“I Know Nothing, Nothing!” : The National Archives Just Torpedoed Biden’s Sgt. Schultz Defense

For years, President Joe Biden has maintained a Sgt. Schultz defense to allegations that his family has profiteered on influence peddling with foreign countries and companies. Despite mounting evidence to the contrary, Biden maintains that he “knows nothing, nothing” about Hunter Biden’s business deals. He recently doubled down on this defense by even denying that family members received money from foreign sources. He repeated his denial even after the release of financial transfer reports from his own administration showing millions transferred from China. Now, emails have emerged that show that Biden personally helped draft responses to the controversial deals in 2015 when he was Vice President. It also appears that Biden officials like former Biden Communications Director Kate Bedingfield knew of his role as the President continued to deny any involvement.

The National Archives has released emails that show that then-Vice President Joe Biden approved an official statement in December 2015 about Hunter Biden’s position on a Ukrainian energy company’s board.

Biden has denied any knowledge or involvement in these business dealings at least seven times as a presidential candidate and as president.

For years, the media has continued to report President Biden’s repeated claim that “I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.” At the outset, the media only had to suspend any disbelief that the president could fly to China as Vice President with his son on Air Force 2 without discussing his planned business dealings on the trip.

Of course, the emails on the laptop quickly refuted this claim. However, the media buried the laptop story before the election or pushed the false claim that it was fake Russian disinformation.

Some in the media have repeated those denials, including most recently the Associated Press which, in 2022, falsely stated that there was no evidence Biden ever discussed the deals with his son despite an actual audiotape proving that claim to be false.

The audiotape showed President Biden leaving a message for Hunter specifically discussing coverage of those dealings:

“Hey pal, it’s Dad. It’s 8:15 on Wednesday night. If you get a chance just give me a call. Nothing urgent. I just wanted to talk to you. I thought the article released online, it’s going to be printed tomorrow in the Times, was good. I think you’re clear. And anyway if you get a chance give me a call, I love you.”

Some of us have written for two years that President Biden’s denial of knowledge is patently false. It was equally evident that the Biden family was selling influence and access. There are emails of Ukrainian and other foreign clients thanking Hunter Biden for arranging meetings with his father. There are photos from dinners and meetings that tie President Biden to these figures, including a 2015 dinner with a group of Hunter Biden’s Russian and Kazakh clients.

People apparently were told to avoid directly referring to President Biden. In one email, Tony Bobulinski, then a business partner of Hunter’s, was instructed by Biden associate James Gilliar not to speak of the former veep’s connection to any transactions: “Don’t mention Joe being involved, it’s only when u [sic] are face to face, I know u [sic] know that but they are paranoid.”

Instead, the emails apparently refer to President Biden with code names such as “Celtic” or “the big guy.” In one, “the big guy” is discussed as possibly receiving a 10 percent cut on a deal with a Chinese energy firm; other emails reportedly refer to Hunter Biden paying portions of his father’s expenses and taxes.

Bobulinski has given multiple interviews in which he stated that he met twice with Joe Biden to discuss a business deal in China with CEFC China Energy Co. That would seem obvious evidence. In addition, the New York Post reported on a key email that discussed “the proposed percentage distribution of equity in a company created for a joint venture with CEFC China Energy Co.” That was the email on March 13, 2017 that included references of “10 held by H for the big guy.”

The new emails show that, as early as 2015, Bedingfield told Hunter’s top financial lieutenant Eric Schwerin via email that Joe Biden approved a statement regarding Hunter’s board position. Yet, for years, Biden’s communications office repeated his denial of any involvement or knowledge. That stands in contradiction to Bedingfield’s 2015 email acknowledging that “VP signed off on this — will give this quote to reporters in my name shortly.” Bedingfield left the White House in 2023.

The White House has continued the categorical denials. When confronted by Fox News’ Peter Doocy on the transfer records showing millions sent from China, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre responded:

“Look, I’m just not going to respond to that from here. Look, we have heard from House Republicans for years and years and years how — the inaccuracies and lies when it comes to this issue. And, I don’t even where to begin to even answer that question because, again, it’s been lies and lies and inaccuracy for the past couple of years and I’m just not going to get into it from here.”

The only reason that Biden would even attempt to maintain this clearly false defense is that he could count on a supportive media to blunt any attacks and limit inquiries.

Of course, there is a difference with the Sgt. Schulz defense. Schultz was harmless and comical. The Biden influence peddling allegation is neither. Despite the striking lack of interest of many in the media, this is about millions of dollars paid to the First Family by foreign sources, including some with foreign intelligence ties.

Influence peddling has long been the favored form of corruption in Washington. While many Democrats repeatedly stress that influence peddling is not criminal, it is corrupt and the Bidens appear to be a class in themselves. Yet, even with the clear contradiction of the President’s repeated statements to the public, Democrats still oppose any investigation into the alleged influence peddling.

What made Sgt. Schultz funny is precisely why the Biden defense is collapsing. The refusal of the media to see what is now in plain view will convince no one. At some point, Democratic leaders will have to recognize the obvious or join the Bidens (and many journalists) in the cast of this theater of the absurd.

