Or...Republican Sexual Predators, Abusers, and Enablers Pt. 1 Donald Trump is accused of sexual assault by multiple women. His wife said he raped her before she decided to describe it differently He is accused of raping a 13-year-old girl and walking in on teens in the Miss Teen USA pageant. He bragged of walking in on naked women at pageants and of course, of grabbing women “by the p***y.” In his recent deposition in the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit, he claimed she liked being raped. Judge Roy Moore is accused of sexual assault and dating underage women. Rep Jim Jordan is seeking to step into Speaker Ryan’s shoes even though he is accused of ignoring sexual assault of young men while a coach, dismissing it as locker room talk Former Republican Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert convicted of sex abuse Former Cobb County COP Chairman Joseph Russell Dendy - child molesting So-called "pro-life"/ antigay activist Howard Scott Heldreth was convicted of raping a child GOP Richland County Commissioner David F. Swartz convicted of sexually abusing a girl from age 6 upwards - released after only 8 years!!!! Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich pleaded no contest to molesting his 10-year-old daughter. Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency pleaded guilty to possessing child p*rnography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor. Republican Speaker of the House in Puerto Rico Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17. Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8- and 10-year old girls. Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl. Republican racist pedophile and United States Senator Strom Thurmond had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child. She was underage. It was rape. Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile. Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl. Republican Congressman Donald "Buz" Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail. ONE MONTH!!!!! Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio was found guilty of child p*rn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos. Republican of the Year Mark A. Grethen convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children. Keep reading, it’s half-way down the page. Republican state senator Ralph Shortey from Oklahoma admitted to being involved in sodomy with a 17 year old male prostitute and transporting child p*rnography. He was sentenced to 15 years. Republican activist Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child. Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a page. To be fair, Dem Congressman was Gerry Studds was also caught for the same thing. The Congressional Page scandal. Republican Congressman Mark Foley abruptly resigned from Congress after "sexually explicit" emails surfaced showing him flirting with a 16-year old boy. Republican activist and Christian Coalition leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his stepdaughter. Republican congressman and anti-gay activist *Robert Bauman** was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar. Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped and notice, they agreed his record could be expunged in THREE YEARS!
https://nypost.com/2023/07/11/the-d...lea-deal-gets-even-more-audacious-by-the-day/ The deceit behind Hunter Biden’s sweetheart plea deal gets even more audacious by the day By Andrew C. McCarthy July 11, 2023 4:01pm Updated The Justice Department’s deceitfulness regarding Hunter Biden’s sweetheart plea deal gets more audacious by the day. Thanks to the media-Democrat complex’s partisanship, it also gets tougher to pierce — which, of course, is the point. Delaware US attorney David Weiss is in a vice of DOJ’s own making. Credible IRS investigators, including supervisory agent Gary Shapley, have reported that he told several law-enforcement officials connected to the Biden investigation that he was not the ultimate decision-maker regarding whether Biden would be charged, that he was being thwarted by other Biden-appointed US attorneys in Washington, DC, and California (the two districts with venue over tax charges) and that the Biden Justice Department, led by Attorney General Merrick Garland, had refused his request to be appointed as a special counsel. On the other hand, Garland, who is Weiss’ boss, has insisted — preposterously — that Weiss has always been the ultimate decision-maker and that all he needed to do was ask Garland for any extra authority he needed to file charges wherever he thought appropriate. Garland claims he was never asked. On Monday, Weiss tried to squirm his way out of this vice in a terse, disingenuous letter to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). In a nutshell, Weiss is straining to back up Garland while hoping no one notices that he does not deny the whistleblower allegations. Weiss maintains that he did not formally request a special counsel designation (under Section 600 of the federal regulations governing the Justice Department). Instead, he claims to have conferred with unidentified “Departmental officials” about being given authority under a different legal provision (Section 515 of the federal laws governing the functions of the attorney general) to file charges outside of his Delaware jurisdiction. Ultimately, he adds, he was assured he would be granted Section 515 authority if it proved to be necessary, but he implies (though he is