“Despite serious risks of retaliation, my client is offering to provide you with information necessary to exercise your constitutional oversight function and wishes to make the disclosures in a nonpartisan manner to the leadership of the relevant committees on both sides of the political aisle,” [attorney Mark] Lytle said in a letter, obtained by The Associated Press, that was sent to the chairmen and ranking members of several House and Senate committees.
(bolding mine)
Really? Would you be so willing to share this information if it pertained to the Trump family?
I don’t see anything in the article to imply otherwise.
Yes, it’s possible that it’s some Trump follower, with questionable reasoning abilities. But it’s also possible that it’s an honest person, who simply wants things to unfold to the letter of the law. Minus evidence to one side or the other, there’s no reason to assume the former or the latter. If they want to talk to everyone, on both sides, that’s a stronger indication, though, that they’re being honest about it.
And, frankly, Biden has said things along the lines of, “A father has no choice but to use his power to intervene to help his son.” Just like I took Trump seriously when he said that he’d work with foreign nations to win the presidency, I have no reason to do otherwise with Biden. If someone says that they’d do immoral things, you should always take that seriously.
Likewise, when Biden advised Clinton to ignore the UN Security Council veto and go into Kosovo, Biden was displaying a certain amount of disregard for the law. It was because he understood that people were murdering each other and that it should be stopped, but it also gave Russia ammunition for things like using whataboutism as an excuse to attack Ukraine.
Biden is not a perfect person and there’s good reason to think that he’s a person who would break the law for sentimental and bleeding heart reasons. That’s way better than Trump but it is illegal and shouldn’t be done. If he’s doing it, someone should blow the whistle and we should take them seriously, up to the point that they demonstrate themselves to be a loon.
If he violated the law, he should face consequences. I don’t care that his dad is the president, I don’t care that his dad is a president I voted for and support. I don’t think whataboutism is helpful here. If this is legitimate information, I am glad it’s being provided. If there is a right wing agenda behind it, so be it. Anything involving the family of the POTUS is bound to be political in some way. But the law is the law.
I don’t think it’s right to cheer when Trump and his associates get in legal trouble, and gripe when Biden’s son is targeted. The law should be enforced properly regardless of who is in trouble.
All that being said, if what they’re doing is approaching certain members of Congress with unsubstantiated allegations rather than presenting real evidence to the proper law enforcement people, then that’s just pure politics and it’s less than useless.
I’ll also be in a “wait and see” mode until we know more.
Maybe this whistleblower has something maybe he doesn’t, but he gave this info to two different inspector generals and they both passed so I know which way I’m leaning.
cite? I know that is not a direct quote, either that or google is broken.
And paraphrases have a tendency to change what was actually said into something else.
And if he didn’t actually say those things, then what?
Other than just pure speculation, what good reason do you have to offer?
That seems to be the case so far.
I’ll be open minded, but I’m extremely skeptical about it. How many times have we heard about smoking bombshells that turn out to be less than nothing?
Give him whistleblower status and we’ll find out what he has to report. I expect to hear a bunch of nonsense from this whistleblower instead of important valid information, but it’s more like a 60/40 thing, and even on the 40 side I doubt it would amount to much.
Bullshit. This is a major claim - put up a cite, or admit you made a mistake.
As for the whistle blower claim - let’s see it. Put up or shut up. I have no attachment to Hunter - if he broke the law, prosecute. But there have been so many bullshit claims about him that I’ll remain skeptical until evidence is produced.
I’m sure that there are some tax issues, few people don’t have some tax issues if the IRS looks hard enough. I wouldn’t be surprised if he ends up owing some back taxes and maybe a penalty.
And there is the thing with buying and owning a gun while addicted to drugs, but that’s something that has rarely been enforced, and never been enforced on its own. But, if it sets a precedent that disqualifies a huge swath of gun owners from owning a gun, then Hunter may have to take one for the team.