If Trump Loses In November, What Do You Think Happens Next

[Ksyrup]

A deal to lose by less!

NEW ���� source close to McCarthy has confirmed a deal is on the table

It will NOT be enough to take him over the line. Sources predicted could bring over 10-12 holdouts but that’s a guesstimate. Few details on contents. Includes one-member motion to vacate https://t.co/L8w9J71m5w

— Gram Slattery (@G_Slattery) January 5, 2023

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

What I want to know or my points

To Brian's point, I invite you to go back in this thread almost two years ago to the day and take a look at things that you wanted answers to that had to come from a congressional investigation about January 6th. Most if not all of those answers have been provided by the January 6th committee.

And?

What is the best case scenario now that this investigation has happened is what? Especially when you consider how the forming of the committee and the hearings etc. all played out.

Why does it matter?

Here is a quote from one of our exchanges.

My point is without the "real" (vs theoretical) who called whom, and the timeline to gauge the responsiveness (or lack of) we aren't going to find the other failures. Only an investigation is going to document all this and that is what I'm interested in.

Everything is documented though a significant portion of the country don't believe what is documented. We know who called whom, we know the timeline, we know all the other failures. The final report is out. It is 845 pages long. Cool

Now what?

[Ksyrup]

Trump has now been elevated to an official nomination by Gaetz.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

There is a gap between Dec 2019 and Aug 2020. The FBI had it during this time.

I do not know what the FBI was doing with it during this time period. The story broke in spite of the FBI. Guiliani broke the story in Oct 2020.

They probably did nothing. The laptop has been passed around and seen by just about every major media outlet and right-wing group. If there was something illegal on it, they would have done something.

I guess I don't know what you expected the FBI to do. A stolen laptop was delivered to them which had passed through a bunch of incredibly shady people. They're a law enforcement agency. Unless there is a crime on the device, they either return the device or put it aside. They're not the National Enquirer.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Just read a really terrifying theory. If the GOP holds the House and a Dem wins the WH in 2024 they could pull this trick to refuse to certify the winner of the election.

They'll elect someone the minute the Saudis or Israelis need an arms deal approved.

[Ksyrup]

One silver lining for McCarthy is that once the number of votes goes over 16, Matt Gaetz will probably lose interest.

— New York Times Pitchbot (@DougJBalloon) January 5, 2023

[Ksyrup]

I was driving home during vote ... #9, I think? Anyway, who is the one vote McCarthy lost?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Now what?

Pretty much everyone is in the same camp they were in prior to the whole charade.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

They probably did nothing. The laptop has been passed around and seen by just about every major media outlet and right-wing group. If there was something illegal on it, they would have done something.

Every major media outlet did not know about the laptop until Aug-Oct 2020. The FBI had the laptop in Dec 2019.

I guess I don't know what you expected the FBI to do. A stolen laptop was delivered to them which had passed through a bunch of incredibly shady people. They're a law enforcement agency. Unless there is a crime on the device, they either return the device or put it aside. They're not the National Enquirer.

There was already an active investigation into Hunter for tax evasion and a gun purchase false statement. It included Delaware folks, IRS and FBI. See link below.

Will Hunter Biden be indicted? - Vox

So we have an active investigation of Hunter, which also includes the FBI. The FBI gets a laptop in Dec 2019 with some possible additional evidence and the FBI "probably did nothing" until Guiliani broke the story in Oct 2020?

Yeah, I want to know why.

What I want to know or my points

(1) is the FBI actively investigating Hunter re: laptop and when did it start (2) when did Barr know about the laptop and contents (3) if Barr did not know about the laptop until Oct 2020, why?

I freely admit I do not know the answers to the 3 questions above. My cynical self would answer FBI did not start investigating until Oct 2020. Probably sat on the laptop since Dec 2019. May be because of some FBI anti-Trump sympathizers. Barr did not know until Oct 2020. If this true, then I want to know why.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Now what?

Fair question. I think I know how I want to answer this but, unlike the Hunter laptop where I believe I know the basic facts & questions, this will take more thought (and I'm watching Andor).

