Below is a link to CNN's coverage of the Devon Archer testimony.
Please note that as reported here the testimony is far less impressive than Miranda Devine would suggest. In particular, please note that the CNN report states that (1) "Archer provided no evidence connecting President Joe Biden to any of his son’s foreign business dealings"…
Below is a link to CNN's coverage of the Devon Archer testimony.
Please note that as reported here the testimony is far less impressive than Miranda Devine would suggest. In particular, please note that the CNN report states that (1) "Archer provided no evidence connecting President Joe Biden to any of his son’s foreign business dealings" and (2) "Archer told the panel that Hunter Biden did put his father on speaker phone in the presence of business partners, but that business was never discussed."
Please note the statement by a White House spokeperson: “It appears that the House Republicans’ own much-hyped witness today testified that he never heard of President Biden discussing business with his son or his son’s associates, or doing anything wrong”
Again, this seems to be much less that Miranda Devine and others have suggested.
Edit2 (7/31/2023 750 pm PST):
Here is an additional link to a just posted NY Times account of today's Devon Archer testimony:
"Biden Spoke With Son’s Associates, but Not About Business, Former Partner Says
Republicans accused the president of lying, while Democrats said the testimony of Devon Archer, who worked with Hunter Biden, showed that his son was selling the illusion of access to his father."
And so again, this seems to be much less that Miranda Devine and others have suggested and assertions that the NY Times is ignoring this story are simply not true.
Yes, I heard that he only said “hi” and talked about the weather. How stupid do they think we are? I have a 40 yr old son. I can assure you that he has never put me on speakerphone to say “hi” to his friends.
When you use "reality" what I think you intend is something like "way of seeing the world." However many viewpoints different people have, there is only one world. To get beyond people's individual opinions, we need to look at evidence and reason about that evidence.
williamJ, I also appreciate your sharing CNN coverage of Archer testimony. When I look for stories on CNN that I perceive as non favorable to Biden- I generally find myself navigating away from front page to their ‘Politics’ sub link. I think it is similar w/ Fox and negative Trump stories. My unsubstantiated feeling is that (most) citizens arriving to CNN or Fox websites rarely, if ever, navigate to a subset link. Not that it isn’t available, but that many are too lazy to dig. Just my current thinking, but always open to data that changes my mind.
Are you aware that as of this date, Fox News still has never told its viewers the actual size of its Dominion Systems lawsuit settlement, $787 million, and that this is the largest libel settlement in American history? (If you do not believe me, go search the Fox News website yourself. Please let me know if I am wrong.)
Yes, I am aware of Fox under reporting of this lawsuit. I’m the last person to defend Fox. I take it you are pretty new to Sasha’s stack to have even asked me this. Welcome to a free thinking 4th turn platform. True critical thinking is valued here
Oh nice try. Using clips from CNN and WaPo. Do you actually think they used full testimony or just sections to push their narrative as support of ‘nothing to see here.’ DOJ worked hard on Saturday (not a usual work day) to threaten Archer start jail sentence immediately, only to have to send second letter after exposed for their intimidation that Archer would be allowed to testify. Regardless whether they spoke business, the phone call was to verify the connection, formerly described as the ‘brand,’ so they would proceed with their business/bribery schemes. If business wasn’t discussed, it was intentional to deny plausibility as described by Bobolinski. Business and bribes/demands were made by Hunter with threats to follow by Joe Biden.
Read them yesterday. You will pardon me if I take CNN's stories/analysis/ with a gain of salt. Given (until recently) their coverage (Protection) of all things Biden.. Thing is IF this was all their was on The Biden's that would be one thing. We could say Nothing To See Here Move Along. But It Ain't. Not by a long shot. As time has gone on it looks like The Biden Family is closer to a Cosa Nostra Bogata, than anything else.
IMHO and in the opinion of one of the Republican Congressmen on the House Oversight Committee yesterday’s Archer Devon testimony is much less than Sasha and various Republicans suggested. Here is another link discussing the matter:
The Republican star witness appears to have been something of a dud.
Again, as I have said several times, I am perfectly prepared to believe all sorts of terrible things about Hunter Biden. So what? Hunter Biden has never held any position, official or unofficial, in the Joe Biden administration. If you want to excite me, show me that Joe Biden did something illegal. Specify what crime he commit and provide court admissible evidence. I and the country are waiting.
