Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
pepperonikkid

Fox News’ Chris Wallace just went to bat for Hunter Biden with a defense that will shock you

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

pepperonikkid

Fox News’ Chris Wallace just went to bat for Hunter Biden with a defense that will shock you

 

https://pantsonfirenews.com/

on October 26, 2020

 

Article:

 

Chris Wallace showed exactly how he feels about President Trump while moderating the first Presidential debate.

His disrespect shows exactly which team he is on.

And he just proved it further by going to bat for Hunter Biden with a defense that will shock you.

Hunter Biden is proving to be bad news for his father’s presidential campaign.

For decades, he has been getting into trouble, only for his father to use his status to fix all his problems.

Hunter Biden was kicked out of the military after failing a drug test for cocaine.

He later dropped off a rental car with a bag of crack cocaine and his driver’s license left inside, and has been caught in many other embarrassing situations.

The junior Biden also impregnated a stripper, refused to pay child support, and married his deceased brother’s widow.
But it isn’t those situations that raise questions.

Instead, it is how he has thrived despite all these screw-ups.

He was given a job paying $180,000 a month as a board member of Ukrainian energy company Burisma despite having no experience in that industry.

While he was on the board, his father, who was Vice President at the time, pressured Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma.

Now there is a laptop formerly belonging to Hunter Biden revealing emails and text messages proving that he had talked to his father about this.

Other text messages purport to show Hunter Biden talking about engaging in inappropriate sexual situations over video with an underage girl, who many speculate is the daughter of his deceased brother’s widow.

Despite all this, Chris Wallace talked it down ahead of the last presidential debate, essentially arguing that if there was truly something damning on the laptop, we would have known about it by now, so there is no reason to look into it.

“Remember that the hard drive – it gets complicated here, the computer guy in Delaware gave to the FBI in December of 2019 – so about 10-11 months ago,” Wallace said.

 

 

Full Story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
1 hour ago, pepperonikkid said:

Fox News’ Chris Wallace just went to bat for Hunter Biden with a defense that will shock you

 

https://pantsonfirenews.com/

on October 26, 2020

 

Article:

 

Chris Wallace showed exactly how he feels about President Trump while moderating the first Presidential debate.

His disrespect shows exactly which team he is on.

And he just proved it further by going to bat for Hunter Biden with a defense that will shock you.

Hunter Biden is proving to be bad news for his father’s presidential campaign.

For decades, he has been getting into trouble, only for his father to use his status to fix all his problems.

Hunter Biden was kicked out of the military after failing a drug test for cocaine.

He later dropped off a rental car with a bag of crack cocaine and his driver’s license left inside, and has been caught in many other embarrassing situations.

The junior Biden also impregnated a stripper, refused to pay child support, and married his deceased brother’s widow.
But it isn’t those situations that raise questions.

Instead, it is how he has thrived despite all these screw-ups.

He was given a job paying $180,000 a month as a board member of Ukrainian energy company Burisma despite having no experience in that industry.

While he was on the board, his father, who was Vice President at the time, pressured Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma.

Now there is a laptop formerly belonging to Hunter Biden revealing emails and text messages proving that he had talked to his father about this.

Other text messages purport to show Hunter Biden talking about engaging in inappropriate sexual situations over video with an underage girl, who many speculate is the daughter of his deceased brother’s widow.

Despite all this, Chris Wallace talked it down ahead of the last presidential debate, essentially arguing that if there was truly something damning on the laptop, we would have known about it by now, so there is no reason to look into it.

“Remember that the hard drive – it gets complicated here, the computer guy in Delaware gave to the FBI in December of 2019 – so about 10-11 months ago,” Wallace said.

 

 

Full Story

That is exactly the RN Russian troll's logic.

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howsithangin
2 hours ago, pepperonikkid said:

Despite all this, Chris Wallace talked it down ahead of the last presidential debate, essentially arguing that if there was truly something damning on the laptop, we would have known about it by now, so there is no reason to look into it.

Discounting the fact that the FBI is full of swamp dwellers working overtime to cover the Biden Family ass, , and a media that wouldn't  report it if Biden or Hunter suicide-bombed a daycare center after their sending out a PSA as to which, where, and when.

 

2 hours ago, pepperonikkid said:

 

“Remember that the hard drive – it gets complicated here, the computer guy in Delaware gave to the FBI in December of 2019 – so about 10-11 months ago,” Wallace said.

 See previous comment on the FBI

1 hour ago, JerryL said:

That is exactly the RN Russian troll's logic.

