Federal criminal investigation Hunter Biden focuses on his business dealings (Update: DOJ appoints special counsel) (5 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    SaintForLife

    SaintForLife

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages
    7,313
    Reaction score
    3,404
    Location
    Madisonville
    Offline
    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.
    nypost.com

    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 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.
     
    FullMonte said:
    Well....if you believe that, do you also believe that the American people deserve to know if Trump and his family are enriching themselves while Donald is President?
    Click to expand...
    Of course and I believe we already seen reports about that.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    If I didn't have thick skin I wouldn't be posting here anymore. That wasn't the primary driver.

    Your answer about Biden is exactly what I talked about with Trump. People normally believe any story about Trump because it fits with his character. Whoever it is, it's best to make that determination based on the facts or evidence.
    Click to expand...
    Yeah, I'm talking about looking at the facts and evidence. Then, where you start getting into 'reasonable doubt' you have to look at the person/character.

    and you're right about the skin. I'm glad you keep coming back. I'm more glad when it's more direct discussion, which you seem to be doing more of lately. Just let's avoid the strawmen at times.
     
    MT15 said:
    So now, on Twitter, a person who is said to be the Vice President of the Democrats in Indiana society (assuming it’s a college club) has posted text messages where he tricked Rudy into thinking he was Ivanka. You just cannot make this stuff up. Caveat, I don’t know if this is real or not, but it’s funny.

    Click to expand...

    It's fake.

    ABC New Host:
    Screenshot_20201021-160051_Twitter.jpg


     
    Thanks, SFL, been off Twitter for a bit. It was funny, though, and totally believable that Rudy would fall for that.

    It’s pretty disingenuous from Miller to try to compare the two, though. Huge difference. He’s a hack.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    Of course and I believe we already seen reports about that.
    Click to expand...

    Sorry, I must have misunderstood your statement " Does the public deserve to know if Hunter and/or Joe were enriching themselves while Joe was Vice President? "

    I thought you were saying that the American people deserved more than just a report about whether or not Hunter and/or Joe were enriching themselves. I didn't realize that the NY Post story was enough for you.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    The Democrats, the media, and many here didn't have any of those concerns about the red flags with the Russia collusion narrative.

    I'm sure you can provide an example of Facebook, Twitter and most of the national media censoring a story that would hurt a Republican right?

    It's perfectly fine to be skeptical of the story, but what's Orewellian is big tech and the media trying to prevent the public from reading or hearing about the story. Why not put a disclaimer or just let people make up their own minds about the stories credibility?
    Click to expand...

    Sure.

    Go ahead and tell me the story that has the same level of red flaggery from the left that should have been 'censored' (keep in mind that YouTube never did a thing to censor it, Facebook allowed it on its platform but controlled the scope of its proliferation, and Twitter initially blocked the linking of the story and then reversed course - these are all important elements of your chain of events vis a vis censoring, which you never mention. It's just "media censorship" writ large, and it's not even media)

    If you want to talk about the national media and their neglect, then you need to talk about 2016. Media companies and journalists have talked about how their being duped in 2016 shaped how they approach these stories in 2020.

    If they were so AGAINST the GOP, then they would not have acted as they did in 2016. And yet they did, and I think it had definitive impact on the election results.

    The GOP pulled one over on them then and they weren't going to let it happen again. The GOP only has itself to blame here. They burned the media back then in exchange for political polling and now get all furious when the media is like "hold up, let's vet this a bit more before running with everything as fact."

    Personal accountability. They don't have it.

    As for your allusion to Orwell... it always amuses me to see so many people throw out the word when they seem to have no real idea about 1984, specifically, or Orwell's positions more broadly. Because anyone thinking that Orwell's work would somehow buttress Trump's administration is laughable.

    But it makes for a nifty soundbite, I guess.
     
    https://time.com/5902557/hunter-biden-rudy-giuliani-ukraine/

    Explicit photos and emails purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden were circulating in Ukraine last year at the same time that Rudy Giuliani was searching for dirt there on former Vice President Joe Biden, two people approached about the material during that period tell TIME.

