but...but....Hunter Biden!!

[CHEEZY17]

OOOOO Jamie Raskin said some partisan things! Shocker!
None of that over rides the official and legal subpoena. The official and legal subpoena was for a closed door session which he ignored. Do you even understand how this works?

You're free to refute what he said, that's why the links are embedded in the quote, facts are provided for you to dispute. Including when Comer told the public Hunter Biden could choose to come before a closed door deposition or a public hearing. But intellectually dishonest delusional disingenuous functionally retarded partisan hacks can't handle facts, and thus we get your antics which hold a different standard for a conspirator of January 6 still in Congress under subpoena than a private citizen who holds no such government office under subpoena. Fact. Hunter showed up, Republicans balked. Jordan never showed up, and now threatens punishment for something he himself is guilty of. And the best part of it all? You still have zero evidence against the actual president himself, Joe Biden, as admitted by your own star witnesses. Seethe more, hack.

There is nothing to refute because ANYTHING said by ANYONE prior to this is irrelevant. It doesnt matter what was said in an interview two months ago. It doesnt even matter what was said last week because those statements are not official or current. The only thing that matters is the language in the official and legal subpoena. The legal and official subpoena says he is to appear for a closed door session. He chose not to. That is factual and accurate and no amount of spin can change that. Really, you, Raskin or anyone else arguing anything different is just dumb at this point.

[dot]

There is nothing to refute because ANYTHING said by ANYONE prior to this is irrelevant. It doesnt matter what was said in an interview two months ago. It doesnt even matter what was said last week because those statements are not official or current. The only thing that matters is the language in the official and legal subpoena. The legal and official subpoena says he is to appear for a closed door session. He chose not to. That is factual and accurate and no amount of spin can change that. Really, you, Raskin or anyone else arguing anything different is just dumb at this point.

I know you want how your party reps behave and abuse their offices to happen in a vacuum and be completely untouched by criticism. But that's not going to be the case, it never was. If you think that their documented history of lying, obfuscation, misrepresentation, traitorous actions, etc is not going to be taken into account when dealing with such bad faith activities as their impeachment inquiry and subpoenas, then you truly are a perfect embodiment of the kind of mark and cult member they rely upon. Look no further than your first star witness, Devon Archer, to see how they treat closed door testimony. Remember how you crowed he would blow the lid off your Biden brand farce? And then your utter embarrassment when he did the absolute opposite and told Comer and co. that there was no involvement with Joe Biden? What did they do? Come out and misrepresent what Archer said, only for Democrats to tell the truth about what he said. But you wouldn't believe that, so you said you'd wait to be exonerated by the transcript when it was released. And what did the transcript say? Exactly what the Democrats said Archer said, which is the opposite of what the Republicans said he said. That's one of those pesky facts Raskin referenced that you readily ignore because it's indefensible. So yeah, I get you want to disregard your cult party's fundamental incompatibility with the truth. That doesn't mean the rest of us will disregard it. Hunter Biden showed up to take up the Republicans on their offer of testimony in public, and they balked. That is factual and accurate. Jim Jordan is over 500 days into defying his lawful subpoena from Congress. That is factual and accurate. As usual, every accusation out of your side is a confession and as such, no amount of spin from you can change these indisputable facts. For you to try and ignore it and their history, that's why you earned your labels.

Delusional. Disingenuous. Intellectually dishonest. Functionally retarded. Partisan. Hack.

[CHEEZY17]

Republicans rejected Hunters offer to publicly testify last month.
The subpoena says what it says. Hunter doesnt get to make his own rules.
The subpoena says to appear before a closed door session. Hunter refused. Those are the facts, homeschool.
It is amusing watching you get so worked up, though.
House GOP Rejects Hunter Biden Offer to Testify Publicly
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ccusations

[dot]

Republicans rejected Hunters offer to publicly testify last month.
The subpoena says what it says. Hunter doesnt get to make his own rules.
The subpoena says to appear before a closed door session. Hunter refused. Those are the facts, homeschool.
House GOP Rejects Hunter Biden Offer to Testify Publicly
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ccusations

“We have mountains of evidence and now we’re ready to bring ‘em in. We’re, we’re in the downhill phase of this investigation now because we have so many documents and, and we can bring these people in for depositions or committee hearings, whichever they choose, and we can ask these questions with evidence.”

