Hunter Biden's Lawyers Demand DOJ To Investigate Trump Allies Over Laptop

[Nostra]

I’m safely in the top 1%. I paid about 23%of my income to income taxes last year if I remember correctly. Still have to do this years.

Our tax system is barely progressive, but it is progressive. There is no money in the bottom 80% of Americans. Taxes need to come from the right side of the graph. I could easily pay 10% or 20% more taxes and not even notice. 30-50% more and I’d have to make some changes.

For the math impaired if I paid 23% last year then 10% more is 25% and 20% more taxes is 28%.


View attachment 755934

So you can’t define fair share.

Got it.

 

[JoeB131]

So let me see if I've got this straight, Joey! Trump leaves it up to individual Governors of each State to impose or not impose Covid shut downs...but you blame HIM for businesses closing? Trump didn't set Covid policies in New York and Michigan. He didn't set them for Florida and South Dakota. Policy was set by all of those States Governors.

No, the problem was that we didn't HAVE a national policy of shutdowns and containment, so what an individual governor did really didn't help when someone from a nearby red state could come in and set off a whole new set of infections.

Which is pretty much what happened.

Ah...so you want to take us back to the Jimmy Carter years? Is that what you call good fiscal policy, Joey?

Jimmy Carter's issues didn't have anything to do with the sensible tax codes that had been in place since FDR's time.

The ones were we fought a world war and still met our obligations.

 

[Oldestyle]

No, the problem was that we didn't HAVE a national policy of shutdowns and containment, so what an individual governor did really didn't help when someone from a nearby red state could come in and set off a whole new set of infections.

Which is pretty much what happened.


Jimmy Carter's issues didn't have anything to do with the sensible tax codes that had been in place since FDR's time.

The ones were we fought a world war and still met our obligations.

So now you're claiming that Cuomo's problem wasn't his own Covid policies but people sneaking into New York from one of those GOP led States? Is that what you're going with, Joey? LOL

 

[Oldestyle]

No, the problem was that we didn't HAVE a national policy of shutdowns and containment, so what an individual governor did really didn't help when someone from a nearby red state could come in and set off a whole new set of infections.

Which is pretty much what happened.


Jimmy Carter's issues didn't have anything to do with the sensible tax codes that had been in place since FDR's time.

The ones were we fought a world war and still met our obligations.

You said we needed to go back to the tax code we had before Reagan. That would be the tax code we had when Jimmy Carter was in the White House.

 

[JoeB131]

So now you're claiming that Cuomo's problem wasn't his own Covid policies but people sneaking into New York from one of those GOP led States? Is that what you're going with, Joey? LOL

Go back, read what I said, have someone explain the big words to you.

You said we needed to go back to the tax code we had before Reagan. That would be the tax code we had when Jimmy Carter was in the White House.

And Ford, Nixon, LBJ, JFK, Ike, Harry Truman, and FDR.

The one where the rich paid their fair share.

The one where we weren't running up huge debt every year because we were paying for the services we got.

The ironic thing was that Reagan, senile fuck that he was... realized that Supply Side didn't work, which is why he raised taxes in 1986.
And Conservatives were so upset the rich paid their fair share they screamed at Bush until he promised "Read my Lips" - and then raised them again.
Then Clinton raised them a third time, and we were paying our bills and running surpluses, until Dubya fucked that up.

 

[Care4all]

They aren’t his personal papers anymore. He forfeited his ownership when he defaulted on paying for the laptop repair. Per the contract, the laptop AND ITS CONTENTS became the property of the repair shop owner. Now the FBI MIGHT be asking for search warrants in an excess of caution to make sure some judge doesn’t throw out the info by stretching the law.

I believe Delaware law states personal papers, property, and finances stay private for 1 year, and the shop or whomever they were left behind with are required to file a report with the State, before they can take possession after 1 year.

I'm not certain if a personal laptop with financial information.... qualifies as personal property forfeited by the owner with permission to distribute it to the public if you do not pay your bill....

