Federal criminal investigation Hunter Biden focuses on his business dealings (Update: DOJ appoints special counsel) (1 Viewer)

[SaintForLife]

Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia and the widow of Yury Luzhkov, the former mayor of Moscow, Senate Republicans revealed in their report on the younger Biden’s work in Ukraine.

Baturina is referenced in the 87-page report, which was released Wednesday, addressing her payment to Biden’s investment firm in early 2014.

“Baturina became Russia’s only female billionaire when her plastics company, Inteko, received a series of Moscow municipal contracts while her husband was mayor,” it said in providing background on the businesswoman.

The report described her involvement with Biden as “a financial relationship,” but declined to delve deeper into why the wire transfer was made.

The probe also found that Baturina sent 11 wires transfers between May and December 2015 to a bank account belonging to BAK USA, a tech startup that filed for bankruptcy in March 2019.

Nine of those 11 wire transfers were first sent to Rosemont Seneca Partners, the investment firm founded by Biden and Chris Heinz, stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry, before being transferred to BAK USA.

Hunter Biden received $3.5M wire transfer from Russian billionaire: Senate report

Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia and the widow of Yury Luzhkov, the former mayor of Moscow, Senate Republicans revealed in their r…

nypost.com

We all know their is massive corruption on both sides of the aisle. Here is an alleged allegation against Hunter Biden who was allegedly enriching himself because his Dad was Vice President.

 

[J-DONK]

JDonk, you consistently conflate this issue. There was no ”censoring” of a news organization, it’s disingenuous to say so, IMO. I have never been in favor of “censorship”, what I said was that this laptop story got the coverage it deserved at the time.

The NY Post published every story it wanted to about the laptop, even as it never vetted the information it published. And we now know that by the time the NY Post had the laptop files, they had already been contaminated by outside files. They were not censored, it’s a misuse of that word.

The decisions that were made by some social media were their decisions to make. The First Amendment protects them. The opinions expressed by experts in the field were theirs to make.

It’s very odd to make the argument that anyone’s rights were violated in this issue. Nobody had their rights violated. In fact, it’s extremely odd to think that anything in the files that were being peddled as from the laptop had any relevance to the election at all.

Also, what you characterize as my “defense” of the Steele dossier consists of just reiterating that it was always covered as unverified. It wasn’t ever treated as a source of facts, and most important feature of it was in fact true. That Putin was actively working to elect Trump and Trump welcomed the help.

In point of fact, your assertion that Steele should be “silenced” in his opinions on disinformation come closer to advocating censorship than anything I have ever said.

The censorship of the story was it being banned on large influential media sites. You can find the same "censorship" descriptions used on plenty of media sites including the Washington Post. I wasn't the first to use that verbiage. I have no idea why it's a sticking point for you.

I have never argued that someone's rights are being violated. I didn't argue for anyone to sue over a violation of their rights did I? I have never made an argument about legality. I'm not sure why you bring that up.

As far as vetting sources before they go on media platforms. Was the Steele Dossier vetted? On the other hand, the Hunter Biden story was "Russian disinformation", as well as Covid lab-leak. You can not have it both ways, and expect people to see as nothing more then partisan pomp.

If you for some reason want to deep dive down into this again, I talked about how Christopher Steele was indirectly paid by Clinton, and was using Clinton allies as sources. That's called a hack job. In a previous thread, I'll summarize my point, why is the new head of the disinformation board retweeting this guy?
That someone so widely discredited has no business in the public sphere. That's what I'm talking about when I argue for silencing Steele.

Maybe a good analogy for you MT15 would be: Do you think the Surgeon General should be retweeting about whatever doctor was the face of ivermectin cures covid?

I feel like my points on all of these topics is honestly very simple to understand. I'm pro free-speech because I don't think the government, or private media companies have the tools to verify information in real time. If that means more disinformation is allowed to circulate, so be it. So far in practice, media companies appear to ban topics based along ideological lines then facts.

If you really want to understand were I am coming from. My own personal world view, backed up by every other western democracy, is that America has a authoritarian party, and a conservative party. If the conservative party becomes authoritarian as well. We are in trouble.

P.S. I'll end this here. I think it gets messy trying to debate multiple topics in one thread. Post like this are inherently harder to follow for any non-participants with the topic jumps even though they do a have a common theme.

 

[wardorican]

Where did I say someone was suggesting social credits? I explicitly say they aren't.

You have people on this board who stand behind twitter banning the hunter biden laptop story. Also, MT15 was still defending Christopher Steele, and the Steele dossier as of what, two days ago? In fact, in that discussion I posted that same cnn article.

There are plenty of Democrats that are ok with censoring discussions on: Hunter's laptop, and various covid topics. You see it on this board, and more importantly in the world at large. When you ban news organization, you've gone far beyond "not amplifying".

