Hunter Biden Tinfoil issues

[kramerica.inc]

The press in unison: "Really, you standing by the pack of lies you told us earlier?"

https://twitter.com/claytravis/status/1 ... mfE5ey8-Lw

"Grumble, grumble...Uhm...I think I refer you to White House Counsel..."

[old salt]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

[cradleandshoot]

The press in unison: "Really, you standing by the pack of lies you told us earlier?"

https://twitter.com/claytravis/status/1 ... mfE5ey8-Lw

"Grumble, grumble...Uhm...I think I refer you to White House Counsel..."

How in the hell did this incompetent idiot wind up being Bidens press secretary? The poor woman is so far out of her league it is embarrassing. Time for Joe to cut bait on this one. She looks like she needs to spend more time with her family.

[MDlaxfan76]

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/05 ... udi-arabia

Yup, Salty doesn't think these guys are dirty.

This thread is about Hunter. You feel a need to deflect and divert attention. If Garland so chooses he can release the hounds on Kushner anytime he so chooses. Then we can start a Jared Kushner tinfoil hat thread.

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.

I don't think there's a prosecution to be had, at least not based on what I've read, which is what I responded twice above.

How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

I've read the discussion and it doesn't matter who brought up Kushner first. My point was the topic was begining to gravitate more towards Kushner. Since you brought it up there appears to nothing to prosecute Kushner about. The whining and bellyaching is about his sweetheart deal that broke no laws that are known. Is there anyone on this forum who would turn their back on this same deal if it was offered to them?

Then don't claim that I'm the one changing the topic or that I want to "deflect and divert attention". I responded to what was being discussed, no change in topic.

And yeah, who on this thread could possibly be "offered" "this same deal". Pretty sure a bunch of us have a heck of a lot more investment and financial market experience than Jared, so, this ain't about the usual ways an investment manager is chosen.

So, yeah, pay off is pretty obvious.

HOWEVER, unless something is found that proves otherwise, not a prosecutable crime.
My hunch would be that they avoided anything that could prove otherwise.

Still dirty.

And if we want to play the what about game, definitely much more dirty than the Hunter situation, based on the known facts. But both have a yuck factor for sure. Neither excuses the other.

As I said in a previous post, can't Garland release the hounds or is that out of the question without probable cause? Kushners deal stinks to high heaven to me and I have zippo investment experience.

Do you mean green light an investigation by "hounds"?
Certainly not a prosecution...but even an investigation needs to be more than just what seems obvious as stinks. Gotta at least have a theory of the specific crime. ..and something to base that on other than supposition.

And while it sure feels like a payoff, Jared no longer had a government position...but yeah, feels like some poking around would be in order...sometimes that means the press...

That is why I inserted the phrase " probable cause" I find it hard to believe that with a little digging that some nefariousness would not come to the surface.

The digging is the challenge, unless with subpoenas.

[MDlaxfan76]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

[cradleandshoot]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

Well it was obvious the topic was gravitating more towards Kushner than it was Hunter. I also read on this forum of folks often times being castigated ( I like that word) for whataboutism. So the theme went from Hunter to whattaboutkushner...

[MDlaxfan76]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

Well it was obvious the topic was gravitating more towards Kushner than it was Hunter. I also read on this forum of folks often times being castigated ( I like that word) for whataboutism. So the theme went from Hunter to whattaboutkushner...

Sure, I just hadn't taken us there. (apparently 3 pages earlier).
My pushback was solely that you had the wrong target.
I was responding to Salty's comment, not changing the topic.

That said, I totally understand why the discussion had earlier turned there, given context of partisan inquiries about Hunter's supposed ethical lapses (not so supposed IMO) and how that reflects on Joe.

The partisan, hypocritical crappola is the issue being addressed.
If one is not willing to decry ethical issues that are directly comparable, indeed much larger and more obvious, then shut up about partisan attacks.

