Hunter Biden's penis begs for mercy as his entire defense is annihilated.
Hunter Biden files mutually contradictory legal defenses, and is shown to be outright lying to the court.
His "house of cards" collapses according to the experts.
The unnamed Biden, codename "The Big Guy", reportedly prepares to withhold aid from the DoJ until top prosecutor investigating his son is fired
https://www.newsweek.com/doj-annihilates-hunter-biden-claims-court-filing-legal-analyst-1877661 DOJ 'Annihilates' Hunter Biden Claims in Court Filing
Jonathan Turley argued Sunday that a recent Department of Justice (DOJ) filing "annihilates" arguments from Hunter Biden's legal team seeking to have certain tax charges dismissed.
In December, the DOJ announced a tax-related indictment against Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, in California, leveling three felonies and six misdemeanors against him, alleging that he attempted to avoid paying roughly $1.4 million in personal taxes between 2016 and 2019. The president's son pleaded not guilty to the charges at an arraignment hearing in Los Angeles on January 11.
In response to this new indictment, Hunter Biden's legal team submitted a filing requesting that the charges be dropped, arguing that the case against him was "politically motivated" and that the additional charges were brought against them to appease conservative voices in the government. Republican lawmakers have long attempted to leverage the younger Biden's personal troubles, legal issues, and business dealings against his father.
In a post on his website on Sunday, Turley wrote that the new filing from Weiss' office "annihilates" the arguments put forward by Hunter Biden's team. In his summation, the filing accuses the defense of "outright lying to the court," with Weiss arguing that claims made in the filing are "patently false, unsupported by evidence, and belied by his own letter and representations in his filings in the Delaware case."
Anonymous
Quoted By:
On Friday, federal prosecutors filed a motion opposing the one from Hunter Biden's team, calling their argument "conspiratorial" and "nothing more than a house of cards." The case against him has been overseen by DOJ special counsel David Weiss, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, since 2018.
Anonymous
>>1276545 Jonathan Turley's opinion isn't news
Anonymous
>>1276548 >hunter Biden defense force, assemble!! It's not an opinion piece or editorial no matter how much an expert legal analysis hurts your feelings
Anonymous
>>1276549 >Jonathan Turley argued Sunday >In a post on his website on Sunday, It is an opinion piece and an editorial tho. The indictment he's talking about happened in December. Are you ok Anon?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Hunter Bidens crap doesnt shock me. Anyone in the know has known since 2020.. The DoJ not acting corrupt is interesting news tho.. Maybe they unretracted their balls.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Why is it so hard for chuds to understand the difference between news and opinion?
Anonymous
>>1276550 Lmao it's not no matter how much you try to gaslight.
They are reporting on the recent legal analysis of the Hunter Biden criminal indictment and you know it. You just want it deleted because you don't like the topic of the analysis. It's painfully obvious.
Idk why you pearl clutch like this.
Anonymous
>>1276553 >not an opinion piece >>In a post on his website on Sunday, Who do you think you're fooling? It's Turley's opinion. There is no new news here. Even if you count the motion filed on Friday as news, that was more than 2 days ago. This board is for current news, not Johnathan Turley's opinion about what happened before.
Anonymous
>>1276556 This thread is up and isn't going anywhere just because you cry about it
Discussions will continue and will not stop just because you cry about it
You have no control over this board no matter how much you cry about it
Anonymous
Quoted By:
The real question is when did Newsweek go from being a hard news magazine to a clickbait site for kneejerking boomers?
Anonymous
>>1276558 The thread is going to get taken down for being an opinion piece and you sholdn't post anymore here until you learn the difference between opinions about things that happened weeks ago and current news.
Anonymous
>>1276560 It is not an opinion piece, it is a factual article reporting commentary provided by an expert on the matter of the Hunter Biden scandal. The author also reached out to hunter's legal team for their input on what Turley said.
If it was Turley himself posting on his own blog/editorial that's different. This is no different than one of WaPo's famous "experts say" article thats clearly simply regurgitative-reporting on what some random people said about something.
I'm sorry you're too feeble minded to understand the difference, and that you think crying will make things you don't like go away.
It will not. Cope.
Anonymous
>>1276565 It IS an opinion piece. Jonathan Turley isn't involved in the case. His opinion means jack shit and is as important as if Hiro or moot commented on the case.
>If it was Turley himself posting on his own blog/editorial that's different It literally says that in the fourth sentence:
>In a post on his website on Sunday, Turley wrote It's an opinion and those aren't allowed here.
Anonymous
>>1276566 >It IS an opinion piece Factual incorrect. I'm sorry you're incapable of understanding the difference, you're still objectively wrong.