careful not to state outright) that he never asked — i.e., he says he has “never been denied the authority to bring charges in any jurisdiction.” It’s a crock, through and through. To begin with, if Weiss were denying the accounts of Shapley and at least one other whistleblower (the main IRS investigator on the case), he would say so. He hasn’t. He obviously told them exactly what they say he told them. Ergo, he either lied to them because he was too cowardly to admit that he was undermining the politically fraught Biden investigation, or he is lying now to protect Garland and the Biden Justice Department. Second, the Section 515 issue is a red herring. Such authority would have been relevant only if the US attorneys in Washington, DC, and California objected to Weiss’ filing charges in their districts. But those US attorneys work for Garland and, ultimately, President Joe Biden, who appointed them. Garland could have ordered them to partner with Weiss on any prosecution of Hunter Biden approved by Weiss and the Biden Justice Department’s Tax Division. Turf battles are not unusual between district US attorneys. When they happen, they are resolved by the attorney general (usually, by the deputy attorney general — in the Biden DOJ, that’s Lisa Monaco). Garland wants you to believe he’s a powerless spectator. He’s not. That brings us to the central deceit. While Garland would have you believe Weiss would have been granted any necessary authority if only he’d asked, it was not Weiss’ job to ask. Rather, it was Garland’s duty to appoint a special counsel, regardless of whether a subordinate asked him to do so. Under the regulations, a special counsel must be brought in from outside the government. By definition, if Weiss had asked to be appointed a special counsel, he would effectively have been resigning his coveted position as US attorney for Delaware. Why would Garland have expected Weiss to ask for Garland to fire him? More to the point, there is no provision in the regs for the AG to appoint a special counsel on request by a district US attorney. Rather, the regs require the AG to name a special counsel if the AG is aware of a conflict of interest that prevents the Justice Department from investigating and prosecuting a case in the normal course. There can be no greater conflict of interest than that posed by the president’s Justice Department’s having to investigate the president himself and/or a close family member of the president. It is the textbook case for a special counsel. The Biden Justice Department could not credibly investigate the Biden family. Garland knows that, yet he refused to appoint a special counsel. The sweetheart plea deal is the result of the conflict of interest the AG was derelict in failing to address. Weiss is just the fall guy. Garland is the culprit in this disgraceful saga. Andrew C. McCarthy is a former federal prosecutor.
If Garland was ostensibly brought from the bowels of a lifetime appellate court appointment to bring credibility back to the DOJ, who will Merrick Garland the Merrick Garlands? Meh, I'm waiting for centi-billion dollar coliseums where I can watch convicts fed to the lions.
WOW that is a very bad look for GOP i'm sure there is a list of Dems that should be on the list as well.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/13/opinion/biden-hunter-joe-trump.html Democrats, It’s OK to Talk About Hunter Biden July 13, 2023, 12:15 p.m. ET By Frank Bruni If you travel in predominantly Democratic circles and want to have a really trying day, write or publicly say something unflattering but true about President Biden, a lament legible or audible beyond people who can be safely depended on to vote for him. Then brace for the furies. Observe that it’s one thing — a noble, beautiful thing — for him to give steadfast support and unconditional love to his profoundly troubled son, but that it’s another for that son to attend a state dinner days after he had cut a deal with federal prosecutors on tax and gun charges. Many of your liberal acquaintances will shush and shame you: Speak no ill of Joe Biden! That’s an unaffordable luxury. You’re playing into his MAGA adversaries’ hands. Note that Biden seems less physically peppy and verbally precise than in years past and suggest that it might be best, for him and for continued Democratic control of the White House, if he let Democrats choose a different 2024 nominee. You’ll be likened to an anchor for Fox News. You’ll be chided for age discrimination. Never mind that you’re examining his behavior, not the year on his birth certificate. You’re being counterproductive. You’ll be asked: What do Hunter Biden and diminished vim matter next to the menace of Donald Trump and a Republican Party in his lawless, nihilistic thrall? That’s a fair question — to a point. But past that point, it’s dishonest and dangerous. Dishonest because it’s often leveled at critics of Biden who have lavished, oh, 100 times as many words on Trump’s epic moral corruption as on Biden’s blind spots and missteps, creating zero impression of any equivalence. Dangerous because it suggests that Americans can’t be trusted to behold politicians in their full complexity — and reality in all its messiness — and distinguish unideal from unconscionable, scattered flaws from through-and-through fraudulence. I don’t see how that’s consonant with the exaltation and preservation of democracy, in which it exhibits scant trust. It also plays into the portrait of Democrats as elitists