Hunter Biden Tinfoil issues

[old salt]

False is false douche bag. STFU.

Respectfully of course.

Hey look — Bigfoot!!!!

Man how far the Colonel Klink has fallen. All that nomenclature and remembering facts that were drilled into his brain doesn’t make up for faulty reasoning.

Wow ! ...a Valentine from Victoria Nuland.

https://nypost.com/2023/08/23/team-obam ... him-fired/
Team Obama loved Victor Shokin, so why did Joe Biden get him fired?

Officials in the Obama administration were reportedly pleased with Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin before then-Vice President Joe Biden got him fired in 2016.

Victor Shokin — the top Ukraine prosecutor whom then-Veep Joe Biden got fired in March 2016 for alleged malfeasance — sure was popular with the rest of the Obama administration.

That love shines through in newly unearthed documents:
“We have been impressed with the ambitious reform and anti-corruption agenda of your government,” gushed the State Department’s Ukraine point person Victoria Nuland to Shokin in summer 2015.
“Ukraine has made sufficient progress on its reform agenda to justify a third guarantee” of aid money, noted another federal functionary that October.

So why did Biden single him out for disposal?
One thing we know: It sure did help his son Hunter.
Remember: Shokin was fired right as he was breathing down the neck of Ukrainian energy company Burisma.
And Burisma, you’ll recall, had made ne’er-do-well Hunter a board member with a sky-high salary despite his literal zero experience either in global business (other than influence-peddling) or energy exploration and exploitation.
Do we have to draw a picture here?

Biden claimed that he told officials in 2015 that he would withhold funds from Ukraine if Shokin wasn't removed from office.

Look: As late as January 2016, the CIA was dumping on claims that Shokin was crooked.
When rumors started to buzz in-country that further aid money was tied to Shokin’s ouster, the agency responded with a literal “Yikes.”
So said agency Ukraine expert Eric Ciaramella, later adding (of a DC meeting with senior leaders from Shokin’s office): “We were super impressed with the group, and we had a two-hour discussion of their priorities and the obstacles they face.”
“Super impressed” does not sound anywhere close to “this guy is crooked and must go.”

Biden’s turned the tale of his move against Shokin into one of his fake tough-guy anecdotes, bragging to the Council on Foreign Relations in 2018 that on his December 2015 trip to Kyiv, “I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b—. He got fired.”
But it sure doesn’t sound like anyone else in the White House thought Shokin was corrupt.

You know who did consider Shokin bad news, though?
Hunter’s former partner, Devon Archer.
Archer told former Fox host Tucker Carlson on his new show that Shokin “was a threat.”
Why? Because “he ended up seizing assets” from Burisma’s owner Mykola Zlochevsky, who reportedly told a credible FBI informant that he had paid $10 million in bribes to Hunter and Joe.
And Archer has testified before Congress that Zlochevsky and fellow Burisma big Vadym Pozharsky asked Hunter in December 2015 to make a call to DC to help relieve the “pressure” they were feeling from Shokin.

In other words: Biden’s biggest Ukraine smokescreen has been utterly blown apart.
The president has risibly said of the affair: “I did nothing wrong. I carried out the policy of the United States government in rooting out corruption in Ukraine.”
But the claim that Shokin — whose remit was to root out corruption within Ukraine — was crooked always smelled bad.
And now we have the receipts showing this stinks to high heaven — and indicating (yet again) that Joe is almost certainly lying about Hunter’s corruption and his own.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The Biden's need to be investigated with the same zeal as the Trump's were.

You mean like a Five year long (and counting) investigation into Hunter and Joe's dealing in Ukraine, using not one, not two, but three separate agencies....all run by Republicans for two years, and then two of three of the Departments run by Republicans for the last three years?

And a SP appointed, who is again, a Republican. That qualifies, does it not?

Yeah. I'm still waiting for the answers.

You already have the relevant, important answer: none of those Departments opened a case on Joe. If they had? Ok, now you have the attention of reasonable, non-partisan Americans.

But they didn't. So....we're good.

It's the same for Kush and his $2 Billion, OS. It's disgusting, and stinks to high heaven. But it's not illegal. How do I know this? No one from the IRS, FBI, or DoJ opened a case on that matter, because they didn't have probable cause to do so. So I'm good. No tinfoil needed.......

