Hunter Biden Tinfoil issues

[Typical Lax Dad]

Nope, if you don't report income, fraudulently, and the IRS doesn't find out about it, you don't get a pass after 6 years of the IRS not knowing better...it's only when that income is reported or discovered that the IRS THEN has a six year window to make a charging decision...the story the whistleblowers tell is that they didn't know about the missing income until 2018...and finished investigating it by 2020...so, the decision COULD have been made in 2020...by the Trump DOJ, the Trump appointed AG, the Trump appointed prosecutors in each jurisdiction...but they didn't...if the decision really needed to be made when the Trump folks were in absolute control, they blew it...note, they COULD have indicted what they had complete and sufficient evidence about, and continued investigating other possible criminal activities so it wasn't because "other evidence was coming in"...I think the likelihood is that they preferred claiming that there was something more nefarious to be concerned about with Hunter...and the prosecutor know he really didn't have any credible evidence of such that he could bring to court...

But the window for pulling the trigger on the decision would have been until 2024 for criminal charges...and 2028 for civil charges.

The Trump appointed prosecutor is saying, under penalty of lying to Congress, that post Biden taking over, post the appointment of Garland as AG, he wasn't under any political pressure to make a different charging decision, that it was his to pursue...or not. And he did the deal he thought appropriate, given the restitution and plea.

Does the IRS work that fast ? When did the IRS first have indications that HB had unreported income for 2014 & failed to file for 2014 ?
Was it before his tax advisor finally convinced him to allow him to file returns for 2014 & 2015, presumably in Oct 2016 ?
What triggers did the IRS have to detect his failure to file before he actually did ? 1099's ? W-2's ?
Was that not the darkest period of his addiction when he was off the rails & off the grid ?

Not sure when the IRS could have known, but my understanding is that the IRS guys are saying that the income not reported at all wasn't; discovered until 2018.

Note, if tax returns are amended with the full income reported, the worst that typically happens is payment required with some penalties. If you come clean before the IRS knows there's an issue, and make payment, no big deal. Happens all the time.

But this is, if the IRS agents are to be believed, income not reported at all, hidden from view on purpose...and they didn't know (or think) that until 2018. The issue then becomes whether there really is such unreported income, how much it is, and whether the taxpayer is willing to make restitution. That needn't take very long, certainly not multiple years.

I do wonder whether anyone is open to considering whether the IRS is actually grossly underfunded, on purpose, such that complex, big money cases are so under staffed that it's just easier to find a settlement and let it go...or just move on to something easier. This actually would be in the "easier" category and wasn't 'big" money. But it was high profile, and the IRS likes to use profile cases to send a message. But this was way, way less money at stake than the typical high profile cases of tax avoidance.

Ironic that the MAGA GOP is so determined to reduce funding for, "de-fund", the IRS.

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

[cradleandshoot]

Nope, if you don't report income, fraudulently, and the IRS doesn't find out about it, you don't get a pass after 6 years of the IRS not knowing better...it's only when that income is reported or discovered that the IRS THEN has a six year window to make a charging decision...the story the whistleblowers tell is that they didn't know about the missing income until 2018...and finished investigating it by 2020...so, the decision COULD have been made in 2020...by the Trump DOJ, the Trump appointed AG, the Trump appointed prosecutors in each jurisdiction...but they didn't...if the decision really needed to be made when the Trump folks were in absolute control, they blew it...note, they COULD have indicted what they had complete and sufficient evidence about, and continued investigating other possible criminal activities so it wasn't because "other evidence was coming in"...I think the likelihood is that they preferred claiming that there was something more nefarious to be concerned about with Hunter...and the prosecutor know he really didn't have any credible evidence of such that he could bring to court...

But the window for pulling the trigger on the decision would have been until 2024 for criminal charges...and 2028 for civil charges.

The Trump appointed prosecutor is saying, under penalty of lying to Congress, that post Biden taking over, post the appointment of Garland as AG, he wasn't under any political pressure to make a different charging decision, that it was his to pursue...or not. And he did the deal he thought appropriate, given the restitution and plea.

Does the IRS work that fast ? When did the IRS first have indications that HB had unreported income for 2014 & failed to file for 2014 ?
Was it before his tax advisor finally convinced him to allow him to file returns for 2014 & 2015, presumably in Oct 2016 ?
What triggers did the IRS have to detect his failure to file before he actually did ? 1099's ? W-2's ?
Was that not the darkest period of his addiction when he was off the rails & off the grid ?

Not sure when the IRS could have known, but my understanding is that the IRS guys are saying that the income not reported at all wasn't; discovered until 2018.

Note, if tax returns are amended with the full income reported, the worst that typically happens is payment required with some penalties. If you come clean before the IRS knows there's an issue, and make payment, no big deal. Happens all the time.

But this is, if the IRS agents are to be believed, income not reported at all, hidden from view on purpose...and they didn't know (or think) that until 2018. The issue then becomes whether there really is such unreported income, how much it is, and whether the taxpayer is willing to make restitution. That needn't take very long, certainly not multiple years.

I do wonder whether anyone is open to considering whether the IRS is actually grossly underfunded, on purpose, such that complex, big money cases are so under staffed that it's just easier to find a settlement and let it go...or just move on to something easier. This actually would be in the "easier" category and wasn't 'big" money. But it was high profile, and the IRS likes to use profile cases to send a message. But this was way, way less money at stake than the typical high profile cases of tax avoidance.

Ironic that the MAGA GOP is so determined to reduce funding for, "de-fund", the IRS.

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

[MDlaxfan76]

Nope, if you don't report income, fraudulently, and the IRS doesn't find out about it, you don't get a pass after 6 years of the IRS not knowing better...it's only when that income is reported or discovered that the IRS THEN has a six year window to make a charging decision...the story the whistleblowers tell is that they didn't know about the missing income until 2018...and finished investigating it by 2020...so, the decision COULD have been made in 2020...by the Trump DOJ, the Trump appointed AG, the Trump appointed prosecutors in each jurisdiction...but they didn't...if the decision really needed to be made when the Trump folks were in absolute control, they blew it...note, they COULD have indicted what they had complete and sufficient evidence about, and continued investigating other possible criminal activities so it wasn't because "other evidence was coming in"...I think the likelihood is that they preferred claiming that there was something more nefarious to be concerned about with Hunter...and the prosecutor know he really didn't have any credible evidence of such that he could bring to court...

But the window for pulling the trigger on the decision would have been until 2024 for criminal charges...and 2028 for civil charges.

The Trump appointed prosecutor is saying, under penalty of lying to Congress, that post Biden taking over, post the appointment of Garland as AG, he wasn't under any political pressure to make a different charging decision, that it was his to pursue...or not. And he did the deal he thought appropriate, given the restitution and plea.

Does the IRS work that fast ? When did the IRS first have indications that HB had unreported income for 2014 & failed to file for 2014 ?
Was it before his tax advisor finally convinced him to allow him to file returns for 2014 & 2015, presumably in Oct 2016 ?
What triggers did the IRS have to detect his failure to file before he actually did ? 1099's ? W-2's ?
Was that not the darkest period of his addiction when he was off the rails & off the grid ?

Not sure when the IRS could have known, but my understanding is that the IRS guys are saying that the income not reported at all wasn't; discovered until 2018.

Note, if tax returns are amended with the full income reported, the worst that typically happens is payment required with some penalties. If you come clean before the IRS knows there's an issue, and make payment, no big deal. Happens all the time.

But this is, if the IRS agents are to be believed, income not reported at all, hidden from view on purpose...and they didn't know (or think) that until 2018. The issue then becomes whether there really is such unreported income, how much it is, and whether the taxpayer is willing to make restitution. That needn't take very long, certainly not multiple years.

I do wonder whether anyone is open to considering whether the IRS is actually grossly underfunded, on purpose, such that complex, big money cases are so under staffed that it's just easier to find a settlement and let it go...or just move on to something easier. This actually would be in the "easier" category and wasn't 'big" money. But it was high profile, and the IRS likes to use profile cases to send a message. But this was way, way less money at stake than the typical high profile cases of tax avoidance.

Ironic that the MAGA GOP is so determined to reduce funding for, "de-fund", the IRS.

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

And yet Salty's contributions there are always defenses, apologia, or whataboutisms re Trump.

TLD is obviously referencing the totality of Salty's contributions...not limited to this thread.

