Note the part about "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" and civil forfeiture law discussed in another thread.

Do you really think that someone can just refuse to answer questions and that not be seen as prejudicial? Or that in asking leading questions requiring a yes/no that a person can be tricked into a lie? Remember the famous "Are you still beating your wife?"
Click to expand...

Remember also that you have the right to remain silent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and RockyTop85
#4,687
#4,687
Septic said:
VIOLATION OF 18 U.S. CODE § 1001
The crime of making a false statement is governed by 18 U.S. Code § 1001. According to the statute, a violation includes anyone that willfully and knowingly:

  1. falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
  2. makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
  3. makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry.
In other words, there are three broad ways to violate this statute. The first is to conceal a material fact through fraud. This can occur without a person directly lying to the FBI. For example, handing over written documents after secretly removing an incriminating one could count as a violation of the statute.

The second prong of the statute relates directly to false statements. It is unlawful to make any materially false or fraudulent statement or representation. This goes beyond a direct lie and also covers indirectly misrepresenting the truth.

Finally, the third section covers non-verbal acts that are covered by the statute. These include providing the FBI with any forced or false document knowing it includes a materially false statement.




It came to be when Donny willingly and knowingly instructed his attorney's to make a false attestation that he'd handed back over all of the classified documents as required by the law.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the information.

Throw Donny in prison if proven guilty.

But let’s not pretend that LEO officers (FBI, ATF, Joe Cop in podunk, TN) can’t lie to Joe Citizen without repercussions. LEO officers lie all the time to people suspected of a crime and the Supreme Court upheld that they are allowed to.

Once this law is applied equally to everyone (including law enforcement) then I may give a care, until then the paper this law is written on is only worth wiping your a$$ with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#4,688
#4,688
MOOOOONEY said:
Thank you for the information.

Throw Donny in prison if proven guilty.

But let’s not pretend that LEO officers (FBI, ATF, Joe Cop in podunk, TN) can’t lie to Joe Citizen without repercussions. LEO officers lie all the time to people suspected of a crime and the Supreme Court upheld that they are allowed to.

Once this law is applied equally to everyone (including law enforcement) then I may give a care, until then the paper this law is written on is only worth wiping your a$$ with.
Click to expand...

I mean there's lots of laws I disagree with but that doesn't make them any less enforceable. I do find it bizarre that LEO's are allowed to, trained to and encouraged to lie to suspects. At least they can AFTER they read you your rights.

Truthfully, I don't know why ANYONE would voluntarily speak to law enforcement AT ALL. If you don't talk to law enforcement, you can't be accused of lying to them. Problem solved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Vol8188
#4,693
#4,693
Septic said:
I mean there's lots of laws I disagree with but that doesn't make them any less enforceable. I do find it bizarre that LEO's are allowed to, trained to and encouraged to lie to suspects. At least they can AFTER they read you your rights.

Truthfully, I don't know why ANYONE would voluntarily speak to law enforcement AT ALL. If you don't talk to law enforcement, you can't be accused of lying to them. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

Then enforce it equally. Why should LEO face no repercussions for lying when Joe Citizen can be held accountable?

I agree no one should should voluntarily speak to law enforcement, but do a search of YouTube. LEO uses a tactic of I’m going to arrest you unless you answer my questions.

LEO continue to violate the constitutional rights of citizens and the best we can come up with is don’t talk to cops. Screw that they should be held accountable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and W.TN.Orange Blood
#4,695
#4,695
Let she amongst you who has not cheated on her husband with a tantric sex guru cast the first stone.

 
#4,698
#4,698
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
LMAO. Like that's suppose to be an insult to MTG compared to Hunter's disgusting life style of having sex w/underaged kids & snorting tons of cocaine on video. Cry harder libtard.
Click to expand...

Is there evidence of Biden engaging in sex with a minor or is this just Twitter hearsay?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top