The Dark Biden Rises: The Reinvention of Hunter in a New and Menacing Image

Below is an expanded version of my New York Post column this week on the latest moves by Hunter Biden and his team. It is the latest reinvention of Hunter but it is unlikely to succeed any more than the earlier incarnations. Yesterday, the deadline to turn over evidence passed for Hunter, his uncle, and one of his associates. They have decided to go full Bannon, even though this course took the former Trump adviser to a speedy conviction for contempt.

Here is the column:

It appears that the Biden franchise is about to follow a new vision for the male scion of President Joe Biden. Just as Christopher Nolan introduced a darker Batman, a new team of political advisers and lawyers have reinvented Hunter Biden in a new and more menacing image. Biden is threatening lawsuits and reportedly preparing a scorched Earth campaign against political and media critics. He is even in court trying to prevent his own daughter from using his name.

Welcome to the new Dark Biden.

Hunter Biden has long been a reclamation project for the media and the Biden team. Despite ample evidence that he and his family may have engaged in one of the largest influence peddling operations in history, the media has struggled to find a redeeming image for someone who has committed his life to a toxic mix of nepotism, narcissism, and narcotics.

First, there was the “Hunter: the wrongly accused international businessman.” This blanket denial of wrongdoing was maintained by his father and dutifully repeated by the media. Hunter Biden did “nothing wrong” and reporters pressing questions of corruption were immediately attacked.

Then came “Hunter Biden: victim of Russian Disinformation.” Before the 2020 election, the media repeated the false claim that the Hunter Biden laptop was likely “Russian Disinformation.” Despite the denial of American intelligence and self-verifying emails on the laptop, the media accepted without question the dubious claims of former intelligence figures organized by longtime Democratic operatives.

Then came “Hunter Biden: heroic recovering addict.” As the media denials became more difficult to maintain on his dealings, Biden released a book that detailed his struggle with drugs and debauchery. The media again launched into the same fawning, unquestioning mode.   Hunter appeared on every network touting his book “Beautiful Things,” that Simon and Schuster reportedly gave him $2 million to write (despite less than 10,000 book sales in the first week). He was portrayed as the very image of courage in speaking openly of the details of his sex and drug addictions even though he repeatedly claimed no memory on issues related to his business dealings or the laptop.

Now we have the Dark Biden. Hunter’s handlers are reinventing Hunter in a more combative image. He is an edgy and aggressive antagonist ready to fight fire with fire against Republicans. A team was assembled to reportedly attack potential witnesses and critics. With a possible criminal indictment and congressional investigations looming, Hunter the businessman or recovering addict or victim will not do.

Hunter appears to have acquired lawyers by the gross, including former Clinton counsel Abbe Lowell. Lowell recently sent out a letter that caused a stir by not only seemingly confirming the authenticity of the laptop but threatening a host of critics. Biden called for groups to be stripped of tax exemptions, suggested a host of possible defamation actions, and even demanded criminal investigations against critics.

The problem is that, unlike Dark Batman, Dark Biden is missing one critical element: a credible threat.

Undeterred, Lowell recently defied a demand for evidence from the House Oversight Committee. In a letter to House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY), Lowell declared “Peddling your own inaccurate and baseless conclusions under the guise of a real investigation, turns the Committee into ‘Wonderland’ and you into the Queen of Hearts shouting, ‘sentence first, verdict afterwords.’”

Lowell categorically refused to turn over a single document to House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), saying there was no “legitimate legislative purpose” for the investigation into Hunter. He left open the possibility the House might convince Hunter to cooperate. Perhaps the House could try to “say it nicer,” as Hunter once instructed ABC News reporter Amy Robach.

The message is “fear us” but it could not be less convincing than if Lowell put black tights and an eared mask on his client. It just does not fit.

Congress clearly has a legitimate interest in investigating whether millions of dollars from foreign interests, including some connected to foreign intelligence, were funneled to the Biden family to influence President Biden.

Emails repeated references not only Joe Biden and suggest knowledge of the dealings despite his repeated denials of any knowledge or involvement. There is also a clear effort to hide Joe Biden’s involvement.  In one email, Biden associate James Gilliar instructed Tony Bobulinski, then Hunter’s business partner: “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.” Bobulinski has given sworn statements that he personally met with Joe Biden to discuss these dealings.

Emails used code names for Joe Biden such as “Celtic” or “the big guy.” In one, “the big guy” is mentioned as possibly receiving a 10% cut on a deal with a Chinese energy firm. There are also references to Hunter paying off his father’s bills from shared accounts.

Code names, cuts for “the big guy” and millions in mysterious foreign transactions are ample reasons for congressional inquiry.

The new buff Biden is a bluff and the Committee just called it. He has until Wednesday 11:59 p.m ET to hand over documents to the House Oversight Committee related to his foreign business dealings or else face a potential subpoena from Republicans.

He would then become less Batman and more Bannon. Unless Lowell backs down, he will follow the same strategy of Steve Bannon who was ultimately charged with contempt and convicted. At the time, I said that Bannon was asking for a contempt charge.

Despite the considerable risk, Hunter Biden is holding to character. He has not shared information on his art sales despite concerns over influence peddling and money laundering. Now his art dealer, Georges Bergès, has also reportedly refused to provide the House Oversight Committee with the identities of the buyers of Biden’s high-priced art work.

It won’t work. It is a course that could lead to a criminal charge entirely separate from the underlying allegations. It just shows, as Joker stated in the Dark Knight, “Madness…is a lot like gravity. All it takes is a little push.”

189 thoughts on “The Dark Biden Rises: The Reinvention of Hunter in a New and Menacing Image”

  1. Cocaine addiction, multiple rehab failures, addiction to prostitutes, zero morals, even having an affair with his dead brother’s wife, fathering a child with a tripper and denying it even after DNA showed the child to be his, taking positions on petroleum company boards with ZERO experience because of his last name, selling “art” that looks like a kindergartner made if hundreds of thousands of dollars to unnamed buyers, why wouldn’t we trust him?

  2. (OT)

    Last night, Judge Howell unsealed most of her December ruling against Scott Perry in the battle over J6-related messages on his phone, which he’d tried to shield by invoking the speech or debate clause:

    “She ordered him to disclose 2,055 of the documents he sought to withhold — including all 960 of his contacts with members of the executive branch, which she said are entitled to no constitutional protection at all. Some 161 items, she said, were proper to withhold. … Thus far, however, investigators have not had access to any of the records because, last month, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to stay Howell’s ruling. On Thursday, those judges heard both public and private arguments about the dispute. The stay remains in place as the appeals court considers whether to leave Howell’s ruling in place, set it aside or modify it in some way.”

  3. They tried to warn us that Trump was a very dangerous man to have his thumb on the nuclear button. The Biden cartel just keeps on giving and giving. Joe Biden said he guaranteed that he had a way of dealing with the Nord Stream pipeline carrying natural gas from Russia to other nations in Europe. He hinted that the plans were in the works. Then when the pipeline was sabotaged he claimed that the Russians sabotaged their own pipeline. So much for dangerous men having their thumb on the nuclear button. Don’t worry, he’ll ask Hunter first before he pushes it.

