- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Hunter Biden Lawyers Impersonating Congressional Staff to Remove Derogatory Evidence
Posted on 7/27/23 at 10:36 am to AggieHank86
Posted on 7/27/23 at 10:36 am to AggieHank86
Some of the Meatball lovers have called me a democrat, groomer, establishment lover, flamed personally that I was a wino alchie-Instead of presenting counter discussion.
I will survive, get some thick-skin. You indeed appear to play esquire for the democrats. Own it.
You do tend to steer from flaming personally. When it gets real heated return fire. But try to ignore the flames.
I will survive, get some thick-skin. You indeed appear to play esquire for the democrats. Own it.
quote:To be fair: you play lawyer for a certain side and are contrarian leaning left. But no one cares.
But can you find even one where I was not insulted first?
The admins obviously do nothing about it.
In your mind, how many times must I tolerate being called a ”pedophile” or some such nonsense without consequence, before I am allowed to respond?
You do tend to steer from flaming personally. When it gets real heated return fire. But try to ignore the flames.
0
Posted on 7/27/23 at 10:54 am to AggieHank86
bullshite.
You shill for the left and call people who disagree with you stupid. All while pretending to be the “pure” conservative. Just own your politics and people might not be so disgusted with these games you play.
You shill for the left and call people who disagree with you stupid. All while pretending to be the “pure” conservative. Just own your politics and people might not be so disgusted with these games you play.
Posted on 7/27/23 at 11:02 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:Not at all. For example, BBonds and I disagree rather often, and I have never called him “stupid.” I reserve that for people who ARE objectively … slow.
You shill for the left and call people who disagree with you stupid
quote:AGAIN, I have NEVER described myself as “conservative.”. Not once. Link it, if you claim otherwise.
while pretending to be the “pure” conservative.
Because the term has become meaningless as too many disparate ideologies have tried to claim it for themselves.
quote:Some are confused by viewpoints that do not fit on a bumper sticker.
Just own your politics and people might not be so disgusted with these games you play.
Posted on 7/27/23 at 11:04 am to AggieHank86
quote:
AggieHank86
Do you ever wonder why nobody calls you “Objective Hank”?
Posted on 7/27/23 at 11:10 am to Rebel
quote:Probably because the bulk of this forum thinks that “Reactionary Far Right” is “objective” and “mainstream.”
Do you ever wonder why nobody calls you “Objective Hank”?
Posted on 7/27/23 at 11:23 am to AggieHank86
quote:
But can you find even one where I was not insulted first?
quote:
So hank is parroting the official "misunderstanding" line from the crackheads lawyers and calling the clerk of court a liar. That seems about right for this middle of the road libertarian
quote:
Don't be a pussy
Quite a high horse you're sitting on counselor
This post was edited on 7/27/23 at 11:27 am
Posted on 7/27/23 at 11:33 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Except, internal (now published) correspondences between the attorneys indicate the Clerk was under the misimpression at the time of the fact, not after the fact.
That doesn't really change anything. Under this hypo, the clerk makes a mistake, realizes it, and then when contacted, claims the one side misrepresented themselves. The correspondence from the attorneys would reflect this set of events (which it does).
I don't think that is what happened, but I was just saying that it IS THEORETICALLY possible the clerk is the person being deceitful here covering his/her arse.
The biggest piece of information that I think makes the Biden attorneys look culpable is that once they were notified of the document removal (which they would have immediately via ECF email), they didn't alert everyone to the issue. If I spoke to a clerk/judge and they took actions that I didn't request, I would IMMEDIATELY notify EVERYONE that a mistake was made, to avoid this very situation. It's better to look like a fool than an evil actor in these scenarios, even if it's not your fault. You fall on that sword b/c the allegations of this sort of impropriety alone are career enders (and possible license yankers)
Posted on 7/27/23 at 12:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The biggest piece of information that I think makes the Biden attorneys look culpable is that once they were notified of the document removal (which they would have immediately via ECF email), they didn't alert everyone to the issue.
quote:
Posted on 7/27/23 at 12:18 pm to NC_Tigah
Well yeah the filing of that information should result in sanctions for the GOP attorney as well.
Posted on 7/27/23 at 12:28 pm to NC_Tigah
Weird situation. Clark was at Latham when he started representing Hunter. He left and founded his own firm, taking Hunter with him, but kept Latham onboard as co-counsel for the defense?
Posted on 7/27/23 at 12:42 pm to AggieHank86
Here's what happened: Fast talking attorney calls clerk and gives impression she works for Kittia without actually saying it while giving herself just enough plausible deniability to blame it on "miscommunication" if it's eventually brought to light.
Sorry but if your immediate excuse is to try and smooth things over by suggesting "miscommunication" instead of presenting a vigorous denial you are 100% covering for something.
Sorry but if your immediate excuse is to try and smooth things over by suggesting "miscommunication" instead of presenting a vigorous denial you are 100% covering for something.
This post was edited on 7/27/23 at 12:44 pm
Posted on 7/27/23 at 1:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:What information?
yeah the filing of that information should result in sanctions for the GOP attorney
Posted on 7/27/23 at 1:11 pm to NC_Tigah
There was personal information that was attached as an exhibit, tax information, part of social security number, etc. Stuff that you can't file.
The firm should have filed a motion to seal the record (or that exhibit) and not engaged in likely misrepresentation to the clerk, BUT their underlying argument was solid.
The firm should have filed a motion to seal the record (or that exhibit) and not engaged in likely misrepresentation to the clerk, BUT their underlying argument was solid.
Posted on 7/27/23 at 1:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:I know that was the claim by Hunter's team. Was it verified?
There was personal information that was attached as an exhibit
Posted on 7/27/23 at 1:20 pm to NC_Tigah
I don't think that fact is in dispute, just the methods used to address it.
Posted on 7/27/23 at 1:22 pm to SlowFlowPro
I keep coming back to the original amicus filing. Apparently GOP Counsel told Clark in advance that they would be filing these materials, and Clark asked that they do so under seal. They declined.
If their REAL goal had been ”informing the judge,” they would not have hesitated to do that. The reasonable interpretation for filing the materials UNsealed is that the goal was to see the materials enter the “public. sphere.”. They do not care about Hunter. They were taking a shot at his father.
On the other hand, Clark WAS warned. He should have had a Motion to Seal sitting on “Go,” ready to file on about ten seconds notice.
If their REAL goal had been ”informing the judge,” they would not have hesitated to do that. The reasonable interpretation for filing the materials UNsealed is that the goal was to see the materials enter the “public. sphere.”. They do not care about Hunter. They were taking a shot at his father.
On the other hand, Clark WAS warned. He should have had a Motion to Seal sitting on “Go,” ready to file on about ten seconds notice.
This post was edited on 7/27/23 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 7/27/23 at 1:31 pm to GumboPot
Yeah, and Hunter will provide cocktails and “blow”. Then write it off on his amended tax returns.
Posted on 7/27/23 at 1:48 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:In that case I see your point.
I don't think that fact is in dispute
Posted on 7/27/23 at 1:58 pm to AggieHank86
Or lack of trust with the legal system drove the idea to get this into public view.
Who's to say the scam agreement wouldn't have been accepted as is if it weren't for the public viewing.
Who's to say the scam agreement wouldn't have been accepted as is if it weren't for the public viewing.
Posted on 7/27/23 at 2:38 pm to cajunangelle
quote:
Jessica Bengels
She should be suspended immediately from practicing law and ultimately disbarred.
Page 9 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News