Exactly. Unethical isn’t illegal. Saudis killed all those Americans on 9/11 but Old Salt likes the fact that Jared was paid for carrying their water. He is still mad at Hillary for Benghazi and Joe for Afghanistan.

[Typical Lax Dad]

False is false douche bag. STFU.

Respectfully of course.

Hey look — Bigfoot!!!!

Man how far the Colonel Klink has fallen. All that nomenclature and remembering facts that were drilled into his brain doesn’t make up for faulty reasoning.

Wow ! ...a Valentine from Victoria Nuland.

https://nypost.com/2023/08/23/team-obam ... him-fired/
Team Obama loved Victor Shokin, so why did Joe Biden get him fired?

Officials in the Obama administration were reportedly pleased with Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin before then-Vice President Joe Biden got him fired in 2016.

Victor Shokin — the top Ukraine prosecutor whom then-Veep Joe Biden got fired in March 2016 for alleged malfeasance — sure was popular with the rest of the Obama administration.

That love shines through in newly unearthed documents:
“We have been impressed with the ambitious reform and anti-corruption agenda of your government,” gushed the State Department’s Ukraine point person Victoria Nuland to Shokin in summer 2015.
“Ukraine has made sufficient progress on its reform agenda to justify a third guarantee” of aid money, noted another federal functionary that October.

So why did Biden single him out for disposal?
One thing we know: It sure did help his son Hunter.
Remember: Shokin was fired right as he was breathing down the neck of Ukrainian energy company Burisma.
And Burisma, you’ll recall, had made ne’er-do-well Hunter a board member with a sky-high salary despite his literal zero experience either in global business (other than influence-peddling) or energy exploration and exploitation.
Do we have to draw a picture here?

Biden claimed that he told officials in 2015 that he would withhold funds from Ukraine if Shokin wasn't removed from office.

Look: As late as January 2016, the CIA was dumping on claims that Shokin was crooked.
When rumors started to buzz in-country that further aid money was tied to Shokin’s ouster, the agency responded with a literal “Yikes.”
So said agency Ukraine expert Eric Ciaramella, later adding (of a DC meeting with senior leaders from Shokin’s office): “We were super impressed with the group, and we had a two-hour discussion of their priorities and the obstacles they face.”
“Super impressed” does not sound anywhere close to “this guy is crooked and must go.”

Biden’s turned the tale of his move against Shokin into one of his fake tough-guy anecdotes, bragging to the Council on Foreign Relations in 2018 that on his December 2015 trip to Kyiv, “I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b—. He got fired.”
But it sure doesn’t sound like anyone else in the White House thought Shokin was corrupt.

You know who did consider Shokin bad news, though?
Hunter’s former partner, Devon Archer.
Archer told former Fox host Tucker Carlson on his new show that Shokin “was a threat.”
Why? Because “he ended up seizing assets” from Burisma’s owner Mykola Zlochevsky, who reportedly told a credible FBI informant that he had paid $10 million in bribes to Hunter and Joe.
And Archer has testified before Congress that Zlochevsky and fellow Burisma big Vadym Pozharsky asked Hunter in December 2015 to make a call to DC to help relieve the “pressure” they were feeling from Shokin.

In other words: Biden’s biggest Ukraine smokescreen has been utterly blown apart.
The president has risibly said of the affair: “I did nothing wrong. I carried out the policy of the United States government in rooting out corruption in Ukraine.”
But the claim that Shokin — whose remit was to root out corruption within Ukraine — was crooked always smelled bad.
And now we have the receipts showing this stinks to high heaven — and indicating (yet again) that Joe is almost certainly lying about Hunter’s corruption and his own.

Joe was cleaning up the state department mess left behind by Hillary and the Obama administration.

[a fan]

False is false douche bag. STFU.

Respectfully of course.

Hey look — Bigfoot!!!!

Man how far the Colonel Klink has fallen. All that nomenclature and remembering facts that were drilled into his brain doesn’t make up for faulty reasoning.

Wow ! ...a Valentine from Victoria Nuland.

https://nypost.com/2023/08/23/team-obam ... him-fired/
Team Obama loved Victor Shokin, so why did Joe Biden get him fired?