Hunter Biden chose public. That's what your committee chairman offered. Whether he thought better of it later because his last televised impeachment hearing went so poorly (sup Turley, thanks for saying the hack don't got jack) or he simply chickened out after making bold claims on camera, the indisputable fact remains that Comer offered public or private testimony and then balked when Hunter chose public.

https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... uments.pdf

https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... merica.pdf

https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... 110823.pdf

Mr. Chairman, we take you up on your offer. Accordingly, our client will get right to it by agreeing to answer any pertinent and relevant question you or your colleagues might have, but—rather than subscribing to your cloaked, one-sided process—he will appear at a public Oversight and Accountability Committee hearing. To quote your November 8, 2023, letter accompanying the subpoena, “Given your client’s willingness to address this investigation publicly up to this point, we would expect him to be willing to testify before Congress.” He is, Mr. Chairman. A public proceeding would prevent selective leaks, manipulated transcripts, doctored exhibits, or one-sided press statements.

Let me know when you are brave enough to tackle some facts, hack.

[Animal]

and only 8 years after they started the Russia collusion investigation against Trump, they are now on the verge of convicting him of some misdemeanor charges of over valuing some of his assets.

[dot]

and only 8 years after they started the Russia collusion investigation against Trump, they are now on the verge of convicting him of some misdemeanor charges of over valuing some of his assets.

Haven't you learned by now, that every time you try and tackle the subject of fraud, it never goes your way? Trump is already determined to be guilty in that case, which has been pointed out to you before. Once again, choosing to remain ignorant reflects badly upon you. Let us know when you are brave enough to tackle the felony counts he's charged with, clearly you haven't made your way to New York to prove him innocent in that case yet.

[Animal]

omg, let's round up all of those villians that have over valued their assets!!! put 'em away!!! that's some funny shit.

Maybe next you can target Etsy and Ebay.

[Reservoir Dog]

Defrauding banks and investors is okay because everyone does it.

.

[saltydog]

and only 8 years after they started the Russia collusion investigation against Trump, they are now on the verge of convicting him of some misdemeanor charges of over valuing some of his assets.

Haven't you learned by now, that every time you try and tackle the subject of fraud, it never goes your way? Trump is already determined to be guilty in that case, which has been pointed out to you before. Once again, choosing to remain ignorant reflects badly upon you. Let us know when you are brave enough to tackle the felony counts he's charged with, clearly you haven't made your way to New York to prove him innocent in that case yet.

He's just repeating what his radio tells him.

[Animal]

Defrauding banks and investors is okay because everyone does it.

.

wasn't it weird when the bankers involved actually testified and said that they don't rely on the provided financial statements much anyway since they aren't audited? What did you think of that testimony?

[dot]

wasn't it weird when the bankers involved actually testified and said that they don't rely on the provided financial statements much anyway since they aren't audited? What did you think of that testimony?

If you're so confident in the value of the nonsense you're spewing, why haven't you gone to New York to turn the guilty verdict around? Until you do that, take a seat and learn what fraud is finally.

[saltydog]

wasn't it weird when the bankers involved actually testified and said that they don't rely on the provided financial statements much anyway since they aren't audited? What did you think of that testimony?

If you're so confident in the value of the nonsense you're spewing, why haven't you gone to New York to turn the guilty verdict around? Until you do that, take a seat and learn what fraud is finally.

He's in Texas, where they're trying their hardest to be the most misogynistic state in the country.

