this is one of those "appearance of impropriety"-type issues Hunter Biden Gallery Sold Art to Dem Donor Appointed to Special Commission by President Biden https://www.nationalreview.com/news...ted-to-special-commission-by-president-biden/
one theory DOJ Prepares To Throw David Weiss Under The Bus https://thefederalist.com/2023/07/25/doj-prepares-to-throw-david-weiss-under-the-bus/
What point in your life will you realize you're turning into a genuine nut job. How in the world are you still this ****? Man being old scares the **** out of me. When was the last time you posted an OP ED about the corrupt saudis and trump? You literally post low iq braindead conspiracies all day looking for dirt on biden while trump is literally doing the stuff you accuse biden of nd you bend over to take up the rear.
https://jonathanturley.org/2023/07/...f-president-on-hunter-bidens-foreign-dealing/ The White House Changes Long-Standing Position of President on Hunter Biden’s Foreign Deals by jonathanturley July 25, 2023 Starting with his campaign for the presidency and continuing until this week, President Joe Biden has maintained one clear and consistent position on his son’s influence peddling schemes. As a virtual mantra, Biden — and the White House staff — have categorically maintained that he had no knowledge of any foreign dealings of his son. That has been proven to be a lie, but Biden continued to maintain the position. Yet, on the eve of the testimony of a key Biden associate, the White House has changed its position. Now the President is only claiming that he was “not in business” with his son. Some of us have written multiple columns over the last four years arguing that the President was clearly and knowingly lying in his denials of knowledge and discussions of these deals. Even when he made the statement, it was clearly untrue but most of the media shrugged and happily walked away. Then the evidence began to mount. The laptop includes pictures and appointments of Hunter’s foreign business associates with Joe Biden. There is also a recording of Joe Biden discussing a Times report on Dec. 12, 2018, detailing Hunter’s dealings with Ye Jianming, the head of CEFC China Energy Company. He assures his son that “I think you’re clear” after lawyers worked on the New York Times before the story ran. There is also a recording of his uncle James assuring Hunter that he and his father were going to arrange for “safe harbor” for him as his world began to collapse. Then there is the July 30, 2017 Whatsapp message from Hunter Biden to one of his Chinese associates, Henry Zhao, the director of Harvest Fund Management and Communist Party official. Zhao was funneling money to Hunter’s firm BHR Partners. Hunter is quoted as writing: “I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.” Nevertheless, the White House has maintained the total denial . . . until this week before the testimony of Devon Archer. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked by Fox News journalist Gillian Turner: “Chairman James Comer today says that the Oversight Committee has evidence that the president in the past communicated directly with foreign business associates of his son Hunter Biden many times. Curious if the White House and the president still stand behind his comment that he’s never been involved and has never even spoken to his son about his business?” The response from Jean-Pierre was surprising: “So, I’ve been I’ve been asked this question a million times. The answer is not going to change. The answer remains the same. The president was never in business with his son. I just don’t have anything else to add.” It takes an utter contempt for the intelligence of the public to insist that “the answer remains the same” and then give an entirely new answer. However, that is only if most of the public is informed of the contradiction. None of the media in the White House press corp followed up on Turner’s questions when Jean-Pierre immediately moved on. If that is now the new spin of the President, it is about four years too late. The President assured the public repeatedly and consistently that he never discussed or knew of these dealings even as evidence mounted in contradiction. He made this false denial part of his presidency in having his staff echo the same denials to the press and the public. As allegations of bribery and influence peddling swirl around the White House, this pattern of dishonesty and denial can become a basis for impeachment inquiries, as it was with Nixon. It is tempting to say that the President is being too clever by half, but this was never particularly clever. Biden was counting on the media watching his back and hoping that he could hold both houses of Congress. The problem is that the media blackout was not total and he lost the House. Now these denials and conflicting accounts are threatening the possibility that he could lose much more than his political standing. If the evidence continues to contradict his blanket denials, Biden could lose his office.