    1. This investigative reporter has usually been right and occasionally wrong in his illustrious. His story makes more sense than the narrative that Russia blew up its own pipeline. If true, it is a massive act of state sponsored political, economic and environmental terrorism by the US. In a normal world, other journalists would be desperately trying to confirm or debunk. And the Republicans in Congress would be investigating.

  4. I am going to start out by saying that this is only a conspiracy theory. What if it is found out that the people who purchased Hunters paintings were from the Ukraine or China? What a tasty bit of gossip that would be. It sure seems that there is something there that the don’t want you to know. You can understand the panic if Hunter’s paintings were purchase by the wrong people. How many of the people on the list of 51 who said that the laptop was Russian disinformation now have one of Hunter’s masterpieces graving the hall in their mansions. The old sayings are the best sayings. One hand rubs the other. Most often greenbacks were exchanged. Only the purposefully innocent were amazed.

  5. Jonathan: It didn’t take much to convince some of your loyal Lilliputians to endorse your conspiracy theory about Hunter Biden. Anonymous (the dim witted) says in his comment (2/24 @12:58) that “there is ample evidence to suggest that is the way to launder cash to buy influence”. The operative word here is “suggest”. Conspiracy theories don’t require proof. You and Anonymous have a lot in common–“suggest”, “may” and “concerns” is what you say when you don’t have any proof.

    Fox News, your employer, is proof positive that unfounded conspiracy theories are the bread a butter of the media giant’s daily fare. The Dominion defamation lawsuit against Fox has shown how Fox personalities lied about the 2020 election–constantly peddling the Trump claim it was stolen–even when they knew that was not true. Now, Kevin McCarthy, in an attempt to appease his MAGA caucus, is giving Tucker Carlson 44,000 hours of surveillance footage of the Jan. insurrection. And what will Tucker do with the footage? If his prior productions offer a clue it is that he will cut and splice the footage to convince his viewers that Jan. 6 was a false flag op–a set up by the FBI and other agencies to put Trump supporters in a bad light. Why would McCarthy give the footage to Carlson that might even jeopardize Capitol security? McCarthy is running scared. He knows that if he doesn’t appease the beast inside his party his days as Speaker are numbered.

    I can’t wait for the next “Criminalization” House Committee hearing. It will prove interesting as to whether future witnesses will offer any credible evidence to prove your theory that the Biden family was part of some vast corruption scheme. My bet is there is nothing there. It would take someone willing to testify–someone who purchased one of Hunter’s paintings with the express purpose of laundering the money in hopes, perhaps, of getting an ambassadorship? What are the chances of that? Anyone willing to make a bet on that?

    1. Why are you and Svelaz and the rest of you left wing nuts making this ludicrous and hypocritical argument ?

      The standard for a warrant, for a subpeona, for an investigation is not a conviction – it is the suspicion that a crime occured.
      A warrant requires probable cause of a crime. A standard that is likely met here. A subpeona requires reasonable suspicion.

      We already know that HB engaged in tax evasion and money laundering – he ended up paying millions in back taxes to the IRS specifically for that. Had he done so with the IRS PRIOR to a criminal investigation he should have been immunized from criminal prosecution.
      Ask Paul Manafort how settling tax problems with the IRS works out though.

      Regardless, HB’s tax and “money laundering”
      problems dwarf those of Manafort.
      Manafort actually reported his activity using loans to himself as a vehicle to avoid Taxes on foriegn earnings brought into the US.
      Hunter just ignore the taxes,l brought the money into the US spent it and then when faced with criminal investigation decided to poney up the taxes – and he did not even pay for them himself.

      Manafort is a saint in comparison to HB.

      1. “A warrant requires probable cause of a crime. A standard that is likely met here. ”

        “Likely” is the operative word here. Meaning there’s no evidence to issue one. A warrant requires that there be more than “likely” of anything.

        It’s obvious that you have a very poor understanding of how the law works.

        “We already know that HB engaged in tax evasion and money laundering – he ended up paying millions in back taxes to the IRS specifically for that.”

        No, you don’t know. He didn’t engage in tax evasion. He simply didn’t pay taxes he was required to. The key here is he paid them back. He wasn’t convicted of a crime and what is your proof that he was laundering money? All you continue to have is pure speculation, nothing more. This is why your frustration about arguments being made contrary to yours don’t make sense. It’s because of your poor understanding of how the law works.

        Manafort’s problems are much more serious than you make them out to be. There was concrete evidence against him and he pled guilty in court.

        “When Mr. Manafort later took out mortgages on two of these properties to obtain cash in the United States, he defrauded the institutions that loaned the money so he could borrow more at better rates, according to the indictment.

        The indictment says that he purchased the Manhattan condo for $2.85 million and later used it as a rental property. It goes on to say that when he applied for a mortgage for the condo, he falsely claimed that it was a secondary home for his daughter and son-in-law so that he could get a sum larger than the loan available for a rental property. He received a $3.2 million loan”

        Manafort had clear and convincing evidence against him. Hunter Biden does not.

        1. What is your native language ?
          It does not appear to be english.

          Regardless, I will make it easier for you.

          A standard that is ABSOLUTELY met here.
          I have lost count of the number of suspicious financial activity reports that have been filed by banks with the Treasury on Hunter Biden.
          Regardless in the REAL WORLD – ONE is sufficient for law enforcement to get a warrant to go through your finances.
          That includes going after the financial records of anyone who bought or sold anything to you.

          Once AGAIN – I do not like the “suspicious financial activities” laws – nor the government ability to confiscate assets that go along with it.
          But that is the law we have.

          I will be happy to join with you to seek changes to those laws.

          But until such changes are made – not only is there enough for a warrant,

          There is more than enough for government to step in and just confiscate all of Hunter Biden’s assets – including the art work.

          Locally we had a person withdrawl all his money from the banks prior to Y2K.

          Then a few years later he deposited back into the banks.
          But he knew that large deposits would trigger banks reporting to the federal government.
          What he did not know is that lots of small deposits also trigger reporting.

          He was investigated. Charged with structuring – deliberately trying to avoid federal reporting requirements,
          He had all of his money confiscated. He was fined 450K, and he was jailed for several years.

          All this because he withdrew his money from the banks prior to Y2K and then later put it back.

          And you think that they can not get a Warrant for Hunter Biden ?

          Your totally full of Schiff.

        2. MThere was lots of evidence against Manafort – just not evidence of actual crimes.

          Manafort had resolved his issues with the IRS several years Prior to being put on the rack by Mueller.

          Manafort was screwed the moment Mueller took and interest in him – just as everyone else Mueller targeted.

          Even Cohen – who actually caved and rolled on Trump makes clear the Bind they are were in.

          Mueller was going to manufacture crimes, put the screws to them unless they rolled on Trump.

          Nut the problem – as demonstrated beautifully by Cohen is that to “roll on Trump” – you have to lie – and you will with near certainty be exposed if you do, because there was nothing True for them to Give Mueller.

          This is again one of those thing left wing nuts like You do not understand.

          I have little doubt that Manafort would have ratted out Trump in a second – if he had anything to Rat out.

          Cohen did roll – but had nothing to offer beyond insults.

          You constantly make these idiotic and stupid arguments.

          Trump is stupid – and at the same time he is so smart he purportedly conducted espionage involving Putin that NO ONE – not NSA, not CIA, not FBI not Mueller not all of the press in the world was able to find evidence of.