My opinion. Goes both ways.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

Had a lot of practice when he was “moderating”…..seem farcical in hindsight….I thought so at the time.

[PizzaSnake]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

Well it was obvious the topic was gravitating more towards Kushner than it was Hunter. I also read on this forum of folks often times being castigated ( I like that word) for whataboutism. So the theme went from Hunter to whattaboutkushner...

So prosecute them both.

Oh, that's right, in the land of the free and home of the brave, we don't actually have trials, we do plea deals. Look at the percentage of actual trials that occur. It's a penal servitude production line. Have to keep the serfs in line. Ever wonder why conviction results in almost total loss of civil rights? Prior to 1830, plea deals were illegal? And by 1885, more than 85% of cases involved plea deals? Now, who would stand to benefit from such a change? As always, qui bono.

https://www.harvard.com/book/pleading_out/

https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-revi ... ading-out/

https://www.acslaw.org/event/dan-canon-pleading-out/

And for real amusement, take a look at this little gem:

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/434/357/

It formalized the practice of threatening defendants with their life, if not liberty, in order to obtain an expeditious disposition of a case. Life imprisonment for passing a $80 dollar check because the defendant wouldn't accept a plea deal for 5 years. That's fcuked up beyond all recognition. Explain why what would have been addressed by a 5 year sentence suddenly required a life sentence? And then compare that to the mockery people like dRumpy make of this system because they are willing, and have the means, to challenge convenient plea deals and subject the prosecutions cases to careful legal scrutiny? Imagine if every case brought by a prosecutor involved the same attention to detail as that shown by Jack Smith? Think maybe some questionable cases brought by sloppy and racist police forces would be rejected?

The "justice" system is not what you might think it is. Oh, and this: over 75 percent of people on death row had refused plea deals. Now, given the incidence of false convictions being discovered and rectified, why might those people have not taken those plea deals?

Anyone who works within the legal system is complicit in some pretty fcuked up shite. Period. That or woefully ignorant as to the true nature of what it has become.

Just as a reminder boys and girls:

"“There’s a reason education SCUKS, and it’s the same reason that it will never, ever, ever be fixed. It’s never going to get any better, don’t look for it, be happy with what you’ve got.

Because the owners of this country don’t want that. I’m talking about the REAL owners, now. The REAL owners, the BIG WEALTHY business interests that control things and make all the important decisions — forget the politicians.


The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. YOU DON’T.

You have no choice. You have OWNERS.

They OWN YOU. They own EVERYTHING.

They own all the important land, they own and control the corporations; they’ve long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the State houses, the City Halls; they’ve got the judges in their back pockets, and they own all the big media companies so they control just about all the news and information you get to hear.

They gotcha by the BALLS.

They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying — lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want — they want MORE for themselves and less for everybody else.

But I’ll tell you what they don’t want. They DON’T want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They’re not interested in that, that doesn’t help them. That’s against their interests.

That’s right. They don’t want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they’re getting FCUKED by system that threw them overboard 30 heck’ years ago. They don’t want that.

You know what they want?

They want OBEDIENT WORKERS. OBEDIENT WORKERS. People who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork, and just dumb enough to passably accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime, and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it.

And now they’re comin’ for your SOCIAL SECURITY MONEY. They want your fcukin’ retirement money.

They want it BACK. So they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They’ll get it. They’ll get it ALL from you sooner or later — ‘cuz they OWN this heck’ place.

It’s a big CLUB. And YOU AIN’T IN IT.

You and I are NOT IN the big club. By the way, it’s the same big club they use to beat you over the head with all day long when they tell you what to believe."

[cradleandshoot]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

[old salt]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

Had a lot of practice when he was “moderating”…..seem farcical in hindsight….I thought so at the time.

...I didn't change the topic. 4 other users did. I did not chastise them. I responded, user to user.
Thread hijacks were tolerated on LP. They usually veered back to the topic, as they do here.