On the other hand, you keep licking his boots...you do you.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Nope, if you don't report income, fraudulently, and the IRS doesn't find out about it, you don't get a pass after 6 years of the IRS not knowing better...it's only when that income is reported or discovered that the IRS THEN has a six year window to make a charging decision...the story the whistleblowers tell is that they didn't know about the missing income until 2018...and finished investigating it by 2020...so, the decision COULD have been made in 2020...by the Trump DOJ, the Trump appointed AG, the Trump appointed prosecutors in each jurisdiction...but they didn't...if the decision really needed to be made when the Trump folks were in absolute control, they blew it...note, they COULD have indicted what they had complete and sufficient evidence about, and continued investigating other possible criminal activities so it wasn't because "other evidence was coming in"...I think the likelihood is that they preferred claiming that there was something more nefarious to be concerned about with Hunter...and the prosecutor know he really didn't have any credible evidence of such that he could bring to court...

But the window for pulling the trigger on the decision would have been until 2024 for criminal charges...and 2028 for civil charges.

The Trump appointed prosecutor is saying, under penalty of lying to Congress, that post Biden taking over, post the appointment of Garland as AG, he wasn't under any political pressure to make a different charging decision, that it was his to pursue...or not. And he did the deal he thought appropriate, given the restitution and plea.

Does the IRS work that fast ? When did the IRS first have indications that HB had unreported income for 2014 & failed to file for 2014 ?
Was it before his tax advisor finally convinced him to allow him to file returns for 2014 & 2015, presumably in Oct 2016 ?
What triggers did the IRS have to detect his failure to file before he actually did ? 1099's ? W-2's ?
Was that not the darkest period of his addiction when he was off the rails & off the grid ?

Not sure when the IRS could have known, but my understanding is that the IRS guys are saying that the income not reported at all wasn't; discovered until 2018.

Note, if tax returns are amended with the full income reported, the worst that typically happens is payment required with some penalties. If you come clean before the IRS knows there's an issue, and make payment, no big deal. Happens all the time.

But this is, if the IRS agents are to be believed, income not reported at all, hidden from view on purpose...and they didn't know (or think) that until 2018. The issue then becomes whether there really is such unreported income, how much it is, and whether the taxpayer is willing to make restitution. That needn't take very long, certainly not multiple years.

I do wonder whether anyone is open to considering whether the IRS is actually grossly underfunded, on purpose, such that complex, big money cases are so under staffed that it's just easier to find a settlement and let it go...or just move on to something easier. This actually would be in the "easier" category and wasn't 'big" money. But it was high profile, and the IRS likes to use profile cases to send a message. But this was way, way less money at stake than the typical high profile cases of tax avoidance.

Ironic that the MAGA GOP is so determined to reduce funding for, "de-fund", the IRS.

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

You mean Old Soldier only posts to this thread? I know you come across as stupid.

[cradleandshoot]

Nope, if you don't report income, fraudulently, and the IRS doesn't find out about it, you don't get a pass after 6 years of the IRS not knowing better...it's only when that income is reported or discovered that the IRS THEN has a six year window to make a charging decision...the story the whistleblowers tell is that they didn't know about the missing income until 2018...and finished investigating it by 2020...so, the decision COULD have been made in 2020...by the Trump DOJ, the Trump appointed AG, the Trump appointed prosecutors in each jurisdiction...but they didn't...if the decision really needed to be made when the Trump folks were in absolute control, they blew it...note, they COULD have indicted what they had complete and sufficient evidence about, and continued investigating other possible criminal activities so it wasn't because "other evidence was coming in"...I think the likelihood is that they preferred claiming that there was something more nefarious to be concerned about with Hunter...and the prosecutor know he really didn't have any credible evidence of such that he could bring to court...

But the window for pulling the trigger on the decision would have been until 2024 for criminal charges...and 2028 for civil charges.

The Trump appointed prosecutor is saying, under penalty of lying to Congress, that post Biden taking over, post the appointment of Garland as AG, he wasn't under any political pressure to make a different charging decision, that it was his to pursue...or not. And he did the deal he thought appropriate, given the restitution and plea.

Does the IRS work that fast ? When did the IRS first have indications that HB had unreported income for 2014 & failed to file for 2014 ?
Was it before his tax advisor finally convinced him to allow him to file returns for 2014 & 2015, presumably in Oct 2016 ?
What triggers did the IRS have to detect his failure to file before he actually did ? 1099's ? W-2's ?
Was that not the darkest period of his addiction when he was off the rails & off the grid ?

Not sure when the IRS could have known, but my understanding is that the IRS guys are saying that the income not reported at all wasn't; discovered until 2018.

Note, if tax returns are amended with the full income reported, the worst that typically happens is payment required with some penalties. If you come clean before the IRS knows there's an issue, and make payment, no big deal. Happens all the time.

But this is, if the IRS agents are to be believed, income not reported at all, hidden from view on purpose...and they didn't know (or think) that until 2018. The issue then becomes whether there really is such unreported income, how much it is, and whether the taxpayer is willing to make restitution. That needn't take very long, certainly not multiple years.

I do wonder whether anyone is open to considering whether the IRS is actually grossly underfunded, on purpose, such that complex, big money cases are so under staffed that it's just easier to find a settlement and let it go...or just move on to something easier. This actually would be in the "easier" category and wasn't 'big" money. But it was high profile, and the IRS likes to use profile cases to send a message. But this was way, way less money at stake than the typical high profile cases of tax avoidance.

Ironic that the MAGA GOP is so determined to reduce funding for, "de-fund", the IRS.

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

And yet Salty's contributions there are always defenses, apologia, or whataboutisms re Trump.

TLD is obviously referencing the totality of Salty's contributions...not limited to this thread.

On the other hand, you keep licking his boots...you do you.

You must have an issue remembering things that you have read on this forum. I was being facisious. I have been told that same thing a number of times on this forum. " Cradle, you remember what the title of this thread is". I'm sorry you didn't get the point but I'm not surprised. I won't be so obtuse in the future, I'll be more direct to point so as not to confuse you. Maybe we need a sarcasm emoji after all.

[MDlaxfan76]

Nope, if you don't report income, fraudulently, and the IRS doesn't find out about it, you don't get a pass after 6 years of the IRS not knowing better...it's only when that income is reported or discovered that the IRS THEN has a six year window to make a charging decision...the story the whistleblowers tell is that they didn't know about the missing income until 2018...and finished investigating it by 2020...so, the decision COULD have been made in 2020...by the Trump DOJ, the Trump appointed AG, the Trump appointed prosecutors in each jurisdiction...but they didn't...if the decision really needed to be made when the Trump folks were in absolute control, they blew it...note, they COULD have indicted what they had complete and sufficient evidence about, and continued investigating other possible criminal activities so it wasn't because "other evidence was coming in"...I think the likelihood is that they preferred claiming that there was something more nefarious to be concerned about with Hunter...and the prosecutor know he really didn't have any credible evidence of such that he could bring to court...

But the window for pulling the trigger on the decision would have been until 2024 for criminal charges...and 2028 for civil charges.

The Trump appointed prosecutor is saying, under penalty of lying to Congress, that post Biden taking over, post the appointment of Garland as AG, he wasn't under any political pressure to make a different charging decision, that it was his to pursue...or not. And he did the deal he thought appropriate, given the restitution and plea.

Does the IRS work that fast ? When did the IRS first have indications that HB had unreported income for 2014 & failed to file for 2014 ?
Was it before his tax advisor finally convinced him to allow him to file returns for 2014 & 2015, presumably in Oct 2016 ?
What triggers did the IRS have to detect his failure to file before he actually did ? 1099's ? W-2's ?
Was that not the darkest period of his addiction when he was off the rails & off the grid ?

Not sure when the IRS could have known, but my understanding is that the IRS guys are saying that the income not reported at all wasn't; discovered until 2018.

Note, if tax returns are amended with the full income reported, the worst that typically happens is payment required with some penalties. If you come clean before the IRS knows there's an issue, and make payment, no big deal. Happens all the time.

But this is, if the IRS agents are to be believed, income not reported at all, hidden from view on purpose...and they didn't know (or think) that until 2018. The issue then becomes whether there really is such unreported income, how much it is, and whether the taxpayer is willing to make restitution. That needn't take very long, certainly not multiple years.

I do wonder whether anyone is open to considering whether the IRS is actually grossly underfunded, on purpose, such that complex, big money cases are so under staffed that it's just easier to find a settlement and let it go...or just move on to something easier. This actually would be in the "easier" category and wasn't 'big" money. But it was high profile, and the IRS likes to use profile cases to send a message. But this was way, way less money at stake than the typical high profile cases of tax avoidance.

Ironic that the MAGA GOP is so determined to reduce funding for, "de-fund", the IRS.

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

And yet Salty's contributions there are always defenses, apologia, or whataboutisms re Trump.

TLD is obviously referencing the totality of Salty's contributions...not limited to this thread.

On the other hand, you keep licking his boots...you do you.

