Columns, Media, Politics

What Elephant? AP Denies that There is Any Evidence That Joe Biden Discussed Hunter’s Business Dealings

For those of us who have written about the Hunter Biden scandal and the family’s influence-peddling operation for years, it is routine to read media stories denying the facts or dismissing calls to investigate the foreign dealings. However, this weekend, the Associated Press made a whopper of a claim that there is no evidence even suggesting that President Joe Biden ever spoke to his son about his foreign dealings. I previously discussed how the Bidens have succeeded in a Houdini-like trick in making this elephant of a scandal disappear from the public stage. They did so by enlisting the media in the illusion. However, this level of audience participation in the trick truly defies belief.

The statement of the Associated Press at this stage of the scandal is breathtaking but telling: “Joe Biden has said he’s never spoken to his son about his foreign business, and nothing the Republicans have put forth suggests otherwise.”

For years, the media has continued to report President Biden’s repeated claim that “I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.” At the outset, the media only had to suspend any disbelief that the president could fly to China as Vice President with his son on Air Force 2 without discussing his planned business dealings on the trip.

Of course, the emails on the laptop quickly refuted this claim. However, the media buried the laptop story before the election or pushed the false claim that it was fake Russian disinformation.

President Biden’s denials continued even after an audiotape surfaced showing President Biden leaving a message for Hunter specifically discussing coverage of those dealings. The call is specifically referring to these dealings:

“Hey pal, it’s Dad. It’s 8:15 on Wednesday night. If you get a chance just give me a call. Nothing urgent. I just wanted to talk to you. I thought the article released online, it’s going to be printed tomorrow in the Times, was good. I think you’re clear. And anyway if you get a chance give me a call, I love you.”

But who are you going to believe, the media or your own ears.

Some of us have written for two years that Biden’s denial of knowledge is patently false. It was equally evident that the Biden family was selling influence and access.

There are emails of Ukrainian and other foreign clients thanking Hunter Biden for arranging meetings with his father. There are photos from dinners and meetings that tie President Biden to these figures, including a 2015 dinner with a group of Hunter Biden’s Russian and Kazakh clients.

People apparently were told to avoid directly referring to President Biden. In one email, Tony Bobulinski, then a business partner of Hunter’s, was instructed by Biden associate James Gilliar not to speak of the former veep’s connection to any transactions: “Don’t mention Joe being involved, it’s only when u [sic] are face to face, I know u [sic] know that but they are paranoid.”

Instead, the emails apparently refer to President Biden with code names such as “Celtic” or “the big guy.” In one, “the big guy” is discussed as possibly receiving a 10 percent cut on a deal with a Chinese energy firm; other emails reportedly refer to Hunter Biden paying portions of his father’s expenses and taxes.

Bobulinski has given multiple interviews that he met twice with Joe Biden to discuss a business deal in China with CEFC China Energy Co. That would seem obvious evidence. In addition, the New York Post reported on a key email that discussed “the proposed percentage distribution of equity in a company created for a joint venture with CEFC China Energy Co.” That was the email on March 13, 2017 that included references of “10 held by H for the big guy.”

The Associated Press later revised the line after an outcry from some of us. It now ends “there is no indication that the federal investigation involves the president.”  The revision creates a new problem. Rather than simply stating the fact, AP seems to struggle to shield the President. There is every indication that “the federal investigation involves the president.” Not only is the President discussed in key emails under investigation, but the grand jury heard testimony that the “Big Guy” is Joe Biden.

That brings us back to Houdini’s trick of making his 10,000 pound elephant Jennie disappear every night in New York’s Hippodrome. He succeeded night after night because the audience wanted the elephant to disappear even though it never left the stage.

I previously wrote about how the key to the trick was involving the media so that reporters are invested in the illusion like calling audience members to the stage. Reporters have to insist that there was nothing to see or they have to admit to being part of the original deception. The media cannot see the elephant without the public seeing something about the media in its past efforts to conceal it.

The media is now so heavily invested in the trick that they are sticking with the illusion even after “the reveal.” The Associated Press story shows that even pointing at the elephant — heck, even riding the elephant around the stage — will not dislodge these denials. This is no elephant because there cannot be an elephant. Poof!

N.B.: This column was revised to add discussion of the AP revision of the line on the investigation.

229 thoughts on “What Elephant? AP Denies that There is Any Evidence That Joe Biden Discussed Hunter’s Business Dealings”

  1. They’ve been going after Trump for years, but no indictments because the charges were all based on Democratic party hoaxes and lies. Now they have their own real scandal to deal with, and they’re desperately looking for distractions. We can expect the AG to double down on Trump to distract attention from Biden. Under the Biden regime, the US has finally won full Banana Republic creds.

    2. Flash, the difference is that in the Iran Contra Affair the accused we actually trying to do something that would aid the country and freedom in Central America, they weren’t lining their own pockets.

  3. Happy Birthday, President Biden!

    What a special time to visit with Hunter and the grandkids. Especially Hunter’s youngest, he must be going on four now? So gracious of you and Dr. Jill to welcome him into the Biden family!

