Federal criminal investigation Hunter Biden focuses on his business dealings (Update: DOJ appoints special counsel) (3 Viewers)

[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.

 

[SystemShock]

Much as I hate to say it, he isn't making that bit up. That guy, and Dagens Nyheter (Swedish newspaper), did get copies of emails between the National Property Board Sweden and Hunter Biden.

Of course, it's still as largely irrelevant as it was six months ago.

Why not say that the DN got the emails?
Why point out that H. Biden had an office in a complex where the Swedish embassy is? Why is that relevant?
Who in the Swedish government is involved with alleged misconduct with Biden? Because the emails had to be sent to a person working for the government.
Where are the emails? What do they say?

 

[RobF]

Why not say that the DN got the emails?
Why point out that H. Biden had an office in a complex where the Swedish embassy is? Why is that relevant?
Who in the Swedish government is involved with alleged misconduct with Biden? Because the emails had to be sent to a person working for the government.
Where are the emails? What do they say?

The Dagens Nyheter link goes to their English article about it. But like I said, it's not really relevant to anything.

 

[MT15]

Well, this paragraph sums up nicely why nobody should have treated the NY Post story seriously at the time, or now for that matter.

“The national story quickly centered on the dubious provenance of the material, particularly given how, four years before, WikiLeaks had begun releasing material stolen by Russian hackers at about the same point in the presidential contest. But for news outlets interested in actually evaluating what the New York Post claimed it had, neither the paper nor its source for the material, President Donald Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani, were willing to share. (Giuliani famously told the New York Times that he was hoping to avoid having the material vetted before being published.) It therefore seemed wise to treat the New York Post’s claims with some skepticism.

Now, a new voice has joined those raising questions about the validity of the material that’s alleged to have been on Hunter Biden’s laptop: the guy who recovered that data in the first place.”

“Here’s where The Washington Post’s discovery that folders were added becomes more important. We have evidence that the portable hard drive had something added to it both before and after the New York Post’s original story — and here’s Mac Isaac agreeing that some of what he’s seen presented as coming from the laptop was never on there.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/04/12/now-warning-about-hunter-biden-laptop-disinfo-guy-who-leaked-it/

 

[SaintForLife]

The story being pushed by Republicans is that Joe Biden was bought for his influence. To the extent that the Republican narrative was basically he was being bribed, it was absolutely disinformation. Again, you have been shown it bought no influence from Joe Biden. So yes, it was and still is disinformation. You so badly want this to be something, you can’t see that it is a nothing burger when it comes to Joe Biden.

Answer me this, if it wasn’t Biden’s son, would you give a damn? Because Hunter’s grifting had as much influence on Joe Biden as Donald, Jr.’s grifting.

The fact that you can't even muster a comment about the censorship is very telling.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

The fact that you can't even muster a comment about the censorship is very telling.

The fact that this is literally the only topic of conversation you post about on this forum now is also very telling.

 

[MT15]

The fact that you can't even muster a comment about the censorship is very telling.

Because there wasn’t any censorship. It’s a joke, is what it is. Reputable news organizations covered it as the political hit job it was, and a couple social media websites decided that they didn’t want any part of this mess.

Some very shady people, including the NY Post whose lack of journalistic ethics is legend, claimed they had the contents of a laptop. But they wouldn’t let anyone see the collection of files. Rudy told people he wanted the contents published without vetting if at all possible and the NY Post was happy to oblige.

Now that one of Bannon’s flunkies has provided WaPo with the files, it is apparent that many files were added after the laptop was in FBI custody by various people, starting even before the NY Post ran their story and continuing over the past 2 years. Even the Trump supporting computer repair shop owner has come out and said that there is stuff on there that wasn’t there when he had the laptop.

So yes, as presented by the NY Post and Rudy, it was and is disinformation. The fact that some of the emails can be verified proves nothing, because those could have been hacked for one thing, and because the verifiable emails don’t prove any corruption of Joe Biden. And it’s only about 2% of the material that can be verified.

And you will ignore all these facts to believe in a vast conspiracy. Because you desperately want to believe the garbage you are being fed by a bunch of grifters.

 

[Sandman]

The fact that you can't even muster a comment about the censorship is very telling.

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."

 

[dtc]

This is the question any reasonable person would ask.

In my best online Bevis voice....

"ehhehehe..... you said reasonable..... ehehhehheeenhe.

 

[UriUT]

So we are clear. Hunter Biden has no clear evidence that alters us policy of any kind. However here we have clear allegations but isnt vociferously broadcast to the world by the hunter Biden laptop crowd.

EXCLUSIVE: The *Real* Reason Jared Kushner was Given $2 Billion to Invest by MBS

On Monday, I wrote about the staggering sum of $2 billion entrusted by the Saudi investment fund PIF to Jared Kushner’s new fund, Affinity Partners—reportedly at the behest of Saudi Crown Prince MBS over objections by a panel of financial advisers who highlighted Kushner’s lack of track record...

vickyward.substack.com

To be perfectly frank, I knew the arrests were linked to an opposition group. I didnt know it was a group ready to depose mbs.

 

[J-DONK]

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."

Does this board feel the same way about Steele dossier? How is/was that more credible story then Hunter's laptop?

Democrats want to turn American press into Mao's China. "We must protect the ignorant masses from disinformation."

I'm surprised this board hasn't started talking about what a great idea social credit scores, and further internet controls would be for the general public.

I have yet to hear a good argument when you guys try to handwave away internet censorship.

 

[MT15]

JDonk: I have yet to hear a good argument for why the NY Post story should have been taken seriously. And no, the fact that there are a few evidently genuine emails scattered among an overwhelming majority of stuff that was obviously added after the actual laptop was in FBI custody doesn’t make the NY Post story any more valid.