Seems like a shop owner who took possession for non payment, would own the laptop after certain time, but NOT the clients personal information to spread to the public.. Social security number, business deals with others, personal addresses etc, would be off limits.... The laptop may be the computer shop owner's to sell and recoup expenses for his work done.... But it just seems wrong, wrong, wrong that a computer shop ....that say I dropped off my computer at, but failed to pick up for whatever reason, could then take all of my personal papers, and documents and emails and medical info, and then splash all the content, on to the internet....!!!

Doesn't that seem wrong for a computer shop to be legally able to do, to you or me?

 

[hadit]

No, the problem was that we didn't HAVE a national policy of shutdowns and containment, so what an individual governor did really didn't help when someone from a nearby red state could come in and set off a whole new set of infections.

Which is pretty much what happened.


Jimmy Carter's issues didn't have anything to do with the sensible tax codes that had been in place since FDR's time.

The ones were we fought a world war and still met our obligations.

Yes, the tax code that had all those loopholes and deductions Reagan got rid of. Yes, let's raise the rates back up to the levels no one paid and re-institute all the deductions. I wouldn't mind deducting the interest on credit card debt.

 

[JoeB131]

I believe Delaware law states personal papers, property, and finances stay private for 1 year, and the shop or whomever they were left behind with are required to file a report with the State, before they can take possession after 1 year.

I'm not certain if a personal laptop with financial information.... qualifies as personal property forfeited by the owner with permission to distribute it to the public if you do not pay your bill....

Seems like a shop owner who took possession for non payment, would own the laptop after certain time, but NOT the clients personal information to spread to the public.. Social security number, business deals with others, personal addresses etc, would be off limits.... The laptop may be the computer shop owner's to sell and recoup expenses for his work done.... But it just seems wrong, wrong, wrong that a computer shop ....that say I dropped off my computer at, but failed to pick up for whatever reason, could then take all of my personal papers, and documents and emails and medical info, and then splash all the content, on to the internet....!!!

Doesn't that seem wrong for a computer shop to be legally able to do, to you or me?

Well stated. The problem was, this data was not Isaac's to disseminate. Legally, he was perfectly entitled to the physical computer after one year, but not the data inside of it.

The logical thing to do, what any sensible person would have done, was to reformat the hard drive and erase all the data before selling it to someone else.

 

[Nostra]

Well stated. The problem was, this data was not Isaac's to disseminate. Legally, he was perfectly entitled to the physical computer after one year, but not the data inside of it.

The logical thing to do, what any sensible person would have done, was to reformat the hard drive and erase all the data before selling it to someone else.

He owned the laptop and all contents.

 

[JoeB131]

He owned the laptop and all contents.

only if he obtained the data legally, which it is not clear that he did.

Obviously Hunter's lawyers feel they have a pretty good darned case, and if they do, any supposed evidence becomes "Fruit of the poisonous tree".

 

[Nostra]

only if he obtained the data legally, which it is not clear that he did.

Obviously Hunter's lawyers feel they have a pretty good darned case, and if they do, any supposed evidence becomes "Fruit of the poisonous tree".

No, it is crystal clear. It became his when Crackhead abandoned it.

If his lawyers feel the have a pretty darned good case why have they not filed it, Simp?

Instead they tried to get Daddy's DOJ to go after people.

Crackhead has squat.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

No, it is crystal clear. It became his when Crackhead abandoned it.

If his lawyers feel the have a pretty darned good case why have they not filed it, Simp?

Instead they tried to get Daddy's DOJ to go after people.

Crackhead has squat.

Everyone claiming that he did not own the laptop as well as the contents can seem to provide a link to a law which proves it.

The Delaware Law which was posted defines "abandoned property," and the laptop did not meet that definition. However, the contract terms specifically state that the laptop can be treated as abandoned property, and Crackhead agreed in writing.

The lawyers are simply attempting to intimidate. They have no case. Mac dude does not seem easily intimidated. We need more like him.

Hunter's lawyer's claims of violation of law start on page 14 (of the PDF, 2nd document in the PDF) here...