I'll come back with my answer by Fri or Sat

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Yeah, I want to know why.

Why do you think the American public needs to know? He is a private citizen. He has never held public office. Why should he be treated differently?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Why do you think the American public needs to know? He is a private citizen. He has never held public office. Why should he be treated differently?

To answer your question directly, it is not about Hunter. It is about any possible Joe connections and any FBI wrong doing/incompetence.

For more details ...

My post #6815 has more context. But I'll repost the section below to answer your question

Originally Posted by Edward64

Let me summarize my understanding of the situation (feel free to correct).

1) There is no doubt it was Hunter's laptop. There is doubt on chain of custody and if things were inserted/changed but many emails have been verified
2) There is little doubt there were some emails re: influence peddling/dealings with China and Burisma. There were already reports of this before Hunter's laptop fiasco, the laptop just provided more evidence
3) There were other stuff that showed Hunter was a POS at that time. But not relevant

The question is whether Joe was aware of them (maybe) and, more importantly, if he profited somehow from those dealings (unlikely)

And then in a couple posts after, I did the timeline of events and said below bolded.

If this timeline and Isaacs recollection is true, the unanswered question is what did the FBI do with the laptop & contents during the period of Dec 2019 to Aug 2020. If the FBI was conducting investigations on the laptop before Guiliani got his hands on it, I've not found it reported (let me know if you find a link). Conspiracists will say FBI sympathizers suppressed the laptop but it could just as easily be FBI incompetence/inefficiencies during Covid.

Bottom-line. Although the laptop was with the FBI for about a 10 months, it is not clear if the FBI had let higher ups know and/or if the contents were being investigated.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Yeah, I want to know why.

Probably because there was no crime committed or they couldn't prove whether the contents of the laptop was real because of chain of custody issues.

Do you think the FBI should be putting out statements for every private citizen who didn't commit a crime? Again, I don't understand what you want the FBI to do here.

Again, they're a law enforcement agency, not a tabloid newspaper.

[sovereignstar v2]

Oh great, HoN Adria Arjona incoming

[sovereignstar v2]

Oh BTW

Hot

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Probably because there was no crime committed or they couldn't prove whether the contents of the laptop was real because of chain of custody issues.

Do you think the FBI should be putting out statements for every private citizen who didn't commit a crime? Again, I don't understand what you want the FBI to do here.

Again, they're a law enforcement agency, not a tabloid newspaper.

Per the vox link I posted, the Feds do think there were crime(s) committed in their original investigation.

So they get a laptop with potentially more info and they choose not to investigate it?

And after the major media got their hands on the contents (after Oct 2020) they have validate many (not all) of the emails/documents. Just think if the FBI had started doing that in Dec 2019

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

To answer your question directly, it is not about Hunter. It is about any possible Joe connections and any FBI wrong doing/incompetence.

.

If you want to know if Joe did anything wrong investigate him, however I am pretty certain you need evidence to start one, not start one in hopes of finding evidence.

There is zero justification for congress to open an investigation in to Hunter.

That being said I hope they do. The republicans are still too stupid to realize the American people aren't interested in revenge politics and pointless hearings. They can keep catering to the ever shrinking base.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I was driving home during vote ... #9, I think? Anyway, who is the one vote McCarthy lost?

Someone had a medical appt. Not sure who.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

If you want to know if Joe did anything wrong investigate him, however I am pretty certain you need evidence to start one, not start one in hopes of finding evidence.

There is zero justification for congress to open an investigation in to Hunter.

That being said I hope they do. The republicans are still too stupid to realize the American people aren't interested in revenge politics and pointless hearings. They can keep catering to the ever shrinking base.

Unfortunately Hunters laptop emails/docs made reference to Joe. Not proven but it implies Joe may have known of Hunters deals. The question is how much and if Joe benefited from them.

So investigating Hunter is investigating Joe.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I was driving home during vote ... #9, I think? Anyway, who is the one vote McCarthy lost?