  4. Al Jazeera breaks more meaningful news than the AP. At least, if you read the AP, you get an idea of which lies the rest of the media and the Democratic Party will be focusing on for the next 1-2 weeks. I would expect that they (meaning the media and Democratic Party, just to be clear) will, once again, be saying “nothing to see here, just move along” and by the end of the week everyone of them will be singing it like a chorus. But it’s hard to also not see the mountain of dead fish right there in your path, which you have to walk around. And the smell, OMG.
    This is not to say that the republicans do not have their own flopping fish. Whenever Mitch McConnell, Lisa Murkowski, and Mitt Romney appear on the screen I start to get a whiff of the unpleasant side of seaside living. And I don’t even have to depend on the AP.

    1. GEB

      For what it’s worth, the *American* version of Al Jazeera is just another woke rag run by bloggers in my experience (or at least was a few years ago, perhaps that has changed). By all means one should check for themselves, of course. The actual Al Jazeera is many magnitudes better. There is a difference between them, they are not operated by the same people.

  5. I think the Biden family has regarded the Clinton family influence peddling as something to emulate,…as one of the privileges of senior
    level public service. The Biden were more ham-handed than the Clintons, who cleverly created a philanthropic entity, which encouraged
    other elites to support and validate the Clinton’s efforts. No one has really discovered where all the money went in Haiti, when the Clinton foundation was in the middle of relief efforts, but one can imagine the answer.
    For the Biden’s enterprises to succeed, they absolutely needed the support of the media and the liberal elites/federal bureaucracy elites and they have had it.
    The biggest issue that should concern American citizens is whether Biden’s foreign policy strategies( if he has them…) are affected by his income from the Biden family influence peddling. It does seem at least with China, and possibly Ukraine and elsewhere, whatever intellectual frameworks Biden possesses are significantly effected by his experience with China. He always tends to express a less threatening view of China than almost all others who inspect, categorize and reflect on the many China activities adverse to US interests.

  6. I guess I am just too old, but growing up and through almost all my adult life, the prevailing concept was that the public could count on something called a “professional journalist” whose credo was to report facts, even if said reporting included a partisan spin. We now know, and it is still hard to accept, that this cadre is almost extinct. Without conscious awareness of this fact and efforts to build our own system of communication (unencumbered by social media censorship both on their own and as government surrogates), they will eventually take over all dialogue on the planet.

    1. So true… look at CNN and their coverage of Antifa (fiery but mostly peaceful). There is not one article that describes the damage done by Antifa in negative terms. Most articles speak glowingly about Antifa and their purposes. They are not described as far-left or Alf-left. Their violence is described as “direct action”. Their are not described as outside provocateurs when they travel to disrupt rallies. Contrast with any conservative group.

      1. There weren’t many articles about Republican victories, either. They were just suddenly discussing it on ‘The View’. Most people aren’t going to bother to parse the data, they will just accept Joy Behar’s analysis. This is just how it’s going to be going forward. Pray that sites like Rumble, Substack, and Twitter continue to flourish and spawn.

    2. quiet conservative: As I was reading your post, I had visions of journalists rummaging through their dictionaries asking: Fact? What’s a fact?

  7. The AP, along with WaPo, the NYT, NPR et al. have all abandoned their journalist objectivity and integrity to become advocacy journalism, and the mouthpiece for the DNC.
    Or, with the current admin, you could say the state mouthpiece.
    The fact they deny the elephant in the room is more telling.

    Support alt-media like Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, Sharly Attkisson, and of course, visit Professor Turley’s site.

  8. Professor Turley,

    You omit that the voicemail comes from the Hunter Biden laptop, the contents of which have not been authenticated in their entirety. I have not seen a news article which has authenticated the voicemail in particular. Clicking through your hyperlink sends me to another article of yours, which hyperlinks to a NY Post article that links to a Daily Mail article. The Daily Mail has neither authenticated the specific voicemail nor provided any context around which the voicemail was discovered.

    News outlets must do their job and actually authenticate the information they reprint. Basic journalistic standards must be followed.

    1. Is the New York Times a good enough source for you? In a story dated March 16, 2022, the Times said it reviewed a cache of files containing emails from Hunter’s laptop that “were authenticated by people familiar with them and the [DOJ investigation into Hunter’s business dealings].”

      1. Amusing to have commenters on this post, who are the type of people that in the past have demanded Trump be arrested and locked up on what amounted to be false accusations, are the same type of people who suggest sweeping this under the rug and ignoring it because “no one cares”. I forget which legal statutes state that crimes must go uninvestigated and unpunished because “no one cares”.

        Their perception that “no one cares” comes from the lack of coverage by the biased mainstream news sources they usually rely on. With few exceptions, the mainstream media rarely, if ever, covered this story. When they do, like the AP here, it’s only to falsely deny any wrongdoing. The media does a good job in keeping their audiences in the dark when it comes to Democrat malfeasance. So, to their audience, lack of coverage must mean “no one cares”.