You must have an issue remembering things that you have read on this forum. I was being facisious. I have been told that same thing a number of times on this forum. " Cradle, you remember what the title of this thread is". I'm sorry you didn't get the point but I'm not surprised. I won't be so obtuse in the future, I'll be more direct to point so as not to confuse you. Maybe we need a sarcasm emoji after all.

I assume you meant facetious.

[OCanada]

My history w typos goes back to the first days of laxpower. At the time a friend and major player there would clean them up. I never cared. Still don’t. You can deal with it or continue to post juvenile replies. Does not matter to me

[OCanada]

Sort of amazing the inductive logic, attribution of motivation with little context save some self serving conclusion. Pomitics is a three dimensional game at least.

Can you translate that word salad into English for us? Never mind, don't bother... What is pomitics though out of curiosity? Is that a branch of politics??

It is known as a typo. Even a dullard could figure that out with little thought. You reply was amusing and bereft of substance. SOP

Oh I knew exactly what you meant and what you were trying to say. I'll give you bonus points for dragging the term dullard out of the 1930s. It was suppose to be bereft of substance seeing how you were the substance I was being bereft about. think about that one for awhile hoser and then take off.

Does this mean we are not friends anymore Huckleberry?

Guys who talk tough on keyboards especially when they got nothing better to add of solid substance are one of the banes of social media. It is a marketplace of ideas. Deal with it.

[old salt]

To drag it out until the SOL for 2014 & 2015 ran, extend it beyond the 2020 & 2022 elections, then take a sweetheart plea deal before the 2024 election campaign begins, while publicly embracing Hunter at every opportunity.
The latest Biden family tragedy overcome, except for grandkid #7.

1. That's Barr's CHOICE, my man. There's nothing on the books...and if he explains that the man didn't pay his taxes, and the limitations are gonna run out? Who in the F is going to complain besides idiots?

2. Now you're back to explaining why, if they were covering for Hunter, they didn't rip the band aid off WAY before 2023.

It just doesn't hold water, no matter how much you try and force it. What's more, it's plain you know this, and are just spooling me up.

Enjoy your weekend!

That wasn't Barr's CHOICE. It was his BELIEF which prompted him to return to Govt service. That the DoJ (most visibly via Comey's FBI) had interfered in the 2016 election campaign, influenced the outcome, then sabotaged the incoming Presidency.

That's fine. But you cannot escape that it was his call. No reasonable person would have complained the IRS for hitting Hunter on tax problems from 2015 and 2016. No reasonable person believes that Hunter's taxes have anything to do his mom, dad, uncle, or anyone else.

File the charges. Hold the election.

I gotta say, it's bit rich to hear that Barr's ethics prevented him from green lighting a prosecution because it involved a family member of a candidate, not the candidate...And how do we know this? Barr came back not for his ego but because he wanted to clean up the DOJ and FBI (I guess with Trump appointee Wray) from political interference...and then proceeded to interfere massively, politically...again and again and again.

But hey, he did tell the truth to Trump that he'd lost the election...so, there's that...

We know because Barr told us why he was coming back. You think Barr liked Trump, or enjoyed working for him ? He concluded that the DoJ interfered in the election & was trying to sabotage a duly elected Presidency.

So, he was delusional?

No, I think he had fallen into MAGA-Fox-think and had/has an enormous ego. You have to have an enormous ego to, from the outside, conclude that you actually know better than the FBI whether Trump had colluded with Russia, whether there was evidence to suspect such. That investigating such was totally unreasonable, an effort to "sabotage"...Anyone with even a smidgen of humility would have realized that there was plenty of reason to at least suspect such efforts and to realize that the FBI would know far more than Joe citizen...including Bill Barr...

He interfered massively politically during his tenure in the job, made all sorts of politically motivated decisions on behalf of Trump and his allies, and established a Special Counsel specifically to target the likely opponent of Trump...this was not a guy who had a "belief" that the DOJ should be apolitical, just a 'belief' that the DOJ should do the political work convenient to his own party. And only on behalf of his party...

Barr didn't join the Trump admin until 2 yrs into the term. He could see the leaks from the DoJ & IC, just like we could. He saw the DoJ IG's report on the FBI lovebirds. He could see what' was going on, while confirmation biased fools lapped up everything fed to the media by the HRC/DNC/Fusion/Steele disinfo op.

[cradleandshoot]

Sort of amazing the inductive logic, attribution of motivation with little context save some self serving conclusion. Pomitics is a three dimensional game at least.

Can you translate that word salad into English for us? Never mind, don't bother... What is pomitics though out of curiosity? Is that a branch of politics??

It is known as a typo. Even a dullard could figure that out with little thought. You reply was amusing and bereft of substance. SOP

Oh I knew exactly what you meant and what you were trying to say. I'll give you bonus points for dragging the term dullard out of the 1930s. It was suppose to be bereft of substance seeing how you were the substance I was being bereft about. think about that one for awhile hoser and then take off.

Does this mean we are not friends anymore Huckleberry?

Guys who talk tough on keyboards especially when they got nothing better to add of solid substance are one of the banes of social media. It is a marketplace of ideas. Deal with it.

I figured you would realize I was busting your stones. You are apparently unfamiliar with Bob and Doug and The Great White North? You must be a youngun? I like your use of huckleberry. We will always be friends. If I didn't enjoy the back and forth I would ignore everything you say. Just just gotta learn to lighten up dude. Maybe you should Google some of those old clips from Bob and Doug...take off ya hoser isn't an insult.

[old salt]

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

And yet Salty's contributions there are always defenses, apologia, or whataboutisms re Trump.

TLD is obviously referencing the totality of Salty's contributions...not limited to this thread.

What's left to say about Trump ? It's all recycled old news. He'll either get indicted, tried & convicted, or he won't.
He'll either get nominated or he won't. He'll either be elected or he won't. Why roll around in the manure ?

None of that justifies what the Deep State apparatchiks did to scuttle Trump's campaigns & sabotage his Presidency.
It's remarkable he accomplished as much as he did.

I'm on the record that I've never voted for him & never will & that I'll support any of the other (R) candidates with the best chance to win.
I'll be pleased if Trump's troubles deny him the nomination -- the sooner the better.

On the other hand, the dirt on the Biden clan is finally coming out & the media can't continue to ignore it.
It needs to be run to ground & proven or disproven.

[old salt]

We also know the National Review is trash and has decayed for ages from what it once was which is anachronistic for folks who don’t bother trying and feel out of place in a post modern world.

Read & enjoy, Junior.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/07/ ... explained/

The Biden Family’s History of Influence-Peddling, Explained

by ANDREW C. MCCARTHY, July 22, 2023

Before Ukraine, the president’s playbook seems to have worked like a charm in Romania.
It was the spring of 2014, and Kyiv was in tumult. For all its talk about democracy, the Obama administration had enthusiastically supported the mass protests in western Ukraine that, on February 21, had ousted the democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovych.

Progressives have memory-holed much of this history. The Obama State Department and its European counterparts had an embarrassingly notorious hands-on role in the Maidan revolution and the new Ukrainian government that emerged in its aftermath. Predictably, this meddling in another nation’s domestic politics, to the point of toppling the elected government, was exploited by Vladimir Putin to rationalize Russia’s responsive aggression in eastern Ukraine — the annexation of Crimea and the border war that exploded into today’s full-out war when Moscow launched its February 2022 invasion.

Though more Euroskeptic than his political rivals in Kyiv, Yanukovych had leaned toward entering Ukraine into a political association and trade agreement with the European Union. As I detailed in Ball of Collusion, this prompted a furious reaction from the Kremlin, which was always in a natural position to leverage its neighbor’s dependence on Russian goodwill for energy supplies, safe commerce, and domestic tranquility. Putin thus threatened that if Yanukovych made his bed with the West, he would block Ukraine’s imports, slash its exports, cut off its energy lines, bleed its economy, and drive it into collapse. Yanukovych succumbed, ditching the European deal in favor of an alternative Russian pact. This accommodation, to fend off the bear on the border, triggered the internal strife that led inexorably to Yanukovych’s abdication and flight to safety in Moscow.

The post-Soviet history of Eastern Europe teaches that chaos is good for the profiteers.
Already one of the developed world’s most corrupt countries, Ukraine was in utter chaos when President Obama made his vice president, Joe Biden, an infamous hack with the pretensions of a geopolitical strategist, his point man for American policy there. Not exactly a boon for America, but it was a windfall for the Biden family business of cashing in on “the big guy’s” political influence.

In these badlands, standing up a new government — basically consisting of the people who were besieged by the ousted government — looks more like a battle of competing mafia protection rackets than an exercise in spontaneous democracy. For a corrupt company such as Burisma, it would mean new regulators demanding payoffs, in conjunction with the government’s existing extortionate demands.