https://jonathanturley.org/2023/07/...-the-media-panic-as-the-biden-scandal-mounts/ 4 hours ago “Nothing to See Here”: Members and the Media Panic as the Biden Scandal Mounts by jonathanturley July 25, 2023 YouTube/Naked Gun Below is my column in the New York Post on the last ditch effort of the members of Congress and the media to get the public to just “move on” from the Biden corruption scandal. The message has been clear and amplified, as former U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) insisted on MSNBC, “Everybody needs to back off!” As evidence and public interest increase, it is a bit late for spin or shiny objects. This week, the scandal is likely to be even more serious for the Bidens and the country. The media is increasingly taking on the appearance of Leslie Nielsen in Naked Gun yelling that there is “nothing to see here” in front of a virtual apocalyptic scene of fire and destruction. Here is the column: “I wonder after this plea happens if you would advise your party to move on?” That question from CBS’s “Face the Nation” host Margaret Brennan to Republican presidential candidate Chris Christie was raised just days before a former business associate of Hunter Biden, Devon Archer, gives potentially explosive testimony to a House committee in the Biden corruption scandal. The media’s desire to “move on” from the scandal is reaching an almost frantic level, as millions in foreign payments and dozens of corporate shell companies are revealed, and incriminating emails are released. The same plaintive demand was made in congressional hearings. What was most striking about the last hearing involving two respected IRS whistleblowers was how Democratic members avoided virtually any specific questions. The members discussed everything from the Emmett Till murder in 1955 to whether the term “two-tiered justice system” is racially insensitive … and of course, Donald Trump. It was clear that the release of the new evidence of corruption had left no room to maneuver for both Democrat politicians and the media. Any question would now trip a wire on the Bidens, so most avoid the allegations in favor of talking about Trump or other shiny objects. The only member who was unwise enough to venture into the allegations was Rep. Dan Goldman (D.-N.Y.) and the result was disastrous for the Democrats. Goldman bizarrely raised one of the most damaging new pieces of evidence in the investigation. He asked about a “lunch where Joe Biden came to say hello at the Four Season’s hotel to a lunch that he was having with CEFC executives.” He then read how Biden associate Rob Walker described the origins of the meeting with the Chinese officials to get his dad to stop by: “Hunter told his Dad that ‘I may be trying to start a company or try to do something with these guys.’ “ Goldman asked slyly, “Now let me ask you something, that doesn’t sound much like Joe Biden was involved in whatever Hunter was doing with the CEFC, if Hunter Biden is telling him that he is trying to do business with them, does it?” That is when Shapley stated the obvious: “No, but it does show that he told his father that he was trying to do business and . . . ” Goldman finally saw that problem and cut him off with “OK, well that is true that Hunter Biden does try to do business, that is correct.” The problem is that Goldman just elicited sworn testimony on how Joe Biden did in fact know about these business dealings despite years of categorical denials of having any knowledge or interaction with Hunter or his business associates. Goldman demolished the Biden defense in less than five minutes. Now, Archer is expected to testify that Joe Biden participated in actual telephone calls with them. That will allow investigators to build further on the foundation Goldman laid. Archer will join other witnesses like Hunter’s business associate Tony Bobulinski, who said that he sat down with Joe Biden to discuss the deals. Bobulinski was instructed by Biden associate James Gilliar not to speak of the former veep’s connection to any transactions. No matter the severity of the revelations, the liberal media calls the investigations a “clown show.” Others have continued to tell the public that there remain no alleged ties from Hunter to President Biden despite emails, pictures and witness testimony. Yet it is becoming harder and harder to avoid these details. With the possible testimony of Hunter’s business associates, the only hope is that Republicans might be convinced to “move on.” What was most notable about the question to Christie was the reference to the plea bargain. A year ago, I wrote a column on how the political and media establishment would likely use a “scandal implosion” approach as the evidence mounted over the corruption allegations. After the Democrats lost the House, there was a need to cap off the scandal and I suggested that the Justice Department would secure a light plea on a couple tax counts with little or no jail time. Members and the media would then declare the scandal closed and demand that we all “move on.” It is unnerving to see how the response unfolded so precisely as predicted. Members made repeated reference to the plea bargain to avoid further discussion. Rep. Kweisi Mfume (D.-Md.) was positively irate that “We are doing this all over again for the Hunter Biden show to someone who has pleaded guilty and has taken responsibility for not filing taxes for two years. This is ludicrous. Beam me up, Scotty. There’s no intelligent life down here. None.” He then tore up papers in disgust. more
conclusion Members and the media were literally citing a plea bargain as dispositive, even as two lead investigators were saying it was fixed and politically influenced. Some in the media attacked these two IRS veterans as “so-called whistleblowers” (just as members previously attacked “so called journalists” for discussing censorship records). Others insisted that the allegations were still “unproven” or “unverified” while showing the same lack of interest in establishing the truth. Notably, these same media outlets did wall-to-wall coverage of the false Russian collusion claims in the Steele dossier. They are now simply shrugging off what could be one of the most serious corruption scandals in modern history despite the testimony of highly credible whistleblowers and thousands of pages of supporting evidence. None of this is going to work, of course. The public has long ago lost trust in the media. Indeed, the “Let’s Go, Brandon” movement is as much a mocking of the media as it is the President. Polls show that the public is not “moving on” and now view this as a major scandal. A majority believes that Hunter has received special protection in the investigation. While the media can continue to suppress the evidence and allegations within their own echo-chambered platforms, truth like water has a way of finding a way out. The scandal is moving forward with or without the media. Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
And yet Trump Admin decided not to do anything with the “evidence”….. Grassley had the FBI evidence months ago but only recently decided to release it…. After the coordinated election lies by the conservative media…. I’d say y’all have a credibility issue.