          So some Stupid person who became a multi Billionaire by magically failing up, conspired secretly with a foreign leader – for years according to some while leaving zero evidence behind.

          And people like Manafort, Flynn, Papadoulis, and Stone – who only came to know Trump in 2016 were so incredibly loyal that they would go to jail rather than Rat him out.

          You claim there is “clear and convincing evidence against Manafort – For what ? Actions that are all perfectly legal.

          Manafort managed political campaigns. He did so for republicans, he did so for Democrats. One of the people he worked with was Tony Podesta – you know one of the huge Democratic lobiests. Manafort Paid Podesta to Lobby for the interests of foreign governments – which BTW is perfectly legal. Though Podesta as he was the one doing the actual lobbying was required to register under FARA.

          But oddly no one went after FARA – BTW FARA is a HUGE problem for Hunter Biden – Hunter was calling up the State department for Burisma – that is lobbying for a foreign interest – and Hunter was not registeed.

          I personally – along with many others think FARA is unconstitutional. Few people have ever been prosecuted for FARA violations.

          I fully expect as FARA charges are discussed regarding Hunter – that you will be ranting that FARA is unconstitutional – except that is not what you were saying when Manafort was being prosecuted.

          So what is it that you think Manafort did that is an actual crime ?

          He was paid extremely well to run political campaigns – including some in foreign countries.
          That is perfectly legal.

          He gave polling data to Kilminich – an Agent of the U state department and maybe also a Russian operative.
          He could have given polling data to Vladimir Putin that still would be legal.

          Anyone that wants can gather polling data on their own – it is perfectly legal.
          Or they can buy it from innumerable sources.

          While most polling data in the US is used by US politicians, US companies and less frequently foreign companies and governments us US polling data too.

          It is perfectly legal.

          What is it that you think Manafort did that is not legal ?

          Manaforts crime – aside from Mueller beliving that he could get him to roll on Trump,
          Was that he helped Trump’s political campaign and Trump won when those like you think he should not have.

          That is what the entire mess of the past decade has been.

          YOUR political message is a FAILURE – it is so bad that Donald Trump was able to win the presidency in 2016 – and you all know Damn well that but for a long list of immoral and illegal and lawless conduct AND the bad luck of Covid, he would have Won Again. and likely will in 2024.

          Over a decade ago you bought this idioctic nonsense that demographics would guarantee a Democratic future in this country – and you moved even farther left, and now that demographics is working against you – minorities are moving right (they have always been more conservative than you represented) and absent every trick in the book you are going to lose power.

          Everyone you have gone after – there “crime” is being on the wrong side of YOUR Politics and power.

          You know another FBI agent – 17 years with the Bureau – who was part of the “Get Trump” crowd, just plead guilty to destroying evidence to frame to Republicans.

          Why isn’t that on MSNBC or CNN ?

        3. It is bad enough that you pretend to know what I have said – when anyone can read what I have actually said.
          Why is it that you beleive that you have the slightest idea what I think and feel ?
          Or that those are relevant to anything ?

          Hunter Biden is inarguably guilty of several crimes under the law we currently have – without any effort to “interpret” it.
          That is just a fact.

          That you are still hiding from that undermines YOUR credibility.

          As to the myriads of political operatives – right and left, the Roves and Stones and Manaforts and Podesta Brothers, the Emanuels, and Palouffe’s

          None of these are people I consider ethical or moral, but they are good at their jobs and I have not seen actual evidence that any of them are criminal.

          And unlike you I am not going to weaponize criminal law to target political opponents.

          Which not only is what you have done – but it is OBVIOUSLY what you have done.

          At the drop of a hat – you start indicting and investigating anyone whose politics offends you.

          Slowly more of the actual evidence on J6 is now getting out – apearently the Capitol police were so incompetent that they accidentally tear gassed themselves.

          The “Riot” started – including the efforts to enter the capitol – not as some planned action, but as a consequence of The capitol police incompetently over reacting. The Capitol Police fired Tear Gas into a peaceful crowd at the very start – that appears to have been an accident – it was coincident with the Capitol Police tear gassing themselves. Regardless, that is what Triggered the Crowd to move forward at the West tunnel.

          I expect we will get alot more over the next months.

          This is the problem with censorship. With one sided narratives.

          Without any doubt the right will be seeking to paint their own one sided narrative.

          What idiots like you who engage in mass censorship do not grasp is that you can not find the truth unless ALL sides are permitted to speak.

          But again we see this from you and your ilk all the time.

          You are incapable of comparing Pence, and Biden and Trump and Obama and Clinton with regards to presidential papers and classified information – without trying to create some warped mutant version of the law.

          Manafort had paid his taxes in a deal worled out with the IRS Before Trump even ran for PResident.

          After you have committed a crime – cooperating, MAY prove a mitigating factor in sentencing.
          It does not alter in the slightest whether you committed a crime.

          Hunter Biden did not pay enormous portions of his taxes. He owed Millions in Taxes. Unlike Manafort who actually thought he was legally paying his taxes and thought he had found a legal way to avoid some of them – Hunter just did not pay them. He did not report the income and did not pay the taxes. PERIOD. That is criminal tax evasion.

          That when he was caught – and AFTER he was being investigated – he found a sugar daddy – where of course there is no Quid Pro Quo involved at all. I mean Hunter is such a nice guy – who would not want to pay his $2M+ tax bill for him ?

          Do you think anyone would do that for you ? How about 200,000 ? 2,000 ? 200?
          Do you think anyone would help you with a tax bill to avoid jail ?
          Sorry Svelaz – your on your own.

          It ain’t me, it ain’t me
          I ain’t no senator’s son, son
          It ain’t me, it ain’t me
          I ain’t no fortunate one, no
          [Verse 2]
          Some folks are born silver spoon in hand
          Lord, don’t they help themselves, no
          But when the taxman come’ to the door
          Lord, the house lookin’ like a rummage sale, yeah

    2. Dennis McIntyre, you are correct. No one who purchases a Hunter Biden painting is going to come forward to say that they purchased it for political reasons. Let’s consider a few things. Hunter had no previous artwork on his resume. His prevailing testimony to his art ability was that he was a crack head. No history of great artwork by Hunter Biden can be found. There also was no proof that he had any expertise in the oil industry yet he was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for his advice by energy companies in both the Ukraine and China. With these instances in mind it should follow that one would wonder exactly what he was being paid for. If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck and if Dennis McIntyre waggles behind it it must be a duck. Thanks for the treatise on brain surgery Mr. McIntyre. Quack.

      1. Thinkitthrough: Speaking of quacking. You waddle around quacking and quacking about this and that, flapping your wings, hoping to get attention. Here’s a short primer on how the art world works.

        Hunter has been painting most of his life. In his book he says art has provided him a way to deal with his drug and alcohol addiction. If he were anyone else we would applaud his efforts to deal with his demons. Admittedly, he has no long art resume. One of our nieces has been an established artist for many years. Her resume goes on for pages–her formal art education, group and solo and art museum exhibitions, teaching experience, etc. With all her experience I think the highest price for one of her paintings was about 10K. And she still can’t live solely on her art so she teaches and is involved in other commercial art endeavors. So how can Hunter command such high prices for his art with such a thin resume?