Using his logic, it pays therefore, for the democrats/media to delay, delay, delay, hide and obfuscate for as long as possible so that this---or any wrong-doing for that matter---becomes old news and, to quote The Hildabeast:  "Such a Long Time Ago"TM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
1 minute ago, Howsithangin said:

 

Using his logic, it pays therefore, for the democrats/media to delay, delay, delay, hide and obfuscate for as long as possible so that this---or any wrong-doing for that matter---becomes old news and, to quote The Hildabeast:  "Such a Long Time Ago"TM.

I was thinking about this today and a conspiracy hat magically appeared on my head.  That doesn't happen often.

If the FBI had the laptop for nearly year and the Trump administration knew they had it, I was thinking it was pretty sleazy politics to wait until right before the election to release it.  Then that hat materialized.

No matter when they did it, the FBI was going to drag their heels and do nothing as long as they possible could.  Also, the media was going to white wash and ignore and lie, as they are doing, no matter when released.  So if the release it earlier, no change with FBI but if Trump tried to fire Wray, big political backlash about using the FBI for political purposes.  Also, the media gets to pooh pooh it for a longer time and turn it into a "that was a long time ago" subject.  

Releasing it now, particularly when you can slam on it in the debates, brings it out to the public.  It forces the Dems to lie, lie, lie right before the election.  The media can't say it is old news.  And...if Trump wins he can fire Wray and screw anyone who says it was for politics.  He isn't going to run for election again anyway, so he gets to keep trying to cut out some of the rot in DC.  

That, and, the Dems would have done it at the moment the most politically advantageous without batting an eye.  Keep playing by their rules.

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NH Populist

Chris Wallace and Adam Schiff both seem saddled with trying to defend the indefensible, don't they?!   Between Hunter Biden business partner Tony Bobulinski's 3 phones and personal testimony and Hunter Biden's computer, whoever sent Chris Wallace out to defend the Bidens is one desperate individual.   Talk about mission impossible...

Edited by NH Populist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

It gets complicated? This is about as complicated as getting up in the morning and making coffee. Something millions and millions of us do every day. This isn't rocket science. The emails are from his account, the profile on the computer is his. It's not just ONE file on a random laptop or server, the entire laptop is covered in his life. I am sure if they checked for prints they would find some of his. These guys want to create the myth that this is some rocket scientology so they can dismiss it. Not so fast, komrade, your marxism is showing. The complications are the attempts to create smoke and mirrors where there are none.

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup

EEhAOuOXkAEa4BT.jpg

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
6 hours ago, pepperonikkid said:

Now there is a laptop formerly belonging to Hunter Biden revealing emails and text messages proving that he had talked to his father about this.

Other text messages purport to show Hunter Biden talking about engaging in inappropriate sexual situations over video with an underage girl, who many speculate is the daughter of his deceased brother’s widow.

Despite all this, Chris Wallace talked it down ahead of the last presidential debate, essentially arguing that if there was truly something damning on the laptop, we would have known about it by now, so there is no reason to look into it.

I concur with Wallace. Because if there was VERIFIABLY "truly something damning on the laptop", then when didn't Giuliani hand the material over to either of the Senate commitees investigating Hunter Biden over EXACTLY the sort of corruption that the material on the laptop (allegedly) "proves"?

The only explanation that comes to mind is that Giuliani either KNEW - or at least had good reason to suspect - that the whole thing was a bogus "plant" and didn't want to be caught give false material to a senate committee. As a former federal prosecutor, Giuliani would how how serious of a matter that would be and didn't want to risk it. 

Anybody here got a BETTER Explanation???

3 hours ago, JerryL said:

I was thinking about this today and a conspiracy hat magically appeared on my head.  That doesn't happen often.

If the FBI had the laptop for nearly year and the Trump administration knew they had it, I was thinking it was pretty sleazy politics to wait until right before the election to release it.  Then that hat materialized.

No matter when they did it, the FBI was going to drag their heels and do nothing as long as they possible could.  Also, the media was going to white wash and ignore and lie, as they are doing, no matter when released.  So if the release it earlier, no change with FBI but if Trump tried to fire Wray, big political backlash about using the FBI for political purposes.  Also, the media gets to pooh pooh it for a longer time and turn it into a "that was a long time ago" subject.  

Releasing it now, particularly when you can slam on it in the debates, brings it out to the public.  It forces the Dems to lie, lie, lie right before the election.  The media can't say it is old news.  And...if Trump wins he can fire Wray and screw anyone who says it was for politics.  He isn't going to run for election again anyway, so he gets to keep trying to cut out some of the rot in DC.  