        And it’s clear their previous mantra, “No one is above the law” was just more hypocritical nonsense.

      2. Read more closely. Did it authenticate the entire laptop? No. Each item must be authenticated. Just like the Steele dossier. Language is important. If you have a NYT article that authenticates this specific video, then we have something.

        1. The Steele Dossier was false when provided as evidence, but this turkey used it in his arguments.

          ATS is acting deceitfully. There is no reason for further authentication of the laptop. The Biden’s accept its authenticity and haven’t disputed the evidence.

          Much of its authenticity comes from third parties involved in the data. They prove it authentic.

          ATS should let us know what he thinks is not authentic and why. The principles he uses on Biden should not suddenly change when Trump is the target, but we all know that ATS doesn’t care about the truth.

          1. When did the Bidens “accept” the authenticity of all contents on the laptop? Do you have a story to link to, or is this just in your head?

    2. Like… “there is no evidence that Joe discussed his business dealing with Hunter”… you know, trying to authenticate that before printing it?

    3. “. . . the contents of which have not been authenticated . . .”

      No method of authentication has ever been invented, or will be invented, that can help the willfully blind to see.

    4. “[T]he contents of which have not been authenticated *in their entirety*.” (emphasis added.)

      So one has to know that *everything* on the laptop is authentic, before one can know that anything on the laptop is authentic?!

      Per usual, you are using an irrational standard of proof, in order to undercut a person’s confidence in their judgment. That is a typical trick of deception used by skeptics.

      1. Each item used as “news” must be authenticated. The voicemail has not been authenticated. This is very simple.

        1. I assume ATS, you are referring to the Biden voice mail. Are you saying that is not Biden’s voice? How do you know that hasn’t been authenticated? Has Biden denied it is his?

        2. “This is very simple.”

          And very dishonest.

          First you claimed that it’s necessary to authenticate the *entirety* of the laptop, before any item can be considered authentic. Now you claim that it’s necessary to authenticate only “each item.”

          Pick a lane.

    5. Anonymous: Right, like they “authenticated” the Russiagate accusations and the Steele Dossier before blasting it all over the media for 4 years. You are either very, very stupid, very, very naive, or just a cynical Democrat who thinks they can get away with this BS on this site.

      1. I agree that each item in the Steele dossier should have been authenticated. Why do you assume otherwise?

        If you were critical of the Steele dossier but now no longer think that authentication of each item is necessary, how can you justify this inconsistency?

        1. ATS, you have been provided the answer more than once. The laptop was authenticated. That does say whether individual bits of data is correct or not. The Steele Dossier was a compilation of fantasies. Do you understand the difference?

          1. The laptop was not authenticated in its entirety. A few emails have been authenticated, but that does not then mean that everything has been.

            Some parts of the Steele dossier were authenticated and others were not. To call it entirely a “fantasy” is, well, a fantasy. There is no difference.

    6. Anonymous, you really embarrassed yourself this time. Your one point is false on its face and of course you neglect to address all the other evidence of what Turley and others have shown. Wow, lame even by your standard.

      1. What is false on its face, and how do you arrive at that general conclusion. No response to my original post has provided a link to an article that has authenticated the voicemail.

    7. “You omit that the voicemail comes from the Hunter Biden laptop, the contents of which have not been authenticated in their entirety. “

      Thank you for further destroying your reputation without anyone else having to say a word.

    8. The voicemails are litterally self authenticating, and did not come from the Laptop.
      Deleted data from the Hunter Biden laptop allowed Hackers in the EU to reconstruct cryptographic keys and other information necescary to Hack Hunter Biden’s Apple Cloud account.

      I would note that while this is technically illegal – it is also self authenticating. The fact that the laptop information provided the cryptographic keys to access Hunter Biden’s Icloud means that the PRESUMPTION must be that little if anything on the laptop can be planted.

      It is in theory possible that Hunter left the Laptop with the computer repair shop, that somehow russian agents accessed it and planted a tiny bit of misinformation. But the odds against that are astronomical.

      At this time it is near certain that 100% of everything from the laptop is authentic.

      That does not mean it is true – but we are will past where it is “russian disinformation”.
      At this point False or “unauthenticated” means – it is something that was actually emailed by the people in question, but they were lying or incorrect.

      As an example we know there are deal memo’s that implicate Joe Biden. But we do not know those deals actually happened.
      In fact we know some did not.

      Regardless, the claim Joe Biden was unaware of Hunter’s business deals is FALSE – he was heavily involved. That is beyond dispute.

      I would further note that whether a deal went through or not may be critical to whether a crime was committed.
      It has no bearing at all regarding whether Joe Biden’s conduct are corrupt.

      In fact – even if – which is highly unlikely – all of Joe Biden’s activities were “legal” – that too does not change that they were corrupt.

      Democrats have already set the bar for impeachment very low.
      Joe Biden (or anyone else) need not have actually violated a law to be impeached.
      They merely need to have engaged in bad conduct.
      Actually less than that – they merely need to have considered engaging in bad conduct.