        Art critics aren’t impressed with the quality of Hunter’s art. George Berges has made a bet. His gallery in Soho is relatively new and he wants to become well know and influencial in NY art circles. What better way than to take on a new artist with a well known family name? And to do that he had to sign a confidentiality agreement to make sure any buyer of Hunter’s work is kept secret. In any case, that’s normal in the art world.

        Now who might want to buy Hunter’s art? If I were a wealthy friend of Hunter I might one of his paintings to help him with his legal bills–that are mounting die to the investigation by the House “Criminalization” Committee. Wealthy Donald Trump doesn’t have that problem. But he still shills for money from unsuspecting supporters to help pay his legal bills. Hunter has not done that. So far as I know he doesn’t have a website solicitating money for his legal bills. If I were someone who wanted influence in the Biden administration I could find better ways then buying one of Hunter’s paintings–say using a “straw” donor to hide donations to the Biden re-election campaign. And there is no evidence of that either.

        The bottom line is that there is no evidence Hunter is using his art sales to funnel money into his dad’s bank account. Why would Hunter do that when he needs the money to pay his attorneys? If either you or Turley thinks otherwise you have an obligation to provide some credible evidence. So far a big nada. So you keep waddling around and quacking. You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to conclude this is just a fishing expedition that is going to waste a lot of taxpayer money on a dead end investigation.

    3. Dominion execs knew their system was defective.

      The website used to have an analysis that supported–while issuing effusive apologies–some of what Trump alleged. (they have plenty of venom-spitting denunciations of Trump and Fox to suit you). It seems to have deleted that particular piece but still has a great deal of material regarding election machine insecurity (as the Democrat expert witness from the 2004 Kerry case against Ohio just testified in Arizona, no machine is secure). There is always the ever-censored

    4. Sadly, it all those conspiracy theories seem to be coming true in real time. Keep on fogging your brain and looking down instead of right in front of your face

    5. When you consider the blatantly and absurd attacks on Donald Trump the Dennis McIntyre thesis becomes a joke!

    6. Funny how your disingenuous rant doesn’t mention the fake dossier story that undermined a presidency
      and that Fox got right and your MSM illegitimately touted for years.
      If the J6th event wasn’t orchestrated by the Feds why the resistance to full disclosure?

  6. OT;

    More classified documents found at mar a lago. Seems a trump aide copied and took classified documents on a laptop. The aide has a history of traveling to Russia. Oops. Seems trump is very grossly negligent and may have exposed secrets to Russia.

    “When Chamberlain Harris’s name first started getting bandied about as the woman in whose possession additional documents with classified markings were found last year at Mar-a-Lago, her LinkedIn bio described how, in addition to a trip to Spain in summer 2018, she also made a trip to St. Petersburg in Summer 2019, immediately before she took an internship at the White House.

    Since then — perhaps today, after the Guardian published a follow-up on the story of those classified documents — the reference to Russia was removed.

    In its first story on the documents, Guardian described that Molly Michael, then Trump’s Executive Assistant, ordered the woman in question to make a digital copy of the documents.”

    1. Anonymous – this post is misleading. According to the “emptywheel” story, she traveled to St. Petersburg (once) before she started working at the White House.
      (“[H]er LinkedIn bio described how, in addition to a trip to Spain in summer 2018, she also made a trip to St. Petersburg in Summer 2019, immediately before she took an internship at the White House.”) Therefore, trying to link her laptop to Russian spying is a bit absurd. It is just the Russia-Trump Collusion hoax redux.

      1. edwardmahl, thanks for pointing out the timeline. So she went to St. Petersburg to provide them with classified documents before she went to work for the Whitehouse. She also went to Spain to provide the Spanish with classified documents before she went to work for the Whitehouse. Anonymous just will not accept that the Russia, Russia, Russia deal is over no mater how many piles of B.S. she turns over.

      2. The main point is that she was moving classified material around to such an extend that it prevented a thorough search by the FBI last summer.

        Who was “trying to link her laptop to Russian spying”? Not Marcy Wheeler or the Guardian.

        1. You. “Seems a trump aide copied and took classified documents on a laptop. The aide has a history of traveling to Russia. Oops. Seems trump is very grossly negligent and may have exposed secrets to Russia.” Implication: the diabolical Trump gave secrets to Putin by putting secrets on a laptop that was taken to Russia by an aide,

          1. That was a different Anonymous who posted the top comment, not me. I agree with you that that person claimed something that the evidence doesn’t support. But again, the actual main point is that the receptionist was moving classified / PRA material around that should have been returned when it was first subpoenaed.

            1. Sorry for the confusion. The PRA material on her laptop doesn’t seem very important to me as long as the original documents exist elsewhere. A dinner menu could be a PRA. The important issue, not yet disclosed, is whether there was highly classified material on a mobile device. BTW, how is the Assange petition going?

  7. How many of you have told your son? Why can’t you be more like Hunter?……………………………………..BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  8. Well, Hunter is attached pretty significantly to Texas/Magnolia LNG deal. And that came from following the Glenfarne Merger Corp.
    Hunter is either the Sponsor on the SEC filings or the CCP is (those are the two sensible options given the serendipity of the events).

    By late March 2023, this entity is suppose to form up or it may wrap up. But only the lawyers (Greenberg & Traurig, White & Case, K&L Gates) know the identity of the main stockholder.

    1. Thks for posting this.

      I couldn’t help seeing the govt welfare queens Warren Buffet’s & Charlie Munger’s Wells-Fargo are involved

  9. OT: Undercover DC Police Officer Pushed Protesters Toward Capitol, Climbed Over Barricade: Court Filing
    Two undercover Metropolitan Police Department officers walked behind Ashli Babbitt on the northwest side of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. One had earlier remarked that “someone will get shot” that day. (William Pope via U.S. District Court/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)
    Two undercover Metropolitan Police Department officers walked behind Ashli Babbitt on the northwest side of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. One had earlier remarked that “someone will get shot” that day. (William Pope via U.S.

    Three undercover Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officers joined the march of protesters up the northwest side of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021—including one who climbed over a barricade and pushed others toward the Capitol and another who walked behind Ashli Babbitt and predicted that “someone will get shot,” according to newly disclosed court documents.

    New filings by Jan. 6 defendant William Pope of Topeka, Kansas, also show MPD bicycle officers stopping four armed men in plainclothes on Jan. 6. The men turned out to be federal agents. Video included with Pope’s filings also shows ..

  10. What consequences can there possibly be when the Democrats control the DOJ, FBI, IRS, various other 3 letter agencies, the White House, and Senate?

    Trump was threatened with impeachment for violating the Emoluments Clause, simply because foreigners paid the going rate to stay at a Trump hotel. However, Hunter Biden selling access to his father as Vice President to foreign nationals, and Joe Biden bragging about his quid pro quo with Ukraine leads to yawns.

    1. Karen: “What consequences can there possibly be when the Democrats control the DOJ, FBI, IRS, various other 3 letter agencies, the White House, and Senate?”
      The obvious consequences– the destruction of the country.

