Hunter Biden (1 Viewer)

[FullMonte]

Lost in all the news coverage about what's going on in the US right now is this bit of information.

The Ukrainian government has completed an audit of thousands of case files related to Burisma. Ruslan Ryaboshapka (the prosecutor general), described by Zelenskiy as "100 percent my person" in the July phone call with president Trump said "I specifically asked prosecutors to check especially carefully those facts about Biden's alleged involvement. They answered that there was nothing of the kind."

Not that anyone SHOULD be surprised to find out that Hunter Biden was not implicated in something that was done by the CEO of Burisma in his role as a government employee, that happened two years before Biden joined the board.

Ukrainian prosecutors find no evidence against Hunter Biden

Audit probed energy company Burisma, of which Biden was a board member from 2014-2019

www.theguardian.com

 

[superchuck500]

"The president’s son eventually paid roughly $2 million in back taxes and penalties after learning of the investigation and getting sober, following a years-long struggle with drug addiction and alcoholism. In the weeks before the trial, the judge blocked Biden’s lawyers from telling jurors about the belated tax payment, or about the potential origins of his addiction – dealing a major blow to his defense strategy."

Hunter Biden offers to plead to avoid a trial in tax case | CNN Politics

Hunter Biden is attempting to resolve his federal tax evasion case in California with a plea where he maintains his innocence but will accept punishment, his lawyers announced in court Thursday, moments before jury selection was scheduled to begin.

www.cnn.com

This seems odd. If prosecutors can speak to what the money was spent on, then it seems the defense should be able to speak to why it was spent. Also, if he paid all back taxes and penalties, then why not let the jury hear that? @superchuck500

I don’t know - it sounds to me like there’s some law there and I would have to read the judge’s ruling to be able to comment on the rationale.