Grassley didnt have any fbi "evidence." He had an uncollaborated allegation which the fbi itself said it looked into and dismissed. Theres no "evidence" Dont spread right wing propoganda
"For many years, it has been Justice Department policy to charge the most serious offense that can be proven. Mr. Garland changed that policy in December 2022." coincidence? https://www.wsj.com/articles/youd-g...iolations-732f8cc0?mod=hp_opin_pos_2#cxrecs_s You’d Go to Prison for What Hunter Biden Did In reaching his plea deal, the Justice Department violated every norm in the tax-enforcement book. By Eileen J. O’Connor July 25, 2023 at 12:52 pm ET While the U.S. attorney for Delaware was negotiating for Hunter Biden to plead to two misdemeanor tax charges, other things were happening in neighboring New Jersey. Last week U.S. District Judge Stanley R. Chesler sentenced Gabriel M. Ferrari, owner of a Linden auto-repair shop, to one year and one day in prison after Mr. Ferrari pleaded guilty to filing a false company tax return. His return failed to include all his income and claimed deductions for personal expenses, including gambling on horse races. In addition to the prison term, he will be required to pay restitution. Prison for tax crimes is real. In the 1990s, New York hotelier Leona Helmsley served nearly two years in prison for defrauding the government by having her business pay her personal expenses and claim tax deductions for them. According to sworn and transcribed testimony that Internal Revenue Service whistleblowers provided to the House Ways and Means Committee and confirmed at last week’s House Oversight Committee hearing, the IRS investigation of Hunter Biden began “as an offshoot of an investigation the IRS was conducting into a foreign-based amateur online p*rnography platform.” Agents established that, for the six years 2014 through 2019, Mr. Biden failed to report or pay tax on perhaps $17.3 million he received from questionable sources. He filed returns several years late, and when he did file them, he claimed as business deductions the cost of his drug dealer’s hotel room, call girls, sex-club dues and his daughter’s tuition at Columbia University. What has been called Hunter Biden’s sweetheart plea deal, however, wasn’t the subject of the House Oversight Committee’s July 19 hearing, where the two whistleblowers testified. Instead, lawmakers intended to explore ways in which the IRS special agents said the Justice Department had thwarted their probe and violated law-enforcement norms—among them: • Denying permission to execute search warrants for which prosecutors agreed probable cause had been established, including the guest house Hunter Biden had occupied at President Biden’s Delaware home and the storage facility in Virginia where he reportedly had moved records of the numerous entities he had likely used to receive income from various sources. • Stalling investigative steps on account of an upcoming election six months away, whereas the Justice Department tradition is to refrain from indicting or taking overt investigative steps for only 60 days preceding an election. • Alerting the attorneys for the subject of the investigation that a search warrant would be executed to obtain documents and other evidence. • Denying authority to interview essential witnesses, including family members and business associates, including those who could shed light on the meaning of “10% held by H for the big guy.” Looked at with the full picture in mind, it is difficult not to wonder if those lines of investigation would have found evidence that Joe Biden was involved in his son’s apparent shakedowns of foreign governments and entities. (The president has repeatedly denied ever discussing business matters with his son.) Democrats on the Oversight Committee accused the witnesses of being overly enthusiastic about bringing criminal charges, and cited testimony that IRS criminal tax attorneys often disagreed with their prosecution recommendations. That’s irrelevant. IRS criminal tax lawyers’ timidity about recommending prosecution is common knowledge in the tax-enforcement community. Further, their views are advisory only. Officials in the Justice Department’s Tax Division decide whether to authorize bringing criminal charges. They did. The Special Agent Report was sent to the Tax Division in February 2021. It was more than 1,000 pages long, describing each element of each alleged crime for each year, each piece of the evidence supporting each element, and the venue in which those charges could be brought. More than a year after the Tax Division received the report, it produced a 99-page memorandum supporting the recommended charges, six felonies and five misdemeanors. Each of these charges can carry prison time, some of them as long as five years. Supervisory Special Agent Gary Shapley testified that Mr. Weiss told the prosecution team he then approached the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia about filing the 2014 and 2015 charges there and was rebuffed. Notwithstanding