  11. The Invasion Of Ukraine One Year Later

    So who was going to stop Vladimir Putin on the road to Kyiv? Hadn’t Donald Trump, during his Presidency, exposed and deepened the fissures in the nato alliance? Under Joe Biden, the United States seemed finished with foreign adventures—humiliated by its chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan and distracted by its internal divisions. And what of Ukraine itself? It was a pseudo-nation, hopelessly corrupt and led by Volodymyr Zelensky, a former sitcom actor with an approval rating south of thirty per cent. Putin’s serene presumption was that, within a week, his forces would overrun Kyiv, arrest Zelensky and his advisers, and install a cast of collaborators. Putin was counting on historians to celebrate his rightful restoration of Imperial Russia.

    One year later, the ramifications of Putin’s delusions are enormous and bloody. We do not know the precise number of dead and wounded, though it is certainly more than a quarter of a million. Unmoved by the losses on his own side, much less on Ukraine’s, Putin has sent his minions to the provinces to scoop up more human material for the meat grinder of his war. And what of his strategic mastery? For years, the Kremlin leadership advertised the modernization of its post-Soviet military, the sophistication of its “asymmetric” fighting doctrine. But every credible analyst of the invasion has been stunned by the scale of Putin’s folly—the miserable planning and poor intelligence, the lack of training and logistics, the lawlessness of his officer corps. His strategy, it turned out, was of the most primitive and criminal variety: the deliberate targeting of civilian structures—schools, hospitals, apartment buildings, power plants, bridges. In Bucha, Kherson, Izyum, and elsewhere, Russian forces and mercenaries have carried out acts of torture, which have been well documented by journalists and human-rights organizations.

    The Hunter Biden scandal was supposed to expose the corruption of Ukraine so Americans would have little sympathy when Putin unleashed his war machine. Instead Putin has been exposed as an incompetent Stalin wannabe; much to the chagrin of his American cheerleaders.

    Yet America’s Far-Right continues rooting for Putin because they want to see not just Volodymyr Zelensky defeated, but Joseph Biden as well. And one see this bizarre perspective in Johnathan Turley’s Blog where on this grim anniversary the Hunter Biden scandal is featured with no mention of the catastrophe brought on by Putin’s miscalculation.


      Yesterday, the Blog St**ge, in one of many stupid posts, obliquely referred to Volodymyr Zelensky as, “That little Nazi beggar in Ukraine”.

      This mindless comment reflects the upside-down nature of America’s Far-Right bubble. A brave, Jewish man, democratically elected as Ukraine’s president, is dismissed as a “Nazi beggar” by a tub-of-lard American redneck on Johnathan Turley’s Blog.

      1. The “democratically elected” president of Ukraine consolidated his power by dissolving political parties he regarded as too “pro Russia”. In total, the “democratically elected” president outlawed 11 political parties, including the largest opposition party in Ukraine. He is denying any opposition to form challenging his rule. Only an imbecile characterizes that as “democratic” rule.

        He is a dictator.

        Not only did he ban opposition political parties. He also nationalized formerly independent TV stations and only permits them to broadcast state approved messaging. So the “democratically elected” president whose boots you are licking has: 1) outlawed political parties opposed to his rule and 2) nationalized and assumed complete control of televised mass communications. Only an imbecile considers those developments consistent with democratic values.

        The dictator even banned religious organizations he considers too “pro Russia”.

        Like banning political parties and only allowing state approved TV broadcasts to air, banning religion is far more consistent with a totalitarian ideology like Nazism than with democracy.

        Pointing these indisputable facts out does not make anyone “pro Putin” or “pro Russia”. Denying, excusing, or falsely characterizing them as representative of democratic values, however, makes you either a liar or a moron.

        Likely both.

      2. Is it absolutely necescary for you to paint everything related to Ukraine in Black and White ?

        The Fact that Putin/Russia were absolutely wrong in invading Ukraine, has nothing to do with evalutating the Ukrainian government or the ukraininan people.

        Zelensky has proven an able war leader and if Ukraine survives – it will be in no small part to his credit.

        That does not change the fact that Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in the world.
        Nor that many of Zelenskies steps have been as anti-democratic as possible.

        Nor does it make Ukraine itself into some kind of racially tolerant utopia.

        You are spouting the typical nonsense of the left.

        George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin – were great men.
        They also had serious flaws.

        We can concurrently remember their greatness and accomplishments, without forgeting they were human.

        The fact that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is an unjustified act of agression, does not change the fact that Ukraine itself has serious problems -= even in the midst of the war.

        I do not know a single american that supports Putin or Russia.
        That does not mean we are entirely unified on risking global nuclear war to defend Ukraine.

    2. Anonymouse – More fractured history. You say: “The Hunter Biden scandal was supposed to expose the corruption of Ukraine so Americans would have little sympathy when Putin unleashed his war machine.” The Hunter Biden scandal started when the laptop was disclosed in October 2020. At that time, no one expected Putin to “unleash his war machine.” If you dispute that statement, cite a well-known conservative or even liberal who was predicting that Putin would invade Ukraine. After his seizure of the Crimea under Obama in 2014, Putin was not making war-like threats. He became agressive after Joe Biden showed incompetence in the withdrawal from Afganistan. You say: “Yet America’s Far-Right continues rooting for Putin because they want to see not just Volodymyr Zelensky defeated, but Joseph Biden as well.” No well-known conservative commentator is “rooting for Putin.” The view from the Right is that we have taken an unnecessarily confrontational attitude to the conflict. The talk of forcing Putin out of power is reckless. The introduction of American military personnel into the fight is virtually a “casus belli.” The destruction of the Nordsream pipeline is another a “casus belli.” Just as Roosevelt led us unwllingly into WWII, Biden seems to be trying to lead us into another global bi-lateral conflict with the “evil” Russians. If we are to avoid a wider conflict, we need to recognize that Russia has legitimate security concerns just as we do. If Russia was arming Cuba to the teeth, we would not sit by idly. Indeed, we entered WWI because the Germans were trying to stir up tensions between Mexico and the USA. The closer a country is to our borders, the more reasonable it is to be concerned about its power and intentions.

    3. “Yet America’s Far-Right continues rooting for Putin because they want to see not just Volodymyr Zelensky defeated”

      Costco Chicken, you are past your due date. The right is split on Ukraine and no-one on the right supports Putin. There are different tactics that are supported, but there is no right answer.

      That is what one gets with a tied up roasted chicken where the head is placed at the other end.

    4. “The Invasion Of Ukraine One Year Later”

      Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the gift that keeps on giving — to democrats.

      The Left’s obsession with an authoritarian regime (that it whitewashes as a “democracy”), its warmongering over a regional war that has no affect on U.S. interests — provides democrats with a handy deflection from the disasters it has caused in America. Inflation, skyrocketing interest rates, impoverishment? But Ukraine. Rampant crime and vagrants camped out in cities? But Ukraine. Utter chaos at the border? But Ukraine. The D’s destruction of America’s energy industry? But Ukraine. Racism getting worse because of our racist policies? But Ukraine. A doddering old fool as “president,” surrounded by incompetent buffoons? But Ukraine.

      And to support the D’s desire to oust Putin, make the “world safe for democracy” by fueling WWIII, and feed their gluttonous desire for diversions, they force Americans to pay some $200 billion for a war that is no threat to America’s sovereignty.

      That is the kind of self-sacrificial, propaganda-driven foreign policy you get with a “President” who puts America last.

