What is your thoughts on Whistleblowers? The newest against Biden.

[*Nately120*]

(05-11-2023, 10:44 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote:  If you care to remember they tried bringing this to light before the last election but a coordinated effort between our mainstream media & possibly our own government agencies smothered and discredited it much like some posters here on P&R. 

 Meanwhile Joe swears he doesn't know anything about it. 

The media didn't report on speculative bluster?  What are they afraid of, being sued for billions of dollars or something?  

[GMDino]

(05-11-2023, 10:44 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote:  If you care to remember they tried bringing this to light before the last election but a coordinated effort between our mainstream media & possibly our own government agencies smothered and discredited it much like some posters here on P&R. 

 Meanwhile Joe swears he doesn't know anything about it. 

Even FOX knows there is nothing there.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Wow! Steve Doocy to James Comer this morning: &quot;You don't actually have any facts to that point. You've got some circumstantial evidence. And the other thing is, of all those names, the one person who didn't profit -- there's no evidence that Joe Biden did anything illegally.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/Ad8L3NSXWE">pic.twitter.com/Ad8L3NSXWE</a></p>&mdash; Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1656649124194705409?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 11, 2023</a></blockquote> 

[*Nately120*]

(05-11-2023, 11:36 AM)GMDino Wrote: Even FOX knows there is nothing there.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Wow! Steve Doocy to James Comer this morning: &quot;You don't actually have any facts to that point. You've got some circumstantial evidence. And the other thing is, of all those names, the one person who didn't profit -- there's no evidence that Joe Biden did anything illegally.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/Ad8L3NSXWE">pic.twitter.com/Ad8L3NSXWE</a></p>&mdash; Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1656649124194705409?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 11, 2023</a></blockquote> 

Hot take - they won't bash Biden because they're scurred of 8 years of President Gavin Newsome 

[Dill]

(05-11-2023, 10:44 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote: If you care to remember they tried bringing this to light before the last election but a coordinated effort between our mainstream media & possibly our own government agencies smothered and discredited it much like some posters here on P&R. 

 Meanwhile Joe swears he doesn't know anything about it. 

You say "tried." But they did actually go public, successfully, with their claims. No one "smothers" Fox, not even government agencies, which by the way are chock full of Republicans, especially the FBI. 

"Discredited" you say. Yes, as in shown to have no foundation. You blame people for exposing disinformation? THAT'S what's bad, not disinforming voters?

So what is the evidence for this "coordinated effort" between media and government that you assert here?

Is there a leaked memo somewhere from the NYT to the FBI about how to protect Biden, like exchanges between Hannity and Trump? 

Why isn't it more likely that there is no evidence Hunter funnelled money to Joe because he didn't? 

If you make absence of evidence proof evidence was "smothered," then you've slipped into the netherworld of Qanon conspiracy. 

[masonbengals fan]

You have way more confidence in Joe than I do.

[NATI BENGALS]

(05-11-2023, 10:44 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote:  If you care to remember they tried bringing this to light before the last election but a coordinated effort between our mainstream media & possibly our own government agencies smothered and discredited it much like some posters here on P&R. 

 Meanwhile Joe swears he doesn't know anything about it. 

They probably did it because they saw what Russia was planning in Ukraine. And saw Trump and Giuliani get used like pawns by Russia, with them trying to blackmail Zelensky and use Ukraine to steal our presidential election. Luckily they are bumbling morons or else we would be looking at a victorious Russia looking for their next target and China taking note of a successful land grab.

[Arturo Bandini]

Funny thing Trump made 1,6 billion while in the White House. But ... Hunter's laptop.