[SCLaxAttack]

Regarding all this thread hijacking talk, this is Old Salt's initial page 39 post along with all other posts before my comment on the House Oversight Committee ignoring one of the similar elephants (no pun intended) in the room that happen to be Republican.

My post isn't whataboutism at all, it was a comment regarding the legitimacy, and hypocrisy, of the House Oversight Committee. To date they haven't looked at anyone's potential bad behavior and grifting but Hunter's. If someone brings up the House Oversight Committee in a discussion, they're fair game and appropriate to the conversation.

Keep sucking in those conspiracy theories.

$10 million buys a lot of Biden family books.
Give us another rant about grifters.
Even the Wash Post is now publishing those conspiracy theories.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... y-members/

Opinion : Millions flowed to Biden family members. Don’t pretend it doesn’t matter.

By Jim Geraghty, Contributing columnist, May 18, 2023

Let’s assume that, as President Biden’s fans insist, there’s no evidence of lawbreaking in the deals that had foreign companies paying more than $10 million to Biden family members during and after Biden’s years as vice president.

And no doubt, the House Oversight Committee led by Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) has its own preconceived narrative that Biden is on the take from all kinds of shady characters. An indictment of bribery or corruption would require proof that, at some point while in office, Biden acted or influenced a U.S. government policy decision to benefit one of those companies, and the House Oversight Committee, so far, does not have that proof.

Yet we’re still left with a motley collection of odd and unsavory figures sending a lot of money through a lot of companies to a lot of members of the Biden family, with little explanation why. Comer contends that bank records confirm more than $10 million in payments, run through at least 20 businesses, mostly limited liability companies, to the president’s son Hunter Biden; the president’s brother, James Biden; James’s wife, Sara Jones Biden; Hallie Biden (widow of Joe Biden’s son Beau, who died in 2015); Hunter’s ex-wife, Kathleen Buhle; Hunter’s current wife, Melissa Cohen; and, as Comer noted, “three children of the president’s son and the president’s brother.”

Just what goods or services did all those Biden family members provide to those companies?

Why did Gabriel Popoviciu, a businessman convicted of bribery in Romania and relatedly investigated by British authorities pay as much as $1 million that ended up in Biden family accounts? Does anyone believe that Chinese energy tycoon Ye Jianming in 2017 gave Hunter Biden a 2.8-carat diamond, estimated to be worth up to $80,000, as a gift out of the pure goodness of his heart? Ye disappeared from public view in 2018 amid a Chinese corruption crackdown.

President Biden voluntarily releases his tax returns and other financial disclosure reports that are required by law. But members of elected officials’ families are not required to disclose anything, leaving a very easy way for any deep-pocketed individual or institution to purchase a friendship with someone who has the politician’s ear.

Maybe it’s entirely coincidental that so many foreign entities just happened to give large amounts of money and gifts to Biden family members, and no one involved ever believed, promised, insinuated or suggested that Joe Biden would ever return the favor.

What the House Oversight Committee report reveals is a larger and more complicated version of Hunter Biden’s ludicrously remunerative “work” for Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian oil and natural gas company from 2014 to 2019. Hunter Biden had never worked in the oil or natural gas industry, and yet Burisma reportedly paid him up to $83,000 per month until his father left office, all without Hunter ever needing to travel to Ukraine. One Burisma official told Reuters in 2019 that Hunter Biden was a “ceremonial figure” at the company.

Why would Burisma so lucratively reward a ceremonial figure? What could Hunter Biden possibly offer the company beyond a connection to his father?

Confronted with the Comer committee’s report, Democrats scream, “What about Ivanka Trump’s trademarks in China, or Donald Trump and Jared Kushner profiting from Saudi investors?” And they’re right to object. We don’t elect leaders to the presidency — or the vice presidency — so that their relatives can cash in with foreign business executives. The sordid intermingling of personal financial interests with U.S. government policy is absolutely fair game in the 2024 presidential election.