Again who determines disinformation? I promise you almost every person on this board has been taken in by disinformation at some point. It's not some obvious thing all the time.

Why are you surprised?

 

[Optimus Prime]

For what it’s worth
=============
The Fox News host Sean Hannity tried to sell Donald Trump on a novel way to heal the wounds of his presidency and the deadly Capitol attack: a pardon for Hunter Biden.

The bizarre idea was referred to in texts releasedby the House January 6 committee, which on Thursday held its first primetime televised hearing.

In one message, Hannity told Kayleigh McEnany, then White House press secretary, Trump “was intrigued by the pardon idea!! (Hunter)”.

The Daily Beast said a source familiar with the conversations between Hannity and Trump confirmed that Hannity was referring to Hunter Biden……

Fox News’ Sean Hannity pitched Trump on Hunter Biden pardon – report

Daily Beast says rightwing host saw pardon for Joe Biden’s son as way to ‘smooth things over’ after Capitol attack

www.theguardian.com

 

[MT15]

There were very friendly texts between Hunter and Tucker Carlson on the (supposed) laptop, too. I thought that was interesting. Tucker was asking Hunter to write a letter of recommendation for his kid to get into college and he seemed to be extremely familiar with Hunter.

 

[samiam5211]

For what it’s worth
=============
The Fox News host Sean Hannity tried to sell Donald Trump on a novel way to heal the wounds of his presidency and the deadly Capitol attack: a pardon for Hunter Biden.

The bizarre idea was referred to in texts releasedby the House January 6 committee, which on Thursday held its first primetime televised hearing.

In one message, Hannity told Kayleigh McEnany, then White House press secretary, Trump “was intrigued by the pardon idea!! (Hunter)”.

The Daily Beast said a source familiar with the conversations between Hannity and Trump confirmed that Hannity was referring to Hunter Biden……

Fox News’ Sean Hannity pitched Trump on Hunter Biden pardon – report

Daily Beast says rightwing host saw pardon for Joe Biden’s son as way to ‘smooth things over’ after Capitol attack

www.theguardian.com

It was just a backhanded way for them to be able to say that Hunter Biden was guilty of whatever crimes they decided to pin on him.

 

[J-DONK]

Why are you surprised?

I'm glad this got bumped, because I lost this.

Ward,

This is a textbook strawman.

Did I actually accuse the board of social credit scores, or further internet controls? No, that was clear when I was making a point about the authoritarian lean of some "liberal" posters on the board.

You knew that, and didn't want to talk about that topic so you tried to strawman your way up that hill.

Don't do this. It's not a good look.

 

[Saintamaniac]

There are plenty of Democrats that are ok with censoring discussions on: Hunter's laptop, and various covid topics. You see it on this board, and more importantly in the world at large. When you ban news organization, you've gone far beyond "not amplifying".

The Hunter Biden story was being used to spread lies disinformation about JOE BIDEN. In fact, the Hunter Biden story wouldn't even be a "story" if it wasn't being used in an obvious attempt to hurt Joe Biden.

As to various covid topics, just because someone is ignorant of the facts and choose to believe BS, doesn't mean that they earn a forum to propagate the BS they believe to be true as facts. The "alternative facts" about covid was getting the ignorant and gullible killed. I just don't see why someone would support spreading information that's getting people killed unless that was their reason for spreading it in the first place.

Again who determines disinformation?

The truth. Not who, what.

 

[MT15]

I'm glad this got bumped, because I lost this.

Ward,

This is a textbook strawman.

Did I actually accuse the board of social credit scores, or further internet controls? No, that was clear when I was making a point about the authoritarian lean of some "liberal" posters on the board.

You knew that, and didn't want to talk about that topic so you tried to strawman your way up that hill.

Don't do this. It's not a good look.

Calling people authoritarian who actually are not, saying they want to censor, when they do not. This is probably projection and definitely it is gaslighting, IMO.

The grifters who say that the Biden laptop story was “censored” are lying. It was covered, I can and have brought up stories written about it that were accurate from what was known at the time. In fact, inaccurate stories in the right wing mainstream media were and still are being covered. “Censorship” of the story is a conspiracy theory. You’re being manipulated the same way that the far right is being manipulated with lies about the “laptop”, once again IMO.

When your sources are defending the integrity of Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani (as if they have any) you might want to pump the brakes. The “laptop” is just a grift. It’s being used by both the far right and the far left to discredit traditional media so that they can control the narrative.

I never said that mainstream media is perfect. It isn’t. But the media grifters who populate both the far right and the far left are much worse. At least traditional media will correct the record when they are wrong. The grifters just move on to the next grift.

 

[wardorican]

I'm glad this got bumped, because I lost this.

Ward,

This is a textbook strawman.

