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. Enough, Mr. Smith!

    Men enjoy freedom of speech in full view in the public square.

    Free speech is for people not effete nobots.

    One permanent and mmutable nom de plume per visitor.

    Ban for life all dastardly aninnymouse posters.

      1. Oliver did not make a claim based on his own Judgement alone.
        He asserted there was no evidence.

        Challenging his judgement does not negate his claim.

        Providing evidence would.

    1. The AP is the unofficial Propaganda Agency of the similarly unofficial Department of Indoctrination of America’s ostensibly sub-rosa communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs), oh, and don’t tell anyone, Americans are not supposed to know that America is communist and not even infinitesimally different from China.

      (Hey, Oli, how ’bout the heels, are heels clothes, can we keep the heels?)

  2. After WW2 CIA & other govt agencies began to illegaly completely most media. That info about their Anti-American Totalitarianism has been dripping out for some time.

    The U.S. Department of Homeland Security logo is seen displayed on a smartphone.
    Truth Cops
    Leaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation
    a member
    The U.S. Department of Homeland Security logo is seen displayed on a smartphone. Photo Illustration: Rafael Henrique/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
    Ken KlippensteinLee Fang
    Ken Klippenstein, Lee Fang

    October 31 2022, 4:00 a.m.

    The Department of Homeland Security is quietly broadening its efforts to curb speech it considers dangerous, an investigation by The Intercept has found. Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents — obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, as well as public documents — illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms.



    Leaked State Dept Memo Reveals US Gov’t Used Taxpayer Money to Create Online Game to “Inoculate Youth Against Disinformation”
    By Jim Hoft
    Published November 20, 2022 at 8:00am



    1. Typo:

      Oky1 says:
      November 20, 2022 at 1:31 PM

      After WW2 CIA & other govt agencies began to illegally completely take over most media. That info about their Anti-American Totalitarianism has been dripping out for some time.

  3. McIntyer;
    . Jim Jordan and James Comer just announced the GOP House will be investigating Hunter Biden

    When drooling leftist lie about stuff that really doesn’t matter.
    Comer was clear, and concise. His committee is investigating President Biden, because has business dealing with foriegn nations, antagonistic to United States interests, have compromised his actions as the sitting President. Hunter was never included in Comers investigative sights.

    But lefts must lie, because that’s all Dennis knows

    1. iowan2: I always wondered. Who is iowan1? Probably your wife if you are married. I imagine you use a fake name because if your wife found out how much time you spend on this blog you would be in a lot of trouble. I use my real name here because I stand by what I say and am willing to back up what I say with facts. You on the other hand…..

      As to your claim I was “lying” about who the GOP intends to investigate consider this. Rep. James Comer was quoted as saying: “In the 118th Congress this committee will evaluate the status of Joe Biden’s relationship with his family’s foreign partners and whether he is a President who is compromised or swayed by foreign dollars and influence”. Who do you think Comer is referring to with “Biden’s relationship with his family’s foreign partners”? Jill Biden? Or one of Biden’s dogs? Get real! The GOP House wants to find some reason to impeach the President. It’s petty payback for the two impeachments of Trump by his supporters in the House. The road to charging Biden is through Hunter. Leaving out the laptop and Hunter doesn’t give the GOP much to talk about. Why do you think Prof. Turley has devoted so many columns over the past year to Hunter and his laptop? It wasn’t a prurient interest in Hunter’s selfies or his pornography! Turley would be disappointed to learn you apparently have not read any of his columns about Hunter and his dad. But the GOP does read Turley’s columns so they think Hunter’s laptop is a pot of gold. As usual, right-wing no nothings like you don’t know what you are talking about! Get your facts straight before you waste our time on this blog.

    2. Hunter will be part of the investigation – because Hunter is an instrument through which Joe Biden has acted.
      But this will not be about Hunter – except that Hunter can not avoid testifying.

  4. Jonathan: Your column comes at the exact time that GOP flame throwing GOP Reps. Jim Jordan and James Comer just announced the GOP House will be investigating Hunter Biden. Mere coincidence? Nope. You have been pounding the table about the Biden alleged “corruption scandal” for a long time. With Jim Jordan in charge you know it will be a three ring circus. And to use your allusion the GOP “elephant” will parade around and magically disappear because the Dem controlled Senate will not be interested in anything Jim Jordan comes up with. The GOP House leadership also says it will eliminate the House’s “Select Committee on the Climate Crisis”. The global warming deniers in the House, bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry, will be pushing for more oil, gas and coal production under the mantra of “energy independence”. I guess investigating Hunter Biden is more important then saving Planet Earth!

    So there is other important news this week you apparently don’t want to discuss:

    –Elon Musk is implementing a new content moderation policy–something you should be concerned about. For starters he won’t reinstate Alex Jones, the convicted conspiracy theorist. This did not go down well with the “free speech absolutists” on Twitter. They were incensed. You should be too because this goes back on Musk’s original pledge that he would permit all speech–except for that which is “illegal”. However, Musk did reinstate Donald Trump after a user poll showed support. Trump might be tempted by the offer since he could get millions more in “eyes” on Twitter than on Truth Social. But that would contradict his claim that his platform would provide an alternative to Twitter. What a dilemma! So I am conducting a poll. How many out there on this blog think Trump will return to Twitter?