    5. “The Hunter Biden scandal was supposed to expose the corruption of Ukraine so Americans would have little sympathy when Putin unleashed his war machine.”

      That sentence is a great example of the Left’s psychopathology of random associations.

      Why are HB scandal, Ukraine corruption, and Putin smushed together into one sentence? Because the Left has a pathological desire to smear. And the smushing is a means to satisfy that desire.

      Never mind the fact that the chronology is screwed up. Never mind the fact that corruption in Ukraine has been widely known for years. Never mind the fact that there is no proof of the causal link among those elements. Leftist fantasies simply rewrite reality.

    6. You assemble a collection fo facts, and then try to connect them to mean things that they clearly do not.

      Is Ukraine corrupt ? Absolutely. They still are.

      Does that mean that Putin can roll over Ukraine and no one will bat an eye ? No.

      While I hope for the best for the Ukrainian people – I am far less persuaded than you that Russia will easily and safely bee defeated.
      I hope that is the case.

      Regardless, contra claims the will of the russian people to continue this remains astronomical. More than 70% of Russians continue to support this war. The anti-war movement in Russia has thus far failed to materialize.

      As you imply – without noting, this is turning into a war of attrition. If that remains the case – Ukraine is losing.
      Ukraine must inflict between 5-8 times the casualties on Russia to survive a war of attrition.
      Curently the ration is about 3:1 – impressive, but not sufficient.

      Russia is absolutely embarrasing itself. And I certainly hope it loses. But that is uncertain.

      Regardless, I know of no one anywhere rooting for Putin.

      The fact that 99.99% of americans pray that Putin loses,
      does not mean that even a majority are willing to send hundreds of Billions to Ukraine to accomplish that.
      It does not mean we are willing to sacrifice americans soldiers to bring about Russia’s defeat.
      It does not mean we are willing to risk global nuclear war for Ukraine.

      We have learned though this that Russia is a paper tiger.
      Most understood before the first Russian crossed into Ukraine that Russian power was waning and that its future is bleak.
      Win or lose, this war has only acceplerated Russias demise.

      But again all that says nothing about whether it is in the US interests to prop up Ukraine.

      What I find incredibly interesting is that we see another massive political re-alignment in the US.

      From Nixon through Bush II Republicans have been the party of global military interventionism.
      Neo Cons have had extraordinary influence in the GOP.

      Obama ran as essentially an anti-war candidate, but Governed as George Bush’s 3rd and 4th terms.

      Trump ran as a peace candidate – and unlike every single president since Carter managed a full terms without involving the US in a foreign entanglement.

      The GOP is divorcing NeoCon’s while Democrats are embracing them.

      The fundimental questions we face are not – Is Russia wrong ? Is Ukraine right ?

      But what is the US role in the world ?

      Despite the heavy involvement of the US in the Ukraine war, it is self evident at this point that Europe, and NATO – with minimal US assistance is capable of cdealing with Russia.

      Trump has been proven right that NATO is capable of taking care of itself – if it wants to.
      That Russia is not the global power it once may have been.

      There are also strong indications that though more formidable, that China too is not the global power it pretends to be.

      Increasingly republicans are no longer willing to repeat the neocon mistakes of the mideastthroughout the rest of the world.
      And the evidence is that the american people are in the same place.

      We are split over the extent to which we are willing to send Billions in weapons to Ukraine – especially when we have problems here at home. But no one supports Putin.

      1. “The anti-war movement in Russia has thus far failed to materialize.”

        There have been anti-war protests. Putin quickly squashes them to keep the general public from knowing how badly it’s going.

        1. I would love to beleive there is a large and serious antiwar movement in Russia.

          But REAL polling not Putin Polling done by those opposed to Putin indicate that Public support for the War in Russia remains high – as much as 70%

          Again I would be ecstatic to be proven wrong.

          While there is plenty of evidence that Putin is trapped in a bubble – that he will not and can not get good advice, and that seriously undermines his ability to successfully prosecute this war.

          That is not the same as the claim that Putin faces broad opposition from his own people.

          If he did – he would have been gone long ago.

          Wishful thinking is not a substitute for reality.

          You have tried to divide the world into Black and white – Either you are anti-putin and favor doing everything right up to the edge of nuclear war to defeat Putin, or your are pro-putin and you want Russian to obliterate Ukraine.

          But that is a false choice. I do not know a single person who is pro-putin. Such people must exist, but I have never met one.

          Tucker Carlson is not Pro Putin, Tulsi Gabbard is not.
          The myriads of people who are demanding that the US actually think about what it is doing before bring us closer to the brink of nuclear war are not one of the Pro-Putin.

          Every single person I know hopes Putin loses.

          But there is a difference between hoping that Putin loses and betting US money, US soldiers, US Equipment, U lives on Ukraine.

          I join you in hoping the Russia n people rise up and overthrow Putin.

          But I will not bet a penny that is happening any time soon.

          Hoping that you are right is infinitely far from believing against the evidence that you are.

          I ultimately beleive Putin is likely to fail – but that occurs as the russian economy collapses – not as the War goes in Ukraine.
          And that economic collapse though likely inevitable, and probably soon – is not days away, it is probably not months away.
          It is probably years away – Few years.

          Again I hope to be wrong.

          I hope the russian economy collapses soon.

          But so far it has not.

          And wishful thinking is not good foreign policy.

          Absolutely I hope to be wrong.
          But I doubt it.

      2. John, we ARE NATO. We are a member nation and we ARE obligated to help defend and support their goals as well. Ukraine can seek membership just as Sweden and Finland do. If Russia doesn’t want that then they should realize that threatening other nations with annexation is just going to make joining NATO more appealing.

        1. “John, we ARE NATO.”
          No we are part of NATO.

          ” We are a member nation and we ARE obligated to help defend and support their goals as well.”
          No we are obligated to defend NATO from outside attack.
          Ukraine is NOT part of NATO.

          “Ukraine can seek membership just as Sweden and Finland do.”

          Absolutely correct. And Russia made it perfectly clear that if Georgia or Ukraine or any of several other adjacent state appeared to be headed towards NATO that Russia would take that as an existential threat.

          That is “wrong”. But it is also FACT. Every single time the west has talked about incorportating one of the nations that Russia identified as forbidden to NATO membership – Putin has responded with military force, violence and destruction.

          Putin has engaged in numerous military incursions since he took power – every single one of those was preceded by NATO talking about including some red line state as a member.

          I would note the US has the Monroe doctrine – we have absolutely forbidden nations outside the western hemisphere from encrouchment into the western hemisphere.
          That has been US policy for over 200 years.
          We have even gone to war over it.

          Regardless, you can beleive Putin is not justified. That Ukraine should be free to join NATO.
          But it was STILL crystal clear from the start that such discussions would have consequences.
          The US – especi9ally under Democrats has discussed NATO membership for Putins red line countries on several occasions in the past.
          Every single instance has resulted in Russia invading.

          It is not like we did not know in advance that starting to discuss Ukrainian NATO membership would with near certainty provoke Putin.

          Wise people do not ask if the bear is a good bear or a bad bear.
          They just do not poke the bear.

          “If Russia doesn’t want that then they should realize that threatening other nations with annexation is just going to make joining NATO more appealing.”