Ken Buck has a doctor appointment, I think.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Per the vox link I posted, the Feds do think there were crime(s) committed in their original investigation.

So they get a laptop with potentially more info and they choose not to investigate it?

And after the major media got their hands on the contents (after Oct 2020) they have validate many (not all) of the emails/documents. Just think if the FBI had started doing that in Dec 2019

The Vox link talks about some old tax crimes and lying on a gun permit application. Absolutely nothing to do with the laptop.

That laptop went through the hands of every media outlet and right-wing activist in the country. If there was something incriminating on it, don't you think they would have released it? Do you think Breitbart or Fox News who had access to the laptop decided to sit on an explosive story like that? What is it you think all these people are conspiring to hide from the public?

Are you suggesting that the FBI, a law enforcement agency that has skewed far-right since its inception and a DOJ stocked with Trump lackeys decided to cover up a crime to protect Joe Biden's kid? That seems logical to you?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Unfortunately Hunters laptop emails/docs made reference to Joe. Not proven but it implies Joe may have known of Hunters deals. The question is how much and if Joe benefited from them.

So investigating Hunter is investigating Joe.

I have yet to see any evidence of Biden being specifically named. All I have heard are alleged terms like "the big guy" and given the chain of custody with that laptop anything on there should be looked at dubiously at best.

It is revenge porn for the far right. Plain and simple. Nothing wrong with admitting you like porn though, just own it and don't act like it would actually accomplish anything.

[RainMaker]

Like I'm all for prosecuting rich, well-connected people so if Trump had him for crimes, it's a shame they didn't prosecute. But this feels more and more like people just want me to see his cock for some reason. Maybe a weird fetish.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The Vox link talks about some old tax crimes and lying on a gun permit application. Absolutely nothing to do with the laptop.

Sure it did. The Vox article quote below indicates there was in investigation to money laundering and unregistered foreign agent. Foreign influence peddling and whether Joe was involved somehow is what the investigation should be about. The laptop contains emails/documentations that refers to this.

According to the New York Times, a federal inquiry into whether Hunter had properly paid his taxes began back during the Obama administration, long before Hunter became a favorite target of Donald Trump’s allies. Then, in 2018, the tax inquiry became a broader criminal investigation into Hunter, conducted by the US attorney’s office in Delaware, examining possible money laundering and whether he was an unregistered foreign agent.

That laptop went through the hands of every media outlet and right-wing activist in the country. If there was something incriminating on it, don't you think they would have released it? Do you think Breitbart or Fox News who had access to the laptop decided to sit on an explosive story like that? What is it you think all these people are conspiring to hide from the public?

Your statement shows you are focused on after the media got access to the laptop & content which is circa Oct 2020 and later.

The question I have is what did the FBI do with the laptop and contents between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020. This was a time period when the media didn't know about the laptop. You said probably nothing. I say that's a problem because there was an ongoing investigation on Hunter already, there were related items (see my vox quote above) so they should have done something.

After Oct 2020, after the elections, there were media investigations done on the laptop. The chain of custody was identified as an issue but many emails/docs were validated and other emails/docs not validated. Google on "fox news hunter biden laptop" and you'll find plenty. And it is not surprising the left leaning major stations aren't pursuing it.

Are you suggesting that the FBI, a law enforcement agency that has skewed far-right since its inception and a DOJ stocked with Trump lackeys decided to cover up a crime to protect Joe Biden's kid? That seems logical to you?

I'm not conceding FBI has skewed far-right. Sure at AG and Director level that may be the case. But underlings are all over. As evidenced by Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and let's not forget Trump's treatment of McCabe and Comey. Trump's path of destruction (and ending of mentor-mentee relationships) likely left a lot of disgruntled underlings.

So no, I doubt FBI was a monolithic far-right wing organization. And yes, I can easily believe some in the FBI wanted to limit damage to Joe (not Hunter specifically) to get back at Trump.