    –The bombshell this week involves the leaker inside the Supreme Court. It appears it was Sam Alito–not a “liberal” clerk or Justice. An antiabortion advocate and former evangelical is making the claim. According to Rev. Bob Schenck, he was informed in advance about both the Hobby Lobby and Dobbs decisions by 2 of his conservative allies who had dinner with Alito.at his home. Alito denies the claim. But if true this shows the conservative Justices are no more than politicians in robes–and adds to the calls in Congress for a binding code of ethics for SCOTUS.

    –Finally, this week Mitch McConnell voted against the Respect for Marriage Act, which includes protection for interracial marriages. I can hear the pillow talk in the bedroom at the McConnell house:

    Elaine: “What were you thinking? You are acting like a turtle!”

    Mitch: “Honey, it was strictly a political decision. I didn’t vote my conscience. You know I love you, but I voted to reflect what I think my
    constituents want.”

    Elaine: “Well, explain how all the polls show voters in Kentucky support abortion rights. If they do don’t you think your constituents
    also support the right to inter-racial marriage?”

    Mitch: (No response. He feigned being asleep)

    1. For once — just once, could you stay on topic instead of using up valuable space airing all your dirty laundry. I wish Turley charged YOU $8 a month for the space.

      1. Anonymous: Not a chance! I provide a public service by discussing topics Prof. Turley ignores, for lack of space, or intentionally doesn’t want to discuss. And where in the protocols of this blog does it say we can’t go off-topic? You won’t find it anywhere because the Herr Professor believes a free exchange of ideas promotes “free speech”–something apparently alien to you. You have a choice. Either make some coherent comment or skip over my comments. I suggest you take your own advice–stop wasting “valuable space” on this blog. So far you are the one without “substance”. Unless you are Elon Musk you don’t have a chance of keeping me quiet!

        1. ” I provide a public service by discussing topics Prof. Turley ignores”

          Dennis is correct. We need diversity in opinion. The professor provides fact mixed with intelligent debate. Dennis provides fanaticism, error and ignorant messages that are not tolerated elsewhere.

          Thank you Dennis.

    2. Nonsense. What you are reporting is what is in your imagination. Can you provide substance.

    3. Dennis McIntyre, you are the second person on this blog to put out the accusation that Alito was the leaker. Like your friend Anonymous you provide no source for your claim. It shouldn’t be hard for you to find and present such proof if it exists. Exist being the operative word. One would think that a studied attorney like yourself would be exited about presenting a point of reference that would prove your assertion. As usual we wait.

      1. Thinkitthrough: So you want a “reference” to the revelation that Justice Alito was the leaker? Although I doubt anything will satisfy your pre-deposed mind here’s a start. The source of the charge comes from a whistleblower–Rev. Rob Scheneck who used to be a leader in the anti-abortion movement. He wrote a letter to Chief Justice detailing his allegations. The NY Times obtained a copy of Scheneck’s letter and published it. Read the letter and other reporting and tell me if I am making up all this. Now Alito has denied he revealed his decisions in Hobby Lobby and Dobbs to dinner guests who then passed the info on to the Rev. who used it in the anti-abortion campaigns. So read the material for yourself and think it through. Why do I have to spoon feed the facts to you? Make your own judgment about who is telling the truth. I know I am expecting an awful lot! Maybe the Senate will hold hearings into this serious judicial ethics breach and possible violations of the law. Stay tuned.

    4. Dennis – you are correct – Jordan should scare the crap out of you.
      He is intelligent, competent and will not be deterred.
      He should be your worst nightmare.
      He will get to the truth, and unlike Democrats he is not going to break all the rules to do so.

      Nothing could be more of a circus than the J6 committee.

      I expect Jordan to be a complete non-nonsense Chair.
      I expect he will treat Democrats with more respect than they treated him.
      I expect that his investigation will be vigorous and focused.
      That both democrats and republicans will have the oportunity to question witnesses.
      I also expect that witnesses will be kept in line,
      and that nearly all the testimony will be conducted in public.
      That Jordan’s hearings will not be “stage managed”.

      Be afraid, be very afraid.
      Jordan is one of the founders of the Freedom Caucus – he is the “anti-chenney”.
      He is concerned about the rule of law, and the rights of citizens – not the perquisites of government.

    5. Musk owns Twitter – he can do with it what he wants.
      Trump can comeback or not – as he pleases.

      If I were to bet – he will return.
      Truth will do fine over time, but Trump is not getting 200M follower by 2024 on Truth.

    6. Your “bombshell” is a dud. This has been debunked repeatedly.
      It is also a stupid claim. Alito would not have leaked a 5month old decision.
      Regardless. Claims that have been denied by all parites on a case that is not Dobbs, that do not involve a draft opinion is about as far away from evidence as you can get. Schenk is not a “former evenagelical” – he is still evangelical. He is formerly pro-life and formerly on the right.
      In otherwords his is now on the left and has been for a while.

      Not a particularly credible source.

      His claim is about Hobbly Lobby, not Dobss, and it is that whisper down the lane he heard the likely outcome, not was provided a draft decision.
      Schenk has no connection to Alito and Schenks claim has been denied by his own sources.

      I have no problem with impeaching Alito or any other justice for leaking any decision.
      But not based on gossip.

    7. It is unfortunate that McConnell was not voted out of GOP leadership as he is the most prominent person responsible for the GOP loss of the Senate.