Officials in the Obama administration were reportedly pleased with Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin before then-Vice President Joe Biden got him fired in 2016.

Victor Shokin — the top Ukraine prosecutor whom then-Veep Joe Biden got fired in March 2016 for alleged malfeasance — sure was popular with the rest of the Obama administration.

That love shines through in newly unearthed documents:
“We have been impressed with the ambitious reform and anti-corruption agenda of your government,” gushed the State Department’s Ukraine point person Victoria Nuland to Shokin in summer 2015.
“Ukraine has made sufficient progress on its reform agenda to justify a third guarantee” of aid money, noted another federal functionary that October.

So why did Biden single him out for disposal?
One thing we know: It sure did help his son Hunter.
Remember: Shokin was fired right as he was breathing down the neck of Ukrainian energy company Burisma.
And Burisma, you’ll recall, had made ne’er-do-well Hunter a board member with a sky-high salary despite his literal zero experience either in global business (other than influence-peddling) or energy exploration and exploitation.
Do we have to draw a picture here?

Biden claimed that he told officials in 2015 that he would withhold funds from Ukraine if Shokin wasn't removed from office.

Look: As late as January 2016, the CIA was dumping on claims that Shokin was crooked.
When rumors started to buzz in-country that further aid money was tied to Shokin’s ouster, the agency responded with a literal “Yikes.”
So said agency Ukraine expert Eric Ciaramella, later adding (of a DC meeting with senior leaders from Shokin’s office): “We were super impressed with the group, and we had a two-hour discussion of their priorities and the obstacles they face.”
“Super impressed” does not sound anywhere close to “this guy is crooked and must go.”

Biden’s turned the tale of his move against Shokin into one of his fake tough-guy anecdotes, bragging to the Council on Foreign Relations in 2018 that on his December 2015 trip to Kyiv, “I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b—. He got fired.”
But it sure doesn’t sound like anyone else in the White House thought Shokin was corrupt.

You know who did consider Shokin bad news, though?
Hunter’s former partner, Devon Archer.
Archer told former Fox host Tucker Carlson on his new show that Shokin “was a threat.”
Why? Because “he ended up seizing assets” from Burisma’s owner Mykola Zlochevsky, who reportedly told a credible FBI informant that he had paid $10 million in bribes to Hunter and Joe.
And Archer has testified before Congress that Zlochevsky and fellow Burisma big Vadym Pozharsky asked Hunter in December 2015 to make a call to DC to help relieve the “pressure” they were feeling from Shokin.

In other words: Biden’s biggest Ukraine smokescreen has been utterly blown apart.
The president has risibly said of the affair: “I did nothing wrong. I carried out the policy of the United States government in rooting out corruption in Ukraine.”
But the claim that Shokin — whose remit was to root out corruption within Ukraine — was crooked always smelled bad.
And now we have the receipts showing this stinks to high heaven — and indicating (yet again) that Joe is almost certainly lying about Hunter’s corruption and his own.

You already told us, MULTIPLE times, that you don't care about these conflicts of interest.

[Typical Lax Dad]

False is false douche bag. STFU.

Respectfully of course.

Hey look — Bigfoot!!!!

Man how far the Colonel Klink has fallen. All that nomenclature and remembering facts that were drilled into his brain doesn’t make up for faulty reasoning.

Wow ! ...a Valentine from Victoria Nuland.

https://nypost.com/2023/08/23/team-obam ... him-fired/
Team Obama loved Victor Shokin, so why did Joe Biden get him fired?

Officials in the Obama administration were reportedly pleased with Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin before then-Vice President Joe Biden got him fired in 2016.

Victor Shokin — the top Ukraine prosecutor whom then-Veep Joe Biden got fired in March 2016 for alleged malfeasance — sure was popular with the rest of the Obama administration.

That love shines through in newly unearthed documents:
“We have been impressed with the ambitious reform and anti-corruption agenda of your government,” gushed the State Department’s Ukraine point person Victoria Nuland to Shokin in summer 2015.
“Ukraine has made sufficient progress on its reform agenda to justify a third guarantee” of aid money, noted another federal functionary that October.