*****

I've been answering a lot of your questions. So let me ask you mine:

1) Between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020 (before media knew about the laptop & contents), you stated FBI probably did nothing because there was no reason to. I stated there was an ongoing investigation of Hunter at the same time. It was for related items (see my Vox quote above). Do you think it's reasonable for the FBI to not review the contents of the laptop, at least superficially, to see if there were any applicable evidence?

Because if they did, they would have found some evidence. Chain of custody is an issue but media has been able to validate some emails/docs through their research. Why shouldn't the FBI have done that?

[PilotMan]

After 6 years of trump they want to win the embarrassment game. This gives them the chance to say look how embarrassing this is, and its revenge for saying trump was an embarrassment.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I've been answering a lot of your questions. So let me ask you mine:

1) Between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020 (before media knew about the laptop & contents), you stated FBI probably did nothing because there was no reason to. I stated there was an ongoing investigation of Hunter at the same time. It was for related items (see my Vox quote above). Do you think it's reasonable for the FBI to not review the contents of the laptop, at least superficially, to see if there were any applicable evidence?

Because if they did, they would have found some evidence. Chain of custody is an issue but media has been able to validate some emails/docs through their research. Why shouldn't the FBI have done that?

I don't get the disconnect here. You're wondering why the FBI didn't act on evidence that nobody has determined to be criminal? Sure emails were validated as real emails from Hunter Biden, that certainly doesn't mean they were validated as evidence of crimes that nobody can seem to specify. Doesn't the fact that the FBI did nothing & that everyone else with this access to the same information couldn't actually reveal anything criminal speak for itself?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I have yet to see any evidence of Biden being specifically named. All I have heard are alleged terms like "the big guy" and given the chain of custody with that laptop anything on there should be looked at dubiously at best.

It is revenge porn for the far right. Plain and simple. Nothing wrong with admitting you like porn though, just own it and don't act like it would actually accomplish anything.

There's a lot of evidence out there beyond your "the big guy" if you google on it. Plenty has been reported but, I admit, none are what I would call near conclusive proof.

But is there smoke? For you, likely not. For me, yes enough to justify an investigation.

No, it should be a congressional investigation. But let me know when AG decides on a independent special counsel/prosecutor to oversee the case. Until then, the only recourse I see is the congressional investigation.

Let's have the investigation and figure it out. The most likely outcome IMO is (1) we find out that Hunter is a POS did something unethical and illegal (2) Joe helped out his son like any dad would do e.g. sure Hunter, use my name if you want. I'll even drop by for dinner at Ruth Chris to say shake hands (3) Biden did not financially or inappropriately benefit from Hunter's escapades.

[Ryche]

Originally Posted by sovereignstar v2

Oh BTW

Hot

So very hot

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I'm not conceding FBI has skewed far-right. Sure at AG and Director level that may be the case. But underlings are all over. As evidenced by Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and let's not forget Trump's treatment of McCabe and Comey. Trump's path of destruction (and ending of mentor-mentee relationships) likely left a lot of disgruntled underlings.

So no, I doubt FBI was a monolithic far-right wing organization. And yes, I can easily believe some in the FBI wanted to limit damage to Joe (not Hunter specifically) to get back at Trump.

The FBI was being run by Wray, a staunch conservative and member of the Federalist Society. The DOJ was run by Bill Barr, another staunch conservative who's claim to fame was covering up Iran-Contra for his right-wing friends. Even Comey and McCabe were Republicans.

Originally Posted by Edward64

1) Between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020 (before media knew about the laptop & contents), you stated FBI probably did nothing because there was no reason to. I stated there was an ongoing investigation of Hunter at the same time. It was for related items (see my Vox quote above). Do you think it's reasonable for the FBI to not review the contents of the laptop, at least superficially, to see if there were any applicable evidence?

Because if they did, they would have found some evidence. Chain of custody is an issue but media has been able to validate some emails/docs through their research. Why shouldn't the FBI have done that?

Who said they didn't review the contents of the laptop? I'm fairly certain that people at the FBI reviewed the laptop. They spent years trying to find any dirt they could on Biden and his family.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

There's a lot of evidence out there beyond your "the big guy" if you google on it. Plenty has been reported but, I admit, none are what I would call near conclusive proof.

Like what? Post it for us. Show us the incriminating stuff that was found on the laptop.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

I don't get the disconnect here. You're wondering why the FBI didn't act on evidence that nobody has determined to be criminal?

I'm not sure I understand your question? When you say the FBI did not act on "evidence that nobody has determined to be criminal", I would counter it's the FBIs responsibility to see if the evidence was determined to be criminal? They had an active but separate investigation on Hunter even before they got the Hunter laptop, why wouldn't they investigate the laptop?

Sure emails were validated as real emails from Hunter Biden, that certainly doesn't mean they were validated as evidence of crimes that nobody can seem to specify.

On your statement "emails were validated as real emails ... doesn't mean they were validated as evidence of crimes" indicates you are referring to Oct 2020 or later after the laptop became public. My question is what did the FBI do with the laptop & contents before from Dec 2019 to Oct 2020?

Doesn't the fact that the FBI did nothing & that everyone else with this access to the same information couldn't actually reveal anything criminal speak for itself?

Again, not everyone had access to the laptop & contents until Oct 2020. The FBI had the laptop & content in Dec 2019. Why did the FBI do nothing during this 10 month period?

I think part of the confusion is the timeline of events. I'm just going to repost my timeline from an earlier post for reference.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - If Trump Loses In November, What Do You Think Happens Next

April 2019 - Hunter drops of latop to Isaacs for repair
April + approx 90 days - Hunter has not returned or paid for repairs so the laptop becomes Isaac's property. He looks at the contents
Oct 2019 - Isaac's father Colonel Mac goes to FBI branch
Oct + few weeks later - FBI visits Isaac
Dec 2019 - FBI visits Isaac again and takes laptop (Isaacs has made backup copy)
Dec + few days later - Isaacs reports below quote. Take it FWIW
Dec + sometime later - Isaacs reaches out to Jim Jordan & Lindsey Graham but does not hear anything back
Aug 2020 - 9 months after FBI visit, Isaacs reached out to Guiliani & attorney

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The FBI was being run by Wray, a staunch conservative and member of the Federalist Society. The DOJ was run by Bill Barr, another staunch conservative who's claim to fame was covering up Iran-Contra for his right-wing friends. Even Comey and McCabe were Republicans.

No question upper echelon were likely partisan hacks. Do you dispute that Trump probably made a lot of enemies in how he treated Comey and McCabe?

Who said they didn't review the contents of the laptop? I'm fairly certain that people at the FBI reviewed the laptop. They spent years trying to find any dirt they could on Biden and his family.

I thought you did?

They probably did nothing. The laptop has been passed around and seen by just about every major media outlet and right-wing group. If there was something illegal on it, they would have done something.

I guess I don't know what you expected the FBI to do. A stolen laptop was delivered to them which had passed through a bunch of incredibly shady people. They're a law enforcement agency. Unless there is a crime on the device, they either return the device or put it aside. They're not the National Enquirer.

If the FBI did review the content of the laptop & contents, they would have found some related evidence (see Vox article). I also want to know the answers to my questions below? I have honestly not been able to find answers

What I want to know or my points

(1) is the FBI actively investigating Hunter re: laptop and when did it start (2) when did Barr know about the laptop and contents (3) if Barr did not know about the laptop until Oct 2020, why?

I freely admit I do not know the answers to the 3 questions above. My cynical self would answer FBI did not start investigating until Oct 2020. Probably sat on the laptop since Dec 2019. May be because of some FBI anti-Trump sympathizers. Barr did not know until Oct 2020. If this true, then I want to know why.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Like what? Post it for us. Show us the incriminating stuff that was found on the laptop.

Fair question. And I'll post it.

But will ask you to answer my questions I asked you previously.

I understand from your question back to me, there may have been some confusion and hopefully I've answered it. To restate my question:

Originally Posted by Edward64 View Post

1) Between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020 (before media knew about the laptop & contents), you stated FBI probably did nothing because there was no reason to. I stated there was an ongoing investigation of Hunter at the same time. It was for related items (see my Vox quote above). Do you think it's reasonable for the FBI to not review the contents of the laptop, at least superficially, to see if there were any applicable evidence?