One doesn't really need a tin-foil "conspiracy theory" hat to believe that lawyer/politicians like Giuliani are sleazy enough to put politics over justice.

As for the FBI, it's entirely plausible that they KNEW it was bogus too and just didn't want to turn it into a political football.

3 hours ago, JerryL said:

That, and, the Dems would have done it at the moment the most politically advantageous without batting an eye.  Keep playing by their rules.

Yes, keep playing by their rules... and convince enough voters that Republicans are just as sleazy as Democrats that elections are lost over it. Remember me posting about that missing 4.7% turnout that I call the "Watergate deficit"? It's alive and well to this day.

Wanna bet that, IF either Trump loses OR we lose the Senate, in either case it's by less than that 4.7%?

  • Disagree (-1) 3
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13
7 hours ago, pepperonikkid said:

Fox News’ Chris Wallace just went to bat for Hunter Biden with a defense that will shock you

 

https://pantsonfirenews.com/

on October 26, 2020

 

Article:

 

Chris Wallace showed exactly how he feels about President Trump while moderating the first Presidential debate.

His disrespect shows exactly which team he is on.

And he just proved it further by going to bat for Hunter Biden with a defense that will shock you.

Hunter Biden is proving to be bad news for his father’s presidential campaign.

For decades, he has been getting into trouble, only for his father to use his status to fix all his problems.

Hunter Biden was kicked out of the military after failing a drug test for cocaine.

He later dropped off a rental car with a bag of crack cocaine and his driver’s license left inside, and has been caught in many other embarrassing situations.

The junior Biden also impregnated a stripper, refused to pay child support, and married his deceased brother’s widow.
But it isn’t those situations that raise questions.

Instead, it is how he has thrived despite all these screw-ups.

He was given a job paying $180,000 a month as a board member of Ukrainian energy company Burisma despite having no experience in that industry.

While he was on the board, his father, who was Vice President at the time, pressured Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma.

Now there is a laptop formerly belonging to Hunter Biden revealing emails and text messages proving that he had talked to his father about this.

Other text messages purport to show Hunter Biden talking about engaging in inappropriate sexual situations over video with an underage girl, who many speculate is the daughter of his deceased brother’s widow.

Despite all this, Chris Wallace talked it down ahead of the last presidential debate, essentially arguing that if there was truly something damning on the laptop, we would have known about it by now, so there is no reason to look into it.

“Remember that the hard drive – it gets complicated here, the computer guy in Delaware gave to the FBI in December of 2019 – so about 10-11 months ago,” Wallace said.

 

 

Full Story

He didn't marry his deceased brother's widow.  What other "facts" are wrong in this article?  $180,000 a month.......I thought it was $50,000.

We are never going to see the photos or videos of underage sexual situations......so why focus on it?  It is a distraction that, coupled with other false information, enables Biden defenders to say that we are just grasping at straws.

They should have focused on the the actual candidate......and what money laundering schemes that Biden enabled as VP or kickbacks he received.  Anything beyond that is a waste of time and a distraction.....for the election.

If Hunter was involved in any crimes.......prosecute him and lock him away.

  • Disagree (-1) 3
  • Agree (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dutch13
4 hours ago, JerryL said:

I was thinking about this today and a conspiracy hat magically appeared on my head.  That doesn't happen often.

If the FBI had the laptop for nearly year and the Trump administration knew they had it, I was thinking it was pretty sleazy politics to wait until right before the election to release it.  Then that hat materialized.

No matter when they did it, the FBI was going to drag their heels and do nothing as long as they possible could.  Also, the media was going to white wash and ignore and lie, as they are doing, no matter when released.  So if the release it earlier, no change with FBI but if Trump tried to fire Wray, big political backlash about using the FBI for political purposes.  Also, the media gets to pooh pooh it for a longer time and turn it into a "that was a long time ago" subject.  

Releasing it now, particularly when you can slam on it in the debates, brings it out to the public.  It forces the Dems to lie, lie, lie right before the election.  The media can't say it is old news.  And...if Trump wins he can fire Wray and screw anyone who says it was for politics.  He isn't going to run for election again anyway, so he gets to keep trying to cut out some of the rot in DC.  

That, and, the Dems would have done it at the moment the most politically advantageous without batting an eye.  Keep playing by their rules.

If there is anything on it.......the FBI has blackmail material on a potential President Biden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NH Populist
1 hour ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

One doesn't really need a tin-foil "conspiracy theory" hat to believe that lawyer/politicians like Giuliani are sleazy enough to put politics over justice.