Did I actually accuse the board of social credit scores, or further internet controls? No, that was clear when I was making a point about the authoritarian lean of some "liberal" posters on the board.

You knew that, and didn't want to talk about that topic so you tried to strawman your way up that hill.

Don't do this. It's not a good look.

MT15 said it better than me. I was seeking clarification because it sounded like you were just adding a bunch of bull to your argument that no one was suggesting, or that no one is even in the same ballpark as suggesting. So, it was a question.. Why are you surprised? Because, I'm not surprised, because I wouldn't expect the subject to even be brought up. So, what postings here have made you think that people are even close to comfortable with this idea?

I wanted to explore your rationale more, at the same time, point out how out of whack it seemed.

 

[Optimus Prime]

So this is a thing



The comments have already proclaimed it better than Citizen Kane

 

[SaintForLife]

The fact that you demand disinformation be spread by the media is also telling. You don't care about truth. You don't care that there is no evidence that Joe Biden was in any way compromised. You want the disinformation because, quite honestly, that is all the Republican party offers now. There is no policy. No platform. Just misinform the public and hope it enrages the base to vote against their own interests.

The sad part is that you believe you have the high ground here screaming "censorship." You just hate it when people or the media won't spread your misinformation. Our unwillingness to spread your b.s. isn't censorship, it is our ability to critically think and say, "no, we aren't going to spread that garbage."

Disinformation huh? It looks like the corporate media is trying to get ahead of the GOP inquiries.

 

[SaintForLife]

"Hunter Biden isn't running for President." We all know Hunter was selling influence with his Dad. 10% for the Big guy(Joe Biden)

All of these people are liars.

Spies who lie: 51 ‘intelligence’ experts refuse to apologize for discrediting true Hunter Biden story

The 51 former “intelligence” officials who cast doubt on The Post’s Hunter Biden laptop stories in a public letter really were just desperate to get Joe Biden elected president.

nypost.com

 

[samiam5211]

Disinformation huh? It looks like the corporate media is trying to get ahead of the GOP inquiries.

What does "Hunter Biden's laptop" mean to you?

Do you think that there is something on there that proves Joe Biden is guilty of something?

 

[J-DONK]

If SFL wants to dig this up, I'll say add my two cents about the upcoming investigations.

If Republicans want to look at the subject of WHY the Hunter Biden story suppressed. That's something to actually look into.

The soft corruption stuff won't play well.

I'm 99% certain Republicans are going to screw up this investigation, along with Fauci.

 

[SaintForLife]

If SFL wants to dig this up, I'll say add my two cents about the upcoming investigations.

If Republicans want to look at the subject of WHY the Hunter Biden story suppressed. That's something to actually look into.

The soft corruption stuff won't play well.

I'm 99% certain Republicans are going to screw up this investigation, along with Fauci.

Oh I'm sure the Republicans will screw up both investigations by spending less time on the most important points.

But according to MT15, there wasn't any suppression of the Hunter Biden story.

 

[SaintForLife]

What does "Hunter Biden's laptop" mean to you?

Do you think that there is something on there that proves Joe Biden is guilty of something?

It shows that Hunter was selling influence to his Dad. "10% for the Big guy" was for Biden according to Tony Bobulinski.

The biggest part of the whole story is the media, big tech, the Democrats and the intelligence community working together to suppress/discredit the story to help Biden get elected.

 

[samiam5211]

It shows that Hunter was selling influence to his Dad. "10% for the Big guy" was for Biden according to Tony Bobulinski.

The biggest part of the whole story is the media, big tech, the Democrats and the intelligence community working together to suppress/discredit the story to help Biden get elected.

I definitely think Hunter Biden should be in jail.

Hunter selling influence doesn’t mean that Joe actually did anything wrong. Sometimes people sell things that don’t actually exist.

There was Russian propaganda floating around me during the 2020 election, like things that suggested Joe Biden was molesting his daughter.

 

[MT15]

It shows that Hunter was selling influence to his Dad. "10% for the Big guy" was for Biden according to Tony Bobulinski.

The biggest part of the whole story is the media, big tech, the Democrats and the intelligence community working together to suppress/discredit the story to help Biden get elected.

How did this huge conspiracy happen? No, seriously, who was pulling the strings? How did they get all these disparate media corporations and tech corporations to play ball? How did whoever get everyone to play along?

Hint: they didn’t. Media and tech are in competition with each other. If one of them had anything credible they would have broken the story in a NY minute. Do you think that FOX, the WSJ, any number of conservative sources conspired to elect Biden? And the Trump FBI also conspired to elect Biden? Do you know how crazy this sounds?

The “laptop” discredited itself. It was/is a collection of files that have been heavily manipulated AFTER the store guy gave it to the FBI. We don’t know exactly what is on the original, at all. Nobody does, except the FBI.