Because if they did, they would have found some evidence. Chain of custody is an issue but media has been able to validate some emails/docs through their research. Why shouldn't the FBI have done that?

And ...

No question upper echelon were likely partisan hacks. Do you dispute that Trump probably made a lot of enemies (in the FBI) in how he treated Comey and McCabe?

[thesloppy]

That timeline does nothing to change my point (beside which you've already grudgingly admitted that the chain of custody is certainly not a matter of fact). Isaac and Giulliani and practically every single person in their orbit has had access to that data for at least 2 entire years now and nobody has been able to produce convincing evidence of a crime. Your question is "Well why didn't the FBI act on that non-evidence in the 2 years before"?

[Ksyrup]

Matt Schlapp. It's always the ones you most expect it from.

[RainMaker]

I think the FBI should review the contents of a device they feel was part of a criminal investigation if they have the legal standing to do so.

Your question doesn't make much sense because it implies the FBI never looked at the laptop and there is zero evidence of that.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Matt Schlapp. It's always the ones you most expect it from.

I read the headline: Herschel Walker Staffer: Matt Schlapp ‘Groped’ My Crotch




..but my brain entirely skipped over the very important word "staffer" and I thought Schlapp had groped Herschell himself & things were about to get REAL interesting

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

That timeline does nothing to change my point (beside which you've already grudgingly admitted that the chain of custody is certainly not a matter of fact). Isaac and Giulliani and practically every single person in their orbit has had access to that data for at least 2 entire years now and nobody has been able to produce convincing evidence of a crime.

The GOP will differ on your assessment and definition of "convincing evidence". Just like the Steele dossier when the Dems had control of the House.

Your question is "Well why didn't the FBI act on that non-evidence in the 2 years before"?

Non-evidence is kinda leading here. I don't concede that at all. I'll use possible evidence instead.

So yes, that is one of my questions. Why didn't the FBI, which already had an active investigation going on, review the contents of the laptop between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020.

And if they did, they would have found possible evidence related to their ongoing investigation. So why didn't they act on it.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

The GOP will differ on your assessment and definition of "convincing evidence". Just like the Steele dossier when the Dems had control of the House.

Non-evidence is kinda leading here. I don't concede that at all. I'll use possible evidence instead.

So yes, that is one of my questions. Why didn't the FBI, which already had an active investigation going on, review the contents of the laptop between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020.

And if they did, they would have found possible evidence related to their ongoing investigation. So why didn't they act on it.

What evidence was there to act on? It seems like they had a broad investigation into him and couldn't find anything to charge him with besides lying on a gun permit and paying his taxes late.

You keep talking about how this laptop has incriminating stuff on it. Can you post it like you said?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I think the FBI should review the contents of a device they feel was part of a criminal investigation if they have the legal standing to do so.

Why wouldn't the FBI had legal standing to investigate from Dec 2019 to Oct 2020 the contents of Hunter's laptop? They already had an active investigation going on?

Your question doesn't make much sense because it implies the FBI never looked at the laptop and there is zero evidence of that.

I actually thought you said they "probably did nothing". So I was going off that.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

What evidence was there to act on? It seems like they had a broad investigation into him and couldn't find anything to charge him with besides lying on a gun permit and paying his taxes late.

You keep talking about how this laptop has incriminating stuff on it. Can you post it like you said?

I will. But I'm still waiting for you to answer my questions. Let me restate them

Originally Posted by Edward64 View Post

1) Between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020 (before media knew about the laptop & contents), you stated FBI probably did nothing because there was no reason to. I stated there was an ongoing investigation of Hunter at the same time. It was for related items (see my Vox quote above). Do you think it's reasonable for the FBI to not review the contents of the laptop, at least superficially, to see if there were any applicable evidence?

Because if they did, they would have found some evidence. Chain of custody is an issue but media has been able to validate some emails/docs through their research. Why shouldn't the FBI have done that?