that Hunter Biden’s attorneys had extended the statute of limitations several times and would have again, Mr. Weiss let it expire. For the government to permit the statute of limitations to expire is unheard of. When a taxpayer refuses a government request to extend the statute of limitations, the government goes ahead and brings the charges. According to the whistleblowers, that couldn’t happen here because, contrary to Attorney General Merrick Garland’s sworn statements to Congress, Mr. Weiss lacked the authority to bring charges in the District of Columbia. For many years, it has been Justice Department policy to charge the most serious offense that can be proven. Mr. Garland changed that policy in December 2022. The Tax Division Manual, however, still provides that prosecutors are specifically prohibited from permitting a defendant to plead to a misdemeanor when the elements of a felony can be proven. Yet according to the whistleblowers’ accounts, that is what is happening here. In 2020 the Justice Department realized that the prosecution of Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn had been based on falsehoods and filed a motion in the federal district court to dismiss the charges. The judge believed the motion to dismiss was politically motivated, and appointed John Gleeson, a retired federal judge, to look into the matter. Judge Gleeson filed a brief asserting that the judge wasn’t obligated to accept an attempt to embroil the judiciary in a “corrupt, politically motivated decision.” On Wednesday Judge Maryellen Noreika will be presented with the scandalously lenient plea deal Mr. Weiss worked out for Hunter Biden, under which he would suffer no penalty for years of serious and willful violations of U.S. tax laws. Will she accept it? Ms. O’Connor, a Washington lawyer, headed the U.S. Justice Department’s tax division, 2001-07.
Turley…. Or opinion pieces….. Turley…. Or opinion pieces…. Turley…. Or opinion pieces…. WSJ opinion piece!!!!! Still can’t explain why WSJ news didn’t publish the Hunter story…..
https://thefederalist.com/2023/07/25/the-best-case-scenario-in-the-biden-inc-scandal-is-bad-enough/ The Best-Case Scenario In The Biden Inc. Scandal Is Bad Enough Is Joe in business with Hunter? It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. BY: DAVID HARSANYI JULY 25, 2023 Earlier this week, Karine Jean-Pierre was asked whether “the White House and the president still stand behind his comment that he’s never been involved and has never even spoken to his son about his business?” “So, I’ve been I’ve been asked this question a million times,” she responded. “The answer is not going to change. The answer remains the same. The president was never in business with his son.” You can already hear Clintonesque semantics creeping into the White House’s answers. Joe Biden is going to end up doing to the word “business” what Bill Clinton did to the word “sex.” First, Jean-Pierre didn’t answer the question, which isn’t whether Biden was “in business” with his son, but rather whether he was “involved” in the business or spoke to his son about it. Whatever Democrats might believe, Joe failing to list himself as the Founder and CEO of the Biden family enterprise on a business card isn’t dispositive. Secondly, Jean-Pierre’s answer is very much not the “same” one she or the president have given a million times — or ever, as far as I can tell. Remember when that middle-aged man in Iowa asked Biden if Hunter had “access to the Obama administration,” and the future president called him a “damn liar” and “fat” and told him he was “too old to vote for me” and then insulted his IQ (a classic) and challenged him to push-up contest like a deranged Izzy Mandelbaum? Yeah, that was just one in a series of instances that Biden lashed out at those who wondered how his family was pulling in millions without leveraging access to the White House. When Biden was asked if, knowing what he knows now, he regretted not discouraging his son from doing business with Ukrainian oil concerns, the then-candidate snapped back: “No. No, I don’t, because I never discussed with my son anything having to do with what was going on in Ukraine. That’s a fact.” A few weeks earlier, Biden said that “I never discussed a single thing with my son about anything having to do with Ukraine. No one has indicated I have. We’ve always kept everything separate.” The White House’s definitive answer until very recently was that Joe had “never even considered being involved in business with his family, nor in any overseas business whatsoever.” In numerous emails and texts that he never thought would be made public, Hunter Biden openly talked about his dad helping him secure payments and taking a cut for himself. Hunter’s former business partner also contends that Joe was involved in the family business. Hunter’s former close friend is reportedly going to testify under oath that Biden made at least 24 calls for the business (there are another 200 alleged incidents of contact). An FBI informant says Biden