As a confidential informant explained to the FBI (an explanation recorded in a Form 1023 report controversially made public this week), bribery is such a deep-seated part of business culture in Ukraine and Russia that businesses customarily account for it in budgeting — the Russian word for the line item is podmazat, which literally means to “oil, lubricate, or make things run smoothly.” Indeed, when Biden took the point on U.S. policy toward Kyiv, our close allies in Britain were about to pounce on Burisma’s well-heeled founder and CEO Mykola “Nikolay” Zlochevsky — in their ongoing bribery probe, the Brits would soon seize $23 million he’d squirreled away in London bank accounts, as Eastern European oligarchs were then wont to do.

Zlochevsky, then 48, had been a minister in Yanukovych’s government. He knew the long knives would be out for him — and not just from the new regime. The new Poroshenko government’s U.S. State Department patrons had put Zlochevsky on a “ban list,” preventing him from traveling to America. With his Ukrainian allies out of power, Zlochevsky would need new, potent allies to protect him and Burisma from his suddenly empowered Ukrainian rivals.

Joe Biden may not know much, but he knew that.
He also knew that the anti-corruption racket is a profitable one for people in power. The game works like this: You inveigh against corruption, ostensibly to encourage a corrupt but supposedly reforming regime to clean up its act; that, of course, increases the pressure on the regime’s corruption targets (e.g., those who’ve bribed their way to fortune); those targets, already no strangers to paying off whomever must be paid off, become more willing to pay the anti-corruption poseurs.

As the House Oversight Committee has shown (see preliminary report, pp. 11–17), Biden appears to have made this work like a charm in Romania.
In 2014 and 2015, when not railing at officials in Kyiv about corruption, he was railing at officials in Bucharest about corruption. At the time, one of their most high-profile corruption targets was Gabriel Popoviciu, a real-estate tycoon ultimately convicted of paying a bribe to acquire a highly desirable lot at a bargain price. While Vice President Biden pressured Romania to ratchet up anti-corruption prosecutions, Popoviciu paid Hunter Biden to use his connections to fend off the Romanian prosecutors.

As the committee documents, the payments were structured to conceal the fact that they were coming from Popoviciu: multiple payments over time by the Romanian tycoon’s business (Bladon Enterprises Limited) to the Bidens’ business partner, Rob Walker. Because smaller money transfers draw less regulatory attention, Walker parceled out Popoviciu’s transfers into smaller payments and doled them out, over time, to various Hunter Biden accounts and accounts of business associates, and even sent $10,000 to an account of Hallie Biden — Beau Biden’s widow with whom Hunter was romantically involved. All in the family.

Amazing how this works: After the vice president congratulated President Klaus Iohannis on the strides Romania was making to crack down on corruption, Hunter stepped up efforts for Popoviciu — the incumbent vice president’s son using his contacts to beseech State Department officials to help a Romanian corruption target’s lawyers get a meeting with Romanian anti-corruption prosecutors. In the midst of the payments from Popoviciu detailed by the committee (which stretched from November 2015 through the end of his father’s term in office), Hunter wrote in one email on behalf of his Romanian client, “He is in my estimation a very good man that’s being very badly treated by a suspect Romanian justice system” (emphasis added). I’m sure you’ll be shocked to hear that the Romanian courts didn’t see it that way, upholding Popoviciu’s nine-year prison sentence.

With Romania and the committee report as background, should we really be all that surprised about the allegations that emerged this week implicating Joe Biden in Ukrainian bribery schemes?

On April 16, 2014, with Kyiv still in upheaval, Vice President Biden was visited at the White House by Hunter and Devon Archer, Hunter’s longtime chum and business partner (who is now looking at prison time, in addition to tens of millions of dollars in fines and restitution costs, after recently losing the appeal of his 2022 federal fraud conviction over a $60 million fraud scheme). Just five days later, Vice President Biden was in Ukraine to conduct various meetings and — well, wouldn’t you know it — the very next day (April 22) it was announced that Archer had been named to the Burisma board of directors, with Hunter’s installation to that board already quietly in the works.

The press lauded Joe Biden as the face of American policy in Ukraine. We don’t know everyone he met with on his visit to Ukraine, nor everyone he spoke with about it. We do know, however, that Zlochevsky told the FBI’s informant he had spoken with both Joe and Hunter Biden about placing Hunter in a lucrative position on Burisma’s board — though the younger Biden, who’d just been ousted from a cushy Navy appointment over his cocaine use, had no experience in the energy sector.

Burisma’s chief financial officer was Vadim Pozharsky. That’s a name you want to remember. The FBI’s informant attended a business meeting with Burisma executives in late 2015 or early 2016, during which Pozharsky explained that the company had hired Hunter to “protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems.” As we shall see, this is completely consistent with statements we know Pozharsky has made.

Hunter did not formally join his partner Archer on the Burisma board until May 12, 2014. In the intervening three weeks, two important things happened. First, the aforementioned British seizure of Zlochevsky’s accounts in London on April 28. Second, well, Burisma started paying up.

As related in a report compiled by Senators Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) and Ron Johnson (R., Wis.), the funds started rolling in with a quarter-million-dollar transfer on May 7 to the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, where Hunter (who went to law school) was “of counsel” (see report, pp. 66–68). Not coincidentally, Boies Schiller is the same firm used by Hunter in the Popoviciu caper. In all, Burisma paid Hunter Biden and Archer over $4 million combined. A big chunk of it came during Joe Biden’s vice presidency. And — mirabile dictu — it seems, for some unfathomable reason, that Hunter’s salary was halved once his father was out of office.

The day Hunter formally joined Burisma’s board, he and Archer were sent an “urgent issue” email by Pozharsky. After alluding to their recent meetings together in Lake Como in Lombardy, Pozharsky reminded his new partners about the new Ukrainian regime’s tormenting of Zlochevsky, which he referred to alternatively as “blackmailing” and as efforts to extort him for money. Because these tactics had been unsuccessful, the regime had now moved on to “concrete” legal actions aimed at “intimidating” Burisma’s commercial contacts and “destabilizing” its business. Consequently, Pozharsky stressed, “we urgently need your advice on how you could use your influence to convey a message/signal, etc., to stop what we consider to be politically motivated actions.”

Hunter responded that he was with Archer in Doha, Qatar, and asked for more information about “the formal (if any) accusations being made against Burisma.” “Who,” he asked, was “ultimately behind these attacks on the company? Who in the current interim government could put an end to such attacks?” Meantime, Hunter and Archer immediately began work on trying to get Zlochevsky removed from the State Department’s ban list in hopes of helping him obtain a visa — a project for which they enlisted Boies Schiller’s help.

By December, however, even with the U.S. vice president’s son on his board, Zlochevsky apparently decided to deal with his troubles the old-fashioned way: by paying a $7 million bribe to officials at the office of Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Vitaly Yarema. State Department official George Kent learned about the bribe, reporting it to his superiors and the FBI. He also raised the concern with the vice president’s office that Hunter Biden’s association with Zlochevsky was compromising the Obama administration’s anti-corruption efforts.

I know you’ll be stunned to hear this, but Vice President Biden took no action.

Hunter and Archer, of course, continued working for Burisma and Zlochevsky. In early 2015, they began planning a dinner party in Washington at which Vice President Biden would stop by and meet a number of their business associates. The dinner was held in the private Garden Room of Café Milano in Georgetown on April 16, 2015. Notwithstanding the mounting bribery allegations against Zlochevsky, Hunter invited Pozharsky. Thus did the Burisma CFO get a coveted meeting with the sitting U.S. vice president. Pozharsky gushed in an email the following day, “Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together.” Pozharsky was soon headed to the airport but asked Hunter to meet for coffee before he departed.

Alas, Pozharsky was not gushing when he emailed Hunter, Archer, and their partner Eric Schwerin nearly six months later, on November 2. Instead, he was bemoaning the lack of “concrete tangible results that we set out to achieve in the first place” — referring, obviously, to Burisma’s installation of Hunter and Archer on its board in order to help Zlochevsky. Having looked at planning documents Hunter and his associates had just provided, Pozharsky complained that they failed to

" offer any names of top US officials here in Ukraine (for instance, the US Ambassador) or Ukrainian officials (the President of Ukraine, chief of staff, Prosecutor General) as key targets for improving Nicolay’s [i.e., Zlochevsky’s] case and his situation in Ukraine."