If you really didn't mean the bolded section (I quoted you elsewhere), please explain what you meant. Also, the second question there in bold.

and

No question upper echelon were likely partisan hacks. Do you dispute that Trump probably made a lot of enemies (in the FBI) in how he treated Comey and McCabe?

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by Edward64

So yes, that is one of my questions. Why didn't the FBI, which already had an active investigation going on, review the contents of the laptop between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020.

And if they did, they would have found possible evidence related to their ongoing investigation. So why didn't they act on it.

Not to be an asshole, but why do you think those are even valid questions? The most simple and obvious answer is they did review every bit of that data and they are using any and everything pertinent as part of an investigation that is ongoing. Point me to literally any concrete evidence of why I or you should assume anything else.

[RainMaker]

The FBI should have done that and likely did.

I'm sure Trump has made enemies everywhere he has been. He's a pretty terrible person who treats people poorly.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

Not to be an asshole, but why do you think those are even valid questions? The most simple and obvious answer is they did review every bit of that data and they are using any and everything pertinent as part of an investigation that is ongoing. Point me to literally any concrete evidence of why I or you should assume anything else.

He's either dumb or playing dumb. Can't really tell at this point.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

Not to be an asshole, but why do you think those are even valid questions? The most simple and obvious answer is they did review every bit of that data and they are using any and everything pertinent as part of an investigation that is ongoing. Point me to literally any concrete evidence of why I or you should assume anything else.

You jumped into the middle of a conversation I was having with Rainman. See post #6882 for full context. I basically thought he said the FBI "probably did nothing" with the laptop & contents between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020. I challenged that and said why wouldn't they, they should have.

Let's go on the assumption they did review the contents during this period. I contend there is enough "possible" evidence to pursue. When the media got the laptop & contents in Oct 2020, they were the ones that did alot of the validation of emails, docs. If the FBI had already done their review, I think they should have provided what they knew then.

There is a gap, lack of info on what the FBI did with the contents of Hunter's laptop between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020. I can't find any information. If you can, please link it, it may resolve my questions. This lack of information for this time period makes me suspicious that FBI was either (1) trying to suppress the info (2) inefficient/ineffective because of Covid

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The FBI should have done that and likely did.

You said they "probably did nothing" between Dec 2019 and Oct 2020. Was that a mistake or do you want to reword or did I misunderstand? A lot of my answers & statements in our back and forth was based on your answer which I took literally. So if I misunderstood, let me know now.

I'm sure Trump has made enemies everywhere he has been. He's a pretty terrible person who treats people poorly.

Okay. Good enough for me.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

He's either dumb or playing dumb. Can't really tell at this point.

I think I answered his question.

It would be good if you answered all my questions.

[RainMaker]

I said "they probably did nothing" in regards to a prosecution or case against him. Genuinely didn't think anyone believed they got access to the laptop and just locked it in a closet for a year without looking. Guess I was wrong. The laptop appeared to be a bunch of boring business e-mails and if there was some smoking gun, guys like Giuliani would have been on TV showing us it.

Anyway, you seem to have the inside scoop on the crimes that laptop held which eluded the FBI, right-wing activists, and media outlets. Care to fill us in now?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I said "they probably did nothing" in regards to a prosecution or case against him. Genuinely didn't think anyone believed they got access to the laptop and just locked it in a closet for a year without looking. Guess I was wrong. The laptop appeared to be a bunch of boring business e-mails and if there was some smoking gun, guys like Giuliani would have been on TV showing us it.

Anyway, you seem to have the inside scoop on the crimes that laptop held which eluded the FBI, right-wing activists, and media outlets. Care to fill us in now?

Okay. So you believe FBI did review laptop & contents from Dec 2019 to Oct 2020 and did not find anything in the laptop that would have helped in their already ongoing investigation.

Okay, I'll answer your question shortly.

[RainMaker]

Yes, I've said that like a dozen times now. If they were pulling up old gun permit applications and tax records from a decade ago, they likely went through his personal laptop.