[GMDino]

This latest attempt by the gop is going about as well as I expected it would.

https://www.rawstory.com/james-comer-informant/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

'We can't track down the informant': James Comer says he lost top witness in Biden investigation

David Edwards
May 14, 2023, 10:47 AM ET
[/url] [url=https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https://www.rawstory.com/james-comer-informant/&text=%27We%20can%27t%20track%20down%20the%20informant%27%3A%20James%20Comer%20says%20he%20lost%20top%20witness%20in%20Biden%20investigation&] [/url]    [url=https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=false&url=https://www.rawstory.com/james-comer-informant/&] 

Fox News/screen grab

[/url][url=https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https://www.rawstory.com/james-comer-informant/&text=%27We%20can%27t%20track%20down%20the%20informant%27%3A%20James%20Comer%20says%20he%20lost%20top%20witness%20in%20Biden%20investigation&][/url]
Rep. James Comer (R-KY) revealed on Sunday that Republicans had lost track of a top witness in the investigation of President Joe Biden and his family.

During an interview on Fox News, host Maria Bartiromo asked Comer about evidence he had of Biden's alleged corruption.
"You have spoken with whistleblowers," she noted. "You also spoke with an informant who gave you all of this information. Where is that informant today? Where are these whistleblowers?"

"Well, unfortunately, we can't track down the informant," Comer replied. "We're hopeful that the informant is still there. The whistleblower knows the informant. The whistleblower is very credible."

"Hold on a second, Congressman," Bartiromo said. "Did you just say that the whistleblower or the informant is now missing?"

"Well, we we're hopeful that we can find the informant," Comer said, explaining the informant was in the "spy business" and "they don't make a habit of being seen a lot."

"The nine of the ten people that we've identified that have very good knowledge with respect to the Bidens," he added, "they're one of three things, Maria, they're either currently in court, they're currently in jail, or they're currently missing."


Watch the video below from Fox News [url=https://www.rawstory.com/james-comer-informant/]or at the link.

[*pally*]

Quote:"The nine of the ten people that we've identified that have very good knowledge with respect to the Bidens," he added, "they're one of three things, Maria, they're either currently in court, they're currently in jail, or they're currently missing."

well gee, those are witnesses that give everyone warm fuzzies about their credibility

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-14-2023, 02:56 PM)pally Wrote: well gee, those are witnesses that give everyone warm fuzzies about their credibility

Consistency, again, raises it's head.  The main (only?) witness against Trump in the New York case is Michael Cohen, a convicted perjurer.  If you have misgivings about these "witnesses" then consistency dictates you have the same against Cohen.  Maybe more so, since he's a proven liar in a court of law.

[Dill]

(05-14-2023, 02:14 PM)GMDino Wrote: This latest attempt by the gop is going about as well as I expected it would.

Yow, I was mostly watching Newsmax yesterday so I missed this.

Their reporters said that the Biden investigation has finally borne fruit--

Biden's family members received TEN MILLION DOLLARS from foreign sources over the course
of ten years.  But the MSM is silent about this.

I was a little confused since Hunter's LLC supposedly took in that amount over that time,
and that's been old news for years. 

Still no connection to Biden. But the Whistleblower was supposed to fix that.

Now he, or his informant, is GONE?!?!?  

I suspect foul play. Where was Hilary last Tuesday, the day before this was to be announced? 

[*pally*]

(05-14-2023, 03:38 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Consistency, again, raises it's head.  The main (only?) witness against Trump in the New York case is Michael Cohen, a convicted perjurer.  If you have misgivings about these "witnesses" then consistency dictates you have the same against Cohen.  Maybe more so, since he's a proven liar in a court of law.

Nope, no inconsistancy here.  EVERY witness Comer apparently has is in legal trouble. Cohen was not the only person to testify in front of the NY Grand jury that indicted Trump.

Unlike these "whistleblowers," Cohen went in front of a televised under-oath Congressional hearing.  He went in front of a Grand Jury and testified under oath and will testify under oath at the trial.  The paper trail apparently backs up his story.  At least enough they feel comfortable putting him in front of a jury.  His testimony has stood up under cross-examination.

These people are anonymous. Their stories are not backed up by the paper trail the Congressmen have put out.  In fact, the same James Cpmer has admitted THEY HAVE NO PROOF of any wrongdoing by Biden.  Yet, Comer and the Republicans keep hyping their evidence of massive wrongdoing. Until these witnesses are placed under oath in public as far as most are concerned they don't actually exist.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-14-2023, 06:12 PM)pally Wrote: Nope, no inconsistancy here.  EVERY witness Comer apparently has is in legal trouble. Cohen was not the only person to testify in front of the NY Grand jury that indicted Trump.