>Jonathan Turley isn't involved in the case. His opinion means jack shit and is as important as if Hiro or moot commented on the case. Irrelevant. This article is reporting on him and what he said, and attempted to report on Hunter's team's response to what he said.
>It literally says that in the fourth sentence: >>In a post on his website on Sunday, Turley wrote Yes, Newsweek is reporting on what he posted. The Newsweek article is not his editorial/blog, it is reporting about his editorial/blog.
An editorial/blog post is different than an article reporting that the post happened and discussing it's impact on relevant events.
I see the real problem here: you're functionally retarded and can't tell the difference.
>It's an opinion and those aren't allowed here. That is your opinion, and you are wrong. Sorry kiddo.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276566 nonsense. cnn or msnbc or npr or cbs or fox news are retarded opinionists..
This guy is retarded opinionist.
All news is now retarded opinionated sources..
Joe fucking Rogan of all people is the only one asking real questions..
Why do you care what retard anyone pays attention too??
Anonymous
>>1276567 >Factual incorrect. Wrong.
>I'm sorry you're incapable of understanding the difference, you're still objectively wrong. Again, who do you think you're fooling? The article literally says they got his opinion from his blog. You can't get around this. It's an opinion piece.
>Irrelevant. Wrong, it's highly fucking relevant that someone not involved in the case is giving an opinion about the case. That literally the definition of an opinion piece.
>Yes, Newsweek is reporting on what he posted On his blog...
>The Newsweek article is not his editorial They are repeating his editorial, jackass.
>An editorial/blog post is different than an article reporting that the post happened and discussing it's impact on relevant events. A news article about a opinionated blog post being made is not news. Jonathan Turley's legal analysis will not have any effect whatsoever on the final outcome of the case. He is not involved and his opinion doesn't matter.
>That is your opinion, and you are wrong. Sorry kiddo. Wrong, it's a fact that this is an opinion piece thread, and again I can't stress enough that the news story it's based on is more than 2 days old.
Anonymous
A bunch of shills furiously defending a report of someones retarded opinion as news in a reddit-tier thread.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276558 Good post
>>1276556 Just stop already ffs
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276570 How are you not medicated yet?
Anonymous
>>1276569 >Wrong. Again, you not being capable of understanding the difference doesn't mean it's wrong.
>The article literally says they got his opinion from his blog. You can't get around this. It's an opinion piece. Man, you really just like digging this hole for yourself, don't you?
Reporting on someone else writing an opinion piece and how it pertains to something, and reporting on the response to the piece, is not the same thing as an opinion piece. Arguing otherwise is factually wrong.
>>Yes, Newsweek is reporting on what he posted >On his blog... Yes. If you make a post on your blog, and I write an article that reports that you made a blog post and explain what it said, am I also making a blog post? No, I'm not.
>They are repeating his editorial, jackass. Correct: that's called reporting. They are reporting on his editorial. That does not make their article an editorial as well.
>A news article about a opinionated blog post being made is not news. Yes it is, because it's not an opinionated blog post, it's a news report about an opinionated blog post.
>Wrong, it's a fact that this is an opinion piece thread Not wrong because no it's not and you saying otherwise doesn't make it so.
> the news story it's based on is more than 2 days old. Nothing in the rules state that the subject of the article must have happened with the past 48 hours, merely that the article being posted must be less than 48 hours old. The article was published Mar 10th, which was yesterday.
You are factually wrong on all levels and you're too dumb and angry to see otherwise.
Cry all you want, the thread will go on. When it doesn't get taken down, you will cry more.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276573 This entire post is 1000000% accurate and it's sad it even has to be explained like this.
Anonymous
>>1276573 >Again, you not being capable of understanding the difference doesn't mean it's wrong. Who gives a shit if it's wrong? The point is it's literally his blog post. There is no new information here except Turley's opinion.
>Yes. If you make a post on your blog, and I write an article that reports that you made a blog post and explain what it said, am I also making a blog post? No, I'm not. That isn't news and you apparently don't know what news is.
>Correct: that's called reporting. They are reporting on his editorial. That does not make their article an editorial as well. There isn't anything to report. The last thing that happened with the case happened 3 days ago. This board is for news that happened less than 2 days ago.
>Yes it is, because it's not an opinionated blog post, it's a news report about an opinionated blog post. It literally says it is in the article.
>Not wrong because no it's not and you saying otherwise doesn't make it so. It's a thread based on someone not involved in the case's opinion of why Hunter's defense is bad. No one gives a shit what he thinks.