Of course, Pozharsky conceded, maybe this was intentional. After all, one should avoid naming names in such documents. That said, what was written was unimportant only as long as “all parties in fact understand the true purpose of the [Burisma] engagement and all our joint efforts.” It was critical, he asserted, for everyone to “be on the same page re our final goals.” Pozharsky thus demanded a list of “concrete deliverables,” including “meetings/communications resulting in high-ranking US officials in Ukraine (US ambassador) and in US publicly or in private communication/comment expressing their ‘positive opinion’ and support of [Zlochevsky]/Burisma to the highest level of decision makers” — repeating that this meant Ukraine’s president, chief of staff, and prosecutor general.

Pozharsky concluded this remarkably blunt email with the hope that “widely recognized and influential current and/or former US policy-makers” would come to Ukraine in the coming weeks to help achieve this “ultimate purpose to close down for any cases/pursuits against [Zlochevsky] in Ukraine.”

These are not the demands, and this is not the tone, of friends who are seeking a favor but of hard men who are paying dearly for a service and who are running out of patience — wondering whether it’s worth continuing to pay.

In a few short weeks, Burisma appears to have gotten what Pozharsky was demanding. Vice President Joe Biden came to Kyiv in early December and met with Ukraine’s president and other top officials. He threatened to withhold $1 billion of U.S. funding unless, within six hours, the regime fired Viktor Shokin — the prosecutor who was investigating Zlochevsky and Burisma.

Mind you, at the time, Ukraine was under siege by Russia. Perhaps you recall Donald Trump’s being impeached by Democrats for withholding aid from Kyiv while it was struggling to fight off Putin’s aggression in the east. But Biden was going to withhold $1 billion . . . over a prosecutor?

We know Biden did this because he bragged about it in a 2018 interview at the Council on Foreign Relations. Never having been the sharpest tool in the shed, he thought this helped him by showing his toughness as he prepared for his presidential run. He claimed it was all about — all together now — fighting corruption! In character, moreover, Biden exaggerated his role in getting the prosecutor axed. Shokin was not fired in six hours; it took four months of arm-twisting, and the threat by Christine Lagarde, director of the International Monetary Fund, to withhold $40 billion of Ukrainian aid — again, to fight corruption, it was said — had more to do with it than did Biden’s gambit.

That said, here we have Biden beating his chest about how he strong-armed Kyiv to fire the prosecutor who was then investigating Zlochevsky’s company — which we now know was then beseeching Biden’s son to persuade top U.S. officials to weigh in on Burisma’s behalf with top Ukrainian officials. If Biden’s very clear admission was not on video, does anyone doubt that he would now deny having said any such thing, just like he vehemently denies ever discussing the business dealings he risibly continues to claim were his son’s and not his own?

In early 2016, when the FBI informant met with Zlochevsky in Vienna, he asked about Shokin’s investigation of Burisma, which had gone public. “Don’t worry,” the informant recalled Zlochevsky responding, “Hunter will take care of all those issues through his dad.” Subsequently, he elaborated that he’d paid $10 million in bribes to the Bidens — half for the then–vice president, half for his son.

Mind you, that wasn’t going to be enough. Though Zlochevsky said he found Hunter useless (his dog, he said, was smarter), Burisma still needed to keep the vice president’s son on the board “so everything will be okay.” If that’s true, then the already obvious is explicit: Hunter’s lucrative sinecure was part of the bribe. And we know Hunter was on the board and was paid millions.

In a later phone call, Zlochevsky told the FBI informant that he wasn’t worried about law-enforcement heat over the bribes he said he had been forced to pay the Bidens. He claimed to have saved texts and recordings that would prove the coercion. Did he really? We can’t say . . . but is it really that hard to believe? Not if you’ve read the WhatsApp message in which Hunter makes extortionate demands of a Chinese business partner with, he claims, his father sitting right there beside him and ready to make the partner’s life miserable.

And Zlochevsky says his payments to the Bidens were structured in such a labyrinthine manner, using multiple companies and bank accounts, that it would take investigators “ten years” to trace the bribe dollars to Joe Biden. Does that really sound so unbelievable once one has studied the House Oversight Committee’s preliminary report? Bear in mind the Popoviciu payment scheme and the dozens of others like it with Chinese and other “business partners”: transaction after transaction in which millions of dollars come the Bidens’ way in exchange for no apparent comparable value.

Nothing, that is, except Joe Biden’s political influence.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

And yet Salty's contributions there are always defenses, apologia, or whataboutisms re Trump.

TLD is obviously referencing the totality of Salty's contributions...not limited to this thread.

What's left to say about HUNTER BIDEN ? It's all recycled old news. He'll either get indicted, tried & convicted, or he won't. Why roll around in the manure ?

None of that justifies what the Deep State apparatchiks did to scuttle BIDEN’S CAMPAIGN & sabotage his Presidency.
It's remarkable he accomplished as much as he HAS.

I'm on the record that I WOULD never voted for him & never will & that I'll support any of the other (R) candidates with the best chance to win.
I'll be pleased if HUNTER’s troubles deny him the nomination -- the sooner the better.

On the other hand, the dirt on the TRUMP is finally coming out & the media can't continue to ignore it.
It needs to be run to ground & proven or disproven.

Fixed this for you…..HBDS. YA slippin’…..2023….YA slippin….

[Farfromgeneva]

We also know the National Review is trash and has decayed for ages from what it once was which is anachronistic for folks who don’t bother trying and feel out of place in a post modern world.

Read & enjoy, Junior.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/07/ ... explained/

The Biden Family’s History of Influence-Peddling, Explained

by ANDREW C. MCCARTHY, July 22, 2023

Before Ukraine, the president’s playbook seems to have worked like a charm in Romania.
It was the spring of 2014, and Kyiv was in tumult. For all its talk about democracy, the Obama administration had enthusiastically supported the mass protests in western Ukraine that, on February 21, had ousted the democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovych.

Progressives have memory-holed much of this history. The Obama State Department and its European counterparts had an embarrassingly notorious hands-on role in the Maidan revolution and the new Ukrainian government that emerged in its aftermath. Predictably, this meddling in another nation’s domestic politics, to the point of toppling the elected government, was exploited by Vladimir Putin to rationalize Russia’s responsive aggression in eastern Ukraine — the annexation of Crimea and the border war that exploded into today’s full-out war when Moscow launched its February 2022 invasion.

Though more Euroskeptic than his political rivals in Kyiv, Yanukovych had leaned toward entering Ukraine into a political association and trade agreement with the European Union. As I detailed in Ball of Collusion, this prompted a furious reaction from the Kremlin, which was always in a natural position to leverage its neighbor’s dependence on Russian goodwill for energy supplies, safe commerce, and domestic tranquility. Putin thus threatened that if Yanukovych made his bed with the West, he would block Ukraine’s imports, slash its exports, cut off its energy lines, bleed its economy, and drive it into collapse. Yanukovych succumbed, ditching the European deal in favor of an alternative Russian pact. This accommodation, to fend off the bear on the border, triggered the internal strife that led inexorably to Yanukovych’s abdication and flight to safety in Moscow.

The post-Soviet history of Eastern Europe teaches that chaos is good for the profiteers.
Already one of the developed world’s most corrupt countries, Ukraine was in utter chaos when President Obama made his vice president, Joe Biden, an infamous hack with the pretensions of a geopolitical strategist, his point man for American policy there. Not exactly a boon for America, but it was a windfall for the Biden family business of cashing in on “the big guy’s” political influence.

In these badlands, standing up a new government — basically consisting of the people who were besieged by the ousted government — looks more like a battle of competing mafia protection rackets than an exercise in spontaneous democracy. For a corrupt company such as Burisma, it would mean new regulators demanding payoffs, in conjunction with the government’s existing extortionate demands.

As a confidential informant explained to the FBI (an explanation recorded in a Form 1023 report controversially made public this week), bribery is such a deep-seated part of business culture in Ukraine and Russia that businesses customarily account for it in budgeting — the Russian word for the line item is podmazat, which literally means to “oil, lubricate, or make things run smoothly.” Indeed, when Biden took the point on U.S. policy toward Kyiv, our close allies in Britain were about to pounce on Burisma’s well-heeled founder and CEO Mykola “Nikolay” Zlochevsky — in their ongoing bribery probe, the Brits would soon seize $23 million he’d squirreled away in London bank accounts, as Eastern European oligarchs were then wont to do.

Zlochevsky, then 48, had been a minister in Yanukovych’s government. He knew the long knives would be out for him — and not just from the new regime. The new Poroshenko government’s U.S. State Department patrons had put Zlochevsky on a “ban list,” preventing him from traveling to America. With his Ukrainian allies out of power, Zlochevsky would need new, potent allies to protect him and Burisma from his suddenly empowered Ukrainian rivals.