was pressuring foreign companies to send millions to the family business. An IRS whistleblower in charge of investigating Hunter Biden’s tax case testified under oath that not only was Joe Biden present at least one meeting, but that the Justice Department wouldn’t let the agency investigate Joe’s role. That’s a lot of compelling circumstantial evidence. Why would all these people make the same claims about Joe Biden helping his son and brother — sometimes years before they knew he would stumble into the presidency? One suspects we’re only a few weeks away from hearing that none of these revelations matter since none of it was technically illegal. So, let’s concede the point for argument’s sake. Donald Trump did nothing technically illegal when pressing Volodymyr Zelensky to give him dirt on Biden, either. Yet, it was an impeachable offense. Even if Joe merely knew about the family business, but wasn’t “in business,” that not only means he spent nearly a decade aggressively lying about his role but that he knowingly used the U.S. government to help his family make millions rather than stepping aside or dissuading them from taking advantage. In 2014, when Hunter first became a public issue, the White House used Democratic Party front-groups like “Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington” to give Joe and Hunter Biden a clean bill of health. “It can’t be that because your dad is the vice president, you can’t do anything,” Melanie Sloan, executive director, told Reuters. “The most important thing is for Biden not to be speaking about these issues with his dad, and for them to try and draw the lines.” If Joe was speaking to his son — literally the most important thing he shouldn’t be doing — and then, say, knowingly blackmailed the Ukrainian government into firing a prosecutor investigating a company sending his family hundreds of thousands of dollars, that would be a corrupt conflict of interest, at the very least. Among the contents of Hunter’s laptop — which FBI and other intel officials knew was real but still tried to suppress — is an email from a Burisma official thanking Hunter for brokering a meeting between himself and Joe Biden while the latter was still vice president. Why would the guy make that up? Yet, even in 2019, Biden was bragging about his ability to withhold a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine. Even Obama-era diplomats raised alarms over Hunter at the time. Obama officials worried about Hunter – who accompanied his dad on an Air Force Two flight to China in 2013, where he reportedly facilitated a meeting for his dad with Chicom billionaires in Beijing — and yet the vice president didn’t even try, according to his own words, to dissuade his family from making millions on these connections he helps solidify. Now, I don’t want to get carried away with cynicism, but I’m going to go out on a limb and contend that Hunter Biden earned his $17 million in foreign investments much as he did $1.3 million from selling art. And Joe, at the very least, knew and helped Hunter, anyway. “In business” or only business adjacent, it’s corrupt.
The Federalist now!!! Inflation and the economy must have y’all worried. Seems strange the GOP is trying to ramp up the Hunter story as Trump gets more federal indictments….. Odd that Grassley held onto the “ FBI document” for several months and didn’t post it until after the charges kept coming for Trump… Odd you don’t view Trump and Giuliani illegally engaging in quid pro quo as undercutting the story… …. People are talking.
new information has come to light https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/07/the-biden-family-business-3.php excerpt: POSTED ON JULY 25, 2023 BY JOHN HINDERAKER IN BIDEN CORRUPTION THE BIDEN FAMILY BUSINESS So Joe Biden’s new line is that he was never “in business with” his son Hunter. Really? And what business was Hunter in? Natural gas? . . . the conversation: Hunter: Dad, good news! Burisma Holdings is going to pay me a million dollars a year to be on their board of directors! Joe: That’s great, son. And here I thought you would never amount to anything, what with spending all of your time and money on drugs and prostitutes. But tell me, what is Burisma? Hunter: Burisma is a natural gas company in Ukraine. Joe: And you are going to be on their board? But the board conducts its business in Ukrainian, doesn’t it? Are you learning to speak the language? Hunter: Of course not. But don’t worry, I don’t have to actually attend any meetings or read any of the board materials. Joe: So, did they hire you for you natural gas expertise? Hunter: Come on, Dad. You know I have never worked in the natural gas industry or had anything to do with natural gas. And science has never exactly been my strong point. Or business, for that matter. Joe: But Hunter, if you don’t know anything about the industry and you can’t speak Ukrainian, and to be honest you have rarely put in an honest day’s work in your life, what makes your worth a million dollars a year? more at the link