So why did Biden single him out for disposal?
One thing we know: It sure did help his son Hunter.
Remember: Shokin was fired right as he was breathing down the neck of Ukrainian energy company Burisma.
And Burisma, you’ll recall, had made ne’er-do-well Hunter a board member with a sky-high salary despite his literal zero experience either in global business (other than influence-peddling) or energy exploration and exploitation.
Do we have to draw a picture here?

Biden claimed that he told officials in 2015 that he would withhold funds from Ukraine if Shokin wasn't removed from office.

Look: As late as January 2016, the CIA was dumping on claims that Shokin was crooked.
When rumors started to buzz in-country that further aid money was tied to Shokin’s ouster, the agency responded with a literal “Yikes.”
So said agency Ukraine expert Eric Ciaramella, later adding (of a DC meeting with senior leaders from Shokin’s office): “We were super impressed with the group, and we had a two-hour discussion of their priorities and the obstacles they face.”
“Super impressed” does not sound anywhere close to “this guy is crooked and must go.”

Biden’s turned the tale of his move against Shokin into one of his fake tough-guy anecdotes, bragging to the Council on Foreign Relations in 2018 that on his December 2015 trip to Kyiv, “I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b—. He got fired.”
But it sure doesn’t sound like anyone else in the White House thought Shokin was corrupt.

You know who did consider Shokin bad news, though?
Hunter’s former partner, Devon Archer.
Archer told former Fox host Tucker Carlson on his new show that Shokin “was a threat.”
Why? Because “he ended up seizing assets” from Burisma’s owner Mykola Zlochevsky, who reportedly told a credible FBI informant that he had paid $10 million in bribes to Hunter and Joe.
And Archer has testified before Congress that Zlochevsky and fellow Burisma big Vadym Pozharsky asked Hunter in December 2015 to make a call to DC to help relieve the “pressure” they were feeling from Shokin.

In other words: Biden’s biggest Ukraine smokescreen has been utterly blown apart.
The president has risibly said of the affair: “I did nothing wrong. I carried out the policy of the United States government in rooting out corruption in Ukraine.”
But the claim that Shokin — whose remit was to root out corruption within Ukraine — was crooked always smelled bad.
And now we have the receipts showing this stinks to high heaven — and indicating (yet again) that Joe is almost certainly lying about Hunter’s corruption and his own.

You already told us, MULTIPLE times, that you don't care about these conflicts of interest.

It’s hard to keep lies straight. I learned not to lie when I was a child.

[old salt]

Like people are stupid enough to believe that Old Salt is only concerned with Hunter Biden. None of those clowns care about Hunter Biden. They want to knee cap Joe headed into the next election cycle…..but Hillary “concocted the Dossier”….and a plan to disseminate it.

I care about the entire Biden family. Just like you care about the entire Trump family. I want the same amount of scrutiny for both.
The Biden's need to be investigated with the same zeal as the Trump's were.

I care about you “not caring”…..You are a hypocrite. Synthesize and discern the differences.

I care about both. The Trumps have been hammered for years while the Bidens get a pass.
We now know what the Trumps did that was illegal & what was unethical.
We still don't know yet for the Bidens.
You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.
You're just jealous that he was able to raise so much investment capital.
It wasn't a loan to pay his child support or tax bills.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Like people are stupid enough to believe that Old Salt is only concerned with Hunter Biden. None of those clowns care about Hunter Biden. They want to knee cap Joe headed into the next election cycle…..but Hillary “concocted the Dossier”….and a plan to disseminate it.

I care about the entire Biden family. Just like you care about the entire Trump family. I want the same amount of scrutiny for both.
The Biden's need to be investigated with the same zeal as the Trump's were.

I care about you “not caring”…..You are a hypocrite. Synthesize and discern the differences.

I care about both. The Trumps have been hammered for years while the Bidens get a pass.
We now know what the Trumps did that was illegal & what was unethical.
We still don't know yet for the Bidens.
You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.
You're just jealous that he was able to raise so much investment capital.
It wasn't a loan to pay his child support or tax bills.

A five year investigation and the appointment of a SC is a pass….say that while looking in the mirror…..as for Jared, making bad bets won’t mean it’s not unethical….. how is that even sensible?….as for loans and gifts to pay for school and other graft…..anybody seent Clarence? You ain’t….