"If you want to excite me, show me that Joe Biden did something illegal. Specify what crime he commit and provide court admissible evidence."
You mean, other than the fact that he is a war criminal (Iraq), international terrorist (Nord Stream), and is attempting to crush the free speech of Americans on social media platforms?
I find all of this spin about Archer's testimony hilarious. What do people think influence peddling and corruption is, anyway?
We know that Joe routinely got phone calls from Hunter when he was with his shady business associates. Why? Of course, it was to demonstrate his access to daddy and the benefit that that would provide to his biz pals having a pipeline directly to the top of the U.S. power structure.
We know that Joe took actions that helped Hunter's business dealings. One example: How in the hell does Hunter, a ne'er-do-well drug addict with ZERO international business expertise (or any expertise) land a lucrative seat on a Ukrainian energy company at the same time his dad has the prosecutor investigating that company fired under the threat of withholding U.S. aid?
Joe and his mouthpieces cannot seriously claim that it's all a coincidence. If the names were "Trump" instead of "Biden" in this scenario, do you think the Dems/MSM would be so ho-hum about it? It's as blatant as it gets.
And it is ludicrous to think that Hunter just had a strange penchant for calling Joe during his business meetings. I have children and I can say that none of them have ever called me during a business meeting. Why would they, unless it involved me? It's nonsensical. I would certainly wonder why they were doing so if it happened more than once, much less numerous times.
The Republicans, to their credit, are investigating all of this and gathering evidence in a meticulous way, including bank records, before launching an impeachment inquiry. That is a good thing. We all want to see a solid case laid out and tried. But this bit of portraying Joe as, at best, pure as the driven snow and just "a loving father" standing by his troubled son, and, at worst, as an unwitting dupe in Hunter's schemes is ridiculous. The man has been in Washington for over FIFTY YEARS as Senator, VP and now POTUS. If he doesn't understand that his position of near God-like power gives him extraordinary responsibilites including being aware of it possibly being abused by, especially, his own drug addict son for illegal gain, then he's a complete idiot.
It is so heartbreaking to see that this is what not just you but everyone on the Left believes - and that's not your fault. The media runs cover for the Democrats and you WANT to believe. You won't accept any evidence. Admit that at the outset. You support, in fact, BURYING evidence, calling it Russian disinformation as the FBI did, as the media did, as the Democrats did. The evidence is on the laptop - the money trail is on the laptop. Hunter texted that he provides the wealth for the family. Joe Biden is disgustingly and horrifically, allowing Hunter to take the fall. A man who has been in government since the age of 30, his entire life, is never going to make the kinds of mistakes someone who hasn't been in government his entire life. He knew what his son was doing. He plays the role of the spaced out know-nothing because easy marks like you believe it. Fine. Who cares. Just don't waste anyone's time pretending like you actually have an interest in the truth here. You do not.
Thank you for your response. Regretfully I do not agree with you as to who is and is not following the evidence.
To cite just one point: In your initial post you accused CNN and the NY Times of not covering the Archer Devon testimony. I posted links showing that that was not true.
Can i suggest the in the interest of truth you post an update to your story?
When I wrote it they had not yet covered it. Their news angle, which I heard this morning is untrue: "Republicans can't find any connection to Hunter's dealings..." Find me one article -- one news story -- that in any way tells the story in a way that reflects the truth: This was clear influence peddling. It isn't that hard -- and it's not complicated. Watch the first hour of Ben Shapiro's story today (which hasn't yet posted on YouTube).
Show me one story at CNN or NBC that reflects accusations of corruption, and not a defense of Joe. Way down on Page One of the Times today is this headline, "Biden Spoke With Son’s Associates, but Not About Business, Former Partner Says" -- that's all they say. How the mighty have fallen. It remains heartbreaking, shocking and horrifying.
Thank you so much for your response. I really appreciate it.
I fully understand that what happened was you wrote your piece and that shortly after you posted it CNN and the NY Times posted their stories. That is why I suggested that you update your piece. I do not think that you want to mislead your readers.
It isn't misleading my readers. I can you show me where, on CNN.com, which is what I posted yesterday, there is any major headline about Hunter and Joe Biden's influence peddling? I just did a quick look at it's not above the fold. https://www.cnn.com <---see for yourself.
Now, look at The NY Times and then look at the Washington Post. What do you see? TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP.
Thank you again for your response and for taking the time to try to correct my errors. Apparently I am just a very slow stubborn learner. My bad. :-(
Regretfully what you posted says that CNN and the NY Times are not reporting the story of Monday's House Oversight hearing. At the time that you posted your remarks, that was true. However shortly after your post both CNN and the NY Times did post stories about the committee hearings. While your original post was accurate at the time that it was written, clearly it no longer is.
Hence my recommendation that you add an update stating this later information. I believe that that is what responsible journalists would do. Were I in your shoes that is what I would do.
As regards the content of the story itself, please note that CNN, the Washington Post, and the NY Times stories all reported the facts, the Democratic perspective, and the Republican perspective. I understand that you would prefer that this information be presented differently. However to do so would be inconsistent with Devon Archer's actual testimony.
As I have already noted elsewhere in this discussion, one of the Republican Congressmen on the committee, Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., acknowledged that the Republicans' widely-hyped witness in their probe of the Biden family's business dealings, Devon Archer, "didn't know anything" about unverified allegations that President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden had accepted millions in bribes.
To my mind, that sounds pretty clear.
Thank you again for your time. I greatly appreciate it.
"Evidence? Sworn testimony? Physical documents? A money trail?"
Give me a break.
Explain to us how Hunter - with zero expertise in anything - got a lavish salary from Burisma as Joe was threatening withholding U.S. funds from Ukraine unless they fired the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma.
Sorry, but the charge that you are making is a bit stale. Suffice it to say that three Republican led investigations have yet to produce any hard evidence of Joe Biden acting inappropriately.
For background, you may want to check out the following:
So you use the corrupt deep-state operation Wikipedia and its equally corrupt MSM sources to "disprove" what is a plain and unambiguous quid pro quo - which includes this whopper:
"United States intelligence community analysis released in March 2021 found that proxies of Russian intelligence promoted and laundered misleading or unsubstantiated narratives about the Bidens"
This is the garbage they promoted to social media companies to grease the skids for the very same "intelligence community" to claim that the laptop was "Russian disinformation" and get the NY Post story - later acknowledged as true even by the NYT - censored from social media, which impacted the election, aka election interference.
Still waiting for a plain explanation as to how Hunter got a big $ salary from Burisma.
1.) Zero expertise in anything nor was any work required = big salary, while
2.) Daddy bragged about getting the prosecutor investigating Burisma fired or he would withhold U.S. funds.
I am perfectly willing to concede to you that Hunter Biden might be guilty of all sorts of nefarious acts. However to most of us those actions are of interest only if they in some way involve Joe Biden in something illegal.
The relation of Joe Biden to the removal of the corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor was already been thoroughly investigated in 2020 by two Republican Senate committees. Neither found court admissible evidence of actual criminality.
If you have the missing evidence, perhaps you should call Fox News, Mitch McConnell, and Leo McCarthy and then share the evidence with the rest of us. Otherwise I have something more important to do, namely read the just released four court Federal indictment against Donald Trump.
I am not a shill and I resent the accusation. We may disagree but that is no reason for you to attack my motives and then verbally abuse me.
Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are two people. That one of them does something nefarious does not show that the other did anything wrong. I am perfectly willing to concede to you that Hunter Biden may have acted improperly. However that does not show that Joe Biden acted improperly.
At the risk of reminding you of a little history, this is not the first time that a member of the President's family has tried to capitalize on their family ties. Something similar happened in the late 1970s with Jimmy and Billy Carter. When Billy Carter tried to market himself as the President's brother, Jimmy carefully avoided entanglement in his brother's activities.
In this age of partisanship, I completely agree that too many people only obtain their news from sources with which they agree. That is why I personally make a determined effort to read and view news from a wide spectrum of opinion. If you do not already diversify your news sources, you should consider doing so and urge others to do so as well.
If you only knew how much I read each day and how I deliberately seek out multiple viewpoints, especially those with which I disagree. Decades of reading and listening, decades of speaking with others, decades of thinking. I am hardly perfect. I make mistakes. And most especially I am always in the deepest debt to those who show me the errors of my ways.
I also go to RealClearPolitics. Their alternating pro and con views are nice. Often they surface viewpoints that I otherwise might miss. Still, as RCP has a fundamentally rightward tilt, I balance it with other sources which have a leftward tilt.
RCP is great, and yes it does lean to the right. I’d suggest it leans to the center, if you turn back the clock, 5 to 6 years. That being how far left the left has turned, at least in my lifetime
I used to be labeled as "extremely radical" and I can't stand to read the leftist articles on RCP. I don't know how long it has been since I have read anything credible or fair in the MSM. The censoring is extreme and the "stories" that are included turn out to be fairy tales a lot of the time now. I am surrounded by the same toxic nonsense in my city and state, so I don't need to seek out woke opinions elsewhere.
My take is RCP (mostly) publishes the ‘left’ stories they do to illustrate how far gone the opinion is. I do read/listen and enjoy viewpoints from left, when I detect authenticity. I find most of those voices now, here on Substack (having been shunned or otherwise cancelled by the MSM hive mind) but are still seeking intellectual honesty
I read Taibbi, Freddie deBoer and sometimes Greenwald. Taibbi is being so persecuted now by the House Dems and I am sure that will enlarge his views about who they are. The MSM are creating an alienated population of journalists, which favors the survival of a free press. The platforms are still vulnerable, though, when the rulers have so much control over the media.
Below is a link to CNN's coverage of the Devon Archer testimony.
Please note that as reported here the testimony is far less impressive than Miranda Devine would suggest. In particular, please note that the CNN report states that (1) "Archer provided no evidence connecting President Joe Biden to any of his son’s foreign business dealings" and (2) "Archer told the panel that Hunter Biden did put his father on speaker phone in the presence of business partners, but that business was never discussed."
Here is the link:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/31/politics/devon-archer-house-testimony/index.html
So assertions that CNN is ignoring this story are not true.
Edit1 (7/31/2023 400 pm PST):
Here is an additional link to a just posted Washington Post account of the Devon Archer testimony:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/31/hunter-biden-congress-oversight-republicans-devon-archer/0baea57e-2fb7-11ee-85dd-5c3c97d6acda_story.html
Please note the statement by a White House spokeperson: “It appears that the House Republicans’ own much-hyped witness today testified that he never heard of President Biden discussing business with his son or his son’s associates, or doing anything wrong”
Again, this seems to be much less that Miranda Devine and others have suggested.
Edit2 (7/31/2023 750 pm PST):
Here is an additional link to a just posted NY Times account of today's Devon Archer testimony:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/31/us/politics/hunter-biden-devon-archer.html?searchResultPosition=1
The headline says it all:
"Biden Spoke With Son’s Associates, but Not About Business, Former Partner Says
Republicans accused the president of lying, while Democrats said the testimony of Devon Archer, who worked with Hunter Biden, showed that his son was selling the illusion of access to his father."
And so again, this seems to be much less that Miranda Devine and others have suggested and assertions that the NY Times is ignoring this story are simply not true.
Yes, I heard that he only said “hi” and talked about the weather. How stupid do they think we are? I have a 40 yr old son. I can assure you that he has never put me on speakerphone to say “hi” to his friends.
Much less “associates” at a business dinner😆
My reporting indicates that the weather is all DJT and Putin discussed when they were alone.
Other than some wedding plans and yoga classes that is.
Obviously nothing to see here either. I’m sure CNN didn’t care about that. 🤪
Ah yes, DJT the perennial topic no matter what is actually under discussion.
Meant to reinforce your point. But will admit it was clumsy.
Thanks for sharing their reporting, Williamj. As my friend Seva has taught me; our society operates on at least two different realities.
When you use "reality" what I think you intend is something like "way of seeing the world." However many viewpoints different people have, there is only one world. To get beyond people's individual opinions, we need to look at evidence and reason about that evidence.
williamJ, I also appreciate your sharing CNN coverage of Archer testimony. When I look for stories on CNN that I perceive as non favorable to Biden- I generally find myself navigating away from front page to their ‘Politics’ sub link. I think it is similar w/ Fox and negative Trump stories. My unsubstantiated feeling is that (most) citizens arriving to CNN or Fox websites rarely, if ever, navigate to a subset link. Not that it isn’t available, but that many are too lazy to dig. Just my current thinking, but always open to data that changes my mind.
Are you aware that as of this date, Fox News still has never told its viewers the actual size of its Dominion Systems lawsuit settlement, $787 million, and that this is the largest libel settlement in American history? (If you do not believe me, go search the Fox News website yourself. Please let me know if I am wrong.)
Yes, I am aware of Fox under reporting of this lawsuit. I’m the last person to defend Fox. I take it you are pretty new to Sasha’s stack to have even asked me this. Welcome to a free thinking 4th turn platform. True critical thinking is valued here
Oh nice try. Using clips from CNN and WaPo. Do you actually think they used full testimony or just sections to push their narrative as support of ‘nothing to see here.’ DOJ worked hard on Saturday (not a usual work day) to threaten Archer start jail sentence immediately, only to have to send second letter after exposed for their intimidation that Archer would be allowed to testify. Regardless whether they spoke business, the phone call was to verify the connection, formerly described as the ‘brand,’ so they would proceed with their business/bribery schemes. If business wasn’t discussed, it was intentional to deny plausibility as described by Bobolinski. Business and bribes/demands were made by Hunter with threats to follow by Joe Biden.
Read them yesterday. You will pardon me if I take CNN's stories/analysis/ with a gain of salt. Given (until recently) their coverage (Protection) of all things Biden.. Thing is IF this was all their was on The Biden's that would be one thing. We could say Nothing To See Here Move Along. But It Ain't. Not by a long shot. As time has gone on it looks like The Biden Family is closer to a Cosa Nostra Bogata, than anything else.
IMHO and in the opinion of one of the Republican Congressmen on the House Oversight Committee yesterday’s Archer Devon testimony is much less than Sasha and various Republicans suggested. Here is another link discussing the matter:
https://www.salon.com/2023/08/01/truly-stunning-admits-hyped-biden-witness-didnt-know-anything-about-alleged-bribe/
The Republican star witness appears to have been something of a dud.
Again, as I have said several times, I am perfectly prepared to believe all sorts of terrible things about Hunter Biden. So what? Hunter Biden has never held any position, official or unofficial, in the Joe Biden administration. If you want to excite me, show me that Joe Biden did something illegal. Specify what crime he commit and provide court admissible evidence. I and the country are waiting.
"If you want to excite me, show me that Joe Biden did something illegal. Specify what crime he commit and provide court admissible evidence."
You mean, other than the fact that he is a war criminal (Iraq), international terrorist (Nord Stream), and is attempting to crush the free speech of Americans on social media platforms?
I find all of this spin about Archer's testimony hilarious. What do people think influence peddling and corruption is, anyway?
We know that Joe routinely got phone calls from Hunter when he was with his shady business associates. Why? Of course, it was to demonstrate his access to daddy and the benefit that that would provide to his biz pals having a pipeline directly to the top of the U.S. power structure.
We know that Joe took actions that helped Hunter's business dealings. One example: How in the hell does Hunter, a ne'er-do-well drug addict with ZERO international business expertise (or any expertise) land a lucrative seat on a Ukrainian energy company at the same time his dad has the prosecutor investigating that company fired under the threat of withholding U.S. aid?
Joe and his mouthpieces cannot seriously claim that it's all a coincidence. If the names were "Trump" instead of "Biden" in this scenario, do you think the Dems/MSM would be so ho-hum about it? It's as blatant as it gets.
And it is ludicrous to think that Hunter just had a strange penchant for calling Joe during his business meetings. I have children and I can say that none of them have ever called me during a business meeting. Why would they, unless it involved me? It's nonsensical. I would certainly wonder why they were doing so if it happened more than once, much less numerous times.
The Republicans, to their credit, are investigating all of this and gathering evidence in a meticulous way, including bank records, before launching an impeachment inquiry. That is a good thing. We all want to see a solid case laid out and tried. But this bit of portraying Joe as, at best, pure as the driven snow and just "a loving father" standing by his troubled son, and, at worst, as an unwitting dupe in Hunter's schemes is ridiculous. The man has been in Washington for over FIFTY YEARS as Senator, VP and now POTUS. If he doesn't understand that his position of near God-like power gives him extraordinary responsibilites including being aware of it possibly being abused by, especially, his own drug addict son for illegal gain, then he's a complete idiot.
Thing is IF this was a One Off situation, you would be correct, But ts Not.
Evidence? Sworn testimony? Physical documents? A money trail?
I understand that you do not like Joe Biden. However your dislikes do not prove criminality in a court of law.
When you have the evidence, please share it. I and the country would like to see it.
It is so heartbreaking to see that this is what not just you but everyone on the Left believes - and that's not your fault. The media runs cover for the Democrats and you WANT to believe. You won't accept any evidence. Admit that at the outset. You support, in fact, BURYING evidence, calling it Russian disinformation as the FBI did, as the media did, as the Democrats did. The evidence is on the laptop - the money trail is on the laptop. Hunter texted that he provides the wealth for the family. Joe Biden is disgustingly and horrifically, allowing Hunter to take the fall. A man who has been in government since the age of 30, his entire life, is never going to make the kinds of mistakes someone who hasn't been in government his entire life. He knew what his son was doing. He plays the role of the spaced out know-nothing because easy marks like you believe it. Fine. Who cares. Just don't waste anyone's time pretending like you actually have an interest in the truth here. You do not.
Sasha,
Thank you for your response. Regretfully I do not agree with you as to who is and is not following the evidence.
To cite just one point: In your initial post you accused CNN and the NY Times of not covering the Archer Devon testimony. I posted links showing that that was not true.
Can i suggest the in the interest of truth you post an update to your story?
When I wrote it they had not yet covered it. Their news angle, which I heard this morning is untrue: "Republicans can't find any connection to Hunter's dealings..." Find me one article -- one news story -- that in any way tells the story in a way that reflects the truth: This was clear influence peddling. It isn't that hard -- and it's not complicated. Watch the first hour of Ben Shapiro's story today (which hasn't yet posted on YouTube).
Show me one story at CNN or NBC that reflects accusations of corruption, and not a defense of Joe. Way down on Page One of the Times today is this headline, "Biden Spoke With Son’s Associates, but Not About Business, Former Partner Says" -- that's all they say. How the mighty have fallen. It remains heartbreaking, shocking and horrifying.
Sasha,
Thank you so much for your response. I really appreciate it.
I fully understand that what happened was you wrote your piece and that shortly after you posted it CNN and the NY Times posted their stories. That is why I suggested that you update your piece. I do not think that you want to mislead your readers.
It isn't misleading my readers. I can you show me where, on CNN.com, which is what I posted yesterday, there is any major headline about Hunter and Joe Biden's influence peddling? I just did a quick look at it's not above the fold. https://www.cnn.com <---see for yourself.
Now, look at The NY Times and then look at the Washington Post. What do you see? TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP.
Sorry, man. Live with it.
Sasha,
Thank you again for your response and for taking the time to try to correct my errors. Apparently I am just a very slow stubborn learner. My bad. :-(
Regretfully what you posted says that CNN and the NY Times are not reporting the story of Monday's House Oversight hearing. At the time that you posted your remarks, that was true. However shortly after your post both CNN and the NY Times did post stories about the committee hearings. While your original post was accurate at the time that it was written, clearly it no longer is.
Hence my recommendation that you add an update stating this later information. I believe that that is what responsible journalists would do. Were I in your shoes that is what I would do.
As regards the content of the story itself, please note that CNN, the Washington Post, and the NY Times stories all reported the facts, the Democratic perspective, and the Republican perspective. I understand that you would prefer that this information be presented differently. However to do so would be inconsistent with Devon Archer's actual testimony.
As I have already noted elsewhere in this discussion, one of the Republican Congressmen on the committee, Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., acknowledged that the Republicans' widely-hyped witness in their probe of the Biden family's business dealings, Devon Archer, "didn't know anything" about unverified allegations that President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden had accepted millions in bribes.
To my mind, that sounds pretty clear.
Thank you again for your time. I greatly appreciate it.
"Evidence? Sworn testimony? Physical documents? A money trail?"
Give me a break.
Explain to us how Hunter - with zero expertise in anything - got a lavish salary from Burisma as Joe was threatening withholding U.S. funds from Ukraine unless they fired the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma.
You want a smoking gun, here it is.
Sorry, but the charge that you are making is a bit stale. Suffice it to say that three Republican led investigations have yet to produce any hard evidence of Joe Biden acting inappropriately.
For background, you may want to check out the following:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden%E2%80%93Ukraine_conspiracy_theory
You clearly aren't concerned with truth.
So you use the corrupt deep-state operation Wikipedia and its equally corrupt MSM sources to "disprove" what is a plain and unambiguous quid pro quo - which includes this whopper:
"United States intelligence community analysis released in March 2021 found that proxies of Russian intelligence promoted and laundered misleading or unsubstantiated narratives about the Bidens"
This is the garbage they promoted to social media companies to grease the skids for the very same "intelligence community" to claim that the laptop was "Russian disinformation" and get the NY Post story - later acknowledged as true even by the NYT - censored from social media, which impacted the election, aka election interference.
Still waiting for a plain explanation as to how Hunter got a big $ salary from Burisma.
1.) Zero expertise in anything nor was any work required = big salary, while
2.) Daddy bragged about getting the prosecutor investigating Burisma fired or he would withhold U.S. funds.
Connect the dots. After all, there are only TWO.
I am perfectly willing to concede to you that Hunter Biden might be guilty of all sorts of nefarious acts. However to most of us those actions are of interest only if they in some way involve Joe Biden in something illegal.
The relation of Joe Biden to the removal of the corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor was already been thoroughly investigated in 2020 by two Republican Senate committees. Neither found court admissible evidence of actual criminality.
If you have the missing evidence, perhaps you should call Fox News, Mitch McConnell, and Leo McCarthy and then share the evidence with the rest of us. Otherwise I have something more important to do, namely read the just released four court Federal indictment against Donald Trump.
"to most of us those actions are of interest only if they in some way involve Joe Biden in something illegal."
I've fought against shills like you all my life. You're as transparent as a sheet of glass.
You continually avoid the question and the ONLY possible answer to it:
How did Hunter - a guy whose only "talent" was that daddy was in a position of power - make millions of$?
You know as well as I do there's only one answer, which is why you do the Texas two-step to avoid it.
Back to shill school for you, sonny.
I am not a shill and I resent the accusation. We may disagree but that is no reason for you to attack my motives and then verbally abuse me.
Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are two people. That one of them does something nefarious does not show that the other did anything wrong. I am perfectly willing to concede to you that Hunter Biden may have acted improperly. However that does not show that Joe Biden acted improperly.
At the risk of reminding you of a little history, this is not the first time that a member of the President's family has tried to capitalize on their family ties. Something similar happened in the late 1970s with Jimmy and Billy Carter. When Billy Carter tried to market himself as the President's brother, Jimmy carefully avoided entanglement in his brother's activities.
In this age of partisanship, I completely agree that too many people only obtain their news from sources with which they agree. That is why I personally make a determined effort to read and view news from a wide spectrum of opinion. If you do not already diversify your news sources, you should consider doing so and urge others to do so as well.
I agree 100% and will admit sometimes it’s hard going.
If you only knew how much I read each day and how I deliberately seek out multiple viewpoints, especially those with which I disagree. Decades of reading and listening, decades of speaking with others, decades of thinking. I am hardly perfect. I make mistakes. And most especially I am always in the deepest debt to those who show me the errors of my ways.
I go to realclearpolitics because of the alternating pro con views.
I also go to RealClearPolitics. Their alternating pro and con views are nice. Often they surface viewpoints that I otherwise might miss. Still, as RCP has a fundamentally rightward tilt, I balance it with other sources which have a leftward tilt.
RCP is great, and yes it does lean to the right. I’d suggest it leans to the center, if you turn back the clock, 5 to 6 years. That being how far left the left has turned, at least in my lifetime
I used to be labeled as "extremely radical" and I can't stand to read the leftist articles on RCP. I don't know how long it has been since I have read anything credible or fair in the MSM. The censoring is extreme and the "stories" that are included turn out to be fairy tales a lot of the time now. I am surrounded by the same toxic nonsense in my city and state, so I don't need to seek out woke opinions elsewhere.
My take is RCP (mostly) publishes the ‘left’ stories they do to illustrate how far gone the opinion is. I do read/listen and enjoy viewpoints from left, when I detect authenticity. I find most of those voices now, here on Substack (having been shunned or otherwise cancelled by the MSM hive mind) but are still seeking intellectual honesty
I read Taibbi, Freddie deBoer and sometimes Greenwald. Taibbi is being so persecuted now by the House Dems and I am sure that will enlarge his views about who they are. The MSM are creating an alienated population of journalists, which favors the survival of a free press. The platforms are still vulnerable, though, when the rulers have so much control over the media.