China China China

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Thanks for non answer ?

Your welcome?

Because I doubt my town’s police chief should tell any suspects their under investigation, and seeing trumps track record with revenge , I can see why he didn’t tell him.

You may not have to tell a suspect he is under investigation, especially if he doesn't ask. If he is some foreign agent, you can lie to him. But if he is an American citizen who asks if he is under investigation, you cannot blatantly lie to him in order to entrap him. As well we have miranda rights. A legitimate and thorough investigation requires interrogation of the suspect who must be given Miranda warning, which, in itself, is an indication of possibly being investigated.

But, the relation between an FBI director and the President is on an entirely different plane than ordinary investigations.

The president is the chief executive of the federal government, and the Constitution vests all executive power in him. Everyone else who works in the executive branch (possibly excluding the VP) is a subordinate, delegated to exercise the president’s power at the president’s pleasure. The president is the superior of the attorney general, who in turn is the superior of the FBI director — the FBI is a component of the Justice Department.

An FBI director cannot realistically be fulfilling his duties of office if he lies to the President. If the President asks the director if he is under investigation, which Trump did, and the director lies, that is grounds for immediate dismissal, if not worse. One can ask, if it is a crime to lie to the FBI, and the President is in ultimate charge of the FBI, then could this statute apply?: The statute spells out this purpose in subsection 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a), which states:

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—

(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device[ , ] a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331),[11] imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both....

as for China I see it in the same light as Ivanka Trump by DC attorney general in inauguration investigation

What do to you see the Biden China angle in light of Professor Di's speech?

With several difference

The magical laptop and convenient Trump-supporting owner of a computer just happen to have Biden’s laptop who then He claimed the FBI later subpoenaed the laptop, which spurred him to turn it over to (for some reason) the lawyer of Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani? . The shop owner’s story about how the laptop was obtained changed repeatedly, as did Giuliani’s.

The laptop emails were not proven to be fake, nor were they denied. There is a sworn witness, Tony Bobulinski, a business associate in the emails matter, who confirms them.

No matter: Conservative media went hog-wild. Fox News has done hundreds of segments on the story — more than it has done on the coronavirus pandemic — and Trump made Hunter Biden and the unproven allegations of corruption a centerpiece of the final presidential debate. C&P

And as I said knowing they lost the election. And what re appears more Hunter stories , but the only legal story is in his home state about his Taxes , which ironically Trump refused to show America and who is still under investigation in the State of NY when he leaves office but we get but but Biden..

And Republicans have a historical habit of making outlandish claims and accusations 1st. Then spend months to years Trying to prove their accusation , the election being their most recent attempt,,, so forgive me if I don’t take the word of a Chinese professor seeing Mike Pompeo warns of Chinese infiltration in American schools... so this one is credible because he’s giving Dirt on Biden?

As for the other guy seems he has been embraced by the conservative media for the same reasons Dirt to keep the narrative going

The Professor is credible because his speech was an analysis given in China to inform Chinese scholars and bureaucrats, not meant for "conservative" propaganda. And it spoke glowingly about Trump's loss and Biden's win. It's no secret that the CCP wanted Trump to be defeated. And that the Bidens have huge financial interests in China. And that could well be used as leverage by China. And Greenwald's statements in his article were verified by links. And it's OK to just disbelieve because you don't like the source or think it's just a bunch of anti-Biden narrative, but it is not an actual "debunking" of the article, nor even a discussion of it. You have demonstrated over and over that you're not willing or able to discuss an idea if you can somehow claim the source is unreliable. Greenwald has proven his merit in reporting, especially from the Progressive perspective--so lumping him in with "conservative media" seems to be more head-in-sand denial than factually driven argument or opinion. Certainly, Professor Di is no republican nor does he have a desire to align with or preserve American conservative values.