We have been discussing the scorched earth campaign by Hunter Biden’s new legal team as well as a type of legion of Doom of Democratic activists. That included seeking criminal investigations of critics while threatening a wide array of journalists and potential witnesses with civil lawsuits. Today, Biden moved against John Paul Mac Isaac, the repairman who revealed the laptop and its contents. The lawsuit, in my view, has serious flaws, but reflects the new “dark Biden” stage of this saga. The effort to go on offense against key figures and witnesses could well backfire for the Hunter Biden team and his family.
In the 42-page filing below in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware includes six privacy-related counts.
Previously, the new Biden team stumbled out of the gate by seemingly (and belatedly) admitted that the laptop is authentic and then backtracking. In an earlier column on the letters sent by Hunter Biden’s lawyer Abbe Lowell, I discussed his calling for criminal investigations, the removal of tax exempt status, and other measures targeting critics and media. It also appeared to confirm that the laptop is indeed Hunter’s. However, the next day, Lowell told NBC “These letters do not confirm Mac Isaac’s or others’ versions of a so-called laptop.” It is a curious position when asking for criminal investigations like asking police to look for people who may or may not have stolen a car that may or may not be yours.
In the new filing, the team continues to equivocate on ownership and even refuses to admit that Hunter Biden left the computer at the shop. Ironically, Hunter Biden hits Issac for conflicting accounts on how the computer came into his possession. In a filing alleging the loss of privacy and ownership of these files, the Hunter Biden legal team still plays coy on the computer’s authenticity. At the top of the countersuit they state:
“In or before April 2019, Counterclaim Defendant Mac Isaac, by whatever means, came into possession of certain electronically stored data, at least some of which belonged to Counterclaim Plaintiff Biden.”
That line is then followed by this footnote:
1 This is not an admission by Mr. Biden that Mac Isaac (or others) in fact possessed any particular laptop containing electronically stored data belonging to Mr. Biden. Rather, Mr. Biden simply acknowledges that at some point, Mac Isaac obtained electronically stored data, some of which belonged to Mr. Biden.
It is still not clear what Biden is trying to suggest. Putting aside someone representing themselves as Hunter Biden, the other possibility is that someone stole the laptop of the son of the Vice President and then took the risk of bringing it into a shop for repair (while using the victim’s name).
The biggest problem facing Biden is that he abandoned the laptop, unless he continues to maintain the possible evil twin or deranged thief theories. The filing, however, offers a new claim to get over this hurdle.
The standard agreement of the shop states “[e]quipment left with the Mac Shop after 90 days of notification of completed service will be treated as abandoned and you agree to hold the Mac Shop harmless for any damage or loss of property.”
Notably, Biden does not deny that he signed that agreement, but he refuses to say that he did. Instead, he claims that the provision is void under a Delaware law setting a period of a year to obtain lawful ownership over abandoned property. 25 Del. C. § 4001. However, the provision states that a person loses ownership claims if he “failed to otherwise assert or declare the ownership rights to the tangible personal property for a period of 1 year.”
The filing focuses on Issac disclosing the contents before the year period but ignores that Biden has not claimed ownership for multiple years. However, the counterclaim maintains that Issac did not even wait the 90 days to access and share some of the material.
It is a curious line of argument for a court, which is faced with an individual who continues to question his ownership of the computer while asserting ownership rights. He also questions whether Issac was premature to claim the property when he still equivocates over whether this is his property over two years after the disclosures.
If Hunter Biden abandoned this property, it is hard to see how he maintains privacy interests in files that he never sought to protect and still does not fully admit are his.
For example, he raised the common tort of intrusion in his private affairs, but he may have effectively released that information into the public domain through his abandonment.
He also raises the common law torts of disclosure of embarrassing private facts. However, that tort has an exception for newsworthiness:
§ 652D Publicity Given to Private Life
One who gives publicity to a matter concerning the private life of another is subject to liability to the other for invasion of his privacy, if the matter publicized is of a kind that
(a) would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and
(b) is not of legitimate concern to the public.
In the end, Biden could be seeking greater discovery on the involvement of political figures like Rudy Giuliani. However, discovery also presents a risk for Hunter Biden, who has yet to be fully examined under oath over his own actions and contacts in the matter. The refusal to admit ownership (or prior conduct) may be due to Hunter Biden remaining under criminal investigation in Delaware on matters potentially related to files found on the laptop. The Justice Department seized the laptop over a year ago.
Biden is asking a court to carry considerable water to allow him to advance such arguments while continuing to question the ownership of the computer or whether he signed the underlying agreement. Indeed, it is curious (if he did not sign the agreement) that there has not been an allegation of fraud or forgery raised by the team. Instead, the legal team attacks the agreement as possibly taking advantage of Hunter Biden, who is an attorney, by noting “the boilerplate terms of the Repair Authorization form used by Mac Isaac were contained in small-print font at the bottom of the page, well below the signature line.”
The question is whether this conflicted set of claims is “well below”
the tolerance level of the federal court.
Your country’s greatest enemy, a dictatorship, wants to know your political secrets, wants access to your economy, and desires to steal your technology.
That country could send a seductive spy to sleep with your politicians. It could flood your universities with “Centers” and “partnership programs.” Of it could go old school and simply buy your politicians. (At least now we know why Biden allowed a Chinese spy balloon to traverse the entire country.)
As you can see from many of the comments, your country’s greatest enemy will have avid supporters, in your home-grown Apologists.
Any comments from Turley should be considered suspicious. After all, he collects a paycheck from a company that has a business model and brand of lying to it’s own viewers, listening and reading audience.
Any comments by FishWings should be considered retaliatory for having been thrown off this blog previously.
I was never thrown off.
Can we cut the Crap.
Yes, Turley on occasion recieves money from a company that is far less deceiptful than the rest of media.
We all read his posts here.
Many of us have watched him on Fox and elsewhere.
Has he LIED ? Nope.
Has he often times given those on the left more credit or deference than they deserve – absolutely.
Does he often suspect malfeasance on the right when there is ZERO evidence – absolutely.
His instincts, his allocation of the benefit of the doubt still lean left. a bit.
Has he been wrong about the law – not that I recall.
I periodically have minor disagreements with Turley.
But I do not question his honesty, his integrity – as you do.
I do not question that even when I think he is wrong.
“Yes, Turley on occasion receives money from a company that is far less deceitful than the rest of the media.”
LOL!!!!! He receives money from fox news all the time. They are deceitful ALL the time. That’s why they are in trouble with dominion. Dominion has a strong case against Fox News. It’s Fox New’s business model. Keeping their audience stupid and gullible.
We have been through this.
You are wrong.
If Rachel maddow did not defame OAN by saying “OAN is litterally Russian paid propoganda” which is false.
Then Fox did not defame DVS by allowing guests to claim DVS rigged the election – a claim that still has not been disproven.
You beleive that claim is false.
I beleive that claim is false.
Fox beleives that claim is false.
But the standard of defamation is beleived false.
It is what is KNOW to be false AT THE TIME.
I do not KNOW that DVS did not rig the 2020 election.
No one at this time KNOWS that – unless some at DVS know they actually did.
That this was not dismissed with predjudice long ago is proof of the corruption and bias in law.
Trump sued Clinton – Who KNEW the Russian collusion nonsense was a hoax,. because SHE created the Hoax, and Trump lost.
There is no possibility in the world that DVS wins.
This should not even be in court.
Should it get to the supreme court – it will be dispatched quickly.
You can not have a free press and require that they can not print anything they can not prove beyond any doubt is true.
Should DVS manage to win the Fox claim – then Trump would be able to successfully sue most of the media over the collusion delusion claim.
Fox is the most trusted meida outlet as evidenced by the fact that 14 of the top 15 news shows are on Fox.
Gtfeld is even beating late night talk shows.
Hello, FishWings! Glad you are back.
Fish Wings – Regarding Turley’s politics, consider the following quote from Wikipedia:
“In appearances on Countdown with Keith Olbermann and The Rachel Maddow Show, he called for criminal prosecution of Bush administration officials for war crimes, including torture.
In USA Today in October 2004, he argued for the legalization of polygamy . . ..
. . . .
In October 2006, in an interview by Keith Olbermann of MSNBC, he expressed strong disapproval of the Military Commissions Act of 2006.[ . . .Commenting on the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which he contends does away with habeas corpus, Turley says, “It’s something that no one thought—certainly I didn’t think—was possible in the United States. And I am not too sure how we got to this point. . . .
When the U.S. Senate was about to vote on Michael Mukasey for U.S. attorney general, Turley said, “The attorney general nominee’s evasive remarks on ‘water-boarding’ should disqualify him from the job.” . . .
. . . .
When Congressional Democrats asked the Justice Department to investigate the CIA’s destruction of terrorist interrogation tapes Turley said, “these are very serious allegations, that raise as many as six identifiable crimes ranging from contempt of Congress, to contempt of Justice, to perjury, to false statements.
. . . .
He has written extensively in opposition to the death penalty, noting, “Human error remains a principal cause of botched executions… eventually society will be forced to deal directly with a fundamental moral question: Has death itself become the intolerable element of the death penalty?”[42]
He is a critic of special treatment for the church in law, asking why there are laws that “expressly exempt faith-based actions that result in harm.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Turley
This doesn’t sound like a rabid right winger. And I assume that when he appeared on Olbermann’s and Maddow’s shows, he was paid.
“It is still not clear what Biden is trying to suggest.” (JT)
That filing is as clear, crisp, and meaningful as are his “paintings.”
I quite honestly do not know how anyone can take these people seriously, let alone vote for them – and I include the larger Dem party in that – anymore. JFK is rolling in his grave, this is a joke, and a bad one. I am legitimately torn between yawning and panic. Somebody, somewhere, start to do the right damn thing.