With great power comes great responsibility, and few jobs are more powerful than the presidency or vice presidency. That means presidents and vice presidents have a responsibility to make sure their relatives aren’t making new “friends” from overseas who just happen to want to give them lots of money. Even if an elected official never returns the favor, the U.S. government’s lecturing other countries about corruption looks laughable when presidential offspring seem to be shilling access like a guy on the corner selling fake Rolexes.

Most of Washington is used to elected officials finding a sweet, low-responsibility, well-paying job for some otherwise unemployable son or niece. In 2012, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington went through the employment records of members of the House and determined that 82 members paid family members through their congressional offices, campaign committees or political action committees. (It came out to 42 Republicans and 40 Democrats; apparently Washington really did have more areas of bipartisan agreement back then.)

And in the grand scheme of things, giving your low-wattage relative a job answering phones in your congressional office is a small enough potential conflict that everyone can live with it.

The problem is the Biden family’s unspecified gigs with foreign companies appear never to have developed a limiting principle while he was vice president. Now, in the White House, variations on Biden’s reflexive “My son has done nothing wrong” response aren’t going to cut it this time. Comer promises more, and he’s taking direct aim at the not-all-that-plausible excuse that the president is entirely disconnected from the financial arrangements of his family members.

Comer, speaking with a Fox News radio program, noted that Biden’s media defenders act as though the revelations have nothing to do with Biden himself. “That is ridiculous,” Comer said. “Of course it has everything to do with Joe Biden.”

https://www.businessinsider.com/bidens- ... 2019-7?amp

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 981003002/

And he may have invested in some of the things you invested in too.

Nah, easier to believe that Joe made his money dirty.

Apparently, Joe’s net worth is $9 million now. Heck of a lot less than his books and speeches brought in.

If I’m not mistaken, a big chunk of the reduction was charitable giving, but maybe he invested poorly!

I'm more interested in what you're ignoring. What did all the Biden family members do to earn payments from the shell corps. No show jobs ?

Did Joe have "show jobs"?
Did anyone doing so have an official position in the White House or a job in the Administration that could affect policy?
What's the exact allegation?

I've been really clear, I think the currently LEGAL grift of making money off of presumed access is gross.

But I think the speculation that Joe profited from any such, without clear proof, or even a clear allegation of HIS wrongdoing, is blatant partisan BS.

Entirely about an attempt to dirty up a presumed opponent, regardless of truth, and without a shred of evidence of wrongdoing.

Why??? Well, it's clearly more than trying to have an election advantage, rather it's a pathetically desperate attempt to blunt the overwhelming evidence of actual wrongdoing, massive corruption and dishonesty, by his opponent and those around him.

And that's what you're doing on here.

Impeach Joe Biden!

Put the Biden Crime Family on barge off GITMO!

Durham can prosecute.

Pathetic.

Or maybe the Biden crime syndicate is very good at laundering all the moolah? Maybe Joe has bags of cash in his Vette parked in the locked garage?? Anybody check to see if Joe has any Swiss bank accounts?? MD your correct here for a change. If the allegations of dirty money are unprovable then the issue should be left alone.

I'll believe the House Oversight Committee is legitimate and not a political witch hunt when they bring in Jared to talk about the Saudi's $2BILLION investment in his first ever investment firm.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

Had a lot of practice when he was “moderating”…..seem farcical in hindsight….I thought so at the time.

...I didn't change the topic. 4 other users did. I did not chastise them. I responded, user to user.
Thread hijacks were tolerated on LP. They usually veered back to the topic, as they do here.

The cutting out key parts ‘dough

[MDlaxfan76]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

Had a lot of practice when he was “moderating”…..seem farcical in hindsight….I thought so at the time.

...I didn't change the topic. 4 other users did. I did not chastise them. I responded, user to user.
Thread hijacks were tolerated on LP. They usually veered back to the topic, as they do here.

The cutting out key parts ‘dough

It was obvious to me what you meant.

I think you also mean "duh".

[Typical Lax Dad]

Looks to me like Salty brought up Kushner, certainly not me.
How about you read the thread discussion then chip in?

Follow your own advice. You're wrong, as usual.
I responded to a series of whataboutism posts about Jared Kushner on page [39].

on page 39...well, I certainly wasn't involved...

...& if you weren't involved, it doesn't exist.

what a crock. I note you keep cutting out key parts.
Cradle was castigating me for changing the subject not staying on thread topic in responding to you; I was responding to the discussion on the page immediately above...you were at the center, the first post in that string. That the change in topic to Jared had happened 3 pages earlier wasn't the point, just that Cradle didn't need to defend you from my post.

Had a lot of practice when he was “moderating”…..seem farcical in hindsight….I thought so at the time.

...I didn't change the topic. 4 other users did. I did not chastise them. I responded, user to user.
Thread hijacks were tolerated on LP. They usually veered back to the topic, as they do here.

The cutting out key parts ‘dough

It was obvious to me what you meant.

I think you also mean "duh".

A lot of future NBA players were high school kids in that video…..duh also works.

[MDlaxfan76]

Regarding all this thread hijacking talk, this is Old Salt's initial page 39 post along with all other posts before my comment on the House Oversight Committee ignoring one of the similar elephants (no pun intended) in the room that happen to be Republican.

My post isn't whataboutism at all, it was a comment regarding the legitimacy, and hypocrisy, of the House Oversight Committee. To date they haven't looked at anyone's potential bad behavior and grifting but Hunter's. If someone brings up the House Oversight Committee in a discussion, they're fair game and appropriate to the conversation.

Keep sucking in those conspiracy theories.

$10 million buys a lot of Biden family books.
Give us another rant about grifters.
Even the Wash Post is now publishing those conspiracy theories.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... y-members/

Opinion : Millions flowed to Biden family members. Don’t pretend it doesn’t matter.

By Jim Geraghty, Contributing columnist, May 18, 2023

Let’s assume that, as President Biden’s fans insist, there’s no evidence of lawbreaking in the deals that had foreign companies paying more than $10 million to Biden family members during and after Biden’s years as vice president.

And no doubt, the House Oversight Committee led by Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) has its own preconceived narrative that Biden is on the take from all kinds of shady characters. An indictment of bribery or corruption would require proof that, at some point while in office, Biden acted or influenced a U.S. government policy decision to benefit one of those companies, and the House Oversight Committee, so far, does not have that proof.

Yet we’re still left with a motley collection of odd and unsavory figures sending a lot of money through a lot of companies to a lot of members of the Biden family, with little explanation why. Comer contends that bank records confirm more than $10 million in payments, run through at least 20 businesses, mostly limited liability companies, to the president’s son Hunter Biden; the president’s brother, James Biden; James’s wife, Sara Jones Biden; Hallie Biden (widow of Joe Biden’s son Beau, who died in 2015); Hunter’s ex-wife, Kathleen Buhle; Hunter’s current wife, Melissa Cohen; and, as Comer noted, “three children of the president’s son and the president’s brother.”

Just what goods or services did all those Biden family members provide to those companies?

Why did Gabriel Popoviciu, a businessman convicted of bribery in Romania and relatedly investigated by British authorities pay as much as $1 million that ended up in Biden family accounts? Does anyone believe that Chinese energy tycoon Ye Jianming in 2017 gave Hunter Biden a 2.8-carat diamond, estimated to be worth up to $80,000, as a gift out of the pure goodness of his heart? Ye disappeared from public view in 2018 amid a Chinese corruption crackdown.

President Biden voluntarily releases his tax returns and other financial disclosure reports that are required by law. But members of elected officials’ families are not required to disclose anything, leaving a very easy way for any deep-pocketed individual or institution to purchase a friendship with someone who has the politician’s ear.