      As to the Respect for Marriage act – it is a mistake. I expect congressmen to vote against any law based on having a single unconstitutional provision – no matter what other positive attributes of the law.

      Regardless, no one on the right is going to criminalize interracial marriage, birth control, or gay marriage.
      Once again you are LYING.

      I do find it interesting that you have finally noticed that McConnel’s wife is asian.
      I thought that made him a lefty according to you ?

  5. I’m a left-leaning Independent, and am convined that Trump is guilty as hell and should be indicted for many obvious crimes. But I also believe the Hunter Biden Ukraine ugliness warrants a thorough investigation and, if indicated, prosecution.

    Unfortunately, the evidence I’ve seen is far less compelling that that for Trump’s crimes. If Biden’s are an elephant, Trump’s are an Argentinosaurus. Turley’s account is of great interest to me, and I will explore his purported evidence. But, to be frank, there is already a lot of stretching in his interpretations. For example, Biden emails Hunter “I thought the article released online, it’s going to be printed tomorrow in the Times, was good. I think you’re clear.” That isn’t them discussing foreign influence-peddling; that’s them talking about the media response to allegations of such impropriety.

    Still, I want it scrutinized properly and dealt with.

    1. “I’m a left-leaning Independent, and am convined that Trump is guilty as hell and should be indicted for many obvious crimes. “

      Did you not note how many times Trump has been investigated with nothing found? If there is something you know that the investigators didn’t can you list those things and some of the proof? Every time someone tries to list the crimes, we find they are bogus. There is a point where people have to stop making claims and realize they have been fed false news.

      1. Trump tells YOU nothing has been found, and you believe him? He’s only been able, until just recently, been able to avoid encountering any real consequences for his illicit malfeasence. But there have been many times he’s been found guilty, beginning with Mueller (who only said not to prosecute a sitting president. Jack Smith wouldn’t have been called to lead the special counsel if there wasn’t a lot of incriminating evidence re: Jan6 and Mar-a-Lago-files.

        1. “Trump tells YOU nothing has been found, and you believe him?”

          No. I believe in the failed investigations, and I recognize that the FBI acted inappropriately. Didn’t you read those things? How long do you wish to wait to admit that the government tried to convict using the resources of the FBI which broke the law and still found nothing?

          I don’t depend on what Trump says. I depend on the facts that are known which is something you should start doing. You are making claims but cannot provide any facts backing them up.

          ” But there have been many times he’s been found guilty, beginning with Mueller (who only said not to prosecute a sitting president.”

          Mueller had no evidence, and much of what he had was tainted, pointing more to the illicit actions of his committee and the FBI. Check out IG Horowitz.

          “Jack Smith wouldn’t have been called to lead the special counsel if there wasn’t a lot of incriminating evidence re: Jan6 and Mar-a-Lago-files.”

          I guess you are unable to learn from experience. Do you still believe in the Steele Dossier? There is a lot of evidence that Hunter Biden engaged in criminal activity, and Joe Biden can likely be associated with personal profit from influence peddling. That is the tip of the iceberg. You have no interest in that. To date, Trump has been investigated numerous times while Biden hides hidden from scrutiny.

          Provide Trump’s crimes with evidence that you think needs to be investigated. You can’t, and you won’t.

          Why has Nancy Pelosi not released all the data about J6? You can’t answer, and won’t even try.

          Why did Nancy Pelosi not secure the Capitol Building properly? Why won’t she testify in front of J6?
          Why is the testimony from J6 scripted?

          Your claims are never ending and never have a solid foundation. I await your non-reply.

        2. “Trump tells YOU nothing has been found… Mar-a-Lago-files.”

          The Washington Post noted, “Federal agents and prosecutors have come to believe former president Donald Trump’s motive for allegedly taking and keeping classified documents was largely his ego and a desire to hold on to the materials as trophies or mementos, according to people familiar with the matter.”

          Did Trump hold nuclear secrets as stated by your side? No. Do you see how foolish such claims :were?

          Wapo continues: “FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property, these people said.”

          These quotes are from the Washington Post that hates Trump and has continuously made accusations against him. They have been wrong repeatedly.

          In the end you will feel no embarrassment for your claims because the left never feels they have to apologize or rectify their mistakes. For the most part the movement is led by fascists. Do you prefer fascists to lead you?

          1. The Washington Post noted, “Federal agents and prosecutors have come to believe former president Donald Trump’s motive for allegedly taking and keeping classified documents was largely his ego and a desire to hold on to the materials as trophies or mementos, according to people familiar with the matter.”

            Add to that the Jan 4, 2017 internal letter from FBI agents to the FBI leadership, that no derogatory information exists against Trump

          2. In otherwords when it is clear you have stepped into a pile of crap – make up a ludicrously stupid motive.

            We have been through this before with the collusion delusion.

            Let me offer a huge clue – when successful people are accused of doing something for no reason or for reasons that are made up and make little sense. Probably you do not know what you are doing.

            Did Trump hold on to some random collection of classified documents for no reason beyond Vanity ?
            Not a chance.

            Would Trump hold onto a personal letter from a foreign leader – such as Kim Jung out of vanity ? Absolutely.
            So would Obama, Bush, ….