After reading all of the comments showing Hunter’s culpability and his lack of legal redress we have to suffer through Svelaz arguing against EVERYONE in a lame attempt to “prove” his boss isn’t involved in anything illegal.
Having 100 comments by Svelaz, some very legalistic, albeit convoluted, it becomes more and more obvious that Svelaz is an operative for the Democrat party or for the Bidens personally. There is no way that any cogent person, and by his 100 comments on every story we can tell that he is at least cogent, would ever go to bat to such a degree for a family that is so obviously corrupt.
This will end up the way that the Hilary story ended up, first all the lemmings defended all of her corruption but once she lost they got mad at her and blamed her for everything that followed. Once Biden is thrown out of office, or voted out of office, fools like Svelaz will just move on to tell us that Kamala Harris is Mother Theresa, Churchill, FDR and Ghandi rolled into one. Once Harris loses he will blame Biden…or Trump!!!!
Hullbobby, you sound desperate. Instead of offering a real argument all you have is whining and showing us your incalculable ability to count past 10.
Nobody has been able to articulate what crimes have been committed. The only evidence is pure speculation.
@Svelaz,
Please read the room.
Your desperation to prove Joe and company innocent is pathetic.
You cite laws which clearly you don’t understand and attempt to claim Hunter was harmed.
The only harm Hunter suffered was self inflicted. Even by his own admission.
The only comment I’ve seen in defense of Hunter is one from CNN where it was stated that influence peddling isnt a crime.
While this may be true to some degree. Not being a registered lobbyist is a crime.
Tax evaison is a crime.
There are more, but the kicker,,, it doesn’t matter. Its enough evidence to impeach Biden.
-G
Svelaz – surely the issues are what crimes may have been committed. I listed several earlier: failure to register under FARA; false gun application; cocaine possession and use; failure to report income; and, of course, influence peddling. All of these offenses may be established.
edward, and I pointed out exactly why those examples were not viable as crimes or why most would not apply. The technicalities and difficulties in proving intent and motive are too high to be able to bring charges. A lot of Hunter Biden haters can’t grasp the complexities that involve proving their claims. It’s all wishful thinking fueled by speculation and conspiracy theories.
Svelaz – as an example, if income shown by his laptop is not shown on his tax returns, what requirement of intent needs to be shown?
Svalaz’s comments are not legalistic.
He is just making things that sound legalistic up.
Just as Hunters Lawyers are doing.
What is disturbing is that the Standford law students that shouted down Judge Duncan are just like him and they will be lawyers and some even judges and the complete baloney that Svelaz is pushing will have traction in the future.
The absolutely most important aspect of “originalism” is not that we fixate on the intent of our founders.
It is that the law and constitution mean ONE thing and ONE thing only – to all of us – except the brain dead.
So long as we have a system that allows for laws to be written that can mean anything – i.e. we have not gone 1984 and made it impossible to convey some things.
And the law itself is written according to rules that dictate that ONE thing – whatever it may be that the law means.
Then we can have “the rule of law, not man”
While the legal system is and should be adversarial, and should have people arguing for all sides.
In nearly all cases – assuming the legislature did their job, the outcome should be obvious.
The role of judges and courts is to assert that obvious meaning as certain.
It is not to decide if the law is god or bad.
WE do that and we punish our legislators when they make bad law.
“He is just making things that sound legalistic up.
Just as Hunters Lawyers are doing. ”
Just pointing out the fact that they are doing exactly what Trump does all the time. It works, why not use it to their benefit?
“The absolutely most important aspect of “originalism” is not that we fixate on the intent of our founders.”
Huh? the most important aspect of originalism is a fixation on the intent of our founders. The whole idea behind originalism is about what they originally thought during their time.
“It is that the law and constitution mean ONE thing and ONE thing only”
Except when it doesn’t benefit originalists. THEN they choose to interpret things differently than how our founders intended. It’s pretty convenient.
Trump wins the majority of the time. Pretty much proof he and his lawyers are not “making the law up as they go”
Regardless, apples are not oranges just because you say so.
Hunter and his lawyers are entitled to try to make whatever case the law allows.
While I think this lawsuit is dangerous – to hunter and essentially legal malpractice.
Hunter has aparently approved this legal strategy.
That is his perogative, and that sheilds his attorneys from malpractice claims.
Mac showe move to have this dismissed with predjucie and seek legal fees, and he should get them.
Political corruption is downstream from cultural corruption. As between this story and the one (also posted today) about cleanliness being denounced as racist, the latter lies closer to the heart of how America – and western civilization more generally – is in an advance stage of decay.
This could eventually come to bring light to ownership/ usership of the laptop in question. Probably will not, due to careful management by Garland. Brighter men, and better schemes have been foiled before.
“Mr. Biden simply acknowledges that at some point, Mac Isaac obtained electronically stored data, some of which belonged to Mr. Biden.”
Surely you recognize that a laptop not belonging to Biden could contain a mix of electronic data, some of which was Biden’s.
But didn’t Hunter sign for it?
We don’t know. There’s a signature attributed to him, and AFAIK, he has neither confirmed nor denied that it’s his signature. The store owner is legally blind and cannot confirm that Hunter Biden is the person who dropped the items off.
Being mentally blind means one can’t see the facts leading up to the computer being abandoned. I wonder which is worse, being visually blind or mentally blind. The latter is worse so I offer you my pity.
Anonymous – according to the New York artilce cited above, the repairman got a good look at Biden’s pictures on the laptop when he was loading its contacts onto an external device. When Hunter returned to the shop to pick up one of his computers, MacIsaac recognized him.
I may have caused some confusion. The article is cited below: “Rice and Nuzzi, “The Sordid Saga of Hunter Biden’s Laptop” New York Magazine, Sept 12, 2022, found at https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/hunter-biden-laptop-investigation.html – ” To rrepeat, these are pro=Biden journalists.
The signature has been compared to other Hunter signatures – it is highly likely it was him,
Anonymous – a couple of writers favorable to Hunter Biden say that the signature on the contract resembles his. Rice and Nuzzi, “The Sordid Saga of Hunter Biden’s Laptop” New York Magazine, Sept 12, 2022, found at https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/hunter-biden-laptop-investigation.html –
“According to an image of the repair order, which was signed by someone whose signature looks a lot like Hunter Biden’s, the date was April 12, 2019. Biden has said he spent much of that winter and spring living an itinerant existence, in motels and Airbnbs up and down the East Coast, on a furtive journey of self-destruction. He has never offered an alternative explanation of his whereabouts that day, so it’s safe to assume he was in Delaware.”
How did it get there?
Someone dropped it off. Was that person Hunter Biden? We don’t know. The store owner can’t confirm that it was him, and it’s certainly fishy: why would he fly across the country to use a store far from his residence at the time in CA? Why would a wealthy person not simply buy a new laptop if it’s not functioning?
We can ask those questions after Hunter states the computer is his.
This is not the first laptop Hunter Biden has lost – it is the third.
It is believed the Russians have one.
The Biden’s are from DE, Hunter was in DE frequently during this time.
Mac has actually identified Biden – he is not without any sight.
But his legally blind status means the identification is not sufficient.
The signature has been compared to Hunters and is a good match.
There is contact information on the reciept and Mac tried to contact Hunter Repeatedly.
The number is correct.
It is not “fishy” that a code addict who has lost numerous laptops would leave two for repair fail to return for them.
I would also suggest you talk to computer repair shop owners. People leave computers and do not pick them up all the time.
Poor Anon…
Uhm no. Not exactly.
Biden sends an email w a contract attached.
Who’s property is it?
Is the electronic data solely Biden’s or is it also owned by the person receiving the email?
So if Hunter sent you a Dick Pick, and you publish it… did you not have the right to do so?
The point is that unless Hunter placed that data on that laptop… there is no way for it to get there.
We don’t know that the actual laptop was his, and a Russian operation could certainly hack his iCloud account and mix real emails of his with other data that aren’t his, load it onto a malfunctioning laptop and drop it all off with a legally blind owner. Or maybe HB did drop it off. Presumably the court case will sort out what the actual evidence is that the laptop itself was his.
“Presumably the court case will sort out what the actual evidence is that the laptop itself was his.”
So far there is no question of the accuracy of the things on the laptop that were disclosed. If you know of any, present them so you don’t sound so foolish.
And space monkeys could fly out of your ass.
Do you know how incredibly hard it would be – like totally impossible to created tens od thousands of fake emails and documents without making a single detectable mistake ?
The odds of Russian Hackers being able to put ONE OR TWO Fakes on with tens of thousands of real emails without leaving fingerprints are TINY.
Anonymous – it is possible to imagine anything, even space aliens. What we know as being likely is: Hunter signed the contract; Hunter was recognized by MacIsaac; Hunter appears all over the contents of the computer both in pictures that no one else should have possession of and in the chain of emails purporting to be from him or to him; other persons referenced in the emails have confirmed the authenticily of emails involving themseves as well as actual related conversations with Hunter and Joe regarding the matters discussed in the emails; Hunter Biden has not claimed that the laptop was not his, and he has not identified any published contents that are “fake”; if memory serves, after the NYP story appeared, he had an attorney send a letter to McIsaac trying to get the laptop back, and now has filed a lawsuit through another attorney to get it back or control the use of its contents. After 4 years, no one on Team Biden can identify anyone who could have “hacked” his laptop, how it was done, or identify any imported material. No rational person would deny that the laptop was his.
I am pretty sure that my laptop does not have Hunter Biden’s emails, icloud. photos, etc on it.