Maybe it’s entirely coincidental that so many foreign entities just happened to give large amounts of money and gifts to Biden family members, and no one involved ever believed, promised, insinuated or suggested that Joe Biden would ever return the favor.

What the House Oversight Committee report reveals is a larger and more complicated version of Hunter Biden’s ludicrously remunerative “work” for Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian oil and natural gas company from 2014 to 2019. Hunter Biden had never worked in the oil or natural gas industry, and yet Burisma reportedly paid him up to $83,000 per month until his father left office, all without Hunter ever needing to travel to Ukraine. One Burisma official told Reuters in 2019 that Hunter Biden was a “ceremonial figure” at the company.

Why would Burisma so lucratively reward a ceremonial figure? What could Hunter Biden possibly offer the company beyond a connection to his father?

Confronted with the Comer committee’s report, Democrats scream, “What about Ivanka Trump’s trademarks in China, or Donald Trump and Jared Kushner profiting from Saudi investors?” And they’re right to object. We don’t elect leaders to the presidency — or the vice presidency — so that their relatives can cash in with foreign business executives. The sordid intermingling of personal financial interests with U.S. government policy is absolutely fair game in the 2024 presidential election.

With great power comes great responsibility, and few jobs are more powerful than the presidency or vice presidency. That means presidents and vice presidents have a responsibility to make sure their relatives aren’t making new “friends” from overseas who just happen to want to give them lots of money. Even if an elected official never returns the favor, the U.S. government’s lecturing other countries about corruption looks laughable when presidential offspring seem to be shilling access like a guy on the corner selling fake Rolexes.

Most of Washington is used to elected officials finding a sweet, low-responsibility, well-paying job for some otherwise unemployable son or niece. In 2012, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington went through the employment records of members of the House and determined that 82 members paid family members through their congressional offices, campaign committees or political action committees. (It came out to 42 Republicans and 40 Democrats; apparently Washington really did have more areas of bipartisan agreement back then.)

And in the grand scheme of things, giving your low-wattage relative a job answering phones in your congressional office is a small enough potential conflict that everyone can live with it.

The problem is the Biden family’s unspecified gigs with foreign companies appear never to have developed a limiting principle while he was vice president. Now, in the White House, variations on Biden’s reflexive “My son has done nothing wrong” response aren’t going to cut it this time. Comer promises more, and he’s taking direct aim at the not-all-that-plausible excuse that the president is entirely disconnected from the financial arrangements of his family members.

Comer, speaking with a Fox News radio program, noted that Biden’s media defenders act as though the revelations have nothing to do with Biden himself. “That is ridiculous,” Comer said. “Of course it has everything to do with Joe Biden.”

https://www.businessinsider.com/bidens- ... 2019-7?amp

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 981003002/

And he may have invested in some of the things you invested in too.

Nah, easier to believe that Joe made his money dirty.

Apparently, Joe’s net worth is $9 million now. Heck of a lot less than his books and speeches brought in.

If I’m not mistaken, a big chunk of the reduction was charitable giving, but maybe he invested poorly!

I'm more interested in what you're ignoring. What did all the Biden family members do to earn payments from the shell corps. No show jobs ?

Did Joe have "show jobs"?
Did anyone doing so have an official position in the White House or a job in the Administration that could affect policy?
What's the exact allegation?

I've been really clear, I think the currently LEGAL grift of making money off of presumed access is gross.

But I think the speculation that Joe profited from any such, without clear proof, or even a clear allegation of HIS wrongdoing, is blatant partisan BS.

Entirely about an attempt to dirty up a presumed opponent, regardless of truth, and without a shred of evidence of wrongdoing.

Why??? Well, it's clearly more than trying to have an election advantage, rather it's a pathetically desperate attempt to blunt the overwhelming evidence of actual wrongdoing, massive corruption and dishonesty, by his opponent and those around him.

And that's what you're doing on here.

Impeach Joe Biden!