[Animal]

wasn't it weird when the bankers involved actually testified and said that they don't rely on the provided financial statements much anyway since they aren't audited? What did you think of that testimony?

If you're so confident in the value of the nonsense you're spewing, why haven't you gone to New York to turn the guilty verdict around? Until you do that, take a seat and learn what fraud is finally.

I think I will just wait for the appeal when they get an actual judge.

[dot]

I think I will just wait for the appeal when they get an actual judge.

Looks like you're not confident at all. Sounds like you're a fraud. No wonder it was so personal for you.

[saltydog]

I think I will just wait for the appeal when they get an actual judge.

Looks like you're not confident at all. Sounds like you're a fraud. No wonder it was so personal for you.

"The Great Pretender"

[saltydog]

[saltydog]

Shell companies!?!?!

[dot]

Shell companies!?!?!

Every accusation is a confession.

[CHEEZY17]

Republicans rejected Hunters offer to publicly testify last month.
The subpoena says what it says. Hunter doesnt get to make his own rules.
The subpoena says to appear before a closed door session. Hunter refused. Those are the facts, homeschool.
House GOP Rejects Hunter Biden Offer to Testify Publicly
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ccusations

“We have mountains of evidence and now we’re ready to bring ‘em in. We’re, we’re in the downhill phase of this investigation now because we have so many documents and, and we can bring these people in for depositions or committee hearings, whichever they choose, and we can ask these questions with evidence.”

Hunter Biden chose public. That's what your committee chairman offered. Whether he thought better of it later because his last televised impeachment hearing went so poorly (sup Turley, thanks for saying the hack don't got jack) or he simply chickened out after making bold claims on camera, the indisputable fact remains that Comer offered public or private testimony and then balked when Hunter chose public.

https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... uments.pdf

https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... merica.pdf

https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/si ... 110823.pdf

Mr. Chairman, we take you up on your offer. Accordingly, our client will get right to it by agreeing to answer any pertinent and relevant question you or your colleagues might have, but—rather than subscribing to your cloaked, one-sided process—he will appear at a public Oversight and Accountability Committee hearing. To quote your November 8, 2023, letter accompanying the subpoena, “Given your client’s willingness to address this investigation publicly up to this point, we would expect him to be willing to testify before Congress.” He is, Mr. Chairman. A public proceeding would prevent selective leaks, manipulated transcripts, doctored exhibits, or one-sided press statements.

Let me know when you are brave enough to tackle some facts, hack.

Theyve already been tackled you retard.
The current subpoena is the authority here; not statements from 2 months ago (or whenever) that youre relying on. The official and legal subpoena says to appear at a closed session. Thats it. Hunter does not get to make his own rules. Thats not how it works. Its not that difficult. Doing a public performance is not the same as appearing in a closed session.
Did Hunter honor the official and legal subpoena yes or no? Uh oh, looks like we have another question for dot to dodge!

[dot]

Theyve already been tackled you retard.
The current subpoena is the authority here; not statements from 2 months ago (or whenever) that youre relying on. The official and legal subpoena says to appear at a closed session. Thats it. Hunter does not get to make his own rules. Thats not how it works. Its not that difficult. Doing a public performance is not the same as appearing in a closed session.
Did Hunter honor the official and legal subpoena yes or no? Uh oh, looks like we have another question for dot to dodge!

Disregarding them because it was cited in Raskin's statement is not tackled. That's you dodging, hack. The record, the facts, they show that Comer and Hunter Biden's representation were in constant contact. Comer, in bad faith like all of his other committee antics, lied to the public about Hunter Biden not being forthcoming and thus threatened subpoena action. The representation, as detailed in the documents presented that you ignore, date stamp and refute Comer's bad faith antics and present the acceptance of a public ask from Comer to testify publicly. Comer and co balked, having seen how televised pushback to their no evidence bad faith allegations go over. Those are the facts. They want a closed door session so they can try and pull another Devon Archer farce again. That's a fact, and ignoring it just like last time when you fell on your face, it doesn't make it go away. So once again, pretend all of this happens in a bubble if you have to try and save face, I really don't care. Your credibility is zero. Thus is the story of you, the delusional disingenuous intellectually dishonest functionally retarded partisan hack.