It is possible that lots of Hunter Biden content might be on Jill Biden’s laptop – are you saying it is Hers ?
I don’t think JT is stupid. Why does he pretend to be unable to distinguish between emails and a laptop?
Emails do not hang in the air. They are sent from equipment to equipment.
In fact, it’s quite common for emails to reside in multiple places: computers owned by the sender and recipients, a Google server, an iCloud account. That some of the emails are his does not itself guarantee that all of the data are his, much less that the hardware was his.
Foolish talk.
What is your argument ?
That someone gathered 10,000 emails, photos, documents by hacking google, apple, …
And then put them on an HD and fed it to Mac ?
The Emails etc would STILL be real.
Anonymous – you state “it’s quite common for emails to reside in multiple places[.]” Well, of course, emails can be recorded in any place that it is a computer. The point is that trying to say that “emails” have an existence separate from computers is nonsense. They exist as recorded bits on computer hardware. They are translated to binary code and recorded on the hard drive. That recording is the remains of the email. When MacIsaac obtained ownership of the laptop, he also got ownership of the recorded code on the hardrive. There are no other Hunter Biden emails at this point. It is nonsensical to say that MacIsaac got the “equipment” but not the equipment. I have asked Svelaz and now ask you to present a legal opinion that says that the “buyer” of a laptop (which MacIsaac essentially is) does not acquire the recorded memory of the machine.
The emails were stored on the laptop.
Do you know how email works?
Because the distinctions are not material.
The emails were ON the laptop. Just as the Clinton emails were on the bathroom basement server and Human Abedin’s laptop found in Anthony Weiners possession.
Why does he pretend to be unable to distinguish
Because in this specific context, there is no difference.
Sure there is. There’s always a significant difference between hardware and data, especially when the former is in the FBI’s possession and the latter was copied with alterations.
This copied with alterations nonsense is typical of the left.
Not copied with alterations.
There are absolutely repositories of Hunter Biden content that mix information from his laptop and FOIA requests and other places that damning hunter material have been found.
There i no evidence that the clone Mac provided Guilliani was altered, or that the original which Guiliani likely has somewhere safe – just as the FBI has likely cloned the drive and is reviewing copies.
Regardless. claims require evidence.
Remember – we know you. We all went throught he collusion delusion.
We all went through Covid.
We have been through the made up nonsense and lies of the left before.
Wow.
Besides Svelaz batting 0.000 on his/her (whatever) arguments, this is kinda funny.
I was curious why Turley didn’t address the contract Biden signed when he left the laptop with the repair shop.
That contract would take precedence over the 1yr period as laid out by DE law since Biden is agreeing that should he fail to pick up the laptop within 90 days, in lieu of payment for time spent, the repair shop takes ownership of the laptop.
That would make this lawsuit moot. (I’ll leave it to the repair shop’s lawyer to address that issue.)
But Turley is spot on. The mere fact that Hunter sues for damages, it is predicated on the notion that the laptop and content on said laptop was his and its real.
So the filing of the lawsuit means that the laptop is his and its real.
Does Hunter want to be known as a vexous ?sp? litigant?
-G
Ian,
“I was curious why Turley didn’t address the contract Biden signed when he left the laptop with the repair shop.”
He didn’t address it because it exposes the very point I’m making. The one you can’t argue that it’s not relevant, because it is.
“But Turley is spot on. The mere fact that Hunter sues for damages, it is predicated on the notion that the laptop and content on said laptop was his and its real.”
No, it’s predicated on what the repair agreement said. Plus the policy of the shop owner only mentioned “equipment”. Not data.
Can you say that the data is part of the equipment, because?
The law clearly makes a distinction between the two for a reason. If the agreement was not explicitly stating that the data within the hard drive would become property of the shop owner then Hunter Biden has good reason to make the argument that the shop owner did not have the right to give away the content within the hard drive.
Svelaz – exactly what law makes a distinction between equipment and data?
Svelaz, Ian has a good question. ” How do pawn shops work?”
Tell us, and tell us what happens to the data on the computer when the pawn shop sells it to someone else.
Poor Svelaz,
Again, you don’t know the laws you cite.
You also don’t seem to follow basic contract law.
The law doesn’t make a distinction.
You abandon property and don’t claim it for over a year, I can go to the courts and take adverse possession.
You park your car in my lot…. never touching or moving it, I can can have it towed. If it sits in the tow company’s yard for over a year… I can go to court and take it.
But if you sign an agreement that says that if you don’t come to get your property within a set and reasonable time period… I get to keep it in lieu of payment.
If you think its illegal… How do pawn shops work?
-G
Jonathan: For conservative commentators like you Hunter Biden is the perfect foil. You and the GOP have tried to make the case that the Biden family is the most corrupt in recent memory and the reason Joe Biden should not be permitted to run in 2024. Good luck with that one. So far what I have seen from the laptop doesn’t make the case. A lot of selfie porn and photos of Hunter with his shirt off next to a very attractive female. Somehow I detect a lot of envy by Hunter’s critics. But if there is a case to make I would expect to see a photo of Hunter with stacks of $100 dollar bills with the caption: “Dad, this is for you!”. Now that would be solid evidence. Well, sort of. Anyway, pardon if I digress and review some other interesting news.
Former Brazilian president Jair Bolsanaro is in the news. He is in exile in FL–close to Mar-a-Lago where he is a frequent visitor. Bolsanaro is having a “Trump moment”. Why? A Brazilian court has just given Bolsanaro 5 days to return pricey jewelry he received from the Saudis while he was president but took with him to FL. Sound familiar? Like the US, Brazil has a law that items a president receives during his presidency belong to the Brazilian people. Sound familiar now? The Brazilian court alleges Bolsanaro and his wife tried to illegally import millions in jewelry received from the Saudis.
That’s why Trump and Bolsanaro are great compatriots. Trump supported him during Bolsanaro’s entire presidency. When he lost to Lula da Silva Trump told him to fight the election results, claim the election was fraudulent, and got Bolsanaro to have his supporters to storm the Capitol at Brazilia. They did and it was the same result as Jan 6. Sound familiar now? Bolsanaro says he wants to return to Brazil and lead the opposition. I have it on good sources that Bolsanaro recently asked Trump for money and logistic support so he can return to Brazil and fight the new government. According to my sources Trump responded: “Sorry, Jair, but I have more important problems right now. But if you do go back save a room for Melania and me. I may need it!”
Dennis,
I think you need to do a bit more research.
The laptop isn’t a silver bullet which stands on its own.
It along w other information shows the level of financial corruption and the ties to China among others.
Did you hear about the SARs that were released to Congress regarding the Biden’s financial activity?
30K to Beau’s widow? out of the 1.3M that went to the Bidens?
Yeah. Its that bad. Actually worse.
-G
The SAR’s don’t say that money was illegal. All it shows is he got money. If it was disbursed to some family members what makes it a crime?
This investigation has gone on for so long and without any clear and convincing evidence of a crime that it’s simply become a long drawn out fishing expedition.
Trump has more convincing evidence if his alleged crimes than any of Hunter Biden or his father put together.
“All it shows is he got money.”
Svelaz, for the edification of all us ignoramuses, why don’t you educate us and spell out for us precisely what the acronym SARs stands for; who files it; where and to whom/what is it addressed or filed; and what criteria warrant such a filing? Thanking you in advance.
Lin, you know what SAR’s are. No need me to tell you. Suspicion is not evidence of a crime. It’s not even enough for probable cause.
Making money is not illegal. Getting money from foreign companies isn’t illegal either. Nobody has been able to articulate exactly what is criminal about making money? What’s the crime? Evidence? Do you know?
Svelaz: And YOU know perfectly well that your oft-repeated defense of “influence peddling” is not the issue. Why do you keep repeating it, ad nauseam?
Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that the concerns were for money laundering and tax law violations.
Ian Gumby is correct.
Thanks
@Svelaz,
Again, clearly you don’t know what you talk about.
SARs are triggered all the time by even folks like you or me.
Sell a house or property where you get a large amount of money into your bank account.
That will trigger a SAR. (Well maybe for most of us who don’t live in a van down by the river…[RIP Chris Farley])
You go to move the money into different accounts like your investment account. That too will trigger a SAR.
You’re right, nothing illegal here.
But the same mechanism that you or I triggered also catches criminal activity.
Like structured payments.
The SAR is used to identify those transactions that require additional scrutiny.
Like receiving potentially illegal payments from outside the country.
This is why SARs themselves are not enough to convict. They are however evidence which can be used to obtain further evidence.
So you have SARs, emails and the WH visitor books or who rode on AF2 w Joe and Hunter.
It adds up.
Shakespeare was spot on….
“Jonathan: For conservative commentators like you Hunter Biden is the perfect foil.”
JT is not conservative. He is a liberal democrat. Like Taibbi, Shellenberger, Weis, Derschowitz, and scores of others who would have been “the left” in the past.
Nor is he libertarain.
But what is especially is not is a woke progressive idiot.
JT exposes the difference between the liberal left of the past and the authoritarian left of today.
John Say: Come on John. JT is not a “liberal democrat”. If he were he would not be attacking Joe and Hunter Biden. Just read JT’s recent columns. Why do you think he spends so much time attacking “liberals” for allegedly silencing “conservatives”? Look at his column on 2/28 (“A House Divided…”) in which he discusses the divide between red and blue states. JT says “…there are good-faith objections to the push by many Democrats to limit free speech and fears that the party is now engaging in a new McCarthyism”. Would a “liberal democrat” say such a thing? It’s preposterous! JT is a paid Fox contributor. He works for Rupert Murdock and is paid to reflect his conservative views. If you think JT is a “liberal democrat” I have a bridge in SF to sell you!