            If you want an espionage act conviction based on Vanity as a motive – you are going to have to prove that the documents chosen would boltser Trump’s Ego.
            Then you are going to have to prove that they both ARE and should be classified.
            And finally you are going to have to Prove Trump did not declassify them,
            Trump merely saying – “I want to keep that – send it to MAL” would be enough to declassify anything.

            This is an impossible case to make.

            Alleging Vanity is just the same as saying “oops, we screwed up”

          3. I would note that if the FBI beleive what they are telling WaPo – there is no crime.

            A crime require Mens Rea – guilty mind.
            You have to know that what you are doing is wrong and do it anyway.

            If you beleive that what you are doing is not wrong – especially when the DOJ’s position is that Trump did not issue exactly the right incantations to declassify this, then there is no crime.

        3. Sue: I often smile about the pleasant females who come here and make comments. Thoughtful comments. Scholarly type comments. You, on the other hand, have not left such a sweet fragrance on the blog. It’s a pity. BTW, your hero Mueller came up with zilch, which everyone (but you apparently) knows.

        4. “Trump tells YOU nothing has been found, and you believe him?”
          I beleive people who have established a reputation for telling the truth so long as they maintain that reputation.
          I also TEND to beleive people who are saying things against their own interests.
          So as an example when the FBI claims they can find no motive – that either means there is no motive, or that Trump was correct and these documents are not classified.

          “He’s only been able, until just recently, been able to avoid encountering any real consequences for his illicit malfeasence.”
          Nope, you still have not actually got him on anything that is not made up yet.

          I will be happy to pull the switch when you have the evidence.
          All you have proven so far is that with nearly the entire world hunting, no evidence of anything has been found.

          “But there have been many times he’s been found guilty, beginning with Mueller (who only said not to prosecute a sitting president.”
          False. Mueller posited lots of lunatic theories but was never willing to even go so far as claiming one of those is true.
          Trump did not actually obstruct Mueller – and Mueller admitted that. Mueller tried to manufacture obstruction from lunatic claims that Trump calling his investigation a witch hunt – which it was, or threatening to fire him was obstruction – it is not.
          What is True is that Mueller spent 22 months investigation a KNOWN Hoax, and NEVER bothered to address those shilling the Hoax.

          Lets make it CLEAR – while the Horowitz report Dam’s the DOJ/FBI Durham has taken this FAR beyond. CrossFire Huricane and the Mueller investigation were unconstitutional from the start.

          “Jack Smith wouldn’t have been called to lead the special counsel if there wasn’t a lot of incriminating evidence re: Jan6 and Mar-a-Lago-files.”
          Of course he would.
          The appointment of any SC in this case is OBVIOUSLY illegal – there is no conflict of interests between Trump and DOJ/FBI.
          There needs to be an SC for the Biden’s – because DOJ/FBI can not investigate relatives of the current president, or the current president themselves. There is no conflict investigating an ex president.

          More likely Garland punted. He was tired of the pressure from Democrats and Biden to engage in a snipe hunt and passed the whole thing off to someone else.
          Now Garland will not be listening to stories of Biden ranting in the whitehouse about prosecuting Trump.
          Nor will he have to hear from congress.
          Further he has thrown up a fairly effective blockade against the House investigating the DOJ/FBI.
          Though I suspect that will not hold up.
          House Republicans are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.
          And DOJ/FBI is more important than Hunter Biden.

          Hunter is a simple tale of the corruption of the Biden family.
          The DOJ/FBI are not merely going after Trump – they are going after parents, and republican voters.

          Iran-Contra has come up. I would raise it again because DOJ/FBI is going to refuse to comment on ongoing investigations.
          That is NOT a real privilege. Congress has oversight responsibility for DOJ/FBI and even the SC. They are entitled to any answers they want, from anyone in government. It is rare that congress will push when DOJ claims ongoing investigations – because doing so risks making a case unprosecutable. But Iran-Contra establishes that there is no “ongoing investigations” privilege.

          The house can demand answers – even on ongoing investigations. And it can hold you in contempt for failing to answer. And if DOJ will not prosecute itself for contempt the House can throw the party in contempt into a House Jail Cell until they clear the contempt.
          That is highly unusual. But Democrats have brought us to where that is possible.

        5. If there are many times he has been “found guilty”, then you could cite one.
          BTW the can’t indict a sitting president does not help you.
          Trump is no longer president. Garland is free to indict him for bad acts that Mueller purportedly identified.
          He has been free to do so for 2 years. That has not happened – because there is nothing.

    2. Unfortunately, the evidence I’ve seen is far less compelling that that for Trump’s crimes

      Trumps crimes? You can’t even name one. How do have evidence of any? Repeat after me. NO TRUMP INDICTMENTS

      1. You lie like a rug. You’ve been presented with alleged crimes multiple times, including the 3 alleged crimes for the Mar-a-Lago warrant.

        1. You make a mockery of the law. I allege you are a pedophile. That is more likely to be true than the 3 allegations you talk about.

            1. Stop with the links. Make your case instead of bloviating about alleged crimes that repeatedly have been investigated and disproven.

              If you wish to continue with your alleged accusations, live with the alleged accusation, you are a pedophile.

              Weissman has proven himself to be dishonest, so I bet to win, he would agree that you are a pedophile, and he would be more likely correct about you than about Trump. Trump was investigated multiple times and found not guilty, while you have not.