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

Claims are for unauthorized access, which is obviously false.

Another claim is related to stolen property, which is also BS.

The final claim is about making public "restricted information." Again, Mac Dude's access to the information was not restricted; it was granted by Hunter. It is also about using the info in a malicious manner (threaten, intimidate, or facilitate the commission of a crime of violence against that covered person), but Mac Dude was just getting the truth out.

 

[JoeB131]

Everyone claiming that he did not own the laptop as well as the contents can seem to provide a link to a law which proves it.

The Delaware Law which was posted defines "abandoned property," and the laptop did not meet that definition. However, the contract terms specifically state that the laptop can be treated as abandoned property, and Crackhead agreed in writing.

The lawyers are simply attempting to intimidate. They have no case. Mac dude does not seem easily intimidated. We need more like him.

Actually, they have a pretty good case. The minute that Mac Issaac gave that data to a third party, he was in violation of the law. He was guilty of Data theft.

The final claim is about making public "restricted information." Again, Mac Dude's access to the information was not restricted; it was granted by Hunter. It is also about using the info in a malicious manner (threaten, intimidate, or facilitate the commission of a crime of violence against that covered person), but Mac Dude was just getting the truth out.

Quite the contrary, there is no right for a computer repairman to access and disseminate your private information. Otherwise they could go to town abusing your personal information.

Hunter Biden’s Laptop, Privacy and Computer Technicians

A recent study conducted by the University of Guelph in Ontario looked at privacy and the practices of computer repair shops. You know, like the repair

securityboulevard.com

The idea here is to get Mac Isaac on record as stating that he started snooping through parts of the lap top before the one year deadline, which he has already admitted he did. That pretty much invalidates all the "evidence' he collected.

 

[hadit]

Hey, look, you fart on command. Let's see if you'll do it again. Quit Schiffing and produce your evidence. You know, the numbers.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Actually, they have a pretty good case. The minute that Mac Issaac gave that data to a third party, he was in violation of the law. He was guilty of Data theft.



Quite the contrary, there is no right for a computer repairman to access and disseminate your private information. Otherwise they could go to town abusing your personal information.

Hunter Biden’s Laptop, Privacy and Computer Technicians

A recent study conducted by the University of Guelph in Ontario looked at privacy and the practices of computer repair shops. You know, like the repair

securityboulevard.com

The idea here is to get Mac Isaac on record as stating that he started snooping through parts of the lap top before the one year deadline, which he has already admitted he did. That pretty much invalidates all the "evidence' he collected.

LOL, your proof is an opinion article which has one weak argument.

I posted Hunter's Lawyer's claims, and briefly explained why they likely are without merit.

The link you posted quotes Delaware law which states...

"any person who holds, stores, safekeeps or otherwise is left with possession of any abandoned personal property … shall be vested with complete and absolute title to said abandoned personal property and shall have all right to sell, alienate, gift or otherwise dispose of the said abandoned personal property…"

So that's what the law says. They then go on to argue that the hard drive contents are not tangible property. Well, we'll se about that, but the contents of the hard drive, if printed out, would be tangible - documents and photos. In its current state, it is still matter - magnetized disks or a bunch of transistors in a semiconductor.

Your link claims that printed photos and documents should be treated differently than a hard drive full of photos and documents. That does not make sense to me.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]

 

[citygator]

So you can’t define fair share.

Got it.

I did. You can’t read.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[hadit]

Oh, hey, I noticed that you accidentally left the rest of my post off when you responded to it. I know you would hate for people to think you were so careless as to do that, so for your convenience I've included it below. Please do be more careful to not look quite so foolish when you're wondering around the house like Joe Biden, trying to remember which way the pants go. Anyway, to save you further embarrassment, here's the entire quote that apparently confused you:

"Yes, the tax code that had all those loopholes and deductions Reagan got rid of. Yes, let's raise the rates back up to the levels no one paid and re-institute all the deductions. I wouldn't mind deducting the interest on credit card debt."