“John Say: Come on John. JT is not a “liberal democrat”. If he were he would not be attacking Joe and Hunter Biden.”
Of course he is. JT’s values are no different than liberals of the past. Do you know who Mario savio was ? The leader of the Bekeley Free Speech movement.
That is liberalism.
Defending the right of Nazi’s to march through Skokie – that is liberalism.
Opposing censorship and blacklists, and the weaponization of government against political enemies – That is liberalism.
And that is Absolutely JT.
“Just read JT’s recent columns. Why do you think he spends so much time attacking “liberals” for allegedly silencing “conservatives”?”
No JT is attacking Woke progressive idiots.
BTW there is NO ALLEGED.
These stupid claims are tedious lies.
Go listen to the democrats at the hearings. Yopu do not need to listen to Taibbi or Shellenerger or anyone else.
“There was no censorship
and if there was it was of both sides.
and if it wasn’t, it was misinformation and justified.
and if it was not misinformation
it was the russians.
and all this is republican lies.
and the government did not do it.
And if they did they are allowed. ”
Just endless lies and excuses.
Dennis We are beyond that. When you say “alleged” – you are LYING.
We are well past PROOF.
This was MASSIVE,
It was PRIMARILY – over 95% censorship OF Conservatives and libertarians.
It was PRIMARILY – over 95% by Democrats, the left and the media.
It Was PRIMARILY censorship of the TRUTH – about the Biden’s about Covid.
Alot of it was By govenrment – which violates the first amendment.
What is surprising is that the Left wing nuts at Twitter were MOSTLY trying to push back.
Ultimately the Caved.
The “twitter files” is not the only evidence.
Alot has come from discovery in a federal case in Lousiana.
This is also WRONG. It is a violation of who we as a country are.
It is a brutal violation of ACTUAL liberalism.
That is Why Turley and so many other are so vigorously opposed to it.
They were opposed to it 70 years ago when Republican Senator MacCarthy was doing it too.
Absolutely Turley is defending Conservatives against Censorship – Just as I would expect he would defend Nazi’s against censorship.
That is a core liberal value.
Turley is not attacking censoring liberals – there is no such thing.
He is attacking authoritarian Progressive wing nuts.
What is disturbing is that so many here are not 100% behind Turley.
You have two choices – you can join Turley to try to reclaim the honor and soul of this country.
Or you can let Tramp and MAGA do it.
Take your pick.
If you are not behind Turley in opposing the censorship of ANYONE.
You are on the wrong side.
And you are NOT liberal.
Of course JT is a liberal Democrat.
Why aren’t YOU.
John, the education system failed people like Dennis. How can one discuss things with those who have no historical knowledge and base everything they believe on sound bites based on present values that are distorted by political operatives? How can he not know where the word liberal comes from? He is not young, so he lived at a time where many Democrats were true liberals. How did he forget so fast?
“You and the GOP have tried to make the case that the Biden family is the most corrupt in recent memory and the reason Joe Biden should not be permitted to run in 2024. Good luck with that one. ”
No, real journalists are seeking the truth about political corruption. Truth that Joe Biden has been hiding and lying about for a decade.
At this time there is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Joe Biden did something illegal.
There is more than enough to impeach him and remove him from office. Though I highly doubt that will occur. There is plenty of proof that Hunter Biden did many illegal things.
There is also plenty of proof that Joe Biden did things that were immoral and corrupt and that if people had known would have assured that he lost the primary much less general election in 2020.
I know few people who care if Joe Runs in 2024 – and most of those are democrats. What many of us care about is that the Truth about Biden comes out,
so that if he is the democrats candidate in 2024, voters know the liar he is.
“So far what I have seen from the laptop doesn’t make the case”
Then you are not paying any attention – there was far more than enough to thwart Joe Biden’s presidential ambitions PRIOR to the laptop – had the MSM actually been interested in Truth.
” A lot of selfie porn and photos of Hunter with his shirt off next to a very attractive female. Somehow I detect a lot of envy by Hunter’s critics. But if there is a case to make I would expect to see a photo of Hunter with stacks of $100 dollar bills with the caption: “Dad, this is for you!”. Now that would be solid evidence. Well, sort of. Anyway, pardon if I digress and review some other interesting news.”
Obviously you are not paying attention. Emails on the laptop document the “deal” with the Chinese – that Ho has already been convicted over.
Tony Bobolinski – a democrat and whistlerblower part of the Biden crew who withdrew over this deal has confirmed significant parts of the deal.
The SAR’s received from Treasury are documenting that the Deal did actually go through – the Biden’s previously denied that.
The Laptop Confirms that money went to Joe Biden and that Joe Biden was part of Hunter Biden’s deals – whether those deasl are legal or not – Joe Biden has repeatedly lied to the american people about even knowing about them – much less being part of them. Further he lied to the american people, slandered Trump when he claimed this was all Russian Disinformation – He absolutely knew better. Again that is not a crime.
But it is deeply immoral. It is truth that if known would not only have cost Biden the election – but resulted in a landslide loss and the justified permanent revilement of history.
Brazillian president Lulu is ALSO in the news for his efforts to bribe brazilian legislators – a crime he was convicted of last time he was president, with the Brazilian supreme court letting him off the hook for.
” A Brazilian court has just given Bolsanaro 5 days to return pricey jewelry he received from the Saudis while he was president but took with him to FL. Sound familiar? ”
Yes, Hunter Biden brought an 80,000 diamond home on AF2 from his Trip to China with VP Joe. He also received a multi million dollar Diamond from a Russian Oligarch. Diamands are a common means of “laundering money”
“Like the US, Brazil has a law that items a president receives during his presidency belong to the Brazilian people.”
Brazil also has laws about Bribery, that Lulu is once again violating.
Brazillion President Lulu is a typical south american corrupt left wing nut – though corruption is commonplace in South and Central america
Biden fits right in.
I have no idea what the Truth regarding Bolanaro is – nor do I care. LuLu was a poor and corrupt president previously, just as his is now.
Brazil’s economy – the 10th largest in the world is in trouble under Lulu. It is already in recession, and will start experiencing global credit problems soon.
Lulu is attacking his Central bank – which is following the US FED as are most Central Banks in an effort to control inflation. It is expected that Lulu will iether Sac the Central Bank comittee, or move the Central bank back under control of the executive. The likely outcome of that will be hyper inflation – as we have seen in Venezuela, and more recently Turkey, and Pakistan.
There remain lots of questions about Brazil’s election.
It is hard to know what can be trusted when there are so many lies from the left.
Jonathan: For conservative commentators like you Hunter Biden is the perfect foil.
Jonathan is not a conservative. It is curious why you keep making the same lie.
The Biden family, which has shaken down China, Ukraine, and Russia for millions of dollars, is now using those dollars to hire slick lawyers to attack everyday Americans perceived to be a threat. Shameful.
Miller, now stop it. Don’t you just hate to see the Biden family’s good name dragged through the mud.
Shaken down? LOL! That’s funny. Yet not a single thing is criminal or illegal. Making money is not a crime. Getting millions isn’t either. So what do you have, really?
Making money and getting money for what? So the CCP is giving a cutout 3 million dollars and then the cutout doles it out to Hunter, James and Hallie…and you say there is nothing going on here. Wow, stop embarrassing yourself. Oh I forgot, you are a Democrat operative and therefore you are paid not to worry about making asinine arguments.
Hullbobby,
“So the CCP is giving a cutout 3 million dollars and then the cutout doles it out to Hunter, James and Hallie…and you say there is nothing going on here.”
Ok, so what’s the crime? You should be able to articulate exactly what the crime is?
Suspicion is not evidence, neither is speculation. What do you actually have?
“FORFEITED LAPTOP IS ISSAC’S PRIVATE PROPERTY, IN THE SOIL, ALL THE WAY TO HEAVEN, AND ALL THE WAY TO HELL, IN EXCLUSION OF EVERY OTHER INDIVIDUAL.”
“When Hunter Biden failed to pick up the laptop, it became the property of the computer store owner who then took a look at its contents. He was appalled to the point of contacting the FBI due to the mountain of evidence the laptop contained of what appeared to be criminal wrongdoing.”
– Election Central
______________
Cuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad inferos.
“Whoever’s is the soil, it is theirs all the way to Heaven and all the way to Hell.”
The phrase is credited to the glossator Accursius in the 13th Century.[3][4][5][6][7] It has been suggested that the principle was brought to England by Accursius’s son, Franciscus Accursius,[3][4] who came to England with Edward I on the latter’s return from the crusades. The principle was firmly established in common law by Edward Coke in Bury v. Pope (1587),[8][9] which gives the first statement in English law of the principle, writing (Liber 1, section 1, page 4, section “Terra” (earth)):[10]
And lastly, the earth hath in law a great extent upwards, not only of water as hath been said, but of aire, and all other things even up to heaven, for cujus est solum ejus est usque ad coelum, as it is holden.
The reporter’s note to this case[8] ascribes the maxim to the time of Edward I, which accords with the attribution to Accursius (father and son).[3] Two other cases around 1600 also use the principle, and a number of 19th century cases also apply it.[10]
The phrase appears in Blackstone’s Commentaries, Book 2, Chapter 2, p. *18:
Land hath also, in its legal signification, an indefinite extent, upwards as well as downwards. Cujus est solum, ejus est usque ad coelum, is the maxim of the law, upwards; therefore no man may erect any building, or the like, to overhang another’s land: and, downwards, whatever is in a direct line between the surface of any land, and the center of the earth, belongs to the owner of the surface; as is every day’s experience in the mining countries. So that the word “land” includes not only the face of the earth, but every thing under it, or over it. And therefore if a man grants all his lands, he grants thereby all his mines of metal and other fossils, his woods, his waters, and his houses, as well as his fields and meadows.