235 thoughts on ““I Know Nothing, Nothing!” : The National Archives Just Torpedoed Biden’s Sgt. Schultz Defense”

  1. “‘Anonymous’ thinks Bragg’s empaneled grand jury . . .”

    From the Left’s handbook on “How to Win Arguments:”

    Step One: Rewrite your opponent’s argument to make him look foolish. If he’s against arson, “reimagine” it as “he’s against fire.” If he’s against rape, “narrate” it as “he’s against sex.”

    Step Two: Use a few epithets that amount to: Only a Neanderthal is against fire.

    Step Three: Demand total power. After all, the opposition is crazy (see Step One).

  2. Jonathan: My comment in response to your column has provoked some rather bizarre responses. “Anonymous” thinks Bragg’s empaneled grand jury is, by definition, an “abuse of power”. Not true. Prosecutors are empowered by law to empanel a grand jury to investigate potential crimes. Sometimes a grand jury finds no evidence of a crime and is dismissed. A prosecutor can’t charge someone unless the grand jury finds probable cause. Of course, when the target is Donald Trump, Anonymous thinks that grand jury is automatically an “abuse of power”. Would Anonymous say the same thing if Hunter or Joe Biden were similarly charged? The answer is obvious and why no one should take Anonymous seriously.

    Then, “edwardmahl” thinks Hillary Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein’s friends, et.al., are all above the law. What crimes has Hillary committed? edward doesn’t say. As to Epstein’s “friends” edward is dead wrong. Ghislaine Maxwell was found guilty on five counts– including sex trafficking. She is doing 20 years.

    Others disagree with me that “the walls are closing in” on the Trumpster. They claim he is a sort of Houdini. Time will tell whether the Trumpster can perform another disappearing act. Stay tuned because I think that bubble will soon burst!

    1. ““Anonymous” thinks Bragg’s empaneled grand jury is, by definition, an “abuse of power”. ”

      The empaneling of a jury is one of the steps of prosecution. If the prosecution in question is not an abuse of power of some kind, then it’s fine. If the prosecution in question is an abuse of power, then the empaneling of the jury for that abuse of power is also an abuse of power.

      Political prosecution is an abuse of power. Picking someone for political reasons and spending huge amounts of resources trying very hard to find some reason, ANY reason to prosecute them is an abuse of power.

    2. Dennis – Hillary obstructed justice by destroying 33k emails subject to a Congressional subpoena. She further destroyed, or had destroyed, the computer system on which the emails had been housed so that they could not be recovered by the FBI, another form of obstruction. She also was “grossly negligent” in handling classified materials by sending and receiving them on an insecure, non-governmental server. She also was behind the Putin-Trump collusion hoax, causing the FBI and DOJ to use millions of dollars investigating the hoax. That conspiracy could almost be called “an insurrection”. Andrew McCarthy believes that she committed perjury by claiming over a hundred times (if memeory serves) that she could not remember the details about her private server. Then we could go back to her approval of a sale of uranium to Russia after Bill Clinton was paid a large sum for a trite speech in Moscow,

    3. Dennis – I apologize. As to “Epstein’s friends”, I was referreing to the powerful and rich men (including an ex-President) who received sexual favors from the harem of young woman, including teenagers, run by Epstein. They got off scot free, while Epstein got the rope.

      1. edwardmahl: “Johns” are rarely prosecuted. That said, who are some of the people who frequented Jeffrey’s Epstein’s Little St. James Island? Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitiz, Peter Dubin, Jean Luis Brunel, Bill Clinton–among others. None have been charged in participating in Epstein’s criminal trafficking of minors. They probably should have been. Trump and Epstein hung out a lot in the 90s in NY. But there is no evidence Trump took advantage of Epstein’s offer of underage girls at his island. Trump eventually distanced himself from Epstein because Trump realized that was something he should not get involved in. Trump preferred older porn stars and those he could corner in a dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman.

        As to your claims about Hillary Clinton. First, let me make it clear I am no fan of the Clintons. But there is no evidence Clinton committed any crimes in connection with the 2016 campaign. All campaigns engage in oppositional research. Both the Clinton and Trump campaigns did it in spades. As to the “Russian collusion” scandal the GOP made a lot of allegations against Clinton. The claim was first raised in 2018 by GOP Rep. Kevin Nunes, who is now the CEO of Trump’s Truth Social. At Trump’s urging AG Bill Barr appointed John Durham to investigate the allegations. After more than 3 years what did Durham come up with? Nothing to prove the “Russian collusion” claims. He prosecuted 2 people for lying to the FBI. Both were a dud. Michael Sussmann was acquitted of lying to the FBI. Barr/Durham came up empty handed in trying to prove Clinton was involved in any crime(s). FBI Director James Comey conducted a lengthy investigation of Clinton’s handling of classified material. Comey concluded Clinton was “extremely careless” but what it was not a prosecutorial offense. This is in contrast with how Trump handled top secret and other classified material and why he is in so much legal trouble. No one has claimed Clinton held on to top secret docs after she left office and refused to return them.

        The Trump administration had four years to find any crimes by Clinton. They couldn’t because there was nothing there to prosecute. You can still believe in all the conspiracy theories surrounding Clinton but I think you are on a fool’s errand!

        1. The libel Dennis writes is incredible. He seldom knows the subject matter and never bothers to use google to make sure what he says is correct.

