Who are the IRS whistleblowers?

[Comshaw]

It’s pretty clear Hunter Biden is not getting the same treatment as ordinary taxpayers. Two highly credible whistleblowers have testified under oath how the DOJ stonewalled and obstructed the IRS investigation every step of the way.

Catherine Herridge of CBS News with the latest report:

Who are the Hunter Biden IRS whistleblowers? Joseph Ziegler, Gary Shapley testify at investigation hearings​

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hunter-biden-irs-whistleblowers-joseph-ziegler-gary-shapley/

Do DOJ officials “often” interfere with IRS investigations? Do they tip off the subject of IRS investigations to planned searches and questioning? Do they withhold relevant evidence such as the Form 1023 from investigators? Do they prohibit questions that might reflect negatively on POTUS? According to two veteran IRS agents, the answer is no.

I'm good with whistleblowers IF there is corroborating evidence that their testimony is truthful and valid. Is there? Has anything other than voiced testimony been offered to support the allegations? If not why not? Every question you posed in the second post above is based solely on the testimony of the two whistleblowers. Did they offer ANYTHING to substantiate their accusations? Anything at all other than their say so? Any written, recorded or other evidence? After the debacle these hearings have been (like a whistleblower they were going to call going on the lam because they are a spy) I am disinclined to believe an accusation solely on the testimony of a "whistleblower".

And let's get this clear, the form 1023 isn't "evidence" of any wrongdoing. It is used to document allegations and investigatable questions that MIGHT lead to evidence. EVERYTHING on the form is only a lead to be investigated, nothing more. Which it was and according to the DOJ lead to nothing. So to be holding it up as evidence of Hunter's nefarious dealing is both disingenuous and stupid. OR the committee is so desperate for something, anything to point at they are trying to warp it into something it isn't.

The committee has been in existence for what, 2 years? And they have produced how much verifiable evidence against Hunter?

yeah


Comshaw

 

[HisArpy]

I'm good with whistleblowers IF there is corroborating evidence that their testimony is truthful and valid. Is there? Has anything other than voiced testimony been offered to support the allegations? If not why not? Every question you posed in the second post above is based solely on the testimony of the two whistleblowers. Did they offer ANYTHING to substantiate their accusations? Anything at all other than their say so? Any written, recorded or other evidence? After the debacle these hearings have been (like a whistleblower they were going to call going on the lam because they are a spy) I am disinclined to believe an accusation solely on the testimony of a "whistleblower".

And let's get this clear, the form 1023 isn't "evidence" of any wrongdoing. It is used to document allegations and investigatable questions that MIGHT lead to evidence. EVERYTHING on the form is only a lead to be investigated, nothing more. Which it was and according to the DOJ lead to nothing. So to be holding it up as evidence of Hunter's nefarious dealing is both disingenuous and stupid. OR the committee is so desperate for something, anything to point at they are trying to warp it into something it isn't.

The committee has been in existence for what, 2 years? And they have produced how much verifiable evidence against Hunter?

yeah


Comshaw

Apologist much?

Or are you just not aware of Hunter's laptop? I mean I can see how that might have escaped your notice, it not really being reported on by the media or anything...

And of course that Hunter has pled guilty to the charges in his sweetheart deal isn't really mainstream news so I can see how you might not be aware of that either.

Then there's the video of old Joe himself bragging and gloating about how he got the Ukraine prosecutor fired via a quid pro quo deal that almost no one has seen. It's totally understandable that you're not aware of it.

So yeah, the testimony of all of Hunter's business partners is probably just sour grapes that Hunter got all the money from his foreign business deals. The shell companies are probably just figments of someone's overactive imagination and the various other family members' tax returns which declared the money payouts are all fabricated or something equally as nefarious and were likely done by secret MAGA moles in the IRS.

To be truthful, I can understand your skepticism. There hasn't been one shred of actual evidence implicating Hunter, let alone Joe, that anything shady as shit is going on. All we have is just a bunch of unsubstantiated claims with nothing to back them up at all.

