Posted on Jul 26, 2023
Man sentenced to 5 years in ‘We Build the Wall’ fraud case
301
4
9
1
1
0
"Prosecutors said he and others stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from a fundraising effort to raise money for a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border."
Man sentenced to 5 years in ‘We Build the Wall’ fraud case
Posted from nbcnews.comPosted in these groups: 
Fraud
Punishment
Fraud Punishment
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 1
0
0
0
Meanwhile Hunter gets no time in MILLIONS of dollars if tax fraud.
Just sayin'
Just sayin'
(0)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
MSG Stan Hutchison Big difference and you are smart enough to know that. Vindman testified to hearsay and opinion.
Shapley testified to FACT (and yes, some opinion).
Vindman's opinion was personal (I think it was improper based on my interpretation of the rules), Shapley's was professional (I think it was wrong to not do these things based on the countless times we have done these things effectively in the past. I think there was hinky stuff going on based on the significant deviation from the multiple similar cases I have worked).
Ultimately, Vindman was unable to testify as to a single broken rule, which is what his allegation was.
Shapley testified to MULTIPLE deviations from the norm and MULTIPLE discrepancies between DoJ testimony to Congress and DoJ statements to Shapley and the team - which is what his allegations were.
Vindman said "I think he broke rules." Shapley said "Here is evidence Garland lied. Here is evidence this case was treated differently than any other case I have ever been involved in." And then Ziegler came on the scene and corroborated almost everything Shapley said.
A little bit of difference in credibility.
Shapley testified to FACT (and yes, some opinion).
Vindman's opinion was personal (I think it was improper based on my interpretation of the rules), Shapley's was professional (I think it was wrong to not do these things based on the countless times we have done these things effectively in the past. I think there was hinky stuff going on based on the significant deviation from the multiple similar cases I have worked).
Ultimately, Vindman was unable to testify as to a single broken rule, which is what his allegation was.
Shapley testified to MULTIPLE deviations from the norm and MULTIPLE discrepancies between DoJ testimony to Congress and DoJ statements to Shapley and the team - which is what his allegations were.
Vindman said "I think he broke rules." Shapley said "Here is evidence Garland lied. Here is evidence this case was treated differently than any other case I have ever been involved in." And then Ziegler came on the scene and corroborated almost everything Shapley said.
A little bit of difference in credibility.
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
MSG Stan Hutchison You disagree? Please show me any point in Vindman's testimony where he had personal knowledge of a specific rule that had been broken and how it was broken.
I will do the same for Shapley.
"Based on this experience... the USAO and DoJ handling of the Hunter Biden tax investigation was very different from any other case in my 14 years at the IRS."
"Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Wolf told us prosecutors had decided to conceal some evidence from the investigators."
"Yet, despite agreeing that there was probable cause, AUSA Wolf cited the "optics" of executing a search warrant at President Biden's residence as the deciding factor for not allowing it to be completed."
"After U.S. Attorney for DC, Matthew Graves, appointed by President Biden, refused to bring charges, I watched Mr. Weiss tell a room full of senior FBI and IRS investigators on October 7, 2022 that he was 'not the deciding person on whether charges are filed.' "
(This was AFTER Merrick Garland told Congress Weiss had full authority. And before Garland TESTIFIED in March 2023 the same.)
Just a few examples. That's just from the first third of Shapley's testimony. There are plenty more.
And Shapley has separately provided e-mails and other documents corroborating his testimony. Including corroboration from others that the treatment of this case was far beyond the norm.
Shapley is a credible witness who brought credible allegations and backed them up with evidence AND corroboration.
Vindman? Not so much. But I will be happy for you to show me different.
I will do the same for Shapley.
"Based on this experience... the USAO and DoJ handling of the Hunter Biden tax investigation was very different from any other case in my 14 years at the IRS."
"Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Wolf told us prosecutors had decided to conceal some evidence from the investigators."
"Yet, despite agreeing that there was probable cause, AUSA Wolf cited the "optics" of executing a search warrant at President Biden's residence as the deciding factor for not allowing it to be completed."
"After U.S. Attorney for DC, Matthew Graves, appointed by President Biden, refused to bring charges, I watched Mr. Weiss tell a room full of senior FBI and IRS investigators on October 7, 2022 that he was 'not the deciding person on whether charges are filed.' "
(This was AFTER Merrick Garland told Congress Weiss had full authority. And before Garland TESTIFIED in March 2023 the same.)
Just a few examples. That's just from the first third of Shapley's testimony. There are plenty more.
And Shapley has separately provided e-mails and other documents corroborating his testimony. Including corroboration from others that the treatment of this case was far beyond the norm.
Shapley is a credible witness who brought credible allegations and backed them up with evidence AND corroboration.
Vindman? Not so much. But I will be happy for you to show me different.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google