[Kismet]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.
You're just jealous that he was able to raise so much investment capital.
It wasn't a loan to pay his child support or tax bills.

It's a PRIVATE EQUITY deal funded 100% by $2 billion of Saudi Sovereign funds. Neither you nor anyone else is going to see any detail. Ever. The Saudis investment return is way beyond return on their $$$$. Kush communicated with them for 4 effing years on official US government business on Whats App and all of the records are either gone or encrypted. Ditto with the Rooskies. You claim no curiosity about all this while you whine to high heaven about Biden every day here.

99% of Kush's activity is not known or hidden from public view BOTH when he was in government and now that he's no longer there. You actually seem to celebrate this as some kind of genius activity on his part. The idea that you are so uncurious in this case yet 100% the opposite in cases of politicals you don't like tells us all we need to know.

[a fan]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.

Jeez. So your premise here is: if Burisma made money, that makes Hunter's BS job in Ukraine while Daddy was working there...ok with you.

You get that, right?

Dude----whether or not Kush makes money off of that is 100% irrelevant to the conflict of interest. Why the heck are you trying to defend this? We all agree it's legal.

Yet unethical.

[MDlaxfan76]

Typical of Salty and the MAGA GOP, Russian puppet prosecutor in Ukraine, Victor Shokin, who the IMF and EU were pressuring to be forced out, is now a hero to these guys. Disgusting.

Prosecutorial career
Shokin was appointed Prosecutor General of Ukraine on 10 February 2015, replacing Vitaly Yarema.[9] He was a controversial appointee due to his perceived role in blocking prosecutions against those accused of shooting demonstrators in the 2014 Ukrainian revolution.[10] As Prosecutor General, he was accused of blocking major cases against allies and influential figures and hindering the fight against corruption in Ukraine.[11]

In early April 2015, Shokin stated that the General Prosecutor Ukraine (GPU) files about criminal orders from former General Prosecutor Viktor Pshonka[a] had disappeared, along with Pshonka's secret casework and secret materials. Shokin stated, "I will tell you more: not only criminal cases, but classified materials have disappeared - secret records, including those related to the orders of Victor Pshonka." (Russian: Виктор Шокин: "Я вам больше скажу: пропали не только уголовные дела, но секретные материалы – секретное делопроизводство. В том числе, то, что касалось распоряжений Виктора Пшонки.").[17][18][19]

Various street protests demanding Shokin's resignation were held.[20][21][22] On 2 November 2015, there was an assassination attempt against him when an unidentified sniper fired three shots into his office, but was foiled by the bulletproof glass window.[23] In response to a query from Ukrainian News Agency in late 2019, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) acknowledged that it is continuing to investigate the attempted assassination of Shokin.[24]

Through 2015 and early 2016, domestic and international pressure (including from the IMF, the EU, and the EBRD) built for Shokin to be removed from office. The Obama administration withheld $1 billion in loan guarantees to pressure the Ukrainian government to remove Shokin from office.[25][26][27] His defenders nonetheless argued that he played an important role "balancing competing political interests".[29] His Deputy Prosecutor, Vitaly Kasko, announced his resignation on 15 February 2016 denouncing the corruption and lawlessness of the Prosecutor's office.[30] Shokin was also criticized in Ukraine for failing to prosecute snipers who killed demonstrators during the revolution, as well as for failing to investigate corrupt businesses.[31]

On 16 February 2016, Shokin submitted a letter of resignation,[32] although the next day an official of the prosecution office stated, "As far as I know he has taken a paid leave".[33] On 19 February 2016 presidential press secretary Sviatoslav Tsegolko wrote on Twitter that the presidential administration had received an official letter of resignation from Shokin.[34]

On 16 March 2016 an official of the prosecution office stated that Shokin had resumed his work.[9] On the same day, his office carried out a raid against one of Ukraine's leading anti-corruption groups, the Anti-Corruption Action Center (AntAC), claiming that it had misappropriated aid money.[22] AntAC was a frequent critic of the Prosecutor General's Office under Shokin.[35] In one notorious case, two of Shokin's prosecutors were caught with stashes of diamonds, cash and valuables in their homes, likely indicating bribery. Prosecutors from another department of Shokin's office were fired or reassigned when they attempted to bring a prosecution against the so-called "diamond prosecutors".[36]

On 28 March, protesters called for Shokin's firing, after his office was authorized by a Kyiv court to investigate AntAC.[22][37] Shokin was formally dismissed in a parliamentary vote on 29 March 2016.[38] The European Union praised Shokin's dismissal due to a "lack of tangible results" of his office's investigations, and also because people in Shokin's office were themselves being investigated.[11] Following his dismissal Shokin went into retirement.[39]

[Typical Lax Dad]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.