– Wiki
_____
“[Private property is] that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”
– James Madison
Hugh wrote at 1:58PM:
Anyone who thinks it is okay what happened to Hunter here, please send me the entire contents of your laptop and any emails and pictures on it and I will post it on the web and then we can let people go through it. Or do you think your emails and pictures are private and belong to you?
I respond:
In the preponderance of circumstances, I think the majority of people would agree. But I also believe when you discover probable crimes while disposing [in this case a laptops hard drive] you have the duty to inform the authorities, which was done. Regarding duplication of hard drive for public review, the contents where pertinent to a presidential candidate. Do you believe that the public shouldn’t have known?
Nothing happened to Hunter.
Something happened to John Paul Mac Isaac.
Per John Paul Mac Isaac’s permission, the contents of John Paul Mac Isaac’s laptop were published.
The problem is Isaac didn’t discover probable crimes. He discovered emails and pictures. He thought they would be of interest to Giuliani and the FBI. He had no idea what they meant. So you can’t say there were probable crimes when Isaac has no evidence that anything in the hard drive could be criminal. So far nothing published is any evidence of illegal or criminal activity.
Speculative assumptions are not evidence.
Duplication of the hard drive taints any semblance of original content. There’s co clear chain of custody or proof that the copies were not tampered with. You can’t use what’s publicly available as evidence. The only thing that matters is the original hard drive with a clear chain of custody and no evidence of tampering. That’s the biggest problem with all these claims. They can’t be clearly substantiated without using the original hard drive’s contents.
@Svelaz…
Wow. Still covering for the Dems and especially for the Bidens?
Really?
So possibly underage prostitutes smoking crack w Hunter?
The emails which show criminal activity?
Before you respond to that… I suggest you spend a couple of hours going thru some of the bribery and other illegal influence pedaling crimes that anyone working in finance are required to watch.
There’s more… including perjury.
But that’s nothing.
-G
Ian,
“So possibly underage prostitutes smoking crack w Hunter?”
Possibly? So you don’t know.
“The emails which show criminal activity?”
What criminal activity? What crimes were committed? You keep saying crimes but never say exactly what. So what exactly are these crimes? Under what statutes or laws is what the emails show is illegal?
“I suggest you spend a couple of hours going thru some of the bribery and other illegal influence pedaling crimes that anyone working in finance are required to watch.”
I did a long time ago. Influence peddling is not illegal according to the Supreme Court. Bribery requires a very narrow definition of intent and motive to be considered criminal. In fact the conservatives in the Supreme Court interpret influence peddling very narrowly and noted that influence peddling is also considered protected free speech. That’s why it’s very hard to pin these “crimes” against Hunter Biden without definitive evidence and clear and convincing proof is required. Speculation and assumptions are not enough to charge Hunter for a crime.
“Influence peddling is not illegal according to the Supreme Court.”
Liar
It’s actually true. Look up McDonell v. United States. It’s all there.
I know that case like my own. You obviously cannot (or will not) read.
Wiseoldlawyer, you don’t know squat. If you did you would have elaborated on why it doesn’t apply. You say you know it like your own, which makes no sense. It’s more likely you don’t know squat. Prove me wrong.
I owe you nothing. You continually pollute this space with your groundless speculations and your obvious attempts to deny the undeniable. Apparently you get your jollies out of strewing confusion and lies. Unfortunately there is always one, and usually several, of you that worm your way into every public conversation. Educating you is not possible.
Svelaz – I have previously cited you to 18 USC 201, the anti-bribery statute, that does say that influence peddling can be a crime when it influences an official action or omission.
Possessing and ingesting large amounts of cocaine is a criminal act. It is also true that selling influence can be a ciminal offense. 18 USC 201 (b)(2)(B). It is also likely that the funds shown in the file entitled “Income.PDF” on his laptop are not reflected in his tax returns. Of course, it is clear that he did not register as a foreign agent under FARA. It also clear that he illegally hid his drug problem when applying for permission to carry a gun. https://nypost.com/ 2021/03/29/ hunter-biden-should-be-charged-for-lying-on-gun-application/
Edward,
“Possessing and ingesting large amounts of cocaine is a criminal act. It is also true that selling influence can be a ciminal offense. 18 USC 201 (b)(2)(B).”
The U.S. Supreme Court announced in 2021 that new decisions in criminal cases are never to be applied retroactively in cases not on direct review. So the cocaine issue is moot.
Selling influence is legal. It’s a 1st amendment protected speech. See McDonell v. United stares
18 USC 201 as determined by the Supreme Court in McDonell v. United States is unconstitutionally broad and encroaches on free speech rights. It’s application must be so narrow that Hunter Biden’s actions do not meet the requirements spelled out by thr court. So that’s out the window too.
“It is also likely that the funds shown in the file entitled “Income.PDF” on his laptop are not reflected in his tax returns.”
“Likely”is not enough cause to prove evidence of a crime.
“Of course, it is clear that he did not register as a foreign agent under FARA.”
FARA applies to government officials or those lobbying on behalf of the government. Hunter Biden was neither.
“It also clear that he illegally hid his drug problem when applying for permission to carry a gun.”
Problem is that is unenforceable. Lots of people lie on their forms. It’s rarely prosecuted and it’s way to old to be prosecuted. So that’s a bust.
That’s why claims of criminal activities are moot.
All you have left is a pointless fishing expedition wasting money and resources on speculation and allegations that hard never been proven accurate.
Svelaz – You said: “What crimes were committed?” I suggested several that may yet be established by investigation. I consider your comments.
1) Cocaine possession and use. This is obviously a crime, and you do not deny it. It is possible that the applicable S/L has run out, but even so, it is a crime that was committed, per the laptop. Your retroactivity comment is abtruse.
2) Influence peddling. 18 USC 201 expressly refers to selling influence which affects an official action or omission. You cite McDonell vs United States for the propositiion that selling influence is protected by the 1st Amendment. The opinion does not so state. The gravaman of the opinion is stated by Justice Roberts:
“In sum, an “official act” is a decision or action on a “question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy.” The “question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy” must involve a formal exercise of governmental power that is similar in nature to a lawsuit before a court, a determination before an agency, or a hearing before a committee. It must also be something specific and focused that is “pending” or “may by law be brought” before a public official. To qualify as an “official act,” the public official must make a decision or take an action on that “question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy,” or agree to do so. That decision or action may include using his official position to exert pressure on another official to perform an “official act,” or to advise another official, knowing or intending that such advice will form the basis for an “official act” by another official. Setting up a meeting, talking to another official, or organizing an event (or agreeing to do so)—without more—does not fit that definition of “official act.”
This language limits the meaning of “official action” but it does not bury the concept as “free speech.” The Bidens took enormous sums of money from the government of Ukraine (indirectly) and China (indirectly). Did that money influence an “official action” in the strict definition outlined by Justice Roberts? Maybe or maybe not. We have just started a proper investigation. Certainly withholding military aid to Ukraine should qualify as such an act. If it doesn’t, why was Trump impeached for even suggesting a delay in giving aid, far less than an outright denial.
3) Unreported income. I suggested that the immense sums reflected on the “Income PDF” file discovered by MacIssac are probably not reflected on Hunter’s tax returns> You say that my suspicions do prove a crime. Of course not. Someone needs to compare the tax returns to the computer data.
4) FARA. “The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) was enacted in 1938. FARA requires certain agents of foreign principals who are engaged in political activities or other activities specified under the statute to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.” https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara
Paul Manafort was convicted of a FARA violation for not registering as a lobbyist for a pro-Russian political party in Ukraine. https://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Paul_Manafort You are incorrect in saying that “the law applies to government offiicials or those lobbying on behalf of the government.” It is enough if someone is lobbying on behalf of “foreign principals.” Why should we assume that Burisma and the Chinese businesses that wired money to Hunter were not “foreign principals”?
5) Lying on a gun application. Oddly, you do not deny that Hunter lied on his gun application. You merely say that such violations are rarely prosecuted. In fact, you could say that most crimes are rarely prosecuted. The question you raised was whether the laptop showed possible crimes, and this is clearly one such crime, whether it is prosecuted or not.
Using your words, looking at the laptop may indeed be a “fishing expedition”. But I suspect that it is an expedition that will catch actual fish.
@Svelaz,
Do you know the prostitutes that Hunter frequented?
Or the strippers? Who he then had sex w and is now is a baby daddy and in court to not let her change the kids name to Biden?
The point is that until you know who’s in the shot, you don’t know their age. I could guess at an age, but its only a guess.
Does the name Traci Lords ring a bell?
(One of my friends from college, went to HS with her)
-G
“Duplication of the hard drive taints any semblance of original content.” I am not a computer expert but I am pretty sure that it is not correct. I believe the repairman needed to copy the data to an external device to even get it off the laptop.
Edward,
“I believe the repairman needed to copy the data to an external device to even get it off the laptop.”.
Yes, however that doesn’t mean it gave him authority to give the data to someone else. He was authorized to extract any data for the purpose of repairing the laptop. Not give it away to an unauthorized individual or make multiple copies.
edwardmahl,
You are correct.
When backing up a hard drive or “cloning,” to another hard drive, which is standard operating procedures for any computer repair, there are what are called checksums that ensure the integrity of the data being backed up or “cloned,” to the other drive.
Data is copied from one hard drive to the next to ensure the data is not lost when under repair on the original hard drive.
Checksums ensure the data integrity. There is no “taints” of the original content.
Once again, Svelaz displays his IT ignorance. He tried to assert that if Elon Musk wanted to make his own smartphone it would cost Musk millions to develop his own smartphone OS.