who decide what people should and shouldn’t be exposed to — what they can and can’t handle. How’s that a winning look? I believe that a victory by Trump in 2024 would be devastating beyond measure for the United States. I believe that a victory by any Republican who has indulged, parroted or promoted Trump’s fictions and assaults on democratic norms would also be a disaster. His abettors have shown their colors and disqualified themselves. And I’ve said that — and will continue to say that — repeatedly. I also believe that Biden has been a good president at a very difficult time, and that even if he’s not near peak vigor, we’d be much, much better served by the renewal of his White House lease than by a new tenant in the form of Trump or one of his de facto accomplices. Biden’s second term, like his first, would be about more than the man himself. It would be about a whole team, a set of principles, a fundamental decency, a thread of continuity, an investment in important institutions. And I believe that there’s more than ample room in all the above to talk about whether Biden is the strongest of the possible Democratic contenders to take on Trump, Ron DeSantis or whomever — although that particular conversation may soon be moot, given the ever-shrinking amount of time for those contenders to put together campaigns and for Democratic voters to assess them. Likewise, it’s possible — no, necessary — to have nuanced conversations about Biden’s and his administration’s mix of virtues and vices. If a big part of the horror of Trump is his estrangement from and perversion of truth, how is the proper or even strategic response to gild or cloak truth and declare it subservient to a desired political end? The intensity of many House Republicans’ fixation on Hunter Biden is deranged, and journalists would be wrong to chronicle every breathless inch of their descent down that rabbit hole. But we’d also be wrong to ignore Hunter Biden entirely, and Democratic partisans who urge that aren’t being realistic and are doing as much to feed suspicions as to quell them. As Peter Baker wrote in The Times last month, “In modern times, the harsh spotlight of media scrutiny has focused on Donald Nixon’s financial dealings with Howard Hughes, Billy Carter’s work as an agent for Libya, Neil Bush’s service on the board of a failed savings and loan, Roger Clinton’s drug convictions and of course the various financial and security clearance issues involving Mr. Trump’s children and son-in-law.” Baker later added: “Even some of the president’s Democratic allies have privately said there were legitimate questions about Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine and China that seemed to trade on his name.” This is a strange, scary time. The leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination is an indicted, twice-impeached former president who cares only for his own eminence and survival and doesn’t let a shred of civic concern, genuine patriotism or recognizable scruple dilute his solipsism. He could well take up residence in the White House again. So the temptation, given the stakes, is to bathe whichever Democrat stands in the way of that in a beatific light, to sing that person’s praises as loudly and unflaggingly as vocal cords permit. That feels like the prudent response. It feels like the ethical one. It’s neither, certainly not for those of us in the news media. It would put us in the business of creating outcomes, not chronicling events, which would be obvious to voters on top of being wrong. It would further erode our credibility, which has suffered plenty of erosion already. It would betray the fundamental purpose and real power of journalism. We do best as a profession — and all of us do best as a democracy and a society — when we hold everyone accountable, regardless of the special circumstances, and when we’re honest across the board. To act otherwise is to send the message that all is gamesmanship and that integrity is for suckers. That’s probably not how we defeat Trump. It’s more likely how he defeats us, long before and long after whatever happens in November 2024.
it's like it never happened CNN cuts Hunter Biden laptop reference from RNC chair’s interview clip https://nypost.com/2023/07/14/cnn-cuts-hunter-biden-laptop-russian-disinfo-references-from-tv-clip/
Sure Democrats can talk about Hunter Biden but to what end? I agree it’s a bad look to have Hunter Biden at a state dinner. I also agree his sentence sounds light but he was convicted. I also have no problem the DOJ and Congressional investigations continue per their Constitutional prerogative. Hunter Biden though isn’t a member of the administration. Nothings been proven that he has a say in policy or that he’s even an informal adviser to the President. That’s far different from Ivanka and Jared who did hold official positions in the Whitehouse, were tasked with developing actual policies, and even say in the place of the President in foreign meetings. Hunter Biden is a POS who capitalized on his family’s name to make money. He’s a deeply troubled man who shouldn’t be trusted to run an ice cream stand. Beyond that he’s not really that important.
This. Everyone gets that Joe Biden’s son is at a minimum a troubled man with serious problems. That politically is only going to get you so far.
FBI agent on Hunter Biden case verifies IRS whistleblower claim, Comer says https://nypost.com/2023/07/17/fbi-agent-on-hunter-biden-case-verifies-irs-whistleblower-claim-comer/