Jeez. So your premise here is: if Burisma made money, that makes Hunter's BS job in Ukraine while Daddy was working there...ok with you.

You get that, right?

Dude----whether or not Kush makes money off of that is 100% irrelevant to the conflict of interest. Why the heck are you trying to defend this? We all agree it's legal.

Yet unethical.

No credibility.

[cradleandshoot]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.

Jeez. So your premise here is: if Burisma made money, that makes Hunter's BS job in Ukraine while Daddy was working there...ok with you.

You get that, right?

Dude----whether or not Kush makes money off of that is 100% irrelevant to the conflict of interest. Why the heck are you trying to defend this? We all agree it's legal.

Yet unethical.

No credibility.

There seems to be a no credibility issue all the way around??

[Typical Lax Dad]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.

Jeez. So your premise here is: if Burisma made money, that makes Hunter's BS job in Ukraine while Daddy was working there...ok with you.

You get that, right?

Dude----whether or not Kush makes money off of that is 100% irrelevant to the conflict of interest. Why the heck are you trying to defend this? We all agree it's legal.

Yet unethical.

No credibility.

There seems to be a no credibility issue all the way around??

Thanks Jethro.

[cradleandshoot]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.

Jeez. So your premise here is: if Burisma made money, that makes Hunter's BS job in Ukraine while Daddy was working there...ok with you.

You get that, right?

Dude----whether or not Kush makes money off of that is 100% irrelevant to the conflict of interest. Why the heck are you trying to defend this? We all agree it's legal.

Yet unethical.

No credibility.

There seems to be a no credibility issue all the way around??

Thanks Jethro.

How did you know I like Kellogs Corn Flakes?? I prefer them with strawberrys. I won't share them with Ellie Mae either. Uncle Jed can get his own bowl. Granny prefers corn liquor.

[Typical Lax Dad]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.

Jeez. So your premise here is: if Burisma made money, that makes Hunter's BS job in Ukraine while Daddy was working there...ok with you.

You get that, right?

Dude----whether or not Kush makes money off of that is 100% irrelevant to the conflict of interest. Why the heck are you trying to defend this? We all agree it's legal.

Yet unethical.

No credibility.

There seems to be a no credibility issue all the way around??

Thanks Jethro.

How did you know I like Kellogs Corn Flakes?? I prefer them with strawberrys. I won't share them with Ellie Mae either. Uncle Jed can get his own bowl. Granny prefers corn liquor.

We were the Clampetts.

[old salt]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.
You're just jealous that he was able to raise so much investment capital.
It wasn't a loan to pay his child support or tax bills.

It's a PRIVATE EQUITY deal funded 100% by $2 billion of Saudi Sovereign funds. Neither you nor anyone else is going to see any detail. Ever. The Saudis investment return is way beyond return on their $$$$. Kush communicated with them for 4 effing years on official US government business on Whats App and all of the records are either gone or encrypted. Ditto with the Rooskies. You claim no curiosity about all this while you whine to high heaven about Biden every day here.

99% of Kush's activity is not known or hidden from public view BOTH when he was in government and now that he's no longer there. You actually seem to celebrate this as some kind of genius activity on his part. The idea that you are so uncurious in this case yet 100% the opposite in cases of politicals you don't like tells us all we need to know.

Do a llttle research. It's not just Saudi funds, there's over $3 billion total & it includes funds from other Gulf States.
There has been reporting on the businesses they have acquired.

[tech37]

Again, call Rettig in...while you're at it, call Wray...and hey, call Barr...nope, you guys don't want to hear they've got nuthin on Joe.

Just Hunter.

This is clearly the same impaired, arrogant, sort of thinking/narrative the Dems rode in 2016... "Hillary will never lose."