          You have this backwards. In every single instance of Russian agression the WEST and particulely the US raised the issue of NATO membership and THEN Russia acted militarily.

          Not the other way around.

          I am not trying to paint Putin as a “good guy”, but he is relatively predictable.
          Biden triggered this.

          Is it actually Russia’s business whether Ukraine or others of its neighbors joins NATO ?
          Arguably not. But Putin has still made it clear that Any of these states joining NATO is an existential threat to Russian and he will respond militarily.

          Russia as a country is in serious trouble anyway.

          The focus of US foreign policy in the region should not have been Russian containment.

          It should have been how to deal with the inevitable collapse of Russia.

          There was some indications that Obama was looking towards that. But Biden and Clinton repeatedly screwed things up in their meddling in adjacent countries.

          As Obama has said – never underestimate Joe’s ability to F$#k things up.;

    7. I absolutely positively completely hope that you are correct and Putin has thoroughly miscalculated.

      But hope is not the same as facts, and those are far less clear.

      Worrying that you are overly optomistic, or that the US interests in this conflict are small, and certainly not sufficient to increase the risk of global nuclear war, is NOT the same as wishing Putin well.

  12. the Hunter painting scandle is the laundering of money right out of the movies. Mickey Blue Eyes, where a mob boss’s paintings sold to people he was extorting for ridiculous prices to hide the fact he was getting payoffs.

  13. Jonathan: Wow! So Hunter Biden has now gone “Dark”–a virtual Darth Vadar of the art world. Why? Because he has told GOP Chairman Comer to pound dirt. Your use of hyperbole does not reinforce your so far unproved claim that “he [Hunter] and his family may have engaged in one of largest influence peddling operations in history”. And ” someone who has committed his life to toxic mix of nepotism, narcissism, and narcotics”. If “nepotism” and “narcissism” were chargeable offenses the Trumpster and his family would have been in the dock years ago. The operative word in your claim is “may” that won’t get you to first base in any legitimate congressional inquiry. Close only counts in horse shoes!

    As to Chairman Comer’s investigation and his demand for records of George Burges’ sales of Hunter’s art work you say there is “concern over influence peddling and money laundering”. Again, “concern”, without any evidence, is not a legitimate justification for a congressional investigation–let alone subpoenas. But “concerns” and “may” are your stock in trade when it comes to the Bidens.

    And comparing Hunter to Steve Bannon is misplaced. Bannon was convicted on 2 counts of contempt . He refused to testify in the Jan 6 House investigation based on the unfounded claim of “executive privilege”. There was substantial evidence Bannon was involved with Trump in trying to overturn the 2020 election. So there was a legitimate reason to compel him to testify. Hunter was never an advisor to his dad, never worked in the Biden administration in any capacity– and no evidence he was taking the proceeds from the sale of his paintings from “foreign interests” and trying to influence administration policy. But that’s the slender conspiracy theory you and Chairman Comer are using to try to compel Hunter and George Berges to produce docs.

    So if both Hunter and Berges refuse to comply with subpoenas what might happen? Chairman Comer can refer both Hunter and Berges to the DOJ for contempt prosecution. What will the DOJ do? Do you really think the DOJ is going tp prosecute the two based on so far just speculation over the private sale of Hunter’s art work? Like I said before this is just a fishing expedition that I think will go nowhere with the DOJ.

    1. @Dennis

      Are you intentionally being obtuse?
      The scrutiny of the art sale is justified since there is ample evidence to suggest that this is a way to launder cash used to buy influence.
      This is why there has to be transparency. Only there isn’t.

      So this has to play out and the art dealer will get a subpoena.
      An IRS audit could also do the same thing too.

    2. Dennis: thank you for your excellent analysis. Turley’s assignment list from Fox must contain some requirement to keep trying to gin up a “Hunter Biden Scandal” on some sort of rotating basis (so long as they claim there IS a scandal, the disicples will believe it’s true), along with other assignments on the list, like attacking Democrats, Joe Biden, etc.. As usual, Turley hedges his accusations with “mays” and “concerns”, and no actual facts, because, as we all know, especially Turley, these qualifiers don’t matter to the disciples.

      1. There is no need to gin up a Hunter Biden scandal.

        Hunter is a walking Scandal.

        If his last name was not Biden there would be no attention on him and he would have been in and out of jail many times by now.

        But the most important Hunter Biden questions are not the crimes we know he is rock solid dead to rights undeniably guilty of,
        But the extent to which he was the Broker for the sale of Joe Biden’s Vice presidency.

        We have a complete moron as president who appears to have been for sale for the better part of the last 50 years – though why anyone would buy him – who knows.

        He “bravely” flew to
        Ukraine – when Putin agreed to cease fire during the period of his travel, but sends and even bigger moron to East Palestine OH where actual Americans arer threatened.

        We get this nonsense from left wing nuts that everything that goes wrong – 2 years in is still Trump’s fault – even though there is no relationship between anything Trump did or did not do and Whatever the problem Biden F’d up.

        People like you are still blaming Trump for Covid deaths – despite the FACT that Covid now with very little remaining doubt came from china.
        That no one – including China managed it any better.
        And that we learn that not only didn’t any of the things you forced on us work – but that in most instances you KNEW that at the time.

        And you have censored people – which you are OK with – that is not OK, that is immoral.
        Worse you censored people telling the truth.

        In YOUIR left wing nut world thwarting “misinformation” – means anything that disagrees with YOU.

        Regardless, you are correct – there is no need to “Gin up a hunter Biden Scandal”.

        Between Democrats as a whole, left wing nuts and president Demento there is more than enough of a mess – without Hunter.

        The very early information from tghe J6 Video is already bad. The recorded remarks of CP officers are damning.
        Further we now KNOW that the CP fired tear gas into peaceful protestors OUTSIDE the capitol – BEFORE anything got out of hand.

        There was no insurection on Jan 6.

        But keep things up – and there will be soon enough.

        1. “But the most important Hunter Biden questions are not the crimes we know he is rock solid dead to rights undeniably guilty of,”

          Such as? What are the crimes and when was he convicted? He’s guilty after conviction. When was that?

          He’s still innocent.

          “We have a complete moron as president who appears to have been for sale for the better part of the last 50 years – though why anyone would buy him – who knows.”

          What was sold? Who benefitted? More importantly where’s the evidence. Relying on conspiracy theories and using speculation for evidence? If that’s how you deem someone guilty Trump would have been in prison a long time ago.

          John, your accusations are devoid of any supporting evidence, real evidence not speculation. But of course you believe the absence of evidence is evidence.

          1. Do you read what you write ?

            Your standard is that someone must already be convicted – for the crime they are being investigated for, prior to starting the investigation.

            No one will ever be convicted of anything.

            Regardless, I listed several things that Hunter Biden is guilty of beyond aa reeasonable doubt that any Jury anywhere in the US outside of The few People republics would have little difficulty in convicting.

            Far less than that is required to conduct an investigation.

            HOWEVER, Hunter Biden is not a legitimate target for a congressional investigation – atleast not as an individual – foreign corruption more generally is.

            The investigation by Congress is not about Hunter Biden. It is about Vide President and now President Joe Biden in his capacity as President and Vice president.