          He probably considers Alan Dershowitiz a traitor to his ignorant rantings so he included Dershowitz in his list of names.

          Dershowitz can prove he wasn’t there, but that doesn’t matter. One can read Dershowitz’s book about this on Kindle. It is free for Kindle if anyone is interested.

          Why can’t Dennis act like a normal human being instead of showing us his animal side?

        2. Campaigns do engage in OPo research. Butthere is no evidence that Trump did in 2016.
          The source purportedly with Dirt on Clinton came to the campaign – they did not seek her.
          And they rejected what she provided as useless.
          Clinton did not do OPO research – she paid to have things made up, and then sold to the FBI.
          That is radically different. I am not aware of that ever occurring before.
          Ken Star long ago said that he had PLENTY to prosecute Hillary, but until Lewinsky could not get to Bill.
          He did not prosecute Hillary – not because of lack of evidence, but because it was outside his remit and
          did not serve justice – Bill would just pardon her.

          Hillary Clinton is likely the most corrupt politician in US history.
          The Biden’s are amateurs in comparison.

          I think Durham has been very successful – He has done what is rare – he has proven a negative.
          Susman and Danchenko were NOT acquitted of Lying to the FBI,
          They were properly acquitted of MATERIALLY lying to the FBI.

          Durham proved the Steele Dossier and the Alpha Bank claims were Hoaxes.
          That is part of the juries findings.
          They did not convict – not because DOJ and FBI were not lied to, but because they KNEW they were being lied to.

          That is a very damning funding and makes the entire Crossfire Hurican investigation and the subsequent Mueller investigation unconstitutional.

          You can not constitutional investigate someone when you KNOW your allegations are a lie and you have nothing else.

          Derschowitz Was epsteins LAWYER. He saw him in the context of his representation.
          There is no unretracted claim that Dershowitz was ever anything more than a lawyer for Epstein.

          Derschowitz has represented Nazi’s and OJ.
          Is it surprising that he would represent Epstein ?

          1. John Say: I am amazed at the amount of gibberish you can put out on subjects you know nothing about. And in your haste you misspell so many words. You need a spell and fact checker. So for starters let’s address Alan Dershowitz and the Durham investigation.

            You say Dershowitz was nothing more than “a lawyer for Epstein”. Really? The Daily Mail had a long article (1/22/2015) and published the flight logs of Epstein’s “Lolita Express”–the term used by the local residents on Little James Island when referring to Epstein’s private plane. The logs show Dershowitz on a number of flights to various destinations on which there were underage women. Now Dershowitz denies having sex with any of them. He was there only for “business” with Epstein. But Virginia Roberts, who was 15 at the time, says she had sex with Prince Andrew and Dershowitz. Dershowitz’s wife did not accompany him on those trips. Now these claims and Dershowitz’s counter-claims are in litigation. The actual facts will eventually be sorted out. But if you believe Dershowitz’s denials you are naive in the extreme!

            And your claims about the Durham investigation are even more bizarre. Durham had nothing to show for his over three investigation. He charged 2 people with lying to the FBI. Both cases ended in acquittals. Durham came up empty handed in his quest to prove the crimes of Hillary Clinton. But you bizarrely say “the Durham investigation is not closed, and recent court filings suggest he has much more he is working on”. What court filings? Durham is finished. He has, or is still preparing, a final report for AG Garland. That’s all. Durham may also be “working on” his memoirs–trying to establish what he could not prove in court. I understand the publisher of the memoirs says it is a work of “fiction”.

            So much for the fantasy world you live in. If you believe all the stuff you hear on Fox or other right-wing websites that is your right. But don’t keep repeating it on this blog that takes up valuable space!

            1. “John Say: I am amazed at the amount of gibberish you can put out on subjects you know nothing about”
              Then you would be able to demonstrate that easily.

              Thus far the EVIDENCE is that you are the one speaking about things you know nothing about.

              “And in your haste you misspell so many words. You need a spell and fact checker.”
              I have repeatedly noted that I as no one is paying me to post on this blog – I will edit my posts as I dam well please.
              If the spelling offends you – your problem.

              I have been published in technical journals about a dozen times. I have no problem with speeling or gramar or quality writing – when that is needed.
              Thisis not that place.

              “You say Dershowitz was nothing more than “a lawyer for Epstein”. Really?”
              Yes, this has actually been adjudicated in court. But then it is you who is not aware of the Facts.

              There is NO ONE claiming that Dershowitz did anything more than act as a lawyer for Epstein.

              Every person or publisher that has claimed otherwise has retracted – sometimes in sworn testimony in court.
              That you are unaware of this is your problem. Including Roberts who never actually met Derschowitz.

              I am not interested in a bunch of news article that insinuate otherwise.

              Do you have a person with first hand knowledge that continues to say otherwise ?

              “Durham had nothing to show for his over three investigation. ”
              False – please review the pre-trial submissions and the testimony and evidence in the trials.
              As well as the juries conclusion of FACTS.

              Durham not only won every single Point he claimed – save one – the defense in both cases agreed with every single factual claim – except one.

              The only issue of consequence before these two juries was – Did the FBI Know that what Sussman and Denchenko were providing them was FALSE ?