      That standard is easily met.

      Though this does not involve the Biden’s, we have something similar with the recent FTX mess.

      Democrats received 40M dollars in he 2022 political campaign of money that is clearly stolen.

          1. https://nypost.com/2022/06/27/voicemail-shows-joe-biden-knew-of-hunters-china-dealings-report/

            https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10938637/Voicemail-Joe-Biden-Hunter-proves-president-DID-speak-Chinese-business-dealings.html

            Your article does not mention the voicemail? Both of these links (obtained by clicking through hyperlinks provided by Turley’s article, which links to another Turley article that links to the NYP article, which links to the Daily Mail) state that the voicemail was taken from Hunter’s iphone backup which was stored on his laptop.

    9. At this time “authentication” is a ruse.

      Sufficient of the laptop has been “authenticated” and NOTHING has proven false, that the remaining contents are presumptively true.

      What is your theory that anything on the laptop is “disinformation” ?

      Do you think the Russians snuck into Mr. Mac’s shop and carefully placed only one or two fraudulent documents on it ?

      So far EVERYTHING that has been checked has proved authentic. Nothing checked has proven manipulated or altered.

      The remainder is presumptively correct.

      It is far more likely that absolutely everything on the Hunter Biden laptop is “authentic” – meaning it came from the laptop and was not planted.
      Than that the 2020 (or 2024) election was fre from significant Fraud. Essentially a random sample of the files on the laptop have ALL been autheniticated. But a random sample of ballots have NOT all been proved valid – in fact every single “random sample” of ballots has had some, often many issues.

    10. There are no standards of journalism today .

      The Steele Dossier was printed – nothing was authenticated prior to printing it.
      And ultimately all allegations proved false.

      It would be hard to do worse.

      That said the press is not a court of law. The media can use ANYTHING on the laptop and presume it is all accurate – meaning that it came from hunter’s laptop, and was not planted or altered, once several documents have been authenticated and none have proven planted or altered.

      I would note that the same standard actually applies in court.

      If the police confiscate your laptop and they find 5000 images of child porn, proving that they will be planted will be YOUR burden.

      You can meet that Burden by Proving that even ONE was planted, but you are going to jail if even ONE was not.

      Regardless, the Hunter Biden laptop is real.
      The Steele Dossier is a hoax.

      Get over it.

      1. I agree that each item in the Steele Dossier should have been authenticated. That is precisely my point. Anyone on this blog who thinks that authentication for each item on the laptop is unnecessary, but who also was critical of the Steele dossier’s lack of authentication is categorically inconsistent.

        1. You are wrong. As soon as bits of data appeared untrue the whole document was in question. However, at the time you didn’t mention any of this. You piled onto the anti-Trump rhetoric in agreement with those basing their logic on the Steele Dossier.

          You are acting hypocritical as usual.

          1. How do you know what I thought about the Steele dossier at the time?

            I was critical of Buzzfeed and thought it demonstrated piss poor journalism to publish unverified sources.

        2. “I agree that each item in the Steele Dossier should have been authenticated.”
          FALSE.
          There is no requirement to prove everything there is no requirement to disprove everything.
          That is not the standard of proof for journalism. for courts.
          Further it is not true that the standards are the same for the Steele Dossier as for the laptop.

          a SINGLE manufactured item – and the Steele Dossier had many – requires every single claim thereafter to be authenticated.
          The same is True of the Biden laptop. But a Single manufactured claim on the laptop is more damaging than the Steele dossier.

          However, items that are merely mistakes that could be honest mistakes, do not require authenticating everything.
          If a SINGLE key claim in the Steele Dossier have been authenticated, the rest would have been presumed likely true.
          At the same time if a SINGLE key claim had proved a Hoax or forgery or disinformation – the entire Dossier would have required authentication.

          The same is True of the Biden laptop.
          Dozens of items have been proven true – the standards of journalism allow the rest to all be presumed accurate, UNLESS a something on the laptop is proven to be a hoax, fraud or disinformation – after which everything must be individuallly verified.

          “That is precisely my point.”
          And you are wrong – you are especially wrong about Journalism, but the standard you are proposing is not even true in court.
          If you find 500 images of Child porn on someone’s laptop – that is enough to convict them of 500 counts of child porn.
          And probably even distributing child porn – just based on the numbers.
          Often you do not even have to prove that the person charged had exclusive access or that they DL’d the images.

          And I am talking about a court of law, not journalism where the standard is much lower.

          “Anyone on this blog who thinks that authentication for each item on the laptop is unnecessary, but who also was critical of the Steele dossier’s lack of authentication is categorically inconsistent.”
          No one is claiming precisely what you are saying.

          With both the Steele Dossier and the Biden laptop the first thing you must do is eliminate for consideration (with respect to authentication) everything that is “public knowledge”.
          Steele Dossier claims that Trump went to Russia at the time of the Beauty pagent, are of no value in authenticating the steele dossier.
          Pictures on the Laptop that could have been obtained by the press do not authenticate the laptop.