>Nothing in the rules state that the subject of the article must have happened with the past 48 hours, Jesus christ you're getting progressively worse and worse at lying the more this goes on. You should just delete this retarded opinion thread now before mods do it for you.
i went to harvard i is smart- G W Bush
i went to harvard i is smart- G W Bush Mon 11 Mar 2024 15:48:46 No. 1276579 Report >>1276553 >You just want it deleted because you don't like the topic of the analysis. analysis aka opinion.
You have been educated beyond your iq.
Anonymous
>>1276578 >There is no new information here except Turley's opinion. You are being so fucking disingenuous.
If something happens in Ukraine, and a military analyst talks about the events and implications, and then someone reports on their expert analysis, that is news.
This is no different
You are just a flailing boomer yelling at clouds because you don't like the topic of analysis, and so you decided to self-deputize yourself and start acting like the sheriff of 4chan claiming that this Mar 10 article is somehow over 2 days old and you don't like what it's talking about
ffs, stop sperging tf out
Anonymous
>>1276581 >If something happens in Ukraine, and a military analyst talks about the events and implications, and then someone reports on their expert analysis, that is news. No it isn't and you are too retarded to be posting on this board until you learn the difference between some random guy giving an expert opinion and news reporting.
Anonymous
>>1276582 >sperging intensifies >pearls=clutched >clouds=yelled at It's news.
Do you want me to post the definition of an opinion article and utterly btfo you?
Anonymous
>>1276587 The opinion of some random guy not involved in the case which he posted on his blog and then Newsweek covered is not ever going to be news no matter what definition you incorrectly think is going to B me TFO. If you want to discuss his opinion about the 3 day old news story go to the board where they like old news >>/pol/
Anonymous
>>1276589 >An opinion article, also known as an op-ed article, is a commentary written by someone who is independent of the newspaper or magazine Who is the author of the article, Deputy Pearl Clutcher McGee?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276589 >>1276582 >>1276579 >>1276578 Lmao imagine if you only tried this hard to not live in a tent behind Starbucks
Anonymous
>>1276590 Jesus you can't even use the term "pearl clutching" correctly. It's only supposed to apply to Karens who scream about their children being indoctrinated at schools.
It's not anyone else's fault but your own that you were so desperate for negative news about Hunter Biden that you latched on to any piece of opinionated clickbait you could find in your feed. Unfortunately it's always going to be Jonathan Turley's opinion and nothing more, worth exactly as much as anyone's posting ITT: nothing.
Anonymous
>>1276593 >He called me a pearl Clutcher! How dare he!? Lmao keep clutching those pearls, sperg. Maybe I'll care some day.
Anonymous
>>1276594 Calling you out for not knowing the difference between fact and opinion isn't pearl clutching.
Anonymous
>>1276596 No matter how you try to twist it, a journalist reporting on another's legal analysis is not an opinion article for an editorial.
No amount of discussion will change that simple fact
Anonymous
>>1276597 >another's legal analysis analysis is another word for opinion you utter moron
Anonymous
Quoted By:
oy vey, shut it down. the fact that hunter biden didn't go to jail for refusing to pay his taxes and lying on a gun background check, the two worst crimes according to dems, is not news
Anonymous
>>1276601 Guess we need to shut down all the tRump threads based on hearsay now.
Anonymous
>>1276636 Noooo that's different because reasons and stuff
Anonymous
Quoted By:
i love how republicans were bitching about weiss being a rino and now they're back to supplicating before him
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276636 >>1276641 none of those are based on hearsay though
Anonymous
Now its 2 bots red vs blue argueing semantics to detract and derail every thread.. we coulda had paradise.. nope. you fuckheads only want suffering.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276651 It's all me baby.
Just like your paranoid schizophrenic ideations, I am every poster in this thread.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276651 Half the time it's the same anon arguing with himself.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1276700 ffs you retard, just stop being so retarded already
Anonymous
/pol/morons are truly hopeless without thread IDs. case in point
>>1276703 Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276707 How are you not medicated yet?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276707 This doesn't even make sense within any context of the existing conversation
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276545 >Biden: im ready to take responsibility for my crimes >Also Biden: here's a bunch of lies that contradict each other all saying I'm innocent. Donald J. Trump Why in the world do democrats blame every single thing they do wrong on trump?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276545 Interesting. However I am still voting for Joe Biden.
Anonymous
Whaddya know. A day later the mewling retard crying about how this was a thread about an opinion article and it would get deleted... was fucking wrong. Shocker.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1276904 He wasn't wrong mods only come here once a month
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Let's go brandon