              That is it. Sussman admitted lying to the FBI, Danchenko admitted lying to the FBI.
              Durham’s claims with respect to who, what when where, are entirely undisputed.

              But those in the FBI who communicated with Danchenko and Sussman – as well as Danchenko and Sussman themselve all testified that
              The FBI knew before the communications that what was being communicated was false, a HOAX.
              And therefore not material.

              THAT is the actual results of the case.

              ” What court filings?”
              Google is your friend.

              “Durham is finished.”
              Because you say so ?
              Durham has not announced that.
              Garland has not announced that.

              You might be correct. But you have no actual evidence of that.

              “So much for the fantasy world you live in.”
              You mean reality ?

              “If you believe all the stuff you hear on Fox or other right-wing websites that is your right.”

              This is typical of the left – Fox lies and 50% of the country is fooled

              Fox does lie, so does msnbc, and cnn and NYT and Wapo, and …

              Which is a part of why I rarely pay much attention to any of them.

              I would be very hard for Fox to have lied to me. That would require that I actually pay attention to them.

              The most frequent instances in which I actually look at something from Fox – is when those of you on the LEFT
              make claims that Fox has said or done something that is a lie. Such as the ludicrously stupid claims regarding the DVS lawsuit.

              It would be wise for you to learn what an actual lies is.

              Unproven allegations are not lies, if they were the entire news media would have been sued to nonexistence.

              Subsequently disproven claims – though there are very few of those – are not lies – again the entire media would have been sued into extinction.

              Regardless, With respect to Derschowitz and Durham – I have read the court documents.

              Generally on an issue I seek primary sources. Not fox, not MSNBC, not the Daily mail.
              When I must use the MSMS, I seek FACTS, or quotes in context, not the reporters oppinions.

              ” But don’t keep repeating it on this blog that takes up valuable space!”

              Typical left wing nut – thinking you are entitled to give others orders.

              Regardless the space on the blog has zero value. It is the internet and the comments section is an essentially limitless free resource.

              It has no cost to me – or to you.

              Again – get your facts straight.

              If you can not get the FACT that the space on this blog has little or no value correct
              Why should you be trusted with more difficult questions ?

              1. “Typical left wing nut – thinking you are entitled to give others orders.”

                Yes and these righteous, sanctimonious lefties are showing us that it is *they* who would have sided with the Nazi’s.

                1. There is zero doubt who the most authoritarian are in this country today (or any country anywhere ever) – the left.

                  It is not an accident that the french revolution lead to Bonaparte.
                  That the Russian revolution lead to Stalin, that the chinese lead to Mao, that the Camobodia lead to Pol Pot. that Venezeuela lead to Chavez, that Cuba lead to Castro, and on and on.

            2. Calling actual facts gibberish does not make them so.

              I would suggest that you consider something else regarding your idiotic Derschowitz claims.

              People who do these things, do not do so only once.
              There is a single claim regarding Derschowitz in his entire life.
              It is unlikely he suddenly became attracted to teenage girls in his 70’s.

              Those people we beleive likely took advantage of epsteins child procurement services, are people that actually have a history of such issues.

              It is my understanding that the House is going to have Tara Reade Testify.
              I am disinclined to believe her – because Joe Biden has a long history of sexually inappropriate conduct, but not rape.

              Just as Trump has a different history of sexual conduct – but not rape.

              Conversely all the other claims against Kavanaugh blew up – I am disinclind to beleive Ford – because if Kavanaugh was a rapist,
              He did not do it only once.

              The people who do these things do it over and over – until the get caught, and when they get caught – lots of others come out of the woodwork.

        3. With respect to Clinton and classified documents – “extremely careless” is absolutely the legal standard for prosecution.

          Regardless, there is a fundimental Difference betweent he Pence, Trump, VP Biden case and that of Hillary and Sen. Biden

          Classified documents can get to the homes of Presidents and Vice Presidents without a crime being committed.
          There is absolutely no way that a classified document can ever exist in the home of someone who is not a current or former president or Vice president without a crime being committed.
          Deutch was prosecuted, Petreaus was prosecuted. Sandy Baker was prosecuted.
          Clinton’s conduct was more serious than Deutch, or Petreus, as well as much more serious than anything Biden or Pence or Trump may have done.
          I would further note Clinton shared classified information with People not in government and therefore obviously not cleared to receive it.

          Thus far Sen Biden had a single Classified document. – Clinton had thousands – though some were copies of the same document in multiple computers.
          As a result of Clinton’s conduct – Anythony Weiner ended up with tons of classified documents – though he likely did not know it.
          The Weiner laptop is a near perfect match for what Deutch was convicted for – bringing a laptop with classified materials to his home ONCE.
          The Weiner laptop was all over the place.

          I would further note – Clitnon was Reckless, but she also did this DELIBERATELY. The rules did not apply to her.

          Of all the classified documents cases – the Trump case is by far the weakest.

          Presidents vice presidents, and ex presidents and vice presidents may posess classified documents. in their homes.
          Sec states, senators may not.

          ex-VP’s and Current VP’s must keep those documents in a SCIF or their official offices.
          The same requirement MAY exist for ex-presidents – the ABJ decision in NARA V JW pretty much says that an expresident can have classified information in their sock drawer.

          VP’s have very limited ability to declassifiy – but they atleast has some – the Sec State does not.
          The president has limitless power to declassify.

        4. There are lots of conspiracy theories involving Hillary. Most are likely false.
          It is unlikely all are.

          Regardless, there is plenty about Hillary that is fact not theory.

    4. Not true. Prosecutors are empowered by law to empanel a grand jury

      Are you this stupid? Or is it your handlers that send you talking points?

      He didn’t say Bragg did not have the power. He said Bragg is abusing his power.

    5. Yeah, the bubble is about to burst….as you have been saying for 8 years. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that the DOJ has had it in for Trump from day one and even attempted a coup to remove him by drumming up a false ‘Russian asset’ narrative means that your credibility is…..zero.

    6. We do not use law enforcement. We do not use Grand Juries to investigate nonsense.

      Can Bragg empannel a grand jury to investigate whether you are a pedophile ?

      I would think you understand the answer is NO.

      The critical facts in this have been known for years. and they do not constitute a crime.

      This is pretty much universally true of the Deranged Trump investigations.

      We do not have star chambers.
      We do not investigate people because you do not like them
      We do not investigate people because you do not like their politics.

      The Biden familiy – While Joe was in public office received millions from foreign agents for no identifiable purpose.
      And they have lied about this and worked hard to bury it for almost a decade.

      That is a foundation for an investigation.

      There are no consequential unanswered issues regarding paying a porn star to be quiet about an affair.

      Yet in left wing nut world it is some how legitimate to pay 500M for massive ballot harvesting – with no investigation,
      To use Govenrment alphabet agencies to supress true stories that damage you politically
      but not OK to complain about the resulting rigged election.

      Do those on the left have a clue what a crime actually is ?

      1. So many of these comments seem to reflect a willful blindness to the fact that a Trump-appointed US attorney has been investigating everything about the Bidens since 2018, which is a long time given that Hunter’s efforts didn’t lead to much. it suggests that the “evidence” like that of the Durham investigation is full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
        Like Durham, the accusers cannot withstand scrutiny.

        1. “So many of these comments seem to reflect a willful blindness to the fact that a Trump-appointed US attorney has been investigating everything about the Bidens since 2018, which is a long time given that Hunter’s efforts didn’t lead to much.”
          So ? He is operating in a Biden run DOJ. He needs Garlands permission to do anything.
          Has the investigation been closed ? The Mueller investigation only lasted 22 months.
          That would be because Trump fully cooperated and despite Muellers whining not only wasn’t there anything there,
          They knew that at the start.
          We didn’t – But FBI/DOJ/Mueller did.
          So we were deceived for almost two years – some like you STILL Beleive.

          “it suggests that the “evidence” like that of the Durham investigation is full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
          Like Durham, the accusers cannot withstand scrutiny.”
          Actually Durham’s revalations have been Damning.

          But for Durham we would not know that the Steel Dossier was manufactured – a hoax.
          We would not know that the Alpha bank claims were manufactured – a hoax.
          We would not know that paid clinton attorneys sold these hoaxes to FBI.
          We would not know that At the time the DOJ/FBI received these Hoaxes – they KNEW they were hoaxes.

          Or more simply – that from approx Oct 2016 the FBI KNEW they had nothing to investigate – and yet they did.
          For years. Is that a Crime ? I think so. Is it unconstitutional – absolutely.

          We also would not know that it is Clinton – Not Trump who was colluding with likely Russian agents
          We would not know that the CIA concluded that Clinton not Trump was Putin’s choice.

          And the Durham investigation is not closed, and recent court filings suggest he has much more he is working on.
          But if we have seen all that Durham is going to do – that is enough.
          You do not seem to grasp that Durham’s losses mean that a Jury has decided that the FBI was NOT Deceived,
          That they KNEW from the start there was no “there there” and that crossfire Huricane was illegal and unconstitutional.
          And that makes Mueller worse.

          More simply Durham has proven beyond ANY doubt that the entire effort to “get Trump” was unconstitutional.

          And after that – you think we should trust any judge or prosecutor on the left ?

          I would further note that YOU purportedly unbiased judge Howell went on a rant accusing Trump and his lawyers of being criminals in the past two days.

          That is an absolute violation of judicial Ethics. She is required to recuse her self.
          You can not prejudge the matters before you. There has been no indictment, no trial, no conviction, There is not even credible allegations of a crime.

          Oh, and we learned that the supposed “evidence” that breaches attorney client privilege is that Trump’s attorney’s in court filed that they searched diligently for classified materials and did not find them.
          Whether you like it or not – that is not sufficient to overcome attorney client privilege.

          Regardless, many many many people have already testified – to the GJ, to the J6 committee.

          We have all been through this nonsense before – the left, the press biased prosecutors and court get everyone riled up.
          And in the end NOTHING.

          Trump has been the most investigated man on earth – and you have nothing.

          Efforts have been made to roll everyone close to him – and NOTHING.

          Neither you nor the judges, nor the DOJ seem to grasp that you can not get people to roll on an innocent man – because even if they wanted – they have nothing to say.

          Cohen “flipped” – he slandered and maligned Trump – But he offered Congress and the courts NOTHING – not because he did not want to.
          He could have gotten a sweet heart deal for rolling on Trump.
          But to Roll you have to have something to offer.