          Information in the Steele Dossier that can be confirmed but were not public knowledge would go along way to authenticating the steele dossier.

          Though I would note that the Steele Dossier is catagorically different from the laptop.

          The Steele Dossier is a bunch of claims allegedly obtained by informants, or through spying.
          The Dossier is not Trump’s journal, or Carter PAge’s laptop.
          It is the product of Steele, Danchenko and Gordon Simpson – allegedly engaged in spycraft.

          Therefore each claim is independently sourced and must be verified independently.

          While the Laptop is all single sourced. Authenticating a few things authenticates everything.

          Proving that ONE thing in the Biden laptop is a hoax cast doubts on it all – because it is a single source.

          Finding ONE thing in the Steele Dosier that Danchenko, Simpson or Steele made up – discredits the whole thing.
          But finding something that a source made up – just discredits that source and then requires better checking of everything else.

        3. Glenn Greenwald has done several excellent articles on the process of authenticating the Hunter Biden laptop to high journalistic standards.

          Greenwald rebutted the claim that the laptop was russian disinformation in Oct. 2020.

          The laptop is authentic, far more than enough of its contents have been authenticated to accept the entire contents.
          Nothing has been falsified.
          Lots of information that Only Hunter or the people he corresponed with could know has been authenticated.
          And more than enough by Oct 2020.

          And for the record – no claim in the Steele Dossier that was not public knowledge was ever authenticated.
          Many claims in the Steele Dossier have been established as fraudulent – made up by Steele, Danchenko or Simpson.

          The Steele dosier is catagorically different from the Biden laptop – both in terms of litterally the catagory of evidence they represent and the standards of authentication.

  9. Back in the 1970’s/80s you would see small paragraph sized stories in the newspapers by AP or UPI. They were considered reliable news sources. Then all journalism became yellowed and they tossed out their factual journalism in favor of populist national enquirer style stories in order to get clicks. AP is no longer a legitimate news source but I can see how Turley would be miffed by their plainly untrue stories.

  10. Again, Turley will use Hunter’s name the way he used Hillary’s name, and it will go on and on. As long as he is employed by FOX, expect the long drawn out game of distraction and right-wing echo chamber memo’s.

    1. There is no distraction here, but your own deflections.
      This is about Hunter Biden, Joe Biden and the other Biden family members who peddle influence all over the world.
      It has nothing to do with Fox, Turley or right-wing.
      We, the American people, will get to the bottom of this stinking and putrid corruption.

      1. Actually it has a great deal to do with fox and the right wing.
        Those are the only ones sane enough to cover this.

        That speaks very badly of the left and the rest of the media

    2. FishWings: Was there a defense of the Biden’s in your idiotic memo? If so, why not supply us with all the exculpatory evidence.

    3. Of course he will – Hillary is the most self evidently politically corrupt politician in modern history.
      We can argue the extent to which she is also a criminal.
      But there is zero doubt she is immoral and unethical.

      Hunter is more complex. Hunter inarguably is a criminal – though the drugs and sex and tax evasion and gun crimes are not especially fascinating.
      If it was not for the fact that Joe Biden is his farther he would be in jail long ago and no one would be paying attention right or left.

      Hunter is NOT the story.
      What is relevant is the extent to which Joe Biden is involved in political corruption.

      There is already far more than enough evidence that Joe Biden is politically corrupt, unethical and immoral.
      What remains to be proven is “is he a criminal.

      I am not sure that is important. What we have is more than enough that he never should have been president.

    4. Fox or no Fox, it is an absolute necessity to explore the bad conduct of those in power.

      You have spent the past 6 years trying to “get Trump” – and repeatedly failed.
      You are still trying to “get Trump” even though he is no longer in power – because he MIGHT be in the future.
      That despite the fact that YOU created the standard that you can not investigate potential political rivals – that is an impeachable offense.
      So why hasn’t Biden been impeached ?

      Regardless, YES I expect that the much greater misconduct of the left will get atleast as much scrutiny as that of the right.

      I would hope that would occur throughout the media.

  12. I will let you in on an obvious fact: the stupid progressives want to be lied to. The ap is giving the stupid progressives what they want.

  13. Were I in a position to do so, i would ban Associated Press from the list of reliable news organizations.
    i won’t read anything they write any longer — they’re in the tank, and this proves it.
    I’ve never bothered to investigate who owns the AP, who controls their output, who in fact has the power to ‘authorize’ such an outlandlsh statement about Hunter Biden, as this statement.

    1. So you would curtail free speech and freedom of the press because you don’t like what they are not reporting. Kim Jung Un called, he would like you to be a part of his team.

    2. It would be far easier to list the “reliable” news organizations than to list the unreliable ones. The “reliable” list would be in single digits, quite possibly zero entries.

  14. It is clear.
    The only way to get the press to monitor the govt is to elect all Republicans. At least then they’ll ask questions.

  15. “It was equally evident that the Biden family was selling influence and access.”

    They are all selling influence and access. Remember Hillary Clinton’s “foundation” when she was Secretary of State?

    Can you even begin to imagine how the money being sent to Ukraine is being laundered over there and rerouted into the bank accounts of the connected?

    Hunter Biden’s efforts were small potatoes, a mere blip on the screen.

  16. More of this “scandal”? Really? Turley is hell bent on making it one despite the fact that the public really doesn’t care about it. This dead horse must be liquified by now. He’s been beating it for so long. Sheesh.

      1. The point is Turley’s poor attempt at making this an issue for so long and wondering why the public isn’t getting outraged is precisely because nobody cares about it. Furthermore Turley ignores the fact that none of the things he alleges are illegal or criminal. Nobody has been able to articulate exactly what law or federal statute they violated or what crime was committed. Getting 10% of a deal is illegal, how? Influence peddling IS legal and Turley knows it.

        1. FOXNEWS has hammered Hunter for a while, they need something to distract from Trump party problems. Turley works for FOX.

          1. And he has opinions published in USA Today and The Hill. Not exactly conservative news outlets.
            Of course, let’s not forget about all of the times he has criticized Trump over the years.

          2. The question is why hasn’t the rest of the media been on this and other stories ?

            We can debate whether there is sufficient proof that the Biden’s are criminals.

            There is no doubt that they are corrupt. That Joe Biden used the power of his office to profit himself and his family,
            and that he did so at the expense of the country.

            That is a huge story.

            The left has been falling all over themselves trying to find a spec of that story regarding Trump and keeps failing.

            The Biden story involves Russian Oligarch’s and diamonds, and powerful criminals from all over the world and deals where the only thing being bought and sold was influence.

            If every single thing the Biden’s did was legal – our laws need changed.
            If every single thing that Joe Biden did was legal – he still unfit to be president.

            We have a special counsel investigating Trump – which is just a stupid way for Garland to protect himself from Biden’s wrath, and from investigation by the House.

            Trump is not president. There is no conflict that requires DOJ/FBI from bowing out.

            Conversely there should have been an SC for Biden 2 years ago.

            1. “ There is no doubt that they are corrupt. That Joe Biden used the power of his office to profit himself and his family,
              and that he did so at the expense of the country.”

              So is Trump and the reason nobody cares is because even republicans didn’t care when trump did it.

              1. If Trump were similarly corrupt – you would have evidence of that. You do not.
                You do not even have credible allegations of Trump acting corruptly as president.

                You say no one cares when “Trump did it” –
                Did WHAT ?

                Every claim you have ever made that Trump did something has fallen flat.
                The steel dossier is a fraud – a hoax.

                So what is it that you have ?

                A litany of Trump acting legally as a private citizen, in ways you do not like.

              2. What has Trump got to do with it ?

                Is the misconduct of Democrats excused by your beliefs about Trumps conduct ?

                I do not know of a single person left or right that beleives that Trump should get a free pass to act illegally or corruptly.

                Only that baseless allegations and overboard misinterpretations of the law were not persuasive.

                The claims of the Left regarding Trump either did not happen, or self evidently were not illegal or immoral.

                I expect the left to use the same standards for the Biden clan as they did for Trump.

                You convicted Trump in your mind based on allegations that were never credible – that did not even make sense – and you are still doing so.

                There is Little doubt at this time that the Biden clan profited from Joe Biden’s public service throughout his entire life.
                There are details we do not know, that are important in determining whether that conduct crossed from merely corrupt, to actually illegal.

                Trump denied your allegations – and proved constantly correct – your claimed misconduct never happened.
                The collusion delusion was a mind virus in left wing nuts.

                Biden denied allegations that have subsequently proven true.
                There have been large numbers of “deal” both foreign and domestic, all with scurilous characters.
                And Joe Biden despite his denials was financially involved.

                Those are claims that were denied that have proven to be true.

                Is this corrupt ? Cetainly. Is it illegal ? Only the investigation we have not had will ascertain that.

        2. Svelaz- your argument, to use the Prof T’s example,
          Ignores the elephant in the room. If “the public isn’t getting outraged” it is because the media, except for Fox and Newsmax, has effectively eliminated this matter from the news. Fox may have the highest ratings, but it is only one network out of a half dozen. NPR alone has several hundred stations. With a politically contrived bandwagon effect, public outrage is pretty damn hard. Don’t take my work for it- the NYT, the WP and all of social media agree. That’s why they attacked and ignored what is clearly a valid story, to keep the public from being “outraged.”

        3. Svelaz – As to your assertion that the public is not interested: this is irrelevant. As to your assertion that “none of the things he alleges are illegal or criminal”: first, we have learned from the impeachments of Trump, that impeachments are no longer limited to “crimes”; second, you ignore the bribery statute (18 USC 201(b) (2)) which criminalizes the acceptance of money by a public official in exchange for: “A) being influenced in the performance of any official act; . . . or (C) being induced to do or omit to do any act in violation of the official duty of such official or person[.]” Joe Biden withheld delivery of aid to Ukraine (“performance of an official act”) until a prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. It beggars the imagination to believe that the millions of dollars received by his surrogate (Hunter) did not influence his strong-arming of the Ukrainian goverment. Although such a suspicion is not yet “proof”, it suggests a possible avenue for prosecution under the Bribery Act. It is also hard to believe – although not yet established – that China would give tons of money to the Biden Crime Family without getting in return some favorable action taken by, or promoted by, Joe Biden.

          1. I would note that the Left constantly alleges that Shokin was corrupt.
            That is false.
            But it is also irrelevant.

            Bribery is not somehow acceptable if the official act was otherwise legitimate.

            I would note that even if Joe’s finances and Hunters were NOT intermingled – and they are – therefore making Joe a party to everything Hunter was paid for, even without the financial links, Joe’s conduct would violate federal ethics laws.

            LONG LONG AGO we had state department emails to the Office of VP telling them to get Hunter out of Ukraine and other US foreign entanglements before this all blew up.

            Obama and his “protectors” were very concerned about the unethical conduct of Biden and his family.
            Not because they gave a damn about Biden, but because the stench would be at Obama’s doorstep too.

            There is a fair amount of internal Obama admin traffice that has surfaced expressing WH concerns about the conduct of Both Clinton and Biden and the likelyhood of a scandal that would handicap the Obama admin.

            It is also worth Noting that one of the few things that Obama tried to do right in foreign policy was to improve relations with Russia.
            But Obama was thwarted in doing so repeatedly by the messy conduct of Clinton and Biden in Ukraine.

            Russia invaded Crimea as a consequence of Hillary staging a Coup in Ukraine that ousted the Putin friendly government.

            And the later entanglements of Biden and Clinton and the fake claims regarding Trump forced Obama to demonize and isolate Putin even further.
            They also made it politically impossible for Trump to improve relations with Russia.

            The US MUST constantly deal with leaders that are bad people.

            No one was happy about MBS arranging the murder of Koshogi in Turkey.
            But the US was allied with Both Turkey – a NATO member, Erodigan, and Saudi Arabia, and MBS.
            Neither MBS nor Erodigan are good people.

            As Biden learned this fall – that does not mean you can piss all over them.

            Putin is not a good person. But from 1994 forward it has been in the US interests to improve relations with Russia and Putin – not piss all over them.

            Biden’s election in 2020 started a chain of events that lead to the invasion of Ukraine and heightened risk to all of us of global nuclear war.
            Trump contained Putin with policies that Biden abandoned. By bringing Europe together militarily, by guaranteeing Europes energy against Putin, Something Biden reniged on to the worlds detriment. By US energy policy that ENABLED Trump to guarantee Europes energy.
            By competently managing the US conflicts that he inherited, and by not engaging in stupid discussions about Ukraine joining NATO.

            Biden as president did just about everything possible to assure that Putin would invade Ukraine.

            And it should be clear to pretty much everyone that At the start of 2022 – Biden did not have the political clout to call Putin up and say – YOU WILL NOT INVADE UKRAINE.

            The man so proud of strong arming Ukraine to fire Shokin, did not have the political presence to stop Putin from starting a war that would be bad for everyone.

        4. No – you do not care about this – and that is a reflection of what is wrong with You.

          Have Trump open a Hotel in Quwait – and you are going to investigate the crap out of it.

          But should Joe Biden be dealing with Ranking members of chinese state security in a Billion dollar persona business deal – and your head is in the sand.

          Of course there is a story here – and unlike the steal dossier – this one is real.

          I will agree with you that the conduct of Hunter Biden would not make the national news – except that he is Joe Biden’s son.
          Hunter would be arrested, convicted and serving time otherwise.

          Instead he is in limbo – he can not be convicted, but he can not go away.

          But the big deal is NOT hunter – it is that Joe was involved in all of it.

          Was Joes involvement legal ? We do not know – because despite ample evidence – despite Trump asking Ukraine to look into part of Joe Biden’s corruption – what little has occured has been the result of beating the left wing nut media over the head with this.

          Rarely stories show up in WaPo or NYT or on CNN, MSNBC, ….

          Always only after Fox or NY Post or some other “Right wing” source has done actual investigative journalism and
          left the MSM with no choice.

          Whether you like it Svelaz – there is and always has been a story here.

          But the REAL story is the coverup – Not Biden’s coverup – but YOUR coverup.

          It is the coverup of the Biden’s corrupt dealings in Ukraine from the start.
          It is faux impeachment 1 which si actually a coverup of the Biden’s crooked dealings.
          It is the coverup of the Biden laptop to win an election.
          It is Social media burying the Truth.
          It is those 50 intelligence officials – lying and their lies being used to supress the truth.

          It is the long long long array of misconduct to bury this.

          And it is the fact that if youa are willing to do all of what everyone KNOWS you did openly – why should anyone beleive you about anything else ?

          Why should anyone beleive that an ideology, a party, the press, that would go so far as to impeach a president for trying to expose the misconduct of the Biden’s – why should anyone beleive the same people would not rig an election or two or three ?

          Why is it that those people should be beleived about anything ?

        5. Ah, so your standard is that there should be no story short of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of a crime ?

          That what was the whole collusion delusion hoax about ?

          There are about 1/2 a dozen crimes that Hunter Biden is guilty of. That is without question.
          If he was not Joe Biden’s son, he would have been jailed – and might even possibly been out by now, and none of this would have made the news.

          Regardless, Hunter inarguably committed multiple crimes – the same ones you convicted Manafort of – and then some.
          As well as sworn false statements.

          But ultimately this is not about Hunter – aside from Why has he not been convicted already ?

          The big deal is about Joe.

          The first HUGE problem is that Joe has lied, through his teeth, to all of us, since atleast 2015 about all of this.
          That is not a crime. But it is quite reasonable for voters to want to throw out a president who lies to them constantly.

          Whether you like it or not – Joe Biden lying repeatedly about this is a huge story.
          It is also impeachable.
          It is especially impeachable – because you impeached Trump for trying to get to the bottom of it.

          You do not seem to grasp that the Fact that Joe was invevled in these deals and the fact that there is inarguably influence peddling,. and that joe has been meeting for years with lots of scurilous people, means that Trump was RIGHT to ask Zelensky to investigate – and in fact he would have been right, had he actually said – investigate or I delay military aide.

          I would note – delaying militay aide for political purposes is ALSO an impeachable offence YOU told us so when you said you were impeachingTrump for that. Biden is delaying military aid to an Ally because they refused to help him win an election.

          How much more corrupt can you get than that.

          Even if absolutely none of Joe Biden’s conduct is criminal – which is unlikely, it is still all impeachable – YOU defined those standards.

          But you do not have any standards except double standards.

          Finally – there is more than sufficient basis for an investigation – unlike the Collusion Delusion which NEVER had the basis to investigate.
          And the american people are entitled to that investigation.

        6. Influence pedaling is NOT legal. And we all know it.

          The supreme court has not made it legal. They have made the standard of proof high.
          Those are not the same.

          McDonald received money from private companies, to perform private acts while he was governor.
          He did not – or atleast no one proved that he used government power to the benefit of those private companies.

          McDonald Was convicted of accepting money to host events for private companies while Governor.
          Not for altering legislation or its enforcement. Not for actions taken as Governor.

          Scotus said you must prove that a politician excercised GOVERNMENT power in return for money.

          There are several suspect incidents – but the Ukraine one is most clear.

          VP Biden told Ukraine that they fire Shokin or they do not get $1B in military aide.
          That is inarguably an excercise of govenrment power.
          He did not say – Fire Shokin or I will not appear at a fund raising dinner.

        7. Public apathy may be traced to their resignation as to the complicity of a justice system and an administration in protecting each other with no hope of a breach to set in motion a process of investigation. The new majority in the House may be a response to that. A newly published book may yet fuel public opinion and outcry. The House will likely act notwithstanding.

    2. The public really doesn’t care about it? Are you really that naive, or just regurgitating Dem talking points? Don’t confuse the media sweeping something under the rug, the FBI working hard to keep it out of the public eye, and the Democrats desperately covering it up for lack of public interest. If it was such a nothing-burger, the powers that be would not be working frantically to keep it from the front page of the NYTimes.

    3. “More of this “scandal”? Really?”

      I agree. I, too, am sick of this scandal.

      But the problem is this: The more that the Feds, D’s, and media try to evade a festering wound, the more spetic it becomes.

    5. You do not care about it – that speaks poorly of you.

      You still care about perfectly above board refinances by Jared Kushner – and you are certain they are crimes.

      But you do not care about actual criminal conduct – there is zero doubt that Hunter committed a number of actual crimes.
      We do not yet know whether Joe Biden committed actual crimes – because we can get no investigation.

      Because DOJ/FBI and this whitehouse are corrupt.

      We are talking about the same people who drug the country through 4 years of hell using as evidence something the KNEW from day one was a HOAX.

      And these same people can not start an investigation – where we KNOW real crimes have been committed ?

      Look at the comments here – people who are aware of the FACTS – care a great deal about the fact that our president is corrupt.
      And likely profiting at the govenrment teat.

      YOU are telling us all that there is nothing her – that is not what you were saying with the Steele Dossier.
      You are telling us there is nothing to investigate – that is not what you were talling us with the collusion delusion.

      You are still demanding investigations into Codnuct by Trump that is not criminal

      And YOU were constantly telling us that influence pedaling was not only criminal – but impeachable for years.

      Every single thing you have said about Trump or Kushner or myriads of other republicans damns you right now.

  18. How could an editor somewhere not have caught this? Elon should take a look at AP when done with Tweeter something is very wrong there.

    1. Amerigo Vespucci came about 1500 years after Jesus. Sorry, that math does not check out.

      1. So you deny that our Father declares the END from the beginning???:

        Isaiah 46:9-10  Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me;  (10)  declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done; saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure;

Comments are closed.