According to Biden, this is just another Russian smear against the Left.   Excuse me, but 3 years of Mueller didn't produce the first.

Edited by NH Populist
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
15 minutes ago, Weaseljd said:

Let me ask you this.  What is more likely.  That in early 2019, before Biden ever announced he was running for President, the Russians concocted this grand scheme to discredit him if he did run because they so wanted someone OTHER than Biden as President that they created this laptop and gave it to this computer shop owner again before Biden ever announced he was running just so it could be turned over to the FBI in December 2019 while Biden was still way behind in all the polls and being encouraged to drop out of the race so that, again, just in case Biden did get the nomination it could then be released to others later in 2020 to again discredit Biden because the Russians so wanted Trump to win.  Or is it more likely that Biden's crack head son in early 2019 actually did drop a laptop off with a bunch of information that makes Biden look bad and he just forgot to pick it up?

I think I am going with option #2 here.  Occam's Razor.

I believe - I seriously believe -  that the foreign parties involved are constantly "wargaming" it; preparing any number of strategies "just in case". Because it's exactly what *I* would do if I was them.

Surely you learned in Law school that Step #1 in preparing any case is to first prepare the other side's case... and then figure out how to defeat yourself.  

Edited by Dean Adam Smithee
  • Disagree (-1) 2
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weaseljd
40 minutes ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

I believe - I seriously believe -  that the foreign parties involved are constantly "wargaming" it; preparing any number of strategies "just in case". Because it's exactly what *I* would do if I was them.

Surely you learned in Law school that Step #1 in preparing any case is to first prepare the other side's case... and then figure out how to defeat yourself.  

No, that is not step #1.

And if that is the case, where is all the wargamed stuff that could/would have come out against Mayor Pete, and Kamala, and Bernie?  If its out there because the Russians wargamed everything, then it still must be out there.  The absence of this stuff is also just as telling against your theory.

  • Agree (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg
2 hours ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

I believe - I seriously believe -  that the foreign parties involved are constantly "wargaming" it; preparing any number of strategies "just in case". Because it's exactly what *I* would do if I was them.

Surely you learned in Law school that Step #1 in preparing any case is to first prepare the other side's case... and then figure out how to defeat yourself.  

Adam - you just WANT your story to be correct. That’s not enough proof. 

WeaselJD’s point is by far the more likely. And you also have one thing wrong, I believe: Giuliani didn’t have the laptop contents when it was handed over to the FBI. 

Finally, since both unlikely and likely possibilities are tossed around as options, why doesn’t “FBI was hiding it because those people who had it are for Biden” qualify? It should. And if that’s true, then Wallace and your theory becomes instantly untrue. 

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
7 minutes ago, zurg said:

Adam - you just WANT your story to be correct. That’s not enough proof. 

WeaselJD’s point is by far the more likely. And you also have one thing wrong, I believe: Giuliani didn’t have the laptop contents when it was handed over to the FBI. 

Finally, since both unlikely and likely possibilities are tossed around as options, why doesn’t “FBI was hiding it because those people who had it are for Biden” qualify? It should. And if that’s true, then Wallace and your theory becomes instantly untrue. 

I didn't say Giuliani had the contents when it was handed over to the FBI. (Oct-Dec '19 I believe)

The best evidence he was at least aware of the existence of this material in Jan '20. That comes right from the mouth of Giuliani himself or the shop owner in a recent interview, can't remember which. And then he came into possession of it sometime after.

Yes, an Option is "“FBI was hiding it because those people who had it are for Biden”.

But even without the FBI, Guliani as a former federal prosecutor SURELY know enough honest computer forensics people who could have authenticated the material and be prepared to say so in testimony. Heck, even *I* know several and I'm no Rudy Giuliani.

But... a sharp lawyer like Giuliani knows to never ask a question that you don't really want an answer to.

 

  • Disagree (-1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weaseljd
20 minutes ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

I didn't say Giuliani had the contents when it was handed over to the FBI. (Oct-Dec '19 I believe)

The best evidence he was at least aware of the existence of this material in Jan '20. That comes right from the mouth of Giuliani himself or the shop owner in a recent interview, can't remember which. And then he came into possession of it sometime after.

Yes, an Option is "“FBI was hiding it because those people who had it are for Biden”.

But even without the FBI, Guliani as a former federal prosecutor SURELY know enough honest computer forensics people who could have authenticated the material and be prepared to say so in testimony. Heck, even *I* know several and I'm no Rudy Giuliani.

But... a sharp lawyer like Giuliani knows to never ask a question that you don't really want an answer to.