                1. I am responding in kind. Over the past number of years you have alleged Trump was guilty of many things and statements most of which weren’t true and were proven not true. Since most of your allegations proved wrong, I am showing you how I can take what you say and make disparaging arguments against you. You are an alleged pedophile. There is good rationale for this statement based on what you have said on this blog..

                  It’s is easy to attack anyone you wish, but you get so offended when you are the one being attacked.

                  1. You keep responding as predicted: with ad hom and begging the question instead of dealing with the substance of the link. You’re incapable of the latter.

                    “I am showing you how I … make disparaging arguments against you.”

                    Duh. That’s all you do. As I said: nothing but ad hom.

                    You’re incapable of focusing on the evidence for the crimes allegedly committed by Trump, discussed at length in the model prosecution memo, which you ignore.

                    No doubt you’ll show us again by responding with more ad hom and once again ignoring the substance of the memo. You’re incapable of dealing with the substance of the memo.

                    1. Your argument is alleged crimes that have been disproven. I await your claims that you can reasonably defend, not links that invariably demonstrate your low level of intellect.

                      To you, Trump is allegedly guilty of something, but you don’t know what it is.
                      To others, you are guilty of pedophilia based on your comments. Pedophilia, alleged or proven, remains in the mind of the beholder.

            2. Wow! A Model prosecution Memo !

              You do know we asked for CREDIBLE claims.

              Anyone can make up a claim.

              We see that with NY AG James in NY – who has a judge in her pocket and is proceing with a ludicrously stupid civil criminal complaint aleging fraud were fraud is actually not possible.

              With respect to MAL:

              Out right refusing to comply with a subpeona – which Trump did not do – is not a crime. When a party issuing a subpeona beleives that the subpeona has not been complied with – they must go to court to get a court order.

              Further subpeona’s DO NOT give you posession of documents. They get you COPIES of documents – a Subpeona is NOT a demand for posession – Again you need a Court order to Take posession.

              There are Many presidential records cases – where the ex-president “lost” – meaning the current executive was given COPIES of ex-presidents records. There is NO case in which the ex-president “lost” – meaning they lost all possession of their own records.

              The whole Top Secret nonsense fails.

              There will be a holy war which Trump may lose over whether he is entitled to retain classified documents.
              As well as a war over whether these documents ARE classified – which Trump may lose.
              Though a loss on either of those is far from certain.

              But what is not even alleged is that Trump after leaving Office stole anything classified or not from anywhere.

              Absent that the BEST you have is that Classified Documents legally present at MAL had to be returned after Jan 20, 2021.

              There is no law that requires that.
              Further – though Trump’s argument that he can “think” a document declassified is False.
              It is absolutely True that if Trump as president transfered classified documents to MAL with the intention of their being available to him AFTER he was president – they are either declassified by that Act, or possesion of them is not a crime.

              Put Differently if the president can give a classified document to someone unable to otherwise possess that document – which is fully within the presidents powers.
              Then The president can also give a classified document to himself as soon to be ex-president.

            3. Your MAL nonsense is another typical example of those on the left trying to bend the law into a pretzel.

              As a rule of thumb – not of law, Crimes require bad acts.

              That is not absolutely the case in the law – but it is 99.999% the case.

              What is the Bad Act ?

              Did Trump attempt to sell nuclear secrets to the Saudi’s ?
              What is the “bad thing” Trump was going to do with these allegedly classified documents ?

              Most of us beleive these are either Documents about Biden’s malfeasance,
              or more likely Collusion delusion documents – and if so they are inarguably declassified.

              Regardless, as with the collusion delusion, it is highly unlikely that Trump picked a random collection of Classified documents that he wanted to keep at MAL.

              It is CERTAIN that all these “classified” documents mean something to Trump.

              And it is important for all of us to understand what these documents are and why they mean something to Trump because that is highly relevant to whether there is any crime.

              Conversely We KNOW what was going on with Clinton.

              First she chaffed at the rules regarding classified documents – as did Trump, but with a fundimental difference.
              Those rules apply to the Sec. State, they do not apply to the president.

              Both Clinton and Trump ignored the Rules.
              But Presidents are entitled to do so, Sec. States are not.

              Clinton broke the law when she removed documents from the State Department SCIF.
              The president could not break the law by moving classified documents to his home even if he wanted.

              Clinton moved classified documents from a secure govenrment controlled storage to a computer accessible from the internet in her how,
              with no govenrment security.

              Trump moved documents from one govenrment secure fascility to another. Trump’s presidential offices at MAL were a government controlled and secured fascitly and they remain so as Ex President.

              I would note that the above is quite important to have any hope of prosecuting Trump.
              Because if Trump as president transfered documents to an insecure fascility – they are declassified.

              Todate there is no evidence Trump shared any of these doucments with anyone – Clinton emailed them to people without security clearances.

              Todate there is no evidence that outside parties had access to these documents.
              Clinton’s email server was on the internet and with near certainty accessed by hostile foreign powers – probably the chinese.

        2. Anyone can allege anything.

          You alleged Russian Collusion.
          You did so without credible evidence.

          There reamains to this date no credible evidence of an actual crime at MAL.

          You have to apply the law as it exists, and narrowly, you do not get to make it up.

          What illegal ACT did Trump perform.
          If you wish to make claims based on the Espionage act – you MUST have an ACT that is a Crime that took place AFTER Jan 20,2021.
          Any ACT before that is not a crime.
          In fact many possible ACTS before that automatically declassify all the documents.