I may be wrong, but the only witness to any real malfeasance is Cohen.  I don't think you're correct in this regard.

Quote:Unlike these "whistleblowers," Cohen went in front of a televised under-oath Congressional hearing.  He went in front of a Grand Jury and testified under oath and will testify under oath at the trial.  The paper trail apparently backs up his story.  At least enough they feel comfortable putting him in front of a jury.  His testimony has stood up under cross-examination.

I could, and will, counter that, unlike these other witnesses, Cohen is a convicted perjurer.  His word means less than nothing as he is a convicted liar.

Quote:These people are anonymous. Their stories are not backed up by the paper trail the Congressmen have put out.  In fact, the same James Cpmer has admitted THEY HAVE NO PROOF of any wrongdoing by Biden.  Yet, Comer and the Republicans keep hyping their evidence of massive wrongdoing. Until these witnesses are placed under oath in public as far as most are concerned they don't actually exist.

In this regard you are correct, these people are currently anonymous.  I am in the same boat as you as to the importance of their testimony.  Where we differ is in lending any credence, at all, to a convicted perjurer.  I can tell you first hand that a competent prosecutor will never, ever, rest the crux of their case on the testimony of a convicted perjurer. 

[Belsnickel]

(05-14-2023, 06:58 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I may be wrong, but the only witness to any real malfeasance is Cohen.  I don't think you're correct in this regard.

Not quite. Not all of the charges are related to that hush money payment that he facilitated. We honestly don't know a ton about the NY case right now because Bragg hasn't shown much of his hand and there is the protective order preventing Trump and his lawyers from sharing things.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-14-2023, 07:26 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Not quite. Not all of the charges are related to that hush money payment that he facilitated. We honestly don't know a ton about the NY case right now because Bragg hasn't shown much of his hand and there is the protective order preventing Trump and his lawyers from sharing things.

Thank you, interesting in its own right.  Discovery requires the prosecution "showing its hand", and not hiding evidence.  Of course an argument could be made that public disclosure could unfairly prejudice voir dire, but in NYC the only reasonable argument in that regard would be made in Trump's favor.  Interesting to say the least.

[*pally*]

(05-14-2023, 08:51 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Thank you, interesting in its own right.  Discovery requires the prosecution "showing its hand", and not hiding evidence.  Of course an argument could be made that public disclosure could unfairly prejudice voir dire, but in NYC the only reasonable argument in that regard would be made in Trump's favor.  Interesting to say the least.

Discovery is between the prosecution and defense not the general public.  Most evidence is generally revealed during the trial. If it becomes public before that it is because of a leak

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-14-2023, 09:11 PM)pally Wrote: Discovery is between the prosecution and defense not the general public.

Partially true.  In some trials discovery will only be between the prosecution and defense.  For such a public trial discovery means evidence is made publicly available, barring a gag order.  Some evidence can be obscured prior to trial, so as not to prejudice a jury, but in general there is not much difference.

Quote: 
[quote]
Most evidence is generally revealed during the trial.

 
Again, a distinction largely without a difference.

Quote:If it becomes public before that it is because of a leak

Evidence is evidence.  When it's disclosed only matters if it prejudices a jury.  Outside of the jury the evidence disclosed, in the order it is disclosed, makes little to no difference.  Truth is truth, regardless.

[Arturo Bandini]

(05-14-2023, 03:56 PM)Dill Wrote: Yow, I was mostly watching Newsmax yesterday so I missed this.

Their reporters said that the Biden investigation has finally borne fruit--

Biden's family members received TEN MILLION DOLLARS from foreign sources over the course
of ten years.  But the MSM is silent about this.

I was a little confused since Hunter's LLC supposedly took in that amount over that time,
and that's been old news for years. 

Still no connection to Biden. But the Whistleblower was supposed to fix that.

Now he, or his informant, is GONE?!?!?  