 

You do realize that people who are a party to the emails on the laptop have come forward and admitted that they were in fact on these emails and they were legit?

Also, does it not strike you as odd that neither Biden has come out and expressly stated the emails are fake?  instead they just say this is part of a Russian disinformation plot while not really saying the emails themselves are fake.  Sometimes what is NOT said is just as important as what is said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg
22 minutes ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

I didn't say Giuliani had the contents when it was handed over to the FBI. (Oct-Dec '19 I believe)

The best evidence he was at least aware of the existence of this material in Jan '20. That comes right from the mouth of Giuliani himself or the shop owner in a recent interview, can't remember which. And then he came into possession of it sometime after.

Yes, an Option is "“FBI was hiding it because those people who had it are for Biden”.

But even without the FBI, Guliani as a former federal prosecutor SURELY know enough honest computer forensics people who could have authenticated the material and be prepared to say so in testimony. Heck, even *I* know several and I'm no Rudy Giuliani.

But... a sharp lawyer like Giuliani knows to never ask a question that you don't really want an answer to.

 

Giuliani probably couldn’t know what that FBI office would do. He had to let them act on it first. When they didn’t, and weren’t going to, his timing was appropriate. If he hadn’t said anything and we found out later that he knew, there’d be hell to pay. From you included, I presume. Given that, then the only question is whether the data is truthful or made up. There too, made up (Russians? Lol) is a mighty stretch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
4 minutes ago, Weaseljd said:

You do realize that people who are a party to the emails on the laptop have come forward and admitted that they were in fact on these emails and they were legit?

Also, does it not strike you as odd that neither Biden has come out and expressly stated the emails are fake?  instead they just say this is part of a Russian disinformation plot while not really saying the emails themselves are fake.  Sometimes what is NOT said is just as important as what is said.

Yes, Of course, I realize that. The essence of a good fake is to start with something that 99% legit that can be authenticated and add the 1% juicy part that's bogus.

The question remains open, counselor: IF the material on the laptop was in fact 100% legit, then why DIDN'T Giuliani turn it all over to the Senate committees investigating Hunter Biden that certainly would have been interested?

 

BTW, just as an aside: If you're looking for someone better than Fauxtobucket to host pics posted her, I like IMGUR.

I used to like photobucket. Heck I even signed up for the $5.99/mo hosting after they went "paid"... until I found out the hard way that the $5.99 only gets you so many "views" per month, after which they watermark it such as in your sig line.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
5 minutes ago, zurg said:

Giuliani probably couldn’t know what that FBI office would do. He had to let them act on it first. When they didn’t, and weren’t going to, his timing was appropriate. If he hadn’t said anything and we found out later that he knew, there’d be hell to pay. From you included, I presume. Given that, then the only question is whether the data is truthful or made up. There too, made up (Russians? Lol) is a mighty stretch. 

The question still remains, though: Why DIDN'T Guilani turn it over to the senate committees investigating HB??? At the very least, even without turning over his own material, he could have at least whispered in their ear: "Psst, hey, guys, the FBI's got this laptop that you might like to know about". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
12 hours ago, pepperonikkid said:

Despite all this, Chris Wallace talked it down ahead of the last presidential debate, essentially arguing that if there was truly something damning on the laptop, we would have known about it by now, so there is no reason to look into it.

Did Chris Wallace say the same thing about Trump's tax returns? I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg
Just now, Dean Adam Smithee said:

The question still remains, though: Why DIDN'T Guilani turn it over to the senate committees investigating HB??? At the very least, even without turning over his own material, he could have at least whispered in their ear: "Psst, hey, guys, the FBI's got this laptop that you might like to know about". 

I don’t know; had that question been asked? 

Anyway, I think that’s much less important than the facts and Joe Biden’s guilt in these foreign affairs deals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
1 minute ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

The question still remains, though: Why DIDN'T Guilani turn it over to the senate committees investigating HB??? At the very least, even without turning over his own material, he could have at least whispered in their ear: "Psst, hey, guys, the FBI's got this laptop that you might like to know about". 

My guess would be that it was viewed as great October surprise material.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg
2 minutes ago, Natural Selection said:

Did Chris Wallace say the same thing about Trump's tax returns? I doubt it.

Didn’t he ask about them? Or was it the second debate? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
Just now, zurg said:

Didn’t he ask about them? Or was it the second debate? 

I don't remember hearing about it. I missed the beginning of the second debate. I've never heard Chris Wallace dismiss Trump's tax returns as an issue with the reasoning that we would have known about it by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...