          And it works really badly for prosecutors when they Roll people – and they LIE just to get a better deal.
          Rolling someone only works when they have something to give.

          Do you honestly think that DOJ and assorted prosecutors have deposed, interviewed threatened even prosecuted hundreds of people close to Trump
          and got NOTHING because there is some grand conspiracy ?

          Do you think Manafort who knew Trump for all of a month, and who probably would roll on his mother,
          would not roll on Trump if he had anything to give ?

          You tortured these people. Bit players people you have not even heard of were interviewed by the FBI/DOJ for 80+ hours – that is 2 weeks straight.
          That is abusive. Further we know that if you put enough pressure on them – you can break anybody.
          You can make them tell you the truth, you can make them tell you anything.
          But you can not make them tell a lie that will hold up in court if there is no lie that will hold up in court.

          The Russian oligarch purportedly working with Trump. Turns out the FBI Agent leading the investigation into Trump just plead guilty for taking money from him.
          So now we have the FBI Colluding with Russia. Clinton colluding with Russia. But not Trump.
          Oh and Clinton is also tied to the same oligarach – as is Biden more remotely. But not Trump.

            1. Yes Mueller convicted innocent people of things that were not crimes and had nothing to do with what he was investigating,
              With DC courst and DC juries that will convict someone for being republican.

              All you are doing is proving my argument.

              Mueller used threats and intimidation and still FAILED to get anything.

              You say he convicted people – yet not one of his convictions lead to another.
              Most of his convictions were for mistakes made during almost 100 hours of questioning.
              Papdoulis got a date wrong. Wow!

              There is not a single person that Mueller convicted who was a drug addict,
              who was being paid millions for no explainable purpose,
              Who was partying with prostitutes.

              You wigged out because Manafort had an agent of the start department on his staff.
              Hunter is doing business deals with Chinese intelligence officers.

              Please Compare Mueller to Biden.

              All that does is expose how corrupt you are.

                1. Whar I ask constantly – is:
                  what do the FACTS tell me ?
                  What does logic tell me ?
                  What does reason tell me ?
                  What does the law tell me ?
                  What does the constitution tell me ?

                  There is no “them vs. me” in my reasoning.

                  Them vs. Me does not occur until
                  What them say conflicts with FACTS.
                  What them say conflicts with logic.
                  What them say conflicts with reason.
                  What them say conflicts with the law.
                  What them say conflicts with the constitution.

                  Or as someone wise once said

                  “You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I’d like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There’s only an up or down – [up] man’s old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.”

            2. A Pledge from Garland and $6 will get you a hamburger at McDonalds.

              The man has lied repeatedly about numerous things. Just recently he claimed 5 Capitol police officers where killed on J6.
              The correct answer was ZERO.

            3. I will be happy to compare Mueller to Durham.

              Who Did Mueller prosecute for anything even related to Trump Russia Collusion ?

              He lost the only actual russian prosecution he attempted,

              The FBI put the screws to Twitter to find evidence of Russian Bots,
              they looked and looked and looked and found none.

              Pretty much EVERY claim regarding Trump and russia has proven complete garbage.

              Durhams prosecutions were on point to his mandate, and his lesses PROVE the FBI
              Knew in 2016 that there was no Russian Collusion.

              What is it that Mueller proved ?
              That if you grill someone long enough you can catch them in a mistake ?
              That campaign managers are pretty amoral people regardless of party – most of them are not even partisan.
              They will work for either party

        2. “Like Durham, the accusers cannot withstand scrutiny.”

          Is this supposed to mean something ?

          The concluded Durham juries decided – and this is now a matter of records that can be introduced as irrefutable in future trials.
          That When the FBI interveiwed Danschenko and Sussman the KNEW they were lying and there was nothing there.

          That is not from me. That is from the Juries findings of fact.

    7. ““Anonymous” thinks Bragg’s empaneled grand jury is, by definition, an “abuse of power”.”

      Bragg’s grand jury is purely a political hit job and everyone knows it — even the jurors. It is abuse of power. It is prosecutorial misconduct.

      You should hope that one day YOU are not railroaded like this by corrupt, politicized, abusive, unethical officers of the justice system in search of a conviction.

      Injustice for one. Injustice for all.

      1. ….but I still think Bragg will push to get his indictment. That’s all he cares about. Bragg won’t back down now. And the jurors are probably at the end of their patience where they will say fine here’s your indictment now can we go home?

        Then Trump will make this perp walk the centerpiece of his campaign and run with it right into the White House in 2025.
        It will backfire on Bragg.

  3. OT,
    Effort to squash Biden family stories long predated Hunter laptop, newly released emails reveal
    “Records newly released by the National Archives show efforts to suppress negative stories about the Biden family’s business deals long predate the Hunter Biden laptop controversy, dating back to 2015 when an aide to then-Vice President Joe Biden boasted she got a reporter to “only use” negative information “if her editors hold a gun to her head.”

  4. But two dead …actually dead….when never before were dead…..doesn’t make the stats for yondr. I’m looking for attorneys to sue them. For what they have done to our school and my kids. Used yonder to cut off support. Now two are dead! Call me contingent attorneys…334 313-2676!