It took me a 30 second search on the Tesla website to find that Musk’s EV use Ubuntu as it’s operating system. A freeware OS.
Svelaz’s knowledge on IT is like his knowledge on law, and Constitutional law: Nothing.
As many and the good professor has noted, once H Biden left the laptop at the computer repair store for 90 days, it is abandoned property, to include the data on the hardware.
The repair shop owner attempted to do the right thing seeing the possible illegal activity and emails on the laptop and turn it over to the FBI.
H Biden is responsible to getting himself into this mess.
The upside it has lead to the subpoena of SARs and the links of the CCP to the Biden family.
Svelaz is mostly incorrect.
We do not know exactly how the Drives were copied.
But it would be My Guess that John Paul Mac “cloned” the drives – that is a sector by sector exact copy.
Presuming the target drive was identical to the source few short of the NSA would be able to tell them apart.
But a Clone does not have to be to a physical disk. It is possible – and I regularly duplicate disks to disk image files.
Asuming that you have a large enough Disk server to put the images on you can copy many hard disks into files.
You can then move those disk image files around intact.
You can later copy them to a disk and put it into another Mac.
Or under Linux you can “Mount” the disk image and examine its contents.
You can even modify the contents of the disk image – but not without leaving clear traces that you did so, and what you modified.
Really really good hackers could make changes – with about a 50:50 chance of not being detected – it is REALLY hard not to leave fingerprints somewhere.
And the more files you modify the more likely you leave traces that you modified them.
With readily available tools you can search a disk – or a disk image for previously deleted content – assuming that Hunter did not use Bleachbit or something like that.
I believe that is how eastern European hackers were able to recover enough information from a copy of Hunter Biden’s HD to hack into his icloud and retreive recent voicemails before they were shut down.
With respect to Guiliani – I would GUESS that Mac gave Guiliani a clone of the HD.
I would also bet heavily that the first thing Guiliani did was have experts make many clones of that original.
And likely put the original somewhere very safe and untouched.
I wrote about what I beleive is the most likely scenario.
That is that Hunters laptop HD’s were Clones with readily available software that most anyone can use.
There are even windows and Mac Disk Cloning tools. Linux has been able to clone a disk since before there was Linux.
But there are even more sophisticated tools. There are readily available open source tools that will clone a defective disk that powers up and is atleast partly readable. Those are available to anyone, and I have used them on occasion, And Mac would certaintly be familiar with those.
If Hunter’s laptop HD had some damage – that is likely what Mac used.
Beyond that there are tools to remove the platters from a defective HD and install them into a “donor drive” to recover files. This SHOULD be done in a clean room and very very carefully. But I have done it without a clean room successfully.
Beyond that there are tools to read and copy the platters in a drive at a very low level, and this will allow you to cover from fairly significant damage – this requires expensive hardware. But quite often drive recovery experts with the correct tools can recover data from drives that were burned, under water od otherwise badly damaged. Amd purportedly the NSA is able to read data from disks that have been erased several times with tools like bleach bit.
Svelaz – You are wrong. MacIsaac said he found a file called “Income’PDF”, containing astronomical amounts of money,which led him to believe that Hunter may have been engaged in financial crimes. That is when he called in the FBI. When the FBI seemed to do nothing, and in fact seemed to threaten him, he called in Rudy Giuliani. See the New York Magazine article I cited above: Rice and Nuzzi, “The Sordid Saga of Hunter Biden’s Laptop” New York Magazine, Sept 12, 2022, found at https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/hunter-biden-laptop-investigation.html –
@George…
Uhm to answer Hugh’s question…
Yes, I believe my emails and photos that reside on my computers or in my internet accounts in storage dedicated to me … are my private properties.
That said… I wouldn’t be handing off my computer(s) to a repair shop and then forget about them.
At which point, after 90 days, per the contract… they become the property of the repair shop, per the contract that I signed. (Work orders are contracts btw…)
Just saying…
“FORFEITED LAPTOP IS ISSAC’S PRIVATE PROPERTY, IN THE SOIL, ALL THE WAY TO HEAVEN, AND ALL THE WAY TO HELL, IN EXCLUSION OF EVERY OTHER INDIVIDUAL.”
“When Hunter Biden failed to pick up the laptop, it became the property of the computer store owner who then took a look at its contents. He was appalled to the point of contacting the FBI due to the mountain of evidence the laptop contained of what appeared to be criminal wrongdoing.”
– Election Central
______________
Cuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad inferos.
“Whoever’s is the soil, it is theirs all the way to Heaven and all the way to Hell.”
The phrase is credited to the glossator Accursius in the 13th Century.[3][4][5][6][7] It has been suggested that the principle was brought to England by Accursius’s son, Franciscus Accursius,[3][4] who came to England with Edward I on the latter’s return from the crusades. The principle was firmly established in common law by Edward Coke in Bury v. Pope (1587),[8][9] which gives the first statement in English law of the principle, writing (Liber 1, section 1, page 4, section “Terra” (earth)):[10]
And lastly, the earth hath in law a great extent upwards, not only of water as hath been said, but of aire, and all other things even up to heaven, for cujus est solum ejus est usque ad coelum, as it is holden.
The reporter’s note to this case[8] ascribes the maxim to the time of Edward I, which accords with the attribution to Accursius (father and son).[3] Two other cases around 1600 also use the principle, and a number of 19th century cases also apply it.[10]
The phrase appears in Blackstone’s Commentaries, Book 2, Chapter 2, p. *18:
Land hath also, in its legal signification, an indefinite extent, upwards as well as downwards. Cujus est solum, ejus est usque ad coelum, is the maxim of the law, upwards; therefore no man may erect any building, or the like, to overhang another’s land: and, downwards, whatever is in a direct line between the surface of any land, and the center of the earth, belongs to the owner of the surface; as is every day’s experience in the mining countries. So that the word “land” includes not only the face of the earth, but every thing under it, or over it. And therefore if a man grants all his lands, he grants thereby all his mines of metal and other fossils, his woods, his waters, and his houses, as well as his fields and meadows.
– Wiki
_____
“[Private property is] that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”
– James Madison
Sorry,
Each of us is responsible for our own lives.
Hunter brought this on himself.
Paul Mac did not Steel From Hunter.
Hunter contracted for services, refused to pay, refused to retrieve them,
and now is pissing over a disabled man for handing him a hand grenade with the pin pulled.
I would note that increasingly the Laptop is just corroboration for FACTS that are proven many many other ways.
John Solomon had lots of documentation on the misconduct of the Biden’s acquired through FOIA requests as well as Trips to Eastern Europe
All before Rudy Gulliani heard of Hunters Conduct.
The House now has HUNDREDS of Suspicious Transaction reports from Banks showing Transfers from all kinds of scurilous characters to the Bidens,
Millions of dollars.
There is also the Trial of Ho – who was convicted for his corrupt dealings with Hunter – using evidence of those dealings – with Hunters name redacted.
The laptop ios damning.
But so are many other things.
The lawsuit is a further attempt to distract.
It is a political strategy.
And the FACT that so many on the left are so gullible is damning.
This is stupider that Trump’s claim he can telepathically declassify.
“Hunter contracted for services, refused to pay, refused to retrieve them,
and now is pissing over a disabled man for handing him a hand grenade with the pin pulled.”
Contrasted for SPECIFIC services. That’s important because if the shop owner did something not specified in the original agreement he can ne liable in court.
Svelaz – this comment is somewhat unclear. Are you suggesting that the shop owner imported data into the computer? No one has made that claim. It would be easy for the FBI to determine if this were true by comparing the hard drive in the possession of the repairman with the laptop in its possession.
“Svelaz – this comment is somewhat unclear. Are you suggesting that the shop owner imported data into the computer?”
No. I’m saying that the shop owner only had a copy and gave it to Giuliani. Giuliani made multiple copies and distributed them to Trump allies and pundits. We know Giuliani is not credible and a liar. How do we know he didn’t tamper with the copy he had? There’s no clear chain of custody or no proof that he couldn’t tamper with the data. Using the emails and any other data derived from those copies and his own won’t fly in court.
The FBI has the original and only the original can be used.
You keep fixating on irrelevant details.
If you abandon your apartment. I am legally obligated to hold your posessions for 90 days – charging you for moving and storage.
After that – they are MINE. You lose ownership. That is part of my lease.
It is also part of state law.
It is also common law.
Mr. Mac had a number of obligations to Hunter Biden. Those obligations ENDED when Hunter refused to pick up the laptop.
I would note Mac tried to contact Hunter by phone – several times.
Hunter did not reply.
“It also appeared to confirm that the laptop is indeed Hunter’s. However, the next day, Lowell told NBC “These letters do not confirm Mac Isaac’s or others’ versions of a so-called laptop.”
A lot of Hunter Biden witch-hunt supporters keep forgetting one important detail about this “scandal” and why there is a back and forth about ownership. People keep saying “laptop”’. The laptop when first mentioned in the “scandal” and how it appeared was not known whether it was really Hunter Biden’s or not. What has been problematic for Republicans and those who keep peddling the “scandal” is not being able to distinguish between “laptop” and “hard drive”. The FBI took possession of the laptop and hard drive. But the shop owner made copies of the hard drive and gave one to Rudy Giuliani who then made more copies and distributed them to various Republican political activists and talking heads. Those copies can’t be verified as authentic and a lot of them have been shown not have been tampered with additions and corrupted files.
There’s reason to believe that Hunter Biden can’t confirm whether any of the information being published by them is indeed authentic EXCEPT a few emails and pictures which he has confirmed. The problem is there no way to determine whether any other information that may have been added was really Hunter Biden’s. That’s why it’s not wise to even give the impression that everything in those copies of the hard drive is genuinely his. Only the FBI has the original hard drive.