[CHEEZY17]

Theyve already been tackled you retard.
The current subpoena is the authority here; not statements from 2 months ago (or whenever) that youre relying on. The official and legal subpoena says to appear at a closed session. Thats it. Hunter does not get to make his own rules. Thats not how it works. Its not that difficult. Doing a public performance is not the same as appearing in a closed session.
Did Hunter honor the official and legal subpoena yes or no? Uh oh, looks like we have another question for dot to dodge!

Disregarding them because it was cited in Raskin's statement is not tackled. That's you dodging, hack. The record, the facts, they show that Comer and Hunter Biden's representation were in constant contact. Comer, in bad faith like all of his other committee antics, lied to the public about Hunter Biden not being forthcoming and thus threatened subpoena action. The representation, as detailed in the documents presented that you ignore, date stamp and refute Comer's bad faith antics and present the acceptance of a public ask from Comer to testify publicly. Comer and co balked, having seen how televised pushback to their no evidence bad faith allegations go over. Those are the facts. They want a closed door session so they can try and pull another Devon Archer farce again. That's a fact, and ignoring it just like last time when you fell on your face, it doesn't make it go away. So once again, pretend all of this happens in a bubble if you have to try and save face, I really don't care. Your credibility is zero. Thus is the story of you, the delusional disingenuous intellectually dishonest functionally retarded partisan hack.

Thats a lot of words to admit Hunter didnt honor the legal and official subpoena.

[dot]

Thats a lot of words to admit Hunter didnt honor the legal and official subpoena.

He showed up, they wouldn't do it in public as they offered. You can keep dodging that fact, it only shows your desperation more and more each time you do it. Hunter Biden also did more than your boy Jordan did. And never forget, at the end of it all, you still don't got jack on Joe Biden. Hack.

[CHEEZY17]

Thats a lot of words to admit Hunter didnt honor the legal and official subpoena.

He showed up, they wouldn't do it in public as they offered. You can keep dodging that fact, it only shows your desperation more and more each time you do it. Hunter Biden also did more than your boy Jordan did. And never forget, at the end of it all, you still don't got jack on Joe Biden. Hack.

He showed up where? Oh, thats right. He showed up to the wrong place so your statement is ridiculous and irrelevant. Hunter does not get to make his own rules; thats not how it works. The subpoena doesnt say: "Hunter please show up to the front of the building for a press conference."
The committee rejected his offer to appear publicly last month so the subpoena was not some crazy surprise.
The official and legal subpoena says to appear for a closed door session as has been done throughout this whole process and Hunter defied that. You can dance around that fact all you want but that is the bottom line.

[stonedmegman]

omg, let's round up all of those villians that have over valued their assets!!! put 'em away!!! that's some funny shit.

Maybe next you can target Etsy and Ebay.

My edick is huuuge.

[dot]

He showed up where? Oh, thats right. He showed up to the wrong place so your statement is ridiculous and irrelevant. Hunter does not get to make his own rules; thats not how it works. The subpoena doesnt say: "Hunter please show up to the front of the building for a press conference."
The committee rejected his offer to appear publicly last month so the subpoena was not some crazy surprise.
The official and legal subpoena says to appear for a closed door session as has been done throughout this whole process and Hunter defied that. You can dance around that fact all you want but that is the bottom line.

He showed up to testify in public, as was offered. That's not making up his own rules, that's taking your boys up on their offer. Your boys balked. Keep dancing around that, we both know you have no leg to stand on. Just as we both know what happens when Republicans shield testimony from public view. Your desperation to avoid yet another embarrassment is obvious. And through it all, you still got nothing against the actual president. You and your reps can't even call out what the supposed crime is that they're looking for. Hack.