Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gab TV, GETTR, Truth Social
One of the more bizarre legal twists to the Hunter Biden’s “Laptop from Hell” saga comes from Biden’s attorneys in the answer to John Mac Issacs’ defamation lawsuit against Hunter Biden, and Biden’s counterclaim.
The timing is interesting, especially in light of the Congressional Committee on Oversight and Accountability discovering a $3 million wire transfer that originated from a Chinese energy company in March 2017 to a lawyer, who then dispersed $1.3 million to Biden family members and a Biden family associate.
Vice-President Biden’s tenure ended in January 2017.
Biden’s attorneys have filed their client’s answer and counterclaims and have alleged invasion of privacy in response to a defamation lawsuit brought by the Delaware-based computer repairman John Mac Isaacs, who they claim triggered the infamous laptop controversy in mid-October 2020.
"[Hunter] Biden had more than a reasonable expectation of privacy that any data that he created or maintained ... would not be accessed, copied, disseminated, or posted on the Internet for others to use against him or his family or for the public to view," reads Biden’s pleading.
Attorneys for Hunter Biden have challenged Mac Isaac's claim that the laptop and an external hard drive became Mac Isaac’s property after Hunter Biden failed to retrieve them within 90 days of leaving them at the Mac Issac’s computer repair shop.
"Contrary to Mac Isaac's Repair Authorization form, Delaware law provides that tangible personal property is deemed abandoned" when the rightful owner has failed to "assert or declare property rights to the property for a period of 1 year," reads the pleading.
Hunter Biden is seeking a jury trial and unspecified "compensatory damages" from Mac Isaac.
Although it escalates the every-twisting revelations about Hunter Biden’s scandalous drug-fueled sexual habits and the Biden family’s communications, it may indeed backfire and be viewed as an attempt to retaliate for Mac Isaac’s original case.
By raising the notion of privacy, it may elevate the question that Hunter Biden invaded others’ privacy by filming them.
If Hunter Biden had the expectation of privacy then why would he think he had the right to film others, including but not limited to his late brother’s widow, whom Hunter had an intimate relationship with after his brother’s death?
The counterclaim also raises the question about any internet postings or shares Hunter may have exposed those with whom he had intimate relationships.
Recently, Hunter Biden’s expanded legal team has changed.
Today, Abbe Lowell, a well-known criminal defense attorney has sent a batch of cease-and-desist letters on Hunter Biden's behalf, including Mac Isaacs.
How could all of this been avoided?
Hunter Biden could have paid the $85 bill to Mac Isaac and picked up the laptop and hard drive from hell. He could have not filmed himself nude and with other women he sexually romped.
Instead, he did what his father is known to have done in Delaware. He refused to pay a bill.
Joe Biden one time refused to pay a bill for the installation of his residential security system. When the Secret Service wanted to upgrade it, Joe Biden was forced to pay the outstanding bill years past to even get the man to co-operate with the Secret Service.
Subscribe to our evening newsletter to stay informed during these challenging times!!
And the question remains, with all this legal representation from high profile litigants, who is paying for said legal services?
Thanks for bringing up how Biden's privacy claim could and Should backfire. I hope it does. Our unequal system of justice has gone too far in favor of elites (Bidens) and against the people (Mac Isaac). CDM continues to wake up the public with excellent reporting. Thank you.