And OJ Simpson was “not guilty” to an African jury.
meaningless pedantry
Lol! You mean you have no argument. They do. Turley’s attempt at minimizing the significance of their claims is a good indicator that they do have a valid argument legally.
Lol! You mean you have no argument
There is no argument against pedanty. It is meaningless facts and minutia, without context, true, but with context, are wrong.
Ah let’s see, who will have a longer witch hunt? Hunter or Donald.
You are correct that we are actually talking about a COPY of the Hard Drives – there were Two from a Laptop.
It is trivial to authenticate the contents. Glenn Greenwald addressed that in Oct 2020.
To continue the cat memes
Your beating a dead cat.
So is Hunter.
Lol!
No, what is trivial is the fact that Turley’s argument doesn’t hold water once you dive into the details.
Everyone is saying, “but the emails, pics, etc”’ none are evidence of a crime or even evidence of intent. Especially. As you correctly pointed out, it’s a COPY of a hard drive that cannot be trusted to be credible enough to be used in court.
Hunter is doing exactly what Trump would do. Trump has shown it’s an effective strategy and that it works.
Copies are introduced into evidence all the time. Electronic content has no actual original – everything is a copy.
Regardless, the FBI has the original HD,
Nor is establishing whether the content can be trusted all that difficult – as Glenn Greenwald addressed in detail in Oct 2020.
Are you arguing that we can not know that the classified Doc’s found on Huma Abedein’s laptop in Anthony Weiner’s posession in 2016 could not be trusted ?
That the emails leaked from the DNC and released by wikileaks are all a fraud ? That the FBI was unable to authenticate the content of Clinton’s Bathroom Basement email server ? That Snowden did not leak CIA/NSA secrets – because we can not trust the copies released ?
That pretty much every pedophile caught with Child Porn on their laptop must be released because we can not trust the content ?
This argument is total nonsense.
It is garbage like this that is why people laugh at the left.
It is why no matter how much you criticize right wing knuckle draggers as stupid and easily lead – it is OBVIOUS you are far worse.
And really just projecting.
Attacks on the laptop are a red herring. First there was more than enough information form FOIA requests and other trust worthy source BEFORE the HD’s were provided to FBI.
Regardless, Treasury has turned over the Hundreds of SAR banks filed on the Biden syndicate, the house is now “following the money” From convicted criminals like Ho through the Biden family.
And yet neither Trump nor his family have ever done anything like this.
The Trump’s have a long history of trading value for value. People pay them to golf, for apartments, for Condo’s.
You have torn Trump and his families finanes entirely apart and exposed them to the public.
And there is no there – there.
There are no unexplained payments for Russian Oligacrch. No diamonds being used to launder money.
No transfers of Millions through cutouts to Eric and Barron.
If there was 1/10th what exists on Hunter on any Trump family member -the whole clan would be in orange jumpsuits.
Recent reporting in RCI – linked here by others noted that there is 10times as much evidence of FARA violations – not just for Hunter – but for everyone part of the Biden Syndicate – yet not a single charge or even investigation.
Yet Trump associates and other Republicans have been charged with FARA violations – starting in the Obama administration all on far flimsier evidence.
Manafort was convicted of violating FARA – the only conviction possibly ever as FARA is likely unconstitutional.
Regardless, Manafort did NOT lobby congress or Government – he Paid Toney Podesta’s firm to do that. But the Podesta’s are democrat/clinton Royalty so no charges, no investigation.
Ho was convicted onder FCBPA – Foreign Corrupt Business Practices Act – He was Litterally convicted of his dealings with Hunter Biden – Hunter’s name was redacted from the court evidence. Bribery is illegal on BOTH Sides.
“You are correct that we are actually talking about a COPY of the Hard Drives – there were Two from a Laptop.”
It was a MacBook. MacBooks have only one hard drive. Not two. Do you have proof that it had two?
There were TWO laptops.
Separately Some MacBooks have provisions for two internal drives – I own one. As well as many other laptops.
Almost every laptop I have owned for decades had multiple internal hard drives.
And any laptop with a USB port can have external drives.
While the above has nothing to do with the Hunter Biden case – it is just more evidence you do not know what you are talking about.
If Hunter Can not confirm it, he does not own it.
“If Hunter Can not confirm it, he does not own it.”
If cannot confirm it the data is worthless which makes the ownership of the data questionable in court. Therefore making any claims of a crime moot.
That is the entire point here.
The moment Hunter claims ownership – all YOUR questions about the authenticity of this information are GONE.
It is possible – and not difficult to prove the infomation is Hunter’s over Hunter’s objections.
But if Hunter is prepared to go to court and say “It Mine, give it back” – the question of provenance is GONE.
The question of who owns it now, is not.
Sorry Svelaz, the information is evidence of a crime regardless.
The laptop data is self authenticating, it is separately authenticated by prior records via FOIA,
It is also now confiremed by SAR’s from Treasury and further confirmed by Banks records that the House has subpeona’d.
We can go from Hunter’s exchanged with the State department to Trips on AF2, to meetings with people like Ho, to emails about those meetings, to photos of those meetings. to arranged introductions, to money transefers through multiple cutouts and shell companies that can be tied to the Biden’s
all the way to bank accounts of Biden Family members.
We even have emails discussing how to make payments to avoid reporting – BTW that is called structuring and it is a federal crime.
We have Emails confirming that payments are to be made for services while Biden was VP, but not paid until AFTER he leaves office.
What is surprising is that you, the left, Democrats, the MSM are still shilling for these crooks.
Is the Biden family the most corrupt ever ?
I doubt it, that is hyperbole.
But they are more corrupt than the Pelosi’s and your average bent congressmen of either party.
Is all of this illegal – pretty much. Will it be possible to prove a crime to the extent needed for a criminal conviction in DC – who knows.
I doubt we will see charges – but that is because Biden is “protected” not because he is innocent.
Regardless, all of this will slowly percolate into the conscieousness of most americans – despite the prodigious efforts to change the narative.
Right now – though damning, the laptop is mostly either tangential, or coroboration for the bank records that have been obtained and are being analyzed.
“The problem is there no way to determine whether any other information that may have been added was really Hunter Biden’s. That’s why it’s not wise to even give the impression that everything in those copies of the hard drive is genuinely his. Only the FBI has the original hard drive.”
Of course there is. It is actually trivial.
If it is an email – it was either sent by someone or received by someone – often many people – they can confirm it.
Further Emails have headers that document the chain of custody as the email was transmited.
Those can be verifed against the logs of mail servers.
Photos have meta data, But beyond that they are of people things and at specific times, you can confirm that those people were at that place at that time.
None of this is especially difficult.
It is POSSIBLE to fake a single picture or email – IF that picture or email is not going to be subject to any forensic scrutiny.
But if you really doubt the autheniticity of content – it is not that difficult to check the myriads of ways that picture or email interacted with the rest of the world.
Not even the russian can fake that. No one can
These issues have already been addressed in courts.
People charged with Child porn have long ago raised the kinds of defenses you are trying.
They lost.
“It is POSSIBLE to fake a single picture or email – IF that picture or email is not going to be subject to any forensic scrutiny.
But if you really doubt the autheniticity of content – it is not that difficult to check the myriads of ways that picture or email interacted with the rest of the world.
Not even the russian can fake that. No one can”
The Russians can. They’ve been known to do so that and that’s exactly why the Hunter Biden laptop story was not deemed credible in the beginning. There has already been proof that the copies of the hard drive were indeed tampered with and content was added. The only way to measure the amount of tampering is to compare with the original which is in the FBI’s possession.
“People charged with Child porn have long ago raised the kinds of defenses you are trying.”
People charged with child porn were caught with possession of their computers. Not copies of their own computers.
“The Russians can. They’ve been known to do so that and that’s exactly why the Hunter Biden laptop story was not deemed credible in the beginning. ”
On the scale we are talking about here – no, no one can. It is likely that Russia can fake ONE email or one Photo including metadata with a fairly high probability of not getting caught. But the problem gets exponentially harder with scale.
You seem to forget that in nearly all cases it is not just the email or photo that has to be faked, but logs on mail servers, guest records at hotels.
Photos taken by other people at the location.
“There has already been proof that the copies of the hard drive were indeed tampered with and content was added. ”
There is no evidence that any content was tampered with – that is actually relatively easy to detect.
This is another Straw mane.
It is unlikely that Guilliani has done anything at all to the copy he received From Mac – except copy it and provide those copies to others.
Absolutely Guiliania has included other materials from FOIA requests and from Eastern European Countries that did not come from the laptop but is ALSO evidence of Biden syndicate Corruption, as well as corroboration for information on the laptop.
No one has represented the Trove of damning information on the Biden’s as coming Solely from the laptop.
“The only way to measure the amount of tampering is to compare with the original which is in the FBI’s possession.”
False. I would note separately that given the FBI has altered emails to lie to the FISA court – why should we trust the FBI’s copy ?
There are myriads of ways to authenticate the content.
I would further note that authenticating does NOT mean proving the content came from Hunter’s laptop.
It means proving that it is real.
The FOIA response form State are REAL, they are not from Hunter’s laptop. Though they corroborate information on the laptop.
The SAR’s and subpeona’d bank records are Authentic, they are not from Hunter’s laptop.
Ultimately WHERE the evidence came is a detail – so long as it is True.
Does it matter if an email comes from Hunter’s laptop’s or from someone who sent it to Hunter ? Or recieved it from Hunter ?
Does it matter if a photo comes from Hunter’s laptop – or one of the hookers in his hotel room ?
NY Post has independently authenticated everything they have published.