Oh Joe can lose. The smear job, totally unsubstantiated, could work.

Not surprisingly you missed the point.

It has nothing to do with Joe winning or losing but everything to do with, in the face of mounting evidence, the blind belief by the Dems and you that there is nothing to Biden corruption, which most certainly includes Ol Joe.

Hey, it's exactly the point of what you wrote. If you mean something different, make it clear.
You're right. Obviously I need to be more careful with whom I'm replying to... expecting everyone to recognize metaphor is expecting too much... the "impaired thinking," pre-election, being "the point," not the 2016 election result as metaphor.

That said, if there actually was clear evidence of Joe's criminality that would stand up to scrutiny in court, I'll be the first to withdraw my support and actively call for an alternative (to be clear, that alternative ain't Trump). But it ain't there. there is no "mounting evidence" outside of right wing fever dreams designed to distract from Trump's 4 cases, 91 indictments, with tremendous granular detail presented, testimony, texts, recordings.
"point" proven...

And I think Rettig, Wray, and Barr, all Republicans appointed by Trump would say they saw nothing criminal about Joe if under oath. And so will Weiss eventually, I think...but I'm entirely open to that being proven wrong.

But hey, call for Rettig, Wray, and Barr to testify under oath if you think they won't explode those fever dreams...
If you've actually been reading my posts for the past couple of years you'd realize I've consistently said, more and all information is way better than less... and absolutely better than suppression of info... let's hear everything to glean some truth. If hearing testimony by those you mention helps to uncover truth in this matter, I'm all for it... obviously.

[old salt]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.

Jeez. So your premise here is: if Burisma made money, that makes Hunter's BS job in Ukraine while Daddy was working there...ok with you.

You get that, right?

Dude----whether or not Kush makes money off of that is 100% irrelevant to the conflict of interest. Why the heck are you trying to defend this? We all agree it's legal.

Yet unethical.

I do not agree that Kushner's fund is unethical. It's a legit business enterprise that funds startups & other companies with growth potential. The acquisitions have been publicly reported. If it makes money for the investors, it's not a sham.

HB was paid to sit on Burisma's BOD & serve as a consultant.

[Kismet]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.
You're just jealous that he was able to raise so much investment capital.
It wasn't a loan to pay his child support or tax bills.

It's a PRIVATE EQUITY deal funded 100% by $2 billion of Saudi Sovereign funds. Neither you nor anyone else is going to see any detail. Ever. The Saudis investment return is way beyond return on their $$$$. Kush communicated with them for 4 effing years on official US government business on Whats App and all of the records are either gone or encrypted. Ditto with the Rooskies. You claim no curiosity about all this while you whine to high heaven about Biden every day here.

99% of Kush's activity is not known or hidden from public view BOTH when he was in government and now that he's no longer there. You actually seem to celebrate this as some kind of genius activity on his part. The idea that you are so uncurious in this case yet 100% the opposite in cases of politicals you don't like tells us all we need to know.

Do a llttle research. It's not just Saudi funds, there's over $3 billion total & it includes funds from other Gulf States.
There has been reporting on the businesses they have acquired.

The question remains why would all of these Gulf state sovereign funds invest with a person with NO experience managing international private equity and with only a mediocre performance in NY real estate prior to government service. Gulf states also previously bailed him out of 666 Fifth Avenue albatross. I only mention this in the context of how you describe HB's lack of qualifications to serve on Burisma's board. What's the effing difference between the two activities?

What businesses? If there's reporting post it.

[Typical Lax Dad]

You might want to hold off on Kushner until you see if he earns or loses revenue for his investors.

Jeez. So your premise here is: if Burisma made money, that makes Hunter's BS job in Ukraine while Daddy was working there...ok with you.

You get that, right?

Dude----whether or not Kush makes money off of that is 100% irrelevant to the conflict of interest. Why the heck are you trying to defend this? We all agree it's legal.

Yet unethical.

I do not agree that Kushner's fund is unethical. It's a legit business enterprise that funds startups & other companies with growth potential. The acquisitions have been publicly reported. If it makes money for the investors, it's not a sham.

HB was paid to sit on Burisma's BOD & serve as a consultant.

Was it illegal? The Clinton Foundation was legitimate by your standards.