I suspect foul play. Where was Hilary last Tuesday, the day before this was to be announced? 

THe informant is in Canada so you wouldn't know him ... 

[Dill]

(05-14-2023, 06:12 PM)pally Wrote: Nope, no inconsistancy here.  EVERY witness Comer apparently has is in legal trouble. Cohen was not the only person to testify in front of the NY Grand jury that indicted Trump.

Unlike these "whistleblowers," Cohen went in front of a televised under-oath Congressional hearing.  He went in front of a Grand Jury and testified under oath and will testify under oath at the trial.  The paper trail apparently backs up his story.  At least enough they feel comfortable putting him in front of a jury.  His testimony has stood up under cross-examination.

These people are anonymous. Their stories are not backed up by the paper trail the Congressmen have put out.  In fact, the same James Cpmer has admitted THEY HAVE NO PROOF of any wrongdoing by Biden.  Yet, Comer and the Republicans keep hyping their evidence of massive wrongdoing. Until these witnesses are placed under oath in public as far as most are concerned they don't actually exist.

Weiselberg MIGHT testify as well, if the DA can "persuade" him. He might risk loss of a financial package for his son, though.  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/30/nyregion/allen-weisselberg-trump-hush-money.html.

I don't see why David Pecker and Stormy herself could not testify as material witnesses as well. 

Cohen perjured himself on behalf of Trump; but his testimony after that was corroborated by a paper trail as his lie was not. 

Any testimony used in the current trial will certainly have that same "paper trail" or it likely won't be used.

I think a jury will take him, and the evidence, seriously enough. They will probably not say "he lied once--can't believe him!"
anymore than they would think they HAVE to believe someone simply because he hasn't been convicted of perjury.
They'll probably consider why he lied before and what his motivation to lie--or tell the truth--would be now. 
And weigh that against Trump who, of course, has NEVER been convicted of perjury. 

Cohen will be convincing enough if what he has to say squares with other evidence and testimony. 

Very likely a jury will find him more convincing that Trump, who continues to lie about everything,
unless there are MAGA jurors who would defend him if he shot someone on 5th Avenue. 

[GMDino]

They lost nine of the ten.

Lost them.

Translated: They  never existed.

https://www.rawstory.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-whistleblowers/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Quote:'They are missing': Marjorie Taylor Greene confirms GOP has lost several Biden 'whistleblowers'

David Edwards
May 15, 2023, 11:38 AM ET
[/url] [url=https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https://www.rawstory.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-whistleblowers/&text=%27They%20are%20missing%27%3A%20Marjorie%20Taylor%20Greene%20confirms%20GOP%20has%20lost%20several%20Biden%20%27whistleblowers%27&] [/url]    [url=https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=false&url=https://www.rawstory.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-whistleblowers/&] 

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene speaking with attendees at the 2022 Student Action Summit. (Gage Skidmore/Flickr)
Show audio player

[/url][url=https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https://www.rawstory.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-whistleblowers/&text=%27They%20are%20missing%27%3A%20Marjorie%20Taylor%20Greene%20confirms%20GOP%20has%20lost%20several%20Biden%20%27whistleblowers%27&][/url]
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) confirmed on Monday that Republicans were out of contact with all but one "whistleblower" in their investigation of President Joe Biden and his family.


Greene spoke to War Room host Steve Bannon after Rep. James Comer (R-KY) [url=https://www.rawstory.com/james-comer-informant/]revealed on Fox News that at least one informant had been lost.


"Now, the truth that I can tell everyone this morning is we have not lost the submarine," Greene said. "That whistleblower is very safe. But he does fear for his life, and rightfully so."

While Greene claimed she was in contact with one whistleblower, up to nine other witnesses were missing or unavailable.


"That whistleblower came through for us, thankfully, through the help of Senator Grassley," she explained. "But other whistleblowers, yes, they are missing. They're either in court, they're in jail, or we cannot talk with them at this time because they can't be found."

"And our investigation is so important, Steve, that this will bring down the president of the United States," she added.

Watch the video below from Real America's Voice.