The authentication standard for journalism is NOT the same as courts use – but it is still high.
You are correct that should this ever come to trial – evidence introduced in court is subject to challenge and a prosecutor will have to prove that the evidence they use is not forged. But that is not so diffcult as you claim.
The prosecutor will have to provide Hunter’s legal team with a complete copy of all evidence – the whole drive.
But the do not have to prove each and every file – only those they use to prosecute.
Hunter’s lawyers are free to try to cloud the issue by trying to prove something from the laptop is hinky – good luck.
“”People charged with Child porn have long ago raised the kinds of defenses you are trying.”
People charged with child porn were caught with possession of their computers. Not copies of their own computers.”
Nope. As I noted it is quite common for people to take computers to repair shops and the repair shops to discover CP and report it to law enforcement.
It was even the NORM for CP cases a decade ago.
Increasingly the norm is for FB or Twitter to report suspected CP to the police who get a warrant to search the home.
where they gather EVERY laptop and computer and phone, They then usually have a Van where they quickly” Search the devices and return any that they do not find CP in a quick search. If they find CP then they question the occupants of the home as to Whose device is the one they found CP on.
Usually there are conflicting stories. Further it is the NORM for the Pedophile to use a device other than their own.
It is extremetly common to find CP on Children’s computers, with the Pedophile claiming the Kids must have Downloaded it.
It is also common for kids to actually DL CP. So the police have to sort that out.
All the objections you raise are the typical objections of a pedophile.
Authenticating content, and demonstrating who “owns” it is a normal law enforcement task.
It is NOT something that is magically impossible because “Russians, Russians, Russians”.
Svelaz – So, if the published material shows Hunter in a Las Vegas hotel with various hookers, he could not possibly say whether that was himself in the pictures? He can’t recognize himself? He can’t remember being in Las Vegas with hookers? He can’t remember taking cocaine? If emails docment conversatations between himself and his uncle and business partners about business deals in China, he can’t remember whether he had such conversations and what they talked about? If the emails show conversations between him and his half-sister about his giving money to his tather, he can’t remember whether there was any such conversation or any payment of money to his father? He has no memory at all? One of the files on the laptop called “Income.PDF” details receipt of astronomical sums of money received by Hunter, broken down by year. (These figures were published in the NYP. https://nypost.com/2022/05/06/mac-shop-owner-john-mac-isaac-reveals-night-he-met-hunter-biden/ ) Wouldn’t it be easy for Biden to consult his financial records to determine if the figures are correct? It would be easy for any normal person to look at the published pictures and emails to say whether they were genuine or not.
For decades, the American left has been hell-bent on destroying the personal lives of its opponents. The left will soon realize that its incessant campaign has reached the point of diminishing marginal returns.
Pathetic even for progressive clowns.
Dear Hunter, It’s yours. Admit it. Be a man for a change.
“The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) was enacted in 1986 and prohibits accessing a computer without authorization, or in excess of authorization. If the Mac Shop or a third party accessed Biden’s files beyond the requisite access needed to recover data, i.e. without authorization or in excess of the original authorization, they may have broken the law.
Some of the most damning information reported by the New York Post relates to Biden’s email. Email may be stored in the cloud and/or locally on a computer. If Biden’s email was only stored in the cloud, for example, where Biden had a Gmail account and only accessed it from the web browser, accessing this content from his computer may be legally problematic. But if Biden’s setup included Microsoft Outlook, whereby his email was pulled down and stored locally (e.g. in a “.PST” file), accessing it may be less of a problem.
While the cat may be out of the proverbial bag, a host of legal options may be available to protect Biden’s private data and pursue those private citizens who may have infringed on Biden’s copyrights or accessed his data without proper authorization.”
https://delawarebusinessnow.com/2020/10/guest-view-hunter-bidens-laptop-and-data-a-legal-and-data-privacy-analysis/
Turley leaves out this significant legal argument. Hunter Biden has more legal options than he would like others to believe.
The computer shop owner became the owner of the laptop then the former owner (Hunter) failed to pay for repairs and retrieve it.
He became owner of the equipment (laptop). Not the data within the hard drive.
The laptop, meaning the screen keyboard, and hard drive ( the physical device) are his. HOWEVER, the data is not part of the equipment. That’s a potential problem for the shop owner. His policy only mentions “equipment”. Not the content within the hard drive. That’s a legal distinction that can be made in court because it’s often the case that a warrant to get a laptop is not a warrant to get the stuff in the hard drive. Courts make that distinction all the time.
Svelaz – If someone abandons a book, do you get only the covers or the covers and the content inside?
Edward,
“Svelaz – If someone abandons a book, do you get only the covers or the covers and the content inside?”
No, it’s more of if someone abandons an address book with passwords and other information. The agreement is similar to fixing the book cover because of damage but the information inside is not part of the job of fixing it.
Svelaz,
You quote a law which clearly you don’t comprehend.
Hunter did hand over the laptop and signed a work order granting permission to the repair shop to have access.
Its the same document which states that Hunter agrees that if he fails to claim his laptop , etc … that he surrenders it to the repair shop in lieu of payment.
So the laptop repair company didn’t violate the law when they accessed his laptop.
Nor did they have to wait 1 year to take possession which btw, if you actually read the DE law… would have meant going to court to get the legal right of possession.
The contract signed by Biden circumvented that waiting period.
Do you really want to play this game?
BTW you really don’t know how email works… can you say IMAP or POP3 (IMAP pulls a copy automatically, btw… ) reading and storing the emails locally on the laptop such that you don’t need an internet connection to get them from Google. Or hotmail. There’s more but I think that discussion would go over your head.
Ian,
Nope. Because the work order did NOT involve retrieving and copying the data to something else. All he was supposed to do is recover the data and fix the laptop. It doesn’t involve the right to publish any data once the laptop is abandoned.
The agreement only states “equipment”. Data is not “equipment”. The agreement allows the shop owner to possess the equipment. Not the data within it.
If a password was given so he could access the laptops hard drive it was only given for the task of the repair. That’s not automatically a right to publish or give away the data to anyone. It’s very likely the password was given and only for the purpose of fixing the laptop, nothing else. That’s important.
He can be liable for publishing or giving the data to someone who was not authorized to have it because it was not part of the repair agreement. Abandoning the laptop does not change that. That’s why the shop owner can be sued.
Remember “equipment” and “data” are two very different things. Look at it this way. Everyone keeps calling it the “laptop” when in fact all that has been involved is a hard drive. The FBI has both the original hard drive and the hardware (laptop)
John Paul Mac Isaac authorized John Paul Mac Isaac to peruse all of the contents of John Paul Mac Isaac’s laptop which was manifestly John Paul Mac Isaac’s private property after being legally forfeited into the exclusive possession of John Paul Mac Isaac.
What part of “you’re a ——- idiot and liar” do you not understand?
““The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) was enacted in 1986 and prohibits accessing a computer without authorization, or in excess of authorization. If the Mac Shop or a third party accessed Biden’s files beyond the requisite access needed to recover data, i.e. without authorization or in excess of the original authorization, they may have broken the law.”
False. Hunter authorized Mac when he delivered the /laptop for repair to do anything necescaery to repair it.
Further once Hunter abandoned the property – it is no longer his, so that law no longer applies.
Mac is now the owner and He can give authorized access to anyone.
“Some of the most damning information reported by the New York Post relates to Biden’s email. Email may be stored in the cloud and/or locally on a computer.”
There is pretty much never an OR.
“If Biden’s email was only stored in the cloud,”
Email is stored locally.
Further you can not access the “cloud” without actually booting the computer.
Guilliani etc were givern the hard drive not the computer.
“for example, where Biden had a Gmail account and only accessed it from the web browser, accessing this content from his computer may be legally problematic.”
Gmail is not an example. Any messages that you read from your gmail account are stored locally.
“But if Biden’s setup included Microsoft Outlook, whereby his email was pulled down and stored locally (e.g. in a “.PST” file), accessing it may be less of a problem.”
I would note that you are correct ish regarding the access of information that is only in the cloud. And some of the contents of the HD were used by Hackers in Europe to get into Hunter’s Icloud account. and download RECENT voice mails before Hunter shut that down.
That was an actual crime, committed by hackers in Europe. Paul Mac has no connection to that.
I would further note that Hunter has a massive further problem.
The cat is out of the bag.
You can not put the jeannie back in the bottle.
No court is going to order the return of Hunters content – they CANT. It has actually been entered into the congressional record. There are copies all over the place.
I would suggest reading the Pentagon Papers case. DOJ tried to get the pentagon papers back. The court said Hell No.
Too late.
“While the cat may be out of the proverbial bag, a host of legal options may be available to protect Biden’s private data and pursue those private citizens who may have infringed on Biden’s copyrights or accessed his data without proper authorization.”
Wishful thinking.
“https://delawarebusinessnow.com/2020/10/guest-view-hunter-bidens-laptop-and-data-a-legal-and-data-privacy-analysis/
Turley leaves out this significant legal argument. Hunter Biden has more legal options than he would like others to believe.”
Yes. he can end up paying Mac’s legal fees.
And he can make Damn sure everyone understands the nasty stuff is his.
“False. Hunter authorized Mac when he delivered the /laptop for repair to do anything necescaery to repair it.
Further once Hunter abandoned the property – it is no longer his, so that law no longer applies.”
Nope. Because abandoning the property according to the agreement it doesn’t specifically say that all the data in the hard drive also becomes property of the shop owner. In court specifics matter.
It does not need to.
Just as when you buy land you get everything on it.
Hunter had 90 days to reteive the laptop, the HD, whatever he beleived was his.
No one Is with a Biden.
Seriously dirtbag? No one is fooled, POS.