    1. He wants to say he’s cutting off skkpping….but he does so with 600 days missed class..y searches ….to curb 54 days missed class on skipping? . He cuts his nose despite his face….and now has suicides. ….he’s the tyrant we all need aware of fighting bogus fires…. I ask despite me being white ask that the Cali the ski the naval the splc be at my hearing ….all the splc…all the eji….all the around there! As we ask for the simple disfigurement of immunity for them versus constitutional rights for kids! Can you be there?

  5. Prof. Turley mentions that Communications Director Kate Bedingfield communicated with Eric Schwerin via email that Joe Biden had approved a statement regarding Hunter’s board position at Burisma, thus showing that Joe did know about Hunter’s business dealings. Bedingfield shows up in another story today in Brieitbart showing that in late 2015, she was actively trying to censor a Bloomberg story about Hunter Biden’s dealings with Burisma. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/03/23/kate-bedingfield-vowed-reporter-would-block-burisma-story-unless-editors-hold-a-gun-to-her-head/ Joe Biden must have been the only person in the WH who did not know about his son’s activities.

  6. ‘T Ain’t So Joe

    Most everyone embellishes most freely admit
    some a lot others a little bit…
    Scariest is a liar caught yet unrepentant of the lie
    while wielding power over who lives and who dies
    crazy to find ourselves in this challenging time
    with a leader fully embedded in the Cult of the Lie

    You claimed new election laws were Jim Crow two-point-oh
    record turnout shows that isn’t so
    guess voters didn’t get the memo
    none were more restrictive than in your own Delaware
    or reliably Democrat New York…

    You never attended historically black Delaware State
    full academic scholarship for law school, wrong
    in the top half of your class, sorry
    you remind us of an ill-intended Mr. Magoo
    or Alfred “what me worry?”…

    So vaccines weren’t available when you took office
    never mind the two shots you’d already received
    “I didn’t condemn the travel shutdown,” right
    “xenophobic fear-mongering” was your phrase
    and now you have your own travel restriction

    “I’ll shut down the virus not the country” epic fail
    “If the prior president had done his job
    all people dead would still be alive” not true
    the nearly million dead since you came in
    tell us, are they all on you?

    Obfuscating always on illegal immigration
    no the border’s not in the least bit “closed”
    every month sets a new record for illegal entry
    while in cover of darkness your charters fly illicit migrants
    to unsuspecting communities around the country

    Border agents didn’t strike people with whips, get a grip
    the number of crossers grows ever higher
    yet you have not lifted a finger
    and fentanyl streams in
    killing a hundred thousand or more every year

    “Had a house burn down with my wife in it,” no
    it was only a small kitchen fire
    didn’t drive a semi, never appointed to the Naval Academy
    never a full professor at University of Pennsylvania
    “raised in the Puerto Rican community,” all hooey

    Never written Law Review articles on the right to privacy
    flunking a law school class for plagiarism didn’t stop your stealing
    Golda Meir never asked you to be her Egypt liaison
    Tree of Life synagogue folks said you didn’t speak there
    that supposed Amtrak conductor chat was 15 years after he retired

    Claimed DC rioters killed a cop — no, Corn Pop
    “no one lost health insurance due to Obamacare,” untrue
    jobs economy inflation all grist for repeated fabrication
    Build Back Better cost nothing, no debt
    lies keep mounting and we’re not even to Hunter or Afghanistan yet

    “Never spoke to my son about his overseas business dealings”
    laptop was “Russia disinformation”
    these layers of deceit and untruth so deep
    c’mon, Big Guy, showing the lie to your denial
    records show you met with at least 14 of the players

    Bragged about threatening to withhold a billion
    unless Ukraine fired the prosecutor looking at Burisma corruption
    and that voice mail you left Hunter
    saying he was probably in the clear
    is that just a figment of our imagination?

    A “commander in chief” apparently unaware
    of the meaning of the phrase “stolen valor”
    claims his son died in Iraq offers lies about purple hearts
    “God’s truth, my word as a Biden”
    tells us exactly what that is worth

    Afghanistan you called “an extraordinary success”
    tell that to the families of the 13 dead soldiers:
    Hoover Pichardo Gee Lopez
    Page Sanchez Espinoza Schmitz
    McCollum Merola Nikoui Soviak Knauss

    Billions in weapons and infrastructure left behind
    we’ll never know for sure how many Americans and allies
    you said al-Qaeda was gone, wrong
    and the under-oath testimony of your generals to Senate Armed Services
    showed you lied about their advice

    Sad to realize only a small number of these lies
    are designed to shield the family criminal enterprise

    So much of it is just who you are
    and this massive inflation of untruth, not transitory
    tells all the world that the supposed “Free World leader”
    is a bumbling, dangerous and most consequential prevaricator

    Excerpts from “‘T Ain’t So Joe” by Richard Milne, author and poster of this comment


  7. Jonathan: Rolling Stone has a report (3/22) entitled “Trump Attorneys Tell Him to Prepare to Lose to Alvin Bragg”. The attorneys have told Trump he will probably lose because “it would be difficult for the former president to get an impartial jury in the Democratic stronghold of Manhattan”. So the attorneys are going to ask for a change of venue because of the high profile nature of the case. That request will be denied. A lot of high profile cases have been tried in NY. Bernie Madoff didn’t ask for a change of venue even though he could have argued he made a lot of enemies in NY through his ponzi scheme. Besides where would Trump find a venue that has not heard about Stormy Daniels?

