Director Of National Intelligence Biden Laptop Emails Not Russian Disinformation Campaign

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Annee

If the hard drives were not Hunter’s. The lawyer would file a cease and desist letter, and sue for slander.

The hard drives are Hunter’s.

A lawyer is supposed to accept hearsay?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Annee

If the hard drives were not Hunter’s. The lawyer would file a cease and desist letter, and sue for slander.

The hard drives are Hunter’s.

A lawyer is supposed to accept hearsay?

Cease and desist

A cease and desist letter is a document sent to an individual or business to stop allegedly illegal activity ("cease") and not to restart it ("desist"). The letter may warn that if the recipient does not discontinue specified conduct, or take certain actions, by deadlines set in the letter, that party may be sued.[1][2] When issued by a public authority, a cease and desist letter, being "a warning of impending judicial enforcement",[3] is most appropriately called a "cease and desist order".

en.m.wikipedia.org...

I have no idea what you are implying. The cease and desist would be used to stop slander by the shop owed against Hunter if the shop owner was voicing lies about Hunter. So what is on the Hard Drives must be Hunter’s, and the Shop owner is not lying about their content.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Annee

If the hard drives were not Hunter’s. The lawyer would file a cease and desist letter, and sue for slander.

The hard drives are Hunter’s.

A lawyer is supposed to accept hearsay?

Cease and desist

A cease and desist letter is a document sent to an individual or business to stop allegedly illegal activity ("cease") and not to restart it ("desist"). The letter may warn that if the recipient does not discontinue specified conduct, or take certain actions, by deadlines set in the letter, that party may be sued.[1][2] When issued by a public authority, a cease and desist letter, being "a warning of impending judicial enforcement",[3] is most appropriately called a "cease and desist order".

en.m.wikipedia.org...

I have no idea what you are implying. The cease and desist would be used to stop slander by the shop owed against Hunter if the shop owner was voicing lies about Hunter. So what is on the Hard Drives must be Hunter’s, and the Shop owner is not lying about their content.

This has gone way beyond the shop owner.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: Annee

Not if we were trying to deny they are ours. If i was his lawyer i wouldnt give them creedence,which requesting them just did.

I find that dishonest.

As a lawyer you’d want all info related to your client.

In no way is that indicating any form of guilt.

You’ve been watching too much court TV

Annee, as a lawyer who works in the same type of firm as Hunter Biden's lawyer would (colloquially termed "big law") you have to understand a lawyer's professional obligations to their client to understand what happened here when Hunter's lawyer asked for the laptop back.

You cannot, EVER, act without instructions from your client. Doing so can lead to disciplinary actions from the bar, up to and including disbarment.

So assuming Hunter's big law lawyer understood his professional obligations, he didn't ask for the laptop back without Hunter's instructions. Granted I haven't seen the physical request and whether he asked for "the laptop" or to "get the laptop back" (news stories suggest the latter).

Either way, the implication is that Hunter and Hunter's lawyer (acting on instructions from Hunter) felt and acted as if they had some property right to the hardware.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Annee

If the hard drives were not Hunter’s. The lawyer would file a cease and desist letter, and sue for slander.

The hard drives are Hunter’s.

A lawyer is supposed to accept hearsay?

Cease and desist

A cease and desist letter is a document sent to an individual or business to stop allegedly illegal activity ("cease") and not to restart it ("desist"). The letter may warn that if the recipient does not discontinue specified conduct, or take certain actions, by deadlines set in the letter, that party may be sued.[1][2] When issued by a public authority, a cease and desist letter, being "a warning of impending judicial enforcement",[3] is most appropriately called a "cease and desist order".

en.m.wikipedia.org...

I have no idea what you are implying. The cease and desist would be used to stop slander by the shop owed against Hunter if the shop owner was voicing lies about Hunter. So what is on the Hard Drives must be Hunter’s, and the Shop owner is not lying about their content.

This has gone way beyond the shop owner.

Changing the subject. Your one of those.

A cease and desist letter could very easily have been sent to the New York Post who ran the information if it was a lie the hard drive was not Hunter’s, and the leaked information a lie. Part of that letter could be a demand for a retraction.

So where is a demand for a retraction if the news story was a lie.

a reply to: Annee

You're the one who brought up guilt.

The rest of us have been discussing the ownership of the laptops and the legitimacy of the information.

a reply to: Annee

If I was a running for president with the DNC behind me, I sure in hell would send an army of layers and use every legal trick if the ownership of the laptop was a blatant lie, and it was used as a pretext to spread falsehoods about my son.


So the laptop was Hunter’s at one point, and what is on it must be legitimate.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Annee

You're the one who brought up guilt.

The rest of us have been discussing the ownership of the laptops and the legitimacy of the information.