 

[Rotadom]

You're right. Nobody is waiting for that.

 

[Rotadom]

It’s pretty clear Hunter Biden is not getting the same treatment as ordinary taxpayers. Two highly credible whistleblowers have testified under oath how the DOJ stonewalled and obstructed the IRS investigation every step of the way.

Catherine Herridge of CBS News with the latest report:

Who are the Hunter Biden IRS whistleblowers? Joseph Ziegler, Gary Shapley testify at investigation hearings​

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hunter-biden-irs-whistleblowers-joseph-ziegler-gary-shapley/

 

[Rightguide]

​

​

​

It’s pretty clear Hunter Biden is not getting the same treatment as ordinary taxpayers. Two highly credible whistleblowers have testified under oath how the DOJ stonewalled and obstructed the IRS investigation every step of the way.

Catherine Herridge of CBS News with the latest report:

Who are the Hunter Biden IRS whistleblowers? Joseph Ziegler, Gary Shapley testify at investigation hearings​

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hunter-biden-irs-whistleblowers-joseph-ziegler-gary-shapley/

Ziegler was a gay Democrat. I wonder what his future looks like in the party after yesterday as telling the truth violates a core principle of the party.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

I'm good with whistleblowers IF there is corroborating evidence that their testimony is truthful and valid. Is there? Has anything other than voiced testimony been offered to support the allegations? If not why not? Every question you posed in the second post above is based solely on the testimony of the two whistleblowers. Did they offer ANYTHING to substantiate their accusations? Anything at all other than their say so? Any written, recorded or other evidence? After the debacle these hearings have been (like a whistleblower they were going to call going on the lam because they are a spy) I am disinclined to believe an accusation solely on the testimony of a "whistleblower".

And let's get this clear, the form 1023 isn't "evidence" of any wrongdoing. It is used to document allegations and investigatable questions that MIGHT lead to evidence. EVERYTHING on the form is only a lead to be investigated, nothing more. Which it was and according to the DOJ lead to nothing. So to be holding it up as evidence of Hunter's nefarious dealing is both disingenuous and stupid. OR the committee is so desperate for something, anything to point at they are trying to warp it into something it isn't.

The committee has been in existence for what, 2 years? And they have produced how much verifiable evidence against Hunter?

yeah


Comshaw

Actually yes, there is an abundance of corroborating evidence for all allegations, including the tip off, the warrant request that was not granted, the statement Weiss made 10/21 about his hands being tied, the IRS recommended charges the US Atty Leslie Wolf said she agreed with. There are written records, witnesses and at the 10/21 meeting, group emails, corroborating reports on key allegations from an FBI agent, even a NYT story. The evidence is so solid that Hunter’s lawyers and DOJ officials are not even denying any of it. They’re complaining about the transcripts from the whistleblower testimonies being released to the public, some are trying to discredit the whistleblowers by accusing them of being GOP hacks (Ziegler is a Democrat), some are arguing this kind of shit is normal and ok, and yesterday there was even an objection raised about GOP use of the term “two tiered system of justice.” Apparently that term is only allowable in reference to systemic racism.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

I'm good with whistleblowers IF there is corroborating evidence that their testimony is truthful and valid. Is there? Has anything other than voiced testimony been offered to support the allegations? If not why not? Every question you posed in the second post above is based solely on the testimony of the two whistleblowers. Did they offer ANYTHING to substantiate their accusations? Anything at all other than their say so? Any written, recorded or other evidence? After the debacle these hearings have been (like a whistleblower they were going to call going on the lam because they are a spy) I am disinclined to believe an accusation solely on the testimony of a "whistleblower".

And let's get this clear, the form 1023 isn't "evidence" of any wrongdoing. It is used to document allegations and investigatable questions that MIGHT lead to evidence. EVERYTHING on the form is only a lead to be investigated, nothing more. Which it was and according to the DOJ lead to nothing. So to be holding it up as evidence of Hunter's nefarious dealing is both disingenuous and stupid. OR the committee is so desperate for something, anything to point at they are trying to warp it into something it isn't.