Put the Biden Crime Family on barge off GITMO!

Durham can prosecute.

Pathetic.

Or maybe the Biden crime syndicate is very good at laundering all the moolah? Maybe Joe has bags of cash in his Vette parked in the locked garage?? Anybody check to see if Joe has any Swiss bank accounts?? MD your correct here for a change. If the allegations of dirty money are unprovable then the issue should be left alone.

I'll believe the House Oversight Committee is legitimate and not a political witch hunt when they bring in Jared to talk about the Saudi's $2BILLION investment in his first ever investment firm.

It was on point, on topic.

This partisan outrage over Hunter is the height of hypocrisy.

All I ask is that we condemn corruption where we find it, while recognizing that not all violations of trust or ethics are equivalent.

In this comparison of Jared to Hunter, the alleged corruption is far larger and more directly within the White House in the Jared situation...by a wide margin.

Neither appear to be prosecutable crimes, both feel unethical at a minimum.

[old salt]

Regarding all this thread hijacking talk, this is Old Salt's initial page 39 post along with all other posts before my comment on the House Oversight Committee ignoring one of the similar elephants (no pun intended) in the room that happen to be Republican.

That's not ALL the posts about Kushner. There were posts by 3 other users. Clearly whataboutism which prompted my response.
I did not introduce Kushner to this thread.

Sure Kushner is cashing in on his previous govt service. Hardly without precedent. There's no indication yet that he's done anything illegal or unethical.
The Congress & media have brought transparency to the public. More so than they have to Biden family dealings.
There's no indication yet that his investors did not make sound investments in real, legal enterprises.
I'm sure the media will alert us if that changes.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Regarding all this thread hijacking talk, this is Old Salt's initial page 39 post along with all other posts before my comment on the House Oversight Committee ignoring one of the similar elephants (no pun intended) in the room that happen to be Republican.

That's not ALL the posts about Kushner. There were posts by 3 other users. Clearly whataboutism which prompted my response.
I did not introduce Kushner to this thread.

Sure Kushner is cashing in on his previous govt service. Hardly without precedent. There's no indication yet that he's done anything illegal or unethical.
The Congress & media have brought transparency to the public. More so than they have to Biden family dealings.
There's no indication yet that his investors did not make sound investments in real, legal enterprises.
I'm sure the media will alert us if that changes.

you gone.

[old salt]

Regarding all this thread hijacking talk, this is Old Salt's initial page 39 post along with all other posts before my comment on the House Oversight Committee ignoring one of the similar elephants (no pun intended) in the room that happen to be Republican.

That's not ALL the posts about Kushner. There were posts by 3 other users. Clearly whataboutism which prompted my response.
I did not introduce Kushner to this thread.

Sure Kushner is cashing in on his previous govt service. Hardly without precedent. There's no indication yet that he's done anything illegal or unethical.
The Congress & media have brought transparency to the public. More so than they have to Biden family dealings.
There's no indication yet that his investors did not make sound investments in real, legal enterprises.
I'm sure the media will alert us if that changes.

you gone.

How's LIV Golf doing ?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Regarding all this thread hijacking talk, this is Old Salt's initial page 39 post along with all other posts before my comment on the House Oversight Committee ignoring one of the similar elephants (no pun intended) in the room that happen to be Republican.

That's not ALL the posts about Kushner. There were posts by 3 other users. Clearly whataboutism which prompted my response.
I did not introduce Kushner to this thread.

Sure Kushner is cashing in on his previous govt service. Hardly without precedent. There's no indication yet that he's done anything illegal or unethical.
The Congress & media have brought transparency to the public. More so than they have to Biden family dealings.
There's no indication yet that his investors did not make sound investments in real, legal enterprises.
I'm sure the media will alert us if that changes.

you gone.

How's LIV Golf doing ?

LIV is doing well for the golfers. As are the ex-pats in the soccer league….you see what Karim Benzema is pulling down?