          The claims regarding Biden are quite simple:

          He or his family benefited personally from public service.
          Those of you on the left claimed that regarding Trump thousands of times, and yet still have no actual instance that occured.
          Conversely the entire world knows that The Biden family did not grow wealthy sellling Condo’s in Florida.
          We all KNOW the Bidens got rich off the public teat.

          He used the power of the presidency to investigate a political rival.
          AGAIN – YOU said that was both a crime and an impeachable offense
          Yet, it is unlikely that even Republicans will try to impeach Biden over that

          He delayed military aide to an ally for political benefit.
          AGAIN – YOU said that was both a crime and an impeachable offense
          Yet, it is unlikely that even Republicans will try to impeach Biden over that

          Is Biden guilty ? I do not know.
          Is there far more than enough for investigation ? Absolutely.

          But Buy YOUR standards – he should have been removed from office shortly after he took office.

          You would have no standard if not for double standards.

      2. I would not stake this on a lack of indictments.

        Do you doubt that the DOJ could indict Trump for anything with a DC grand Jury ?

        The reason the MAL investigation is dead is that indictments and prosecution would have to occur in Florida.

        That is why the big Jan. 6th Stink. The left knows that even the weakest basis to put Trump in front of a DC Grand Jury will get them anything they want.

        My guess is that Garland appoint an SC – something he has no actual basis for.
        To escape personal pressure from Biden and democrats to do something obviously lawless.
        He already is in pretty deep shit and will spend most of the next 2 years testifying before the house.

    3. “I’m a left-leaning Independent, and am convined that Trump is guilty as hell and should be indicted for many obvious crimes.”
      I have no idea what has convinced you. Do you have evidence ?
      I have not voted for Trump ever. There are lots of things about him I do not like and would not want to be associated with.
      But I am capable of seeing what he did right as president and what he did not.
      I am also capable of grasping that NO ONE has come close to providing a basis for investigation – much less indictment.

      “But I also believe the Hunter Biden Ukraine ugliness warrants a thorough investigation and, if indicated, prosecution.”
      Hunter is mostly inconsequential. He certainly should be prosecuted – that should have occured long ago.
      But HIS misconduct is not what is relevant.
      It is VP and later President Biden’s.

      “Unfortunately, the evidence I’ve seen is far less compelling that that for Trump’s crimes.”
      Then you are under a rock.
      First, Crime means something.
      Trump is a mysoginsyt and a bragart. Those are offensive, and common among politicians – Biden is both as well as an actual liar.
      But none of the above is an actual crime.
      Everything Trump was impeached for twice – Biden has done as well right in front of us all.
      But again none of that is a crime.
      Trump has been accused of many actual crimes, but so far – no actual evidence.
      There was no collusion delusion.

      Conversely BEFORE the first Trump impeachment, there was actual evidence of Biden public corruption in Ukraine.
      Lots of documents obtained from FOIA requests, or from the Ukraine govermnent, or From Biden speaking publicly.

      “But, to be frank, there is already a lot of stretching in his interpretations.”
      I agree completely – we have that problem all over the place. Alito purportedly leaked Dobbs – because some left wing nut evangelical claims that he “heard it through the grapevine”, regarding the Hobby Lobby decision years earlier.
      Yet we have posters here claiming that some gossip is truth and then jumping years into the future using past gosspi to attempt to prove something radically different in the future.

      ” For example, Biden emails Hunter “I thought the article released online, it’s going to be printed tomorrow in the Times, was good. I think you’re clear.” That isn’t them discussing foreign influence-peddling; that’s them talking about the media response to allegations of such impropriety.”
      I agree that YOUR read is possible – it is not a smoking gun. But it is evidence of something else – that Biden was well aware of the allegations against Hunter. That is something he has repeatedly denied.
      I would further note the Call is in reference to a 2018 Story regarding Both Biden’s involvement in dealings in China.
      The VM is not proof of consciousness of guilt. It is proof of knowledge of Hunter’s conduct in China.
      Joe Biden has said repeatedly that he NEVER spoke to Hunter about his overseas business dealings.
      The most favorable reading of this VM to Joe Biden is that he had no prior knowledge of Hunters foreign business dealings prior to this article.
      But that is reaching a bit. Regardless. Biden was aware of this article – obviously, and therefore aware of Hunter’s foreign business dealings – the topic of the article – which Clearly Biden read. And the VM is speaking about those business dealings.

      So Joe Biden unarguably LIED – not exaggerated, not stretched the truth – but baldfaced lied. about his knowledge of his son’s business dealings. But it is arguable that the “your in the clear” phrase indicates that Joe knows more about Hunter’s foreign business dealings than the Times story covers.

      Regardless, the VM is not proof of a crime But it is far more basis for an investigation than the Steele Dossier

      “Still, I want it scrutinized properly and dealt with.”
      It is far more important to look into the current president than the ex president – ALWAYS

        1. Each of us is free to vote for whoever we wish for whatever reason we choose.
          My grandmother was quite clear that she always voted for the most handsome candidate.

          There is not a chance ever that I would have voted for Hilary, or Biden, or most democrats – though I have voted for several losing democrats that were libertarian, back in an era when Democrats were not falling off the left side of the world.