The committee has been in existence for what, 2 years? And they have produced how much verifiable evidence against Hunter?

yeah


Comshaw

Forgot to add that I agree with your point about the form 1023 by itself not being evidence, but it absolutely was something IRS investigators should have had access to and authorization to investigate where it might lead.

 

[Comshaw]

Forgot to add that I agree with your point about the form 1023 by itself not being evidence, but it absolutely was something IRS investigators should have had access to and authorization to investigate where it might lead.

It was a DOJ form. The DOJ investigated it and found nothing of consequence. Why would they pass it over to the IRS? Of course the argument can be made that those who did the investigation for the DOJ were biased and ignored some things. But there is no evidence of that other than the word of the "whistleblowers" so the same argument can be made legitimately against them. That's where concrete evidence as opposed to opinions comes in.

Comshaw

 

[Comshaw]

Actually yes, there is an abundance of corroborating evidence for all allegations, including the tip off, the warrant request that was not granted, the statement Weiss made 10/21 about his hands being tied, the IRS recommended charges the US Atty Leslie Wolf said she agreed with. There are written records, witnesses and at the 10/21 meeting, group emails, corroborating reports on key allegations from an FBI agent, even a NYT story. The evidence is so solid that Hunter’s lawyers and DOJ officials are not even denying any of it. They’re complaining about the transcripts from the whistleblower testimonies being released to the public, some are trying to discredit the whistleblowers by accusing them of being GOP hacks (Ziegler is a Democrat), some are arguing this kind of shit is normal and ok, and yesterday there was even an objection raised about GOP use of the term “two tiered system of justice.” Apparently that term is only allowable in reference to systemic racism.

The warrant request not granted was because there was nothing, in the opinion of the leaders, to allow one. As far as Weiss statement, he has explained what he meant and refuted it (link below).

There are written records, witnesses and at the 10/21 meeting, group emails, corroborating reports on key allegations from an FBI agent, even a NYT story.

Care to link me to a page that proves ANY of those?

I could go on and shoot down every instance you insist is true, but I don't feel like spending the time. It should say much that one of your first points I proved to be false.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/10/poli...s-whistleblower-claim-hunter-biden/index.html

Comshaw

 

[Lazaran]

•
The RWCJ “members” version of “Five Eyes” - “Five Is”:

Ignorant Idiotic Imbeciles Investigating Imaginary Improprieties. (And no, the 6th “I” was not a mistake)



In related news: The IRS was obviously “slow walking” a certain orange POS’s “audit”, but I don’t remember the RWCJ “members” “Five Is” showing the same concern.



And NEWSFLASH!!! for “Right “guide”: The left wing of the Democratic Party, which obviously includes gay people, does NOT like President Biden.



Also: So now the RWCJ “members” are fully accepting the testimony of a person who the RWCJ “members” have previously insisted is suffering from a mental illness???



RWCJ “members”

 

[Comshaw]

To the point I made, here's a video of the whistleblowers testifying. Starting at 1:04 you will hear the first one use terms like "it appeared to me" and "I still think", both are OPINIONS NOT facts or concrete evidence. He also complains that the prosecutor ignored his team's recommendations to charge Hunter with felonies and misdemeanors but admits he does not know why. Perhaps because the prosecutor didn't see enough evidence to charge Hunter?
The second one at 2:50 complains about not being allowed to investigate more on the What's app messages, but admits he doesn't know why. Perhaps because the prosecutor saw there wasn't enough reason to investigate? I'd assume they don't like wasting time and money on irrelevant investigations.

At 4:44 the commentator admits that there is no smoking gun.

It appears neither one of these guys are credible nor do they have any kind of real evidence for their allegations.

Comshaw

 

[Lazaran]

To the point I made, here's a video of the whistleblowers testifying. Starting at 1:04 you will hear the first one use terms like "it appeared to me" and "I still think", both are OPINIONS NOT facts or concrete evidence. He also complains that the prosecutor ignored his team's recommendations to charge Hunter with felonies and misdemeanors but admits he does not know why. Perhaps because the prosecutor didn't see enough evidence to charge Hunter?
The second one at 2:50 complains about not being allowed to investigate more on the What's app messages, but admits he doesn't know why. Perhaps because the prosecutor saw there wasn't enough reason to investigate? I'd assume they don't like wasting time and money on irrelevant investigations.

At 4:44 the commentator admits that there is no smoking gun.

It appears neither one of these guys are credible nor do they have any kind of real evidence for their allegations.

Comshaw

•
The RWCJ “members” know that ^is true.

It’s really all about gaslighting, and the smearing of President Biden through Hunter’s various indiscretions.

See also: “BENGHAZZI!!!”, and “HILLARY’S E-MAILS!!!”

They will keep this going through the next election and beyond, despite it being a nothing burger.

The truly concerning bit, is that they are using this charade to lay the groundwork for an authoritarian capture operation IF the rapey, racist, corrupt orange traitor (or another “republican “) somehow gets elected in 2024.

*nods*

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Ziegler was a gay Democrat.

This matters why?

Rhetorical question, by the way. You can't answer that which you have no answer for. As you were, Scat-Man.

 

[Lazaran]

This matters why?

Rhetorical question, by the way. You can't answer that which you have no answer for. As you were, Scat-Man.

•
“Right”guide and the other RWCJ “members”:

“Gay “Democrats “ can’t possibly have an ax to grind with President Biden.”

Also “Right”guide and the other RWCJ members:

“Gay “Democrats” and other left leaning “Democrats” disapprove of President Biden’s policies.”

Also “Right”guide and the other RWCJ “members”:

“Gay people have a mental illness and should not be listened to.”



“Right”guide

 

[Rotadom]

This matters why?

Rhetorical question, by the way. You can't answer that which you have no answer for. As you were, Scat-Man.

Is he no longer gay? Or a Dem? Did my dude go straight and Republican?

 

[DeluxAuto]

 

[HisArpy]

To the point I made, here's a video of the whistleblowers testifying. Starting at 1:04 you will hear the first one use terms like "it appeared to me" and "I still think", both are OPINIONS NOT facts or concrete evidence. He also complains that the prosecutor ignored his team's recommendations to charge Hunter with felonies and misdemeanors but admits he does not know why. Perhaps because the prosecutor didn't see enough evidence to charge Hunter?
The second one at 2:50 complains about not being allowed to investigate more on the What's app messages, but admits he doesn't know why. Perhaps because the prosecutor saw there wasn't enough reason to investigate? I'd assume they don't like wasting time and money on irrelevant investigations.

At 4:44 the commentator admits that there is no smoking gun.

It appears neither one of these guys are credible nor do they have any kind of real evidence for their allegations.

Comshaw

This is the worst sort of denialism.

They whistleblowers are investigators. It's their job to examine evidence and see if there's anything in it to lead them to more clues and evidence. For them to say "I was led to believe..." and "It appeared to me..." is them articulating their mental processes. To try and use how they were thinking in order to say the actual evidence which they were examining never existed is nothing short of ridiculous.

ALL of us have done dumb things. For your closest friends to say "you know, I thought when you did that..." when discussing some of the dumb things you did doesn't make those dumb things disappear and not exist. It doesn't mean you never did something dumb. And it certainly doesn't make your friends into liars.

Yet this is EXACTLY what you're trying to do here.

 

[dkovic77]

The warrant request not granted was because there was nothing, in the opinion of the leaders, to allow one. As far as Weiss statement, he has explained what he meant and refuted it (link below).

Care to link me to a page that proves ANY of those?

I could go on and shoot down every instance you insist is true, but I don't feel like spending the time. It should say much that one of your first points I proved to be false.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/10/poli...s-whistleblower-claim-hunter-biden/index.html

Comshaw

Shocker.. nothing from the desk of “I have all the evidence” and then tumbleweeds.

So great at providing “sources” that do nothing but ask more questions… and just those questions are no sufficient evidence.

Maybe we do an over/under on when the next fun link on this topic from our “sir got nothing” will surface. I’m sure he was so happy when that DOJ form was out there.. finally! Evidence! Oh wait, it’s not.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1682061745840349185

 

[DeluxAuto]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1682061745840349185

Now President Joe Biden will never be President

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

The FBI is furious Chuck Grassley released an internal document that makes unverified claims about Hunter and Joe Biden accepting bribes​

A paid “Confidential Human Source” claims the Bidens took bribes. FBI kept it from IRS investigators and fought hard to keep it from Congress. Dems and media dismisses the credibility of the CHS and insist it’s a nothing burger. FBI is furious the nothing burger has been made public.

https://www.businessinsider.com/fbi...ent-unverified-claims-joe-hunter-biden-2023-7

 

[Lazaran]

•
Sanitation engineers take trash away.

Garbage individuals like BabyBoobs deliver it.



BabyBoobs

 

[icanhelp1]

Do DOJ officials “often” interfere with IRS investigations? Do they tip off the subject of IRS investigations to planned searches and questioning? Do they withhold relevant evidence such as the Form 1023 from investigators? Do they prohibit questions that might reflect negatively on POTUS? According to two veteran IRS agents, the answer is no.

Trump was 100% within his purview to initiate an investigation of Burisma and Hunter Biden and got impeached by the congressional deep state ‘Biden sycophants’. I believe some within the Trump administration was aware of that 1023 and had to keep it to themselves.Our upper echelons of the justice department is so corrupt I don’t believe we can ever recover in our life time. It’s beyond believable what’s going on within our government walls. How a 1023 with such damning evidence disappeared into a black hole is beyond belief. I watched the congressional hearing and democrats demonstrated how incapable they are as an objective body. Trump and racism was their contribution, sick and sad.

 

[icanhelp1]

The FBI is furious Chuck Grassley released an internal document that makes unverified claims about Hunter and Joe Biden accepting bribes​

A paid “Confidential Human Source” claims the Bidens took bribes. FBI kept it from IRS investigators and fought hard to keep it from Congress. Dems and media dismisses the credibility of the CHS and insist it’s a nothing burger. FBI is furious the nothing burger has been made public.

https://www.businessinsider.com/fbi...ent-unverified-claims-joe-hunter-biden-2023-7

The hearing was about Trump and racism! WTF!!!

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

This is the worst sort of denialism.

They whistleblowers are investigators. It's their job to examine evidence and see if there's anything in it to lead them to more clues and evidence. For them to say "I was led to believe..." and "It appeared to me..." is them articulating their mental processes. To try and use how they were thinking in order to say the actual evidence which they were examining never existed is nothing short of ridiculous.

ALL of us have done dumb things. For your closest friends to say "you know, I thought when you did that..." when discussing some of the dumb things you did doesn't make those dumb things disappear and not exist. It doesn't mean you never did something dumb. And it certainly doesn't make your friends into liars.

Yet this is EXACTLY what you're trying to do here.

Definitely denialism. Sworn testimony under oath, corroborated by other witnesses, including a second IRS investigator who testified under oath and an active FBI agent. A non-denial denial of Shapley’s testimony by prosecutor Weiss about what he told six people in a meeting. A concerted effort by the FBI to conceal from IRS investigators and congressional committees a form FD1023 that contained serious allegations by a long time paid FBI informant regarding the Biden family.

The outcome of all this is already playing out in the court of public opinion. A majority of Americans believe a two tiered system of justice is in play, motivated by politics. Unlike 2020, both probable presidential candidates are tainted with public perceptions of corruption. Very few voters are happy with the choices they’ll probably have.