But, besides that I posted a very thoughtful thread about what people are calling “censorship” on social media. Did you read it?

My question would be why people think this is an actual story. It’s not. It was covered in the actual news media very similarly to the Steele dossier - with copious disclaimers that it could not be verified.

And in the case of the collection of files they called the “laptop” - the media couldn’t even view the files until recently. At least the Steele Dossier was made public, there was no such transparency for the “laptop” at the time. The story deserved the treatment it got.

People who are hyperventilating over this are being distracted from some very real corruption that is being exposed. Who does that serve?

 

[SaintForLife]

Does this board feel the same way about Steele dossier? How is/was that more credible story then Hunter's laptop?

Democrats want to turn American press into Mao's China. "We must protect the ignorant masses from disinformation."

I'm surprised this board hasn't started talking about what a great idea social credit scores, and further internet controls would be for the general public.

I have yet to hear a good argument when you guys try to handwave away internet censorship.

The majority of the calls for combating disinformation is nothing more than a push for more censorship.

What's funny is the people who are supposedly experts at disinformation are some of the biggest purveyors of disinformation.

CIA linked Anne Applebaum, Jeffery Saddam has WMD Goldberg, Jonah IRAQ WMD Goldberg, Frances Fake Whisteblower Haugen, Will Hurd(Former CIA) Brian The Walls are Closing In Stelter were all at the recent Disinformation Conference. It's laughable

 

[Optimus Prime]

 

[Optimus Prime]

Sounds about right
===============

Republicans have been cagey about what their agenda would be if they gain control of Congress in November. “I’ll let you know when we take it back,” is all Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) will tell voters.


Why so reticent?

Because while Americans worry about such things as inflation and the war in Ukraine, the top concerns of congressional Republicans can be ranked roughly as follows:


1) Hunter Biden

2) Hunter Biden

3) Hunter Biden


4) Hunter Biden


This, at least, is the impression given by Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the man in line to become chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, the House’s main investigative panel.

In interviews with Fox News and other public pronouncements, Comer has alleged that the president’s son is responsible for just about everything.


Why is fentanyl flowing into the United States? Hunter Biden.


Why is President Biden pushing electric vehicles? Hunter Biden.


Why isn’t the president tougher on Russian oligarchs? Hunter Biden.


Why isn’t the administration pinning the pandemic on a Wuhan lab leak and battling China over currency manipulation? Hunter Biden and Hunter Biden.


Why did the United States rejoin the Paris climate accord? Hunter Biden.


Why did the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff reassure the Chinese military in the last chaotic days of the Trump administration? Again, Hunter Biden.


“Congressional Republicans plan to open up five avenues of investigation into Hunter Biden,” the New York Post reported last week, citing Comer’s prospective panel…….

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/04/hunter-biden-obsession-republicans-comer/

 

[wardorican]

Does this board feel the same way about Steele dossier? How is/was that more credible story then Hunter's laptop?

Democrats want to turn American press into Mao's China. "We must protect the ignorant masses from disinformation."

I'm surprised this board hasn't started talking about what a great idea social credit scores, and further internet controls would be for the general public.

I have yet to hear a good argument when you guys try to handwave away internet censorship.

Where do you come up with this crap? Who on this site even comes close to suggesting social credits?

Hey, don't amplify bullshirt doesn't mean, censorship. Just, like, choose not to give bullshirt more time. Prioritizing isn't censorship.

The Steele Dossier was clearly discredited. Even CNN ripped it apart eventually. But, at the time, due to just how scuzzy Trump is and his shady business practices, and the fact he did have various Russian contacts with his campaign.. it was probably a bit harder to disprove at first.

The Steele dossier: A reckoning

When it came to light in January 2017, just days before Donald Trump took office, the so-called Steele dossier landed like a bombshell and sent shockwaves around the world with its salacious allegations about Trump and his supposed ties to Russia.

www.cnn.com

 

[MT15]

And if you remember, even as it came out it wasn’t taken seriously. At least not the salacious parts. It was always talked about with the caveat that it was unproven and usually, as I recall, it was said that at least parts of it were most probably wrong.

There is a clear narrative being pushed by certain people that the Dossier was the entire reason why Trump was investigated, when the investigation had already been opened before it came out. Sure, they threw it into the FARA applications, they threw the kitchen sink into those.

It doesn’t change the fact that Trump certainly deserved to be investigated over this. He had freaking Paul Manafort as his campaign manager for crying out loud. He publicly refused to criticize Putin for killing journalists and opposition leaders in Russia, he had minor campaign aides bragging to foreign governments about Russian cooperation with the campaign, he publicly asked Russia to hack a former US government official who happened to be his political opponent, his campaign privately met with a person they thought was a member of Russian government to “get dirt on Clinton”, people in his orbit attempted to coordinate with Wikileaks the dump of hacked material from Russia.

I mean, all of these things are so far out of the norm for a political campaign that it would have been a lapse in national security if he hadn’t been investigated. And he actively tried to obstruct the investigation, committing multiple crimes in the process.

 

[J-DONK]

Where do you come up with this crap? Who on this site even comes close to suggesting social credits?

Hey, don't amplify bullshirt doesn't mean, censorship. Just, like, choose not to give bullshirt more time. Prioritizing isn't censorship.

The Steele Dossier was clearly discredited. Even CNN ripped it apart eventually. But, at the time, due to just how scuzzy Trump is and his shady business practices, and the fact he did have various Russian contacts with his campaign.. it was probably a bit harder to disprove at first.

The Steele dossier: A reckoning

When it came to light in January 2017, just days before Donald Trump took office, the so-called Steele dossier landed like a bombshell and sent shockwaves around the world with its salacious allegations about Trump and his supposed ties to Russia.

www.cnn.com

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.

 

[MT15]

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.