          I have defended Trump here – repeatedly – not as a good person. He is not, though very few politicians are.
          But against accusations that are FALSE.
          I am not really defending Trump – but attacking people who substitute emotion for reason.
          My dislike for some of Trumps antics does not make him a criminal, nor does it make accusations true.
          I am not convinced that Biden is not a worse person that Trump, he is certainly more incompetent.

          But the point is that everything that a person does is not evil because they do some things you do not like.

          Biden has been a disasterous failure as president. But there ARE a few things I credit him with.
          He has preserved Trump’s Shift to asia
          He left afghanistan. He did so badly, but he still left. I did not expect that. I expected him to stay.
          While I do not beleive Putin would have invaded Ukraine but for 3 failures of Biden
          The botched afghan withdrawl made the US look weak.
          Biden’s energy policy reversal made Europe vulnerable, and Putin expected they would cave.
          Biden’s allowing talk of Ukraine joining NATO was a well know red line for Putin.
          MOSTLY Biden has handled the actual war well.
          I am very critical that Biden torpedoed a peace deal in April.
          And I am very critical that Biden does not grasp that it is a big mistake to try to actually defeat Putin.
          Even a small chance that leads to nuclear war is unacceptable.

          If you want to be critical of Trump or Republicans – be accurate and honest – they are at best the lessor evil, they are far from perfect.

          I strive to do the same with Biden and democrats. I have listed the few things Biden has done that I respect.
          Too few and he still is a disaster. But if you paint people in black and white – you are decieving yourself.

          I do not beleive in pulling punches to acheive peace or compromise.
          But I do beleive in Truth – and the truth is as Brian Stevenson said – “No person is the worst thing they have ever done”

  6. Schrödinger’s Cat:
    It’s Anybody’s Guess whether or not Pres. Biden is Guilty or Not of said interactions.
    “the only issue arising would be whether or no the publication was defamatory”,

    AS for Schrödinger’s Cat – You will have to ‘Open the Box’ to know if the Cat is Dead or Not.
    [e.g.: You will have to Open an Investigation (The Box) to know if Biden is Guilty or Not ]


  7. Svelaz, since you comment 1000 times a day hew is it that you failed to comment (unless I missed it) on the radical lawyer getting only 15 months for firebombing a police car? do you have any comment on the obvious double standard shown to leftists or do you think it is all fine?

  8. Why does Turkey repeatedly refer to Joe Biden as “President Biden” at times when he wasn’t president? Most of Biden’s alleged contacts with these people were when he was a *private citizen.*

    Trump has had all sorts of similar meetings and contacts with crooked and shady foreign players. You all know this right?

    Only one meeting is alleged to have happened when Biden was not a private citizen. That was in 2015, when Biden was VP. And yet, even in that instance the temporally-challenged Turley refers to him as “President Biden.”

    Lawyers like Turley are trained to be very precise. Turley is not making this mistake by accident, he is doing it on purpose because he knows you people are too stupid to make the distinction. He is propagandizing *down* to you.

    1. Steve Rendall, you spend your time telling us about the whether the reference to Joe Biden is correct but you ignore the obvious relationships that Joe Biden had with Hunter’s business associates. President Obama sent Joe Biden on many important trips to meet with the leaders of nations around the world. For you to diminish the influence of Vice President Joe Biden is at best laughable. Foreign dignitaries met with Joe Biden because the new that he had the ear of President Biden. No matter how much you want to believe that the elephant has disappeared most of the rest of us can see that it’s still there. You mistake the elephant act as being an illusion when it’s really just another delusion and you are a willing member of the audience.

    2. We still refer to President Trump, President Obama, President Clinton, President Bush, ….

  9. AP may be even more dangerous that the NY Times and WAPO because they are used by so many small papers around the country. I live in SW Florida, an area that voted Red by about 65-70% and our small rag uses AP exclusively and we are bombarded with left wing rubbish. I have written and complained that they are not catering to their own area but it does no good.

    PS. I only get the rag because I love crossword puzzles, but I really am close to ending it. When I lived in MA I had to cancel the Boston Globe because it was insane. I used to buy the NY Times but I stopped that 15 years ago. We really need to starve the beast or at least ignore it for our own well being.

    1. HullBobby, I, too, subscribed to the NYTimes for the crossword long after I gave up on the rest of the paper. I gave up on Will Shortz when the crossword went PC. The Wall Street Journal crossword and those at onlinecrosswords dot net frontslash play.php fill the need.

      1. Ray, I also find the Times crossword too political sometimes. Another huge disappointment is the route that Jeopardy is going. I have always loved the show, but it is getting pretty “woke” these days as well. The left is like a contagion that is eating the host, hopefully we can stop it before it succeeds.

    2. I quit my local left wing paper. Being politically correct, remember they are sensitive, I told them I needed it printed on 22” round paper so it would fit my bird’s cage. They wouldn’t do it so I cancelled. They were happy since I told them a reason that wasn’t politically incorrect. They accept the inane and idiotic obviously.

      1. Mike, why would you do such a thing to your poor bird. Be careful. Like the canary in a coal mine your poor bird may soon drop dead from the gas. I believe that a “sorry birdie” is in order.

  10. When are Americans going to “bell the Biden cat” by calling him what he is, a traitor? The entire family is a nest
    of traitors who need to swing from a high tree. Why did they sell a portion of the petroleum reserve to the Chinese? For how much? What was the Bidens’ take? Those who cooperate with the Bidens’ schemes are as traitorous as the family themselves. Clean house now

  11. Did the good Professor Turley not get the memo? We can’t be havin’ truthfulness in the press. I guess there won’t be AP puff pieces on Turley anytime soon. Watch your back Jonathan! Can you say ‘Seth Rich’?. And of course, the FBI will know nothing.

  12. Communists like Joe Xiden do what commies do….they lie, lie, lie, lie, cheat, and steal. It it genetic—-compliments of their daddy, Satan, the Father of Lies.

  13. Dear Prof Turley,

    Top Secret/Eyes only. Over 50 top national security intelligence officials, past and present, have established the Laptop as classic Russian disinformation.

    I’m afraid Hunter Biden’s Laptop is really Vlad Putin’s Laptop. .. which raises some national security issues as well.

    *this is all classified far above the media, AP, Congress, me, you .. .or the GOP’s level.

  14. This morning the AP is running with their favorite conspiracy trope ala Hillary Clinton’s vast right ring conspiracy, in reporting a shooting at a Colorado Springs, CO gay bar with multiple deaths and many injured:

    Experts warned that extremist groups could see anti-gay rhetoric as a call to action.

    Maxine Waters must be relishing it all

    Last week in Charlottesville, VA last week, 3 University of Virginia students were shot dead, 2 injured by another student, black, who likely has mental illness. Had the shooter been white, it would have dwarfed the lies promoted by AP regarding the 2017 Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally where ANTIFA BLM provoked the escalation. When Alex Fields, the mentally ill white guy, with a history of psychiatric hospitalizations, schizophrenia, no compliant treatment and physically abusing his grandmother, ran over a BLM ANTIFA sympathizer because they mobbed his car, AP sensationalized the story, and bludgeoned the nation about alleged white supremacist groups that I have yet to meet. In 2016 in Orlando, FL, a closeted homosexual Muslim married guy, Omar Mateen, opened fire with a gun at “Pulse gay bar” killing many patrons, and the AP hammered the story that it was a hate crime, even if they failed to report that the shooter led a double sexual life, including having hookups with gay men on Grindr and visiting Pulse bar for sexual flings with gay men.

    While the latest shooting in Colorado Springs will likely follow the trajectory of Pulse in Orlando, Charlottesville BLM ANTIFA vs Unite the Right Rally, and the 1998 death of Matthew Shepherd in Wyoming, who was actually killed by Aaron McKinney, his crystal meth boyfriend/dealer and not by homophobic straights guys, America knows the AP drill:

    DNC Talking Points at all costs

    Yet the Left quashed Christianity in America’s public schools because we were supposedly dogmatic, judgmental and believed in myths

    1. Wow. What a summary. So sad you’re preaching to the converted. We have a compliant media today Joseph Goebbels would envy.

    2. The courts “quashed Christianity in America’s public schools because” the 1st Amendment protects against the government’s establishment of religion.

      You should model yourself more on Christ’s teachings, including Thou shalt not bear false witness. and Love thy neighbor as thyself.

      1. The quashing of Christianity by the courts was a legislative action, not based on historical precedence where some states had an established religion.

        I am not judging the decision, only your ability to understand the history of the nation where you live.

      2. If there is an establishment clause conflict between Religion and Government – it is government that must yeild.
        It is NOT teaching christianity in schools that is unconstitutional. It is government moving into schools and forcing religion out.

        This is true of all rights, in nearly all instances. The interests and powers of government must always be subservient to the rights – particularly enumerated constitutional rights of the people.

        As an example the right to free speech, assembly, and petition government prevails over congresses wish to exclude protestors from the Capital.

        The courts may not interfere with Christianity or any other religion outside of the very narrowest domain of Government.

        You misunderstand the establishment clause. Its clear purpose is to keep Government out of religion. not to banish religion from the public sphere.

  15. This level of dishonesty was inevitable with the perfectly legitimate under our Constitution Twitter takeover, the midterms that were anything but a ‘blue wave’ either, and outlets like CNN clearing house. We pretty much have to accept that our dems are now whole hog part of a fascist, global, cabal. If they don’t back off, this will not end well around the globe, as every country is now dealing with some version of this stuff. We could throw generations broken by their insularity and privilege in there too, but it’s moot by now.

    Depriving people of the basic necessities of life, including honest information, creates desperation, and desperate people do things aristocracy doesn’t like. There is no such thing as a moderate that is actually actively involved in the DNC at this point, and they ain’t coming back. Same goes for the dem pravda. And yes, it all gained full, actual traction, in earnest, when Obama started circumventing Congress and the courts as his official policy.

      1. Thanks for sharing the AP article. I saw that earlier and was hoping JT’s AP claim was based on more than what was written there.

    1. I am no longer surprised at posters like Concerned Citizen at 10:34 who asks: “Did anyone come across the AP claim that JT is referring to? Thanks.”

      Questioners such as CC are able to navigate the web to find blogs such as Res Ipsa but give the appearance that they lack the skills necessary to launch a search engine, enter an operand such as “AP Biden Foreign Business”. I used this operand in one of the 20+ search engines listed in the All-Knowing Wikipedia and learned that even the BBC “fact checked” the AP claim and found it lacking.

      It makes one wonder if, by asking about the source, thee questioners are throwing shade.

Comments are closed.