Joe Biden may not know much, but he knew that.
He also knew that the anti-corruption racket is a profitable one for people in power. The game works like this: You inveigh against corruption, ostensibly to encourage a corrupt but supposedly reforming regime to clean up its act; that, of course, increases the pressure on the regime’s corruption targets (e.g., those who’ve bribed their way to fortune); those targets, already no strangers to paying off whomever must be paid off, become more willing to pay the anti-corruption poseurs.

As the House Oversight Committee has shown (see preliminary report, pp. 11–17), Biden appears to have made this work like a charm in Romania.
In 2014 and 2015, when not railing at officials in Kyiv about corruption, he was railing at officials in Bucharest about corruption. At the time, one of their most high-profile corruption targets was Gabriel Popoviciu, a real-estate tycoon ultimately convicted of paying a bribe to acquire a highly desirable lot at a bargain price. While Vice President Biden pressured Romania to ratchet up anti-corruption prosecutions, Popoviciu paid Hunter Biden to use his connections to fend off the Romanian prosecutors.

As the committee documents, the payments were structured to conceal the fact that they were coming from Popoviciu: multiple payments over time by the Romanian tycoon’s business (Bladon Enterprises Limited) to the Bidens’ business partner, Rob Walker. Because smaller money transfers draw less regulatory attention, Walker parceled out Popoviciu’s transfers into smaller payments and doled them out, over time, to various Hunter Biden accounts and accounts of business associates, and even sent $10,000 to an account of Hallie Biden — Beau Biden’s widow with whom Hunter was romantically involved. All in the family.

Amazing how this works: After the vice president congratulated President Klaus Iohannis on the strides Romania was making to crack down on corruption, Hunter stepped up efforts for Popoviciu — the incumbent vice president’s son using his contacts to beseech State Department officials to help a Romanian corruption target’s lawyers get a meeting with Romanian anti-corruption prosecutors. In the midst of the payments from Popoviciu detailed by the committee (which stretched from November 2015 through the end of his father’s term in office), Hunter wrote in one email on behalf of his Romanian client, “He is in my estimation a very good man that’s being very badly treated by a suspect Romanian justice system” (emphasis added). I’m sure you’ll be shocked to hear that the Romanian courts didn’t see it that way, upholding Popoviciu’s nine-year prison sentence.

With Romania and the committee report as background, should we really be all that surprised about the allegations that emerged this week implicating Joe Biden in Ukrainian bribery schemes?

On April 16, 2014, with Kyiv still in upheaval, Vice President Biden was visited at the White House by Hunter and Devon Archer, Hunter’s longtime chum and business partner (who is now looking at prison time, in addition to tens of millions of dollars in fines and restitution costs, after recently losing the appeal of his 2022 federal fraud conviction over a $60 million fraud scheme). Just five days later, Vice President Biden was in Ukraine to conduct various meetings and — well, wouldn’t you know it — the very next day (April 22) it was announced that Archer had been named to the Burisma board of directors, with Hunter’s installation to that board already quietly in the works.

The press lauded Joe Biden as the face of American policy in Ukraine. We don’t know everyone he met with on his visit to Ukraine, nor everyone he spoke with about it. We do know, however, that Zlochevsky told the FBI’s informant he had spoken with both Joe and Hunter Biden about placing Hunter in a lucrative position on Burisma’s board — though the younger Biden, who’d just been ousted from a cushy Navy appointment over his cocaine use, had no experience in the energy sector.

Burisma’s chief financial officer was Vadim Pozharsky. That’s a name you want to remember. The FBI’s informant attended a business meeting with Burisma executives in late 2015 or early 2016, during which Pozharsky explained that the company had hired Hunter to “protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems.” As we shall see, this is completely consistent with statements we know Pozharsky has made.

Hunter did not formally join his partner Archer on the Burisma board until May 12, 2014. In the intervening three weeks, two important things happened. First, the aforementioned British seizure of Zlochevsky’s accounts in London on April 28. Second, well, Burisma started paying up.

As related in a report compiled by Senators Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) and Ron Johnson (R., Wis.), the funds started rolling in with a quarter-million-dollar transfer on May 7 to the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, where Hunter (who went to law school) was “of counsel” (see report, pp. 66–68). Not coincidentally, Boies Schiller is the same firm used by Hunter in the Popoviciu caper. In all, Burisma paid Hunter Biden and Archer over $4 million combined. A big chunk of it came during Joe Biden’s vice presidency. And — mirabile dictu — it seems, for some unfathomable reason, that Hunter’s salary was halved once his father was out of office.

The day Hunter formally joined Burisma’s board, he and Archer were sent an “urgent issue” email by Pozharsky. After alluding to their recent meetings together in Lake Como in Lombardy, Pozharsky reminded his new partners about the new Ukrainian regime’s tormenting of Zlochevsky, which he referred to alternatively as “blackmailing” and as efforts to extort him for money. Because these tactics had been unsuccessful, the regime had now moved on to “concrete” legal actions aimed at “intimidating” Burisma’s commercial contacts and “destabilizing” its business. Consequently, Pozharsky stressed, “we urgently need your advice on how you could use your influence to convey a message/signal, etc., to stop what we consider to be politically motivated actions.”

Hunter responded that he was with Archer in Doha, Qatar, and asked for more information about “the formal (if any) accusations being made against Burisma.” “Who,” he asked, was “ultimately behind these attacks on the company? Who in the current interim government could put an end to such attacks?” Meantime, Hunter and Archer immediately began work on trying to get Zlochevsky removed from the State Department’s ban list in hopes of helping him obtain a visa — a project for which they enlisted Boies Schiller’s help.

By December, however, even with the U.S. vice president’s son on his board, Zlochevsky apparently decided to deal with his troubles the old-fashioned way: by paying a $7 million bribe to officials at the office of Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Vitaly Yarema. State Department official George Kent learned about the bribe, reporting it to his superiors and the FBI. He also raised the concern with the vice president’s office that Hunter Biden’s association with Zlochevsky was compromising the Obama administration’s anti-corruption efforts.

I know you’ll be stunned to hear this, but Vice President Biden took no action.

Hunter and Archer, of course, continued working for Burisma and Zlochevsky. In early 2015, they began planning a dinner party in Washington at which Vice President Biden would stop by and meet a number of their business associates. The dinner was held in the private Garden Room of Café Milano in Georgetown on April 16, 2015. Notwithstanding the mounting bribery allegations against Zlochevsky, Hunter invited Pozharsky. Thus did the Burisma CFO get a coveted meeting with the sitting U.S. vice president. Pozharsky gushed in an email the following day, “Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together.” Pozharsky was soon headed to the airport but asked Hunter to meet for coffee before he departed.

Alas, Pozharsky was not gushing when he emailed Hunter, Archer, and their partner Eric Schwerin nearly six months later, on November 2. Instead, he was bemoaning the lack of “concrete tangible results that we set out to achieve in the first place” — referring, obviously, to Burisma’s installation of Hunter and Archer on its board in order to help Zlochevsky. Having looked at planning documents Hunter and his associates had just provided, Pozharsky complained that they failed to

" offer any names of top US officials here in Ukraine (for instance, the US Ambassador) or Ukrainian officials (the President of Ukraine, chief of staff, Prosecutor General) as key targets for improving Nicolay’s [i.e., Zlochevsky’s] case and his situation in Ukraine."

Of course, Pozharsky conceded, maybe this was intentional. After all, one should avoid naming names in such documents. That said, what was written was unimportant only as long as “all parties in fact understand the true purpose of the [Burisma] engagement and all our joint efforts.” It was critical, he asserted, for everyone to “be on the same page re our final goals.” Pozharsky thus demanded a list of “concrete deliverables,” including “meetings/communications resulting in high-ranking US officials in Ukraine (US ambassador) and in US publicly or in private communication/comment expressing their ‘positive opinion’ and support of [Zlochevsky]/Burisma to the highest level of decision makers” — repeating that this meant Ukraine’s president, chief of staff, and prosecutor general.

Pozharsky concluded this remarkably blunt email with the hope that “widely recognized and influential current and/or former US policy-makers” would come to Ukraine in the coming weeks to help achieve this “ultimate purpose to close down for any cases/pursuits against [Zlochevsky] in Ukraine.”

These are not the demands, and this is not the tone, of friends who are seeking a favor but of hard men who are paying dearly for a service and who are running out of patience — wondering whether it’s worth continuing to pay.

In a few short weeks, Burisma appears to have gotten what Pozharsky was demanding. Vice President Joe Biden came to Kyiv in early December and met with Ukraine’s president and other top officials. He threatened to withhold $1 billion of U.S. funding unless, within six hours, the regime fired Viktor Shokin — the prosecutor who was investigating Zlochevsky and Burisma.

Mind you, at the time, Ukraine was under siege by Russia. Perhaps you recall Donald Trump’s being impeached by Democrats for withholding aid from Kyiv while it was struggling to fight off Putin’s aggression in the east. But Biden was going to withhold $1 billion . . . over a prosecutor?

We know Biden did this because he bragged about it in a 2018 interview at the Council on Foreign Relations. Never having been the sharpest tool in the shed, he thought this helped him by showing his toughness as he prepared for his presidential run. He claimed it was all about — all together now — fighting corruption! In character, moreover, Biden exaggerated his role in getting the prosecutor axed. Shokin was not fired in six hours; it took four months of arm-twisting, and the threat by Christine Lagarde, director of the International Monetary Fund, to withhold $40 billion of Ukrainian aid — again, to fight corruption, it was said — had more to do with it than did Biden’s gambit.

That said, here we have Biden beating his chest about how he strong-armed Kyiv to fire the prosecutor who was then investigating Zlochevsky’s company — which we now know was then beseeching Biden’s son to persuade top U.S. officials to weigh in on Burisma’s behalf with top Ukrainian officials. If Biden’s very clear admission was not on video, does anyone doubt that he would now deny having said any such thing, just like he vehemently denies ever discussing the business dealings he risibly continues to claim were his son’s and not his own?

In early 2016, when the FBI informant met with Zlochevsky in Vienna, he asked about Shokin’s investigation of Burisma, which had gone public. “Don’t worry,” the informant recalled Zlochevsky responding, “Hunter will take care of all those issues through his dad.” Subsequently, he elaborated that he’d paid $10 million in bribes to the Bidens — half for the then–vice president, half for his son.

Mind you, that wasn’t going to be enough. Though Zlochevsky said he found Hunter useless (his dog, he said, was smarter), Burisma still needed to keep the vice president’s son on the board “so everything will be okay.” If that’s true, then the already obvious is explicit: Hunter’s lucrative sinecure was part of the bribe. And we know Hunter was on the board and was paid millions.

In a later phone call, Zlochevsky told the FBI informant that he wasn’t worried about law-enforcement heat over the bribes he said he had been forced to pay the Bidens. He claimed to have saved texts and recordings that would prove the coercion. Did he really? We can’t say . . . but is it really that hard to believe? Not if you’ve read the WhatsApp message in which Hunter makes extortionate demands of a Chinese business partner with, he claims, his father sitting right there beside him and ready to make the partner’s life miserable.

And Zlochevsky says his payments to the Bidens were structured in such a labyrinthine manner, using multiple companies and bank accounts, that it would take investigators “ten years” to trace the bribe dollars to Joe Biden. Does that really sound so unbelievable once one has studied the House Oversight Committee’s preliminary report? Bear in mind the Popoviciu payment scheme and the dozens of others like it with Chinese and other “business partners”: transaction after transaction in which millions of dollars come the Bidens’ way in exchange for no apparent comparable value.

Nothing, that is, except Joe Biden’s political influence.

Why would I read that if I don’t trust your analytical abilities and read plenty on my own that comes from quality sources? Anachronistic, the NR, your mindset, it’s all outdated and a prentice attempt at intellectualism where little exists. No different than three liberals pontificating in a deli in Gramercy Park on the meaning of life.

The sad thing is you don’t even distinguish between journalism and theory/analysis and the filtering differences. Cry about buses and habe tons yourself you are incapable of overcoming as you call me jr it only illustrates how irrelevant and far you’ve fallen from common and decent society.

[MDlaxfan76]

To drag it out until the SOL for 2014 & 2015 ran, extend it beyond the 2020 & 2022 elections, then take a sweetheart plea deal before the 2024 election campaign begins, while publicly embracing Hunter at every opportunity.
The latest Biden family tragedy overcome, except for grandkid #7.

1. That's Barr's CHOICE, my man. There's nothing on the books...and if he explains that the man didn't pay his taxes, and the limitations are gonna run out? Who in the F is going to complain besides idiots?

2. Now you're back to explaining why, if they were covering for Hunter, they didn't rip the band aid off WAY before 2023.

It just doesn't hold water, no matter how much you try and force it. What's more, it's plain you know this, and are just spooling me up.

Enjoy your weekend!

That wasn't Barr's CHOICE. It was his BELIEF which prompted him to return to Govt service. That the DoJ (most visibly via Comey's FBI) had interfered in the 2016 election campaign, influenced the outcome, then sabotaged the incoming Presidency.

That's fine. But you cannot escape that it was his call. No reasonable person would have complained the IRS for hitting Hunter on tax problems from 2015 and 2016. No reasonable person believes that Hunter's taxes have anything to do his mom, dad, uncle, or anyone else.

File the charges. Hold the election.

I gotta say, it's bit rich to hear that Barr's ethics prevented him from green lighting a prosecution because it involved a family member of a candidate, not the candidate...And how do we know this? Barr came back not for his ego but because he wanted to clean up the DOJ and FBI (I guess with Trump appointee Wray) from political interference...and then proceeded to interfere massively, politically...again and again and again.

But hey, he did tell the truth to Trump that he'd lost the election...so, there's that...

We know because Barr told us why he was coming back. You think Barr liked Trump, or enjoyed working for him ? He concluded that the DoJ interfered in the election & was trying to sabotage a duly elected Presidency.

So, he was delusional?

No, I think he had fallen into MAGA-Fox-think and had/has an enormous ego. You have to have an enormous ego to, from the outside, conclude that you actually know better than the FBI whether Trump had colluded with Russia, whether there was evidence to suspect such. That investigating such was totally unreasonable, an effort to "sabotage"...Anyone with even a smidgen of humility would have realized that there was plenty of reason to at least suspect such efforts and to realize that the FBI would know far more than Joe citizen...including Bill Barr...

He interfered massively politically during his tenure in the job, made all sorts of politically motivated decisions on behalf of Trump and his allies, and established a Special Counsel specifically to target the likely opponent of Trump...this was not a guy who had a "belief" that the DOJ should be apolitical, just a 'belief' that the DOJ should do the political work convenient to his own party. And only on behalf of his party...

Barr didn't join the Trump admin until 2 yrs into the term. He could see the leaks from the DoJ & IC, just like we could. He saw the DoJ IG's report on the FBI lovebirds. He could see what' was going on, while confirmation biased fools lapped up everything fed to the media by the HRC/DNC/Fusion/Steele disinfo op.

yeah, he was so upset...I mean, obviously, he knew without a doubt that "the DoJ interfered in the election & was trying to sabotage a duly elected Presidency."

Of course the Russians didn't interfere, of course Trump's Campaign didn't welcome that interference, of course the FBI shouldn't have investigated...but they SHOULD have announced that they were reopening an investigation into the Dem candidate right before the 2016 election...obviously...that wasn't "interference", that was helpful to Trump...

So, when Trump fires the FBI Director because he wouldn't swear loyalty to Trump (he SHOULD have, obviously), Barr obviously knows that the DOJ shouldn't investigate the Russian matter any further, no, of course they should drop it...

So, Barr knows that he's the guy who should come in and set things straight. He lets Trump know that he believes in a the "unitary powers of the Presidency", meaning the FBI Director SHOULD be loyal to the President. The DOJ and FBI, after all are part of the Executive, and SHOULD take orders on who to prosecute and who not from the President. And as AG, Barr knows before he even has the job that he should drop prosecutions of any of Trump's political allies and he should open investigations into Trump's political opponents. That's why he's being hired...to do the President's political wishes.

Of course.

[a fan]

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

And yet Salty's contributions there are always defenses, apologia, or whataboutisms re Trump.

TLD is obviously referencing the totality of Salty's contributions...not limited to this thread.

What's left to say about Trump ? It's all recycled old news. He'll either get indicted, tried & convicted, or he won't.
He'll either get nominated or he won't. He'll either be elected or he won't. Why roll around in the manure ?

None of that justifies what the Deep State apparatchiks did to scuttle Trump's campaigns & sabotage his Presidency.
It's remarkable he accomplished as much as he did.

I'm on the record that I've never voted for him & never will & that I'll support any of the other (R) candidates with the best chance to win.
I'll be pleased if Trump's troubles deny him the nomination -- the sooner the better.

On the other hand, the dirt on the Biden clan is finally coming out & the media can't continue to ignore it.
It needs to be run to ground & proven or disproven.

You just said the quiet part out loud again.

You claim that the FBI should never have investigated TeamTrump, and that it's not ok to go after a sitting POTUS like that. That's off limits.

Yet here you are in the last sentence DEMANDING that the FBI investigate Biden while he's in office.

This is why we argue about this Deep State stuff, OS. For the life of me, I don't understand why you can't see your double standard. Everyone else sees it but you.

What needs to happen to get you to see your double standard?


What's more------if Biden was "obviously" corrupt to the point where it "can't be ignored"? Where was the Trump DoJ and FBI? Asleep at the wheel for four years?

[Farfromgeneva]

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

And yet Salty's contributions there are always defenses, apologia, or whataboutisms re Trump.

TLD is obviously referencing the totality of Salty's contributions...not limited to this thread.

What's left to say about Trump ? It's all recycled old news. He'll either get indicted, tried & convicted, or he won't.
He'll either get nominated or he won't. He'll either be elected or he won't. Why roll around in the manure ?

None of that justifies what the Deep State apparatchiks did to scuttle Trump's campaigns & sabotage his Presidency.
It's remarkable he accomplished as much as he did.

I'm on the record that I've never voted for him & never will & that I'll support any of the other (R) candidates with the best chance to win.
I'll be pleased if Trump's troubles deny him the nomination -- the sooner the better.

On the other hand, the dirt on the Biden clan is finally coming out & the media can't continue to ignore it.
It needs to be run to ground & proven or disproven.

You just said the quiet part out loud again.

You claim that the FBI should never have investigated TeamTrump, and that it's not ok to go after a sitting POTUS like that. That's off limits.

Yet here you are in the last sentence DEMANDING that the FBI investigate Biden while he's in office.

This is why we argue about this Deep State stuff, OS. For the life of me, I don't understand why you can't see your double standard. Everyone else sees it but you.

What needs to happen to get you to see your double standard?


What's more------if Biden was "obviously" corrupt to the point where it "can't be ignored"? Where was the Trump DoJ and FBI? Asleep at the wheel for four years?

Wonder if you’ll get a derivative of “they did it first” in response.

[Kismet]

Who knows ? Maybe Manafort & Gates would have skated had they not jumped on the Trump bandwagon. ...& we'd never have heard of FARA.

You do realize you haven’t said peep about Trump’s troubles and they are far more serious than anything involving Hunter Biden. You have HBDS…..you have fallen pretty far off your perch over the past 8 years but I saw it coming.

What's the name of this thread again?? There are plenty of threads here dedicated solely for defecating on the trump crime syndicate. You knew that already.

And yet Salty's contributions there are always defenses, apologia, or whataboutisms re Trump.

TLD is obviously referencing the totality of Salty's contributions...not limited to this thread.

What's left to say about Trump ? It's all recycled old news. He'll either get indicted, tried & convicted, or he won't.
He'll either get nominated or he won't. He'll either be elected or he won't. Why roll around in the manure ?

None of that justifies what the Deep State apparatchiks did to scuttle Trump's campaigns & sabotage his Presidency.
It's remarkable he accomplished as much as he did.

I'm on the record that I've never voted for him & never will & that I'll support any of the other (R) candidates with the best chance to win.
I'll be pleased if Trump's troubles deny him the nomination -- the sooner the better.

On the other hand, the dirt on the Biden clan is finally coming out & the media can't continue to ignore it.
It needs to be run to ground & proven or disproven.

You just said the quiet part out loud again.

You claim that the FBI should never have investigated TeamTrump, and that it's not ok to go after a sitting POTUS like that. That's off limits.

Yet here you are in the last sentence DEMANDING that the FBI investigate Biden while he's in office.

This is why we argue about this Deep State stuff, OS. For the life of me, I don't understand why you can't see your double standard. Everyone else sees it but you.

What needs to happen to get you to see your double standard?


What's more------if Biden was "obviously" corrupt to the point where it "can't be ignored"? Where was the Trump DoJ and FBI? Asleep at the wheel for four years?

Salty's disingenuous double standard disappeared many moons ago - still shilling for someone he doesn't agree with and never voted for while calling for the current POTUS to be convicted for some kind of crimes he can't quite enumerate while advocating that Orange Cheato gets a free pass.

MUUUUUUUAHHHHHHH

[old salt]

What's left to say about Trump ? It's all recycled old news. He'll either get indicted, tried & convicted, or he won't.
He'll either get nominated or he won't. He'll either be elected or he won't. Why roll around in the manure ?

None of that justifies what the Deep State apparatchiks did to scuttle Trump's campaigns & sabotage his Presidency.
It's remarkable he accomplished as much as he did.

I'm on the record that I've never voted for him & never will & that I'll support any of the other (R) candidates with the best chance to win.
I'll be pleased if Trump's troubles deny him the nomination -- the sooner the better.

On the other hand, the dirt on the Biden clan is finally coming out & the media can't continue to ignore it.
It needs to be run to ground & proven or disproven.

You just said the quiet part out loud again.

You claim that the FBI should never have investigated TeamTrump, and that it's not ok to go after a sitting POTUS like that. That's off limits.

Yet here you are in the last sentence DEMANDING that the FBI investigate Biden while he's in office.

This is why we argue about this Deep State stuff, OS. For the life of me, I don't understand why you can't see your double standard. Everyone else sees it but you.

What needs to happen to get you to see your double standard?

What's more------if Biden was "obviously" corrupt to the point where it "can't be ignored"? Where was the Trump DoJ and FBI? Asleep at the wheel for four years?

Salty's disingenuous double standard disappeared many moons ago - still shilling for someone he doesn't agree with and never voted for while calling for the current POTUS to be convicted for some kind of crimes he can't quite enumerate while advocating that Orange Cheato gets a free pass.

MUUUUUUUAHHHHHHH

You're the one who should have the red face, laughing boy. I called out the bogus Russia Russia Russia hoax from the outset of the campaign in 2015. Remember my Boris & Natasha cartoons. I pointed out the media's attempt to smear Flynn, even before the "lock her up" cheer. The call from Farkas for leaks, then Ignatius publishing the classified leak of Flynn's perfectly legal ph call. After 2 years of Xfire Hurricane & the Mueller probe, no actionable findings of collusion, conspiracy or espionage were produced. The govt complicity in the bogus Steele dossier, then the revelation that it was Russian disinfo, funded & initiated by Clinton. Trump never had a chance. It's a miracle that he was able to complete his term & accomplish as much as he did. He was, & remains, a very imperfect messenger, but his message still resonates & should not be discounted.

After years of slow walking, obstructed investigations & media purposeful disinterest, the Biden family dealings are finally getting the scrutiny they deserve. Why the fear of finding out what's there ?

[Typical Lax Dad]

What's left to say about Trump ? It's all recycled old news. He'll either get indicted, tried & convicted, or he won't.
He'll either get nominated or he won't. He'll either be elected or he won't. Why roll around in the manure ?

None of that justifies what the Deep State apparatchiks did to scuttle Trump's campaigns & sabotage his Presidency.
It's remarkable he accomplished as much as he did.

I'm on the record that I've never voted for him & never will & that I'll support any of the other (R) candidates with the best chance to win.
I'll be pleased if Trump's troubles deny him the nomination -- the sooner the better.

On the other hand, the dirt on the Biden clan is finally coming out & the media can't continue to ignore it.
It needs to be run to ground & proven or disproven.

You just said the quiet part out loud again.

You claim that the FBI should never have investigated TeamTrump, and that it's not ok to go after a sitting POTUS like that. That's off limits.

Yet here you are in the last sentence DEMANDING that the FBI investigate Biden while he's in office.

This is why we argue about this Deep State stuff, OS. For the life of me, I don't understand why you can't see your double standard. Everyone else sees it but you.

What needs to happen to get you to see your double standard?

What's more------if Biden was "obviously" corrupt to the point where it "can't be ignored"? Where was the Trump DoJ and FBI? Asleep at the wheel for four years?

Salty's disingenuous double standard disappeared many moons ago - still shilling for someone he doesn't agree with and never voted for while calling for the current POTUS to be convicted for some kind of crimes he can't quite enumerate while advocating that Orange Cheato gets a free pass.

MUUUUUUUAHHHHHHH

You're the one who should have the red face, laughing boy. I called out the bogus Russia Russia Russia hoax from the outset of the campaign in 2015. Remember my Boris & Natasha cartoons. I pointed out the media's attempt to smear Flynn, even before the "lock her up" cheer. The call from Farkas for leaks, then Ignatius publishing the classified leak of Flynn's perfectly legal ph call. After 2 years of Xfire Hurricane & the Mueller probe, no actionable findings of collusion, conspiracy or espionage were produced. The govt complicity in the bogus Steele dossier, then the revelation that it was Russian disinfo, funded & initiated by Clinton. Trump never had a chance. It's a miracle that he was able to complete his term & accomplish as much as he did. He was, & remains, a very imperfect messenger, but his message still resonates & should not be discounted.

After years of slow walking, obstructed investigations & media purposeful disinterest, the Biden family dealings are finally getting the scrutiny they deserve. Why the fear of finding out what's there ?

Drivel