    The emails’ alleged availability, which has not been previously reported, comes to light in the wake of Giuliani’s recent claims that he obtained private photos and emails of Hunter Biden from a broken laptop abandoned in Delaware. Giuliani, who is President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, has passed this material to right-wing news outlets, which began publishing it last week. Giuliani did not respond to requests for comment on the origins of the material he obtained.
    Click to expand...
     
    Meanwhile DNS just announced Russia and Iran are behind hacking of voter registrations as well as targeted emails to Ds from Proud Boys to vote Trump or Else!

    As well as sending emails of voter fraud from overseas with doctored video to cast doubt.
     
    That news conference was ... weird. Very short on specifics, like if they really wanted to be transparent and inform the public, there was very little informing going on. They didn’t even specify that the “Proud Boys” emails came from Iraq, as has been reported. They didn’t give any specific assurances, or say much of anything. It was just, weird. Like it seemed like they thought it was important to schedule this news conference and then they didn’t really say anything.

    Raised more questions than it answered, imo.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    I think it's fine to question the legitimacy of the story, but that's not the big issue here. The big issue is how the media and the big tech worked together to censor a story because it can harm Joe Biden. They probably regret covering the 2016 Hillary email story and want to make sure they don't make the same mistake.

    Also, the media didn't mind running with the unverified Steele dossier and the many stories that spun off of that. There were questions about its authenticity, but that didn't stop the media from covering it at nauseum. There were many other Russiagate stories that were based on questionable evidence or anonymous sources, but once again the media had to problem covering them extensively. The suddenly incurious media had no problem investigating to see if Trump was financially compromised by Russia for four years, but now they can't ask Joe if it's Hunter's laptop or if he profited from his son's relationships in Ukraine and China.

    Those 50 intelligence officials, which include the known liars like Brennan and Clapper, didn't provide any evidence for their claims. The Russian disinformation claim or blaming Russia for things happens far too often. Putin has to be laughing that their hacking of the emails and Facebook ads has caused a political party to almost automatically assume Russia is involved whatever the case may be.
    Click to expand...

    I have seen this same terminology in twitter posts, including from Donald Trump Jr., so I will presume it is now the formal talking point but is the "media and big tech worked together to censor the story" really what happened?

    The Biden laptop story was published by the NY Post - a media outlet that, despite varying degrees of credibility - is well known across the country. The story has been incessantly amplified by the hour by Fox News, the American news network with more viewers than any other. Op/eds about the Biden laptop story (the story itself, not the attack on the story) appeared in the Wall Street Journal and the Boston Herald - and probably more, I just haven't look further.

    Twitter initially blocked the story on the ostensible basis that it contained images of stolen content - Twitter later reversed that position. Facebook didn't block the story. YouTube didn't block the story. Instagram didn't block the story.

    And there's certainly no evidence that any of these decisions were made in concert.

    So we have a story with obvious credibility issues that was widely available and discussed. It was online. It was on TV. It was in newspaper. This claim that "media and big tech worked together to censor the story" is so obviously not true that it's just unintelligent. What you're really doing is demanding that all media and social media outlets, private enterprises all of them, must cover all stories without judgment as to their quality. Is that really what you believe?

    Trust me, if there was evidence that a particular story was truly being censored and shut out of American discourse, I would be right there with you in the alarm. But good Lord, that's not what happened here. The story was and is widely available - everyone knows about it. Fox News chooses not to cover negative Trump stories all the time, but I suspect that doesn't bother you. So why are you and Don Jr. crying about it so much? Your premise is false.
     
    superchuck500 said:
    The Biden laptop story was published by the NY Post - a media outlet that, despite varying degrees of credibility - is well known across the country. The story has been incessantly amplified by the hour by Fox News, the American news network with more viewers than any other.
    Click to expand...

    The interesting part of that statement? Reportedly, the story was shopped to Fox News first, and they passed on it because they couldn't verify the facts of the story. But, once the NY Post reported it, Fox was free to report all they wanted about it, because they were insulated. They were no longer worried about reporting an accurate verified story, they were simply reporting on a story that someone else reported.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom