[ad_1]
Don’t expect “We’re No. 1” brags from the White House or Wilmington, but that doesn’t diminish the single’s, ah, success. Both Bidens have had brushes with defamation.
Courtesy of Fox News, here’s the headline of the century: “Biden, Hunter in unique examination of presidential history as first father and son.”
The president has paid his dues by carefully handling classified information, with the added bonus of his unwitting scrutiny of how much Donald Trump is being held by the same Justice Department. When it came to the classified documents that Biden allegedly scattered like so much birdseed, the feds couldn’t even be bothered to search for more, leaving the job to their lawyers for more than a month.
It’s a sweet deal if you can get it.
No impromptu SWAT team for a Biden raid, no pictures of documents scattered on the floor, no Deep State agents whispering to reporters that American secrets could be sold to enemy governments. Even the discovery of the first documents on November 2 was kept secret for two months in the middle of the election.
The official party line remains that good ol’ Uncle Joe made a mistake. He means no harm, and the FBI investigation proves it!
A similar bias is slowly playing out in Hunter’s mock tax and lobbying study, now in its fifth year. Attorney General Merrick Garland is proving a bitter political hack by trying to bury the case deeper than Jimmy Hoffa, rather than indicting or not indicting the president’s son.
But beyond the story cited by Fox, the headline’s reference to the “separate” Biden investigations also illuminates unfinished business. If there is any real justice left in justice, there will soon be a single investigation involving father and son.
That’s what you get.
Joe and Hunter openly clash over an influence-peddling scam that has netted the family tens of millions of dollars. In fact, the more we learn, the more convinced I am that Joe’s role is minimal.
I believe that the whole truth, if we find it, will show that Joe was the master and savior forerunner and transmitter of the end. This is the only arrangement that explains both the extraordinary amount of money and the ridiculous lie of why Joe still never spoke to Hunter about his son’s business.
For most people following the story, the working theory involves the assumption that Hunter followed his father around the world as Joe, then Veep, while serving as a key figure in the Obama administration. With this attitude, Hunter, the ultimate prodigal son, has brazenly used the opportunity to cut deals with foreign governments and companies in China, Ukraine, Russia and more.
Joe, on the other hand, came across as a loving, permissive father who had been bereaved and a serious statesman whose loyalty was taken for granted. Amazingly, that image still has currency in some media and public spaces, even though Joe may have been very wealthy during his lifetime in government.
While he did get some booty from his son’s business, according to information found on Hunter’s abandoned laptop, they didn’t come close to explaining the president’s vast wealth.
That’s why Tony Bobulinski is such a valuable player. The bombshell statement that he met with Joe to discuss a big deal in China and the email confirmation that Joe was the “big man” lined up for a secret 10% cut suggest a pattern that could have been going on for years.
Bobulinski also said, and emails show, that Hunter referred to his father as “the chairman” when discussing the deals.
Joe is playing dumb.
The Daily Mail also reported on Friday that Joe and Hunter plan to participate in a phone call in late 2017 about a multimillion-dollar deal to sell U.S. liquefied natural gas to China.
However, Joe still acts as Sgt. Schultz, he knew nothing about the predator business. It begs the question why he would go to this extreme to claim innocence. Even CNN is finally calling him out.
One reason he sticks to the story is if he admits to knowing about the plans, “What did you find out and when did you find out? And what did you do? “
That could be the beginning of the end of the show and possibly the biggest corruption scandal in American history. Ultimately, it shows that we have a president who is troubled by taking money from our enemies.
If true, full disclosure shows that Joe first identified his targets based on his personal knowledge of individuals in foreign governments and big business organizations. Then it falls to Hunter and Joe’s brother Jim to set the tone, promising that dear old dad is on board and will offer help, protection, favoritism, a good word—whatever is needed.
The value of such promises to the family of the Vice President of the United States explains why targets are willing to pay millions to the Bidens. The rulers, all with a troubled past and in need of help, were getting the kind of American power money couldn’t buy.
It might explain why Garland is so scared of Hunter’s case of inheriting the lead role of Joe. Investigating the boss’s son is such an obvious conflict of interest for him that he should have been assigned a special counsel since Joe’s presidency.
But doing so would light a fuse because any prosecutor named would quickly be confronted with clear evidence that Joe had attended meetings and received some money from the scheme. From there, the president will remain the subject of the investigation and ultimately the target, and it will be up to the competition regarding the extent of his participation.
Ironically, Garland could stumble into that situation because Joe handled classified documents properly. If special counsel Robert Hurr finds any connection between the documents and the influence peddling scheme, he will be forced to merge the two cases – which could destroy the Biden presidency.
Even as Hurr and Garland try to cut Biden’s breaks, an energized GOP Congress will blow the whistle. The Oversight Committee, chaired by Kentucky’s James Comer, has already zeroed in on “Big Man.”
Comer didn’t mince words, referring to whistleblowers and other evidence, saying, “I want to be clear, this is an investigation of Joe Biden and that’s where our focus is.”
Mark, mark. . .
[ad_2]
Source link