NO. Why do you seem angry?

I was responding to another poster.

So, are you a lawyer?

a reply to: jwlaffer

I think the problem is some people are trying to have it both ways. They are sitting on a knife edge of whether the laptop was ever Hunter's to begin with. Asking for it to be returned to Hunter implies it was his. But they want to claim it never was his.

Either it was his or it wasn't. Asking for it to be returned implies it was his but they don't want to say that because then it implies that the evidence is real.

No one has come out and denied the laptop was his, at least as far as I have seen. It's pretty simple. If Hunter wants to claim it isn't his he should ask for it to be turned over to the authorities so they can press charges against the shop owner or the New York Post or Rudy.

originally posted by: jwlaffer

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: Annee

Not if we were trying to deny they are ours. If i was his lawyer i wouldnt give them creedence,which requesting them just did.

I find that dishonest.

As a lawyer you’d want all info related to your client.

In no way is that indicating any form of guilt.

You’ve been watching too much court TV

Annee, as a lawyer who works in the same type of firm as Hunter Biden's lawyer would (colloquially termed "big law") you have to understand a lawyer's professional obligations to their client to understand what happened here when Hunter's lawyer asked for the laptop back.

You cannot, EVER, act without instructions from your client. Doing so can lead to disciplinary actions from the bar, up to and including disbarment.

So assuming Hunter's big law lawyer understood his professional obligations, he didn't ask for the laptop back without Hunter's instructions. Granted I haven't seen the physical request and whether he asked for "the laptop" or to "get the laptop back" (news stories suggest the latter).

Either way, the implication is that Hunter and Hunter's lawyer (acting on instructions from Hunter) felt and acted as if they had some property right to the hardware.

Thank you.

My logical-simplified position is — if this happened to me — I would request proof of some type.

And in requesting that — would not be any admission of guilt.

a reply to: Annee

Lol, not angry in the slightest; rather amused, in point of fact.

You do realize that this is an open message board wherein all posts are visible and unless you're PMing with another user, any and all posts you make in the open can be replied to by any member?

And my profession has no bearing on the current discussion.

a reply to: Annee

Requesting proof would be appropriate but asking for a laptop you claim was never yours isn't appropriate. You could obtain proof by requesting it be turned over to the authorities to be examined for tampering. Even if you acknowledge that it was yours, you could make the same request to prove that it was tampered with. You wouldn't need to possess it. You would actually want the authorities to possess it to show a chain of custody so that you could prove you didn't tamper with it.

originally posted by: Khaleesi
a reply to: Annee

Requesting proof would be appropriate but asking for a laptop you claim was never yours isn't appropriate. You could obtain proof by requesting it be turned over to the authorities to be examined for tampering. Even if you acknowledge that it was yours, you could make the same request to prove that it was tampered with. You wouldn't need to possess it. You would actually want the authorities to possess it to show a chain of custody so that you could prove you didn't tamper with it.

Is there legitimate facts of the lawyer’s request to return a/the laptop?

Or is this all speculation?

a reply to: Annee

Not quite sure what you are asking. Did the lawyer request the return of the laptop? That's what is being reported. As far a speculation of what a lawyer should do, others have already answered that question. I personally would not want to be in possession of the laptop even if it were mine. As I said, turn it over to the authorities. Never have any contact with it so if anything is tampered with, I could rightfully claim I couldn't have possibly been involved since I never had possession since taking it to the repair shop. Chain of evidence would back me up.

originally posted by: Khaleesi
a reply to: Annee

Not quite sure what you are asking. Did the lawyer request the return of the laptop? That's what is being reported.

Reported by whom?

I’m reading “allegedly”, “appear to”, etc.

a reply to: Annee

Anybody at this point that believes Schiffs Russian tale of blame, are deeply trapped within their own echo chamber.....I guess it's too emotional for them to break free.

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: Annee

Anybody at this point that believes Schiffs Russian tale of blame, are deeply trapped within their own echo chamber.....I guess it's too emotional for them to break free.

Oh, I agree.

People are definitely entrapped in their own wannabe dialogue — fueled by emotions.

The FBI and Department of Justice confirms that the contents of Hunter Biden's laptop is legitimate and they have that laptop in their possession.

mobile.twitter.com...

originally posted by: carewemust
The FBI and Department of Justice confirms that the contents of Hunter Biden's laptop is legitimate and they have that laptop in their possession.

mobile.twitter.com...

I just logged in to post this, is there a new thread?

This should have it's own thread, this is huge.

a reply to: burntheships

I think you should start one if proof is revealed. Right now, all we have are senior journalists saying that high-ranking people in the doj are confirming the existence and reality of Hunter Bidens laptop being legitimate.

We need to avoid being like the fake News New York Times, Washington Post and CNN.