    So the Bragg case will stay in NY and Trump will claim “victimhood”–that the “racist” DA Alvin Bragg is pursuing a “political prosecution”. Trump’s claim that Bragg, a Black man, is a “racist” will not sit well with Black prospective jurors. It seems that Trump is always his own worst enemy.

    And what is Trump’s response to the hawks circling overhead? We all know what banana republic dictators do when their backs are against the wall. They remove, or attempt to remove, officials who pose a threat. In a post today Trump called for the removal of every law enforcement official leading the investigations against him. This includes Jack Smith, Alvin Bragg, Letitia James and Fani Willis. Tall order. Trump no longer controls the levers of power. He can’t demand that Bill Barr stop the Jack Smith investigation. And he certainly has no power to stop the 3 other cases that are independent state investigations. Poor Donald. He is a desperate man and desperate men do desperate things. The Trumpster has become desperately delusional. His latest post is Exhibit No. 1.

    For those on this blog who think I have it in for the Trumpster that’s not true. I will take no pleasure in seeing Trump fingerprinted and his mug shot taken. Well, maybe a little. No, my main concern is that our justice system operates under one principle–no one is above the law–not even a former president. For some on this blog they have been drinking too much of the MAGA lemonade. They refuse to see that a man who brakes the law must be held accountable–irrespective of his status as a former president.

    1. “No, my main concern is that our justice system operates under one principle–no one is above the law…” Haha sure it is.

      Subpoena-defying, power-abusing Alvin Bragg included?

      1. The fact that Bragg had even empaneled a grand jury in the first place is an abuse of power.

    2. They refuse to see that a man who brakes (sic) the law ….

      Paid DNC troll refuses to see error in his handlers talking points

    3. Dennis – surely you know that “some people ARE above the law” – Hillary Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein’s friends, Michael Sussman, BLM rioters, Antfa rioters, students who shout down Conservative speakers, and, so far, the Biden Crime Family.

    4. “No one is above the law”. Really? A more apt description of the persecution of Trump was offered by Lavrentiy Beria, Stalin’s secret police Commisar during Russia’s communist purges: “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime”.

      For years, the libs been desperately trying to find something, anything, to criminally charge Trump (and his family), starting up with a years long “Russian collusion” witch-hunt which was rife with prosecutorial misconduct, conflicts of interest and lies.

      During this same time, the corruption, drug use, influence peddling, firearms offenses (and many more) of the Biden family are swept under the rug, When will we hear that “the walls are closing in” on the Bidens? The hypocracy of all this is revolting.

    5. Rolling Stone???? The Duke LaCrosse team Rolling Stone?
      Bragg has already bailed. Cqncelled the last two meeting of the Grand Jury…for no reason… He has realized his silly mechanization, make him look, oh so stupid…in the eyes of his peers.
      If he plods on past his own ego, and does put this in the hands of a judge, it will never survive the pleadings.

    6. Shall we have another Bobby Mullah investigation where he doesn’t know what the Steele Dossier is or the role illary, Perkins Coie, and FusionGPS played in it? Ah, so honest.

    7. For nearly eight years now idiots like you have been crowing that “The walls are closing in.” on Trump. He is the most heavily and constantly investigated and harassed politician in American history, but so far all of the allegations have gone up in smoke. Don’t you ever get tired of being a fool?

    8. Except that the justice system doesn’t work like that. We’ve see the DoJ fabricate charges and even wrangle convictions out of innocent people because they have unlimited resources and the defendants don’t. Michael Flynn was one as the DoJ told him to take the deal (after suppressing exculpatory evidence with Flynn’s attorneys who were back-stabbing him) or they’d go after his kid. Flynn got new attorneys, got the exculpatory evidence, the DoJ was forced to drop the charges and request the Court vacate the plea-bargain and the Obama-appointed Judge did all he could to keep rail-roading Flynn whom Trump finally pardoned because it was an obvious political persecution.

      So take that naive BS somewhere else. We know the Courts, DoJ, FBI and many other institutions have been corrupted by bad actors. Mostly on the left, but some on the right.

    9. for Dennis, whose main concern is that our justice system operates under one principle…

      “Hypothetically, a Democrat can drive their Oldsmobile off a bridge drowning their passenger and fail to report the accident allowing their passenger’s lifeless body to remain underwater for nine hours and not be charged with a crime.” @mkolken

    10. So… WTF does Trump have to do with Brandon’s corrupt influence peddling and selling out the US?

      Dang, you partisans are thick!

    11. Typical LW extremist. You don’t think the balance of power will ever shift. Ask the late Harry Reid and the Democrat Senators who voted to end the filibuster for judicial nominees how that worked out for them? Ask Adam Schiff snd Fang Fang’s boyfriend how denying the opposition the ability to appoint Committee members worked for them?
      Absent clear and overwhelming evidence of serious criminality, it is a fool’s errand to try to jail a former President. The Republicans are not going to ignore the precedent and we start down the path to being an official Banana Republic.

      Is the the fundamental transformation that Obama was talking about?

Leave a Reply