            While there is far more than enough to appoint a Special Counsel – and I suspect that Biden may seek a special counsel as a means to sheild himself from scrutiny by Congress, It is also far more than the ZERO standard required for Congressional oversite of those in Government acting in their oficial capacity.

            VP Biden’s actions conduct, documents, etc. are FULLY subject too congrssional oversight.

          2. Apparently WP deleted my response before I could post.

            Regardless – are you a complete numnuts ?

            First the standard to open a criminal investigation is a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed – that is a low standard.
            The Steele Dossier, the Alpha Bank claims, the initial papadoulis memo all met that low standard.
            UNTIL further investigation destroyed reasonable suspicion.
            The Papdoulis meeting with downer fell apart as the basis for investigation when Both Downer and Papdoulis confirmed that the memo that floated arround regarding the conversation was FALSE.
            Papadoulis was not drunk, he barely talked to Downer and the exchange was not about Clinton emails.

            The Alpha Bank Hoax fell apart the moment the CIA noted that the data was altered by humans.
            The Steele Dossier fell apart the moment Danshenko was exposed as the primary author and completely collapsed when he was interviewed by the FBI and admitted that it was all rumours and speculation and nearly all of it was sourced to DNC staff members – Not “russian spies”.

            At this point the FBI had no reasonable suspicion of Trump – this is long before Mueller was appointed, and even before Flynn was interviewed – which is the reason that DOJ tried to back out of the Flynn prosecution – because there is no crime of lying to the FBI EXCEPT during a legitimate investigation.
            The Investigation should have turned arround to examine the Clinton Campaigns efforts to feed false allegations to the FBI/DOJ – which is a crime.

            Regardless the standard for a criminal investigation of a private person is reasonable suspicion.

            HOWEVER the standard for congress to investigate the actions of the executive (or judicial) branches is ZERO.
            There is no 4th or 5th amendment rights to the president as president.
            There is no presumption of innocence, there is no right to privacy regarding the actions of those in the executive branch.

            There is a limited shield from “executive privilege” – a court created privilege that only the courts can adjudicate.

            We constantly hear Garland and those before congress saying “that it is official policy not to comment on ongoing investigations.

            That is correct, it is even an absolute legal requirement regarding leaks. DOJ/FBI is forbidden from trying people in the press – even though they do it all the time.

            However it does not apply to congress. It is normal for congress to defer to DOJ when it claims silence regarding an “ongoing investigation”.
            But the constitutional oversite powers of congress Trump the policies of DOJ. Congress is and has in the past demanded that DOJ/FBI testify about ongoing investigations. It has also conducted paralell investigations.
            And the courts have 100% completely allowed this – with ONE caveat. When Congress simultaneously investigates something that Law enforcement is investigating there is a serious risk that congresses demands for information MAY immunize potential criminal defendants.
            That is what ultimately happened in Iran-Contra.

            Regardless Congrss is completely free to investigate the actions of government – including criminal investigations, with the risk of immunizing a criminal defendent falling to congress – not DOJ.

          3. No I do not believe the absence of evidence is evidence.

            It is very very rare that you can actually prove a negative.
            The collusion delusion has been one of those instances.

            Conversely claims of election fraud in 2020 ARE NOT

            Which is one of your problems. While there is lots of evidence of fraud and lawlessness in 2020,
            The fact that SOME claims are less probable is not proof that all claims are false.

            Which is nonsense you keep spouting regarding Fox recently.

            While there is more than enough evidence to require inquiry that never happened.
            Even if there were absolutely no evidence – alleging fraud when there is none – is not a crime.
            Seeking an investigation of fraud when there is none – is not a crime.
            Seeking to overturn an election because of fraud when there is none – is not a crime.
            Had that actually happened – Had Trump actually made claim that were proveably false,
            Had he sought to “overturn” the election based on proveably false claims – that would NOT be a crime.

            It would be a reason to vote against him in the future.

            Regardless, back to the Bidens.

            There is PLENTY of evidence.
            As noted before there is even proof beyond a reasonable doubt of criminal guilt regarding Hunter.
            There is far more than reasonable suspicion of criminal guilt regarding Joe Biden.

            If you are unaware of that – you have blinders on.

      2. Absolutely Turley like many liberal democrats give the left the benefit of the doubt – even though pretty much ALWAYS – May turns into WAS.
        And concerns turns into crimes.

        Conversely again most libheral (not left wing nut progressive) democrats do not afford anyone on the right the same grace – despite the fact that may turns into – fake news.

        The Biden Crime syndicate is real.
        Russian Collusion is a hoax.

        And we have the least competent president in US history blundering towards nuclear armagedon.

        “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.”
        Ronald Reagan, 1984 State of the Union

        As Joe Biden commits acts of war against the nation with 50% of the worlds nuclear weapons.

        1. “Absolutely Turley like many liberal democrats give the left the benefit of the doubt – even though pretty much ALWAYS – May turns into WAS.
          And concerns turns into crimes.”

          Turley hedging his accusations and speculation. “Pretty much” as in rarely. Turley only brings up issues when it benefits the Fox News narrative so he can get called to provide legal opinion.

          1. 8) Svelaz practices libel on almost a daily basis.
            1) He is used to changing the words of others
            2) He doesn’t understand the ideas behind intellectual and real property.
            3) He has no morals.
            4) He has no understanding of free speech or amendment #1
            5) He has no understanding or research, medicine or the law.
            6) He has no understanding of off-patent generic vs high cost new drugs.
            7) He has no idea of what insults and ad hominem are. He insults everyone.

          2. Sorry but your full of Schiff.

            Turley continues to give the benefit of the doubt to those on the left long past the point at which they have lost any trust.

            And constantly pretends there is some parity between the actual misdeeds of the left and the alleged misdeeds of those on the right.

      3. . Turley’s assignment list from Fox…

        natcha, I dont read your propaganda/mindless trolling. But I spend apporximately 1.3 seconds to scan confirming my suspicions.

        Your goal is to lie about the facts and attack our host.
        thats all you have. Lie in your baseless attacks on Prof. Turely

      4. Gigi: Thank you. The loyal followers of Turley on this blog don’t need any convincing. They are true believers. Take Anonymous, the nut job. He says “scrutiny of the art sales is justified since there is ample evidence to suggest that this is a way to launder cash used to buy influence”. Does he offer any of that “ample evidence”? No, he like Turley and the GOP “Criminalization” House Committee couldn’t provide any evidence at the first hearing that Hunter was laundering money by those wanting influence with the Biden administration. This pack of conspiracy theorists is like Rudy Giuliani when he met with Arizona’s election officials to try to get them to overturn the state’s election. When the Arizona official asked Giuliani what evidence he had for his claim what was Giuliani’s response? “We don’t have any evidence but we have a lot of theories”.

        Personally, I think if Pres. Biden decides not to run in 2024, for health, age or maybe pressure from the Dem establishment, the whole Hunter Biden issue will go away. Why? Because the GOP has one strategy Put doubt in the minds of enough voters–that the Biden family is corrupt. The strategy doesn’t require proof. Just throw up enough dirt that something might stick with some voters. If Biden doesn’t run Hunter goes away as an issue.

    3. Denis McIntyre, you know full well that Hunter’s refusal to testify is not just about his artwork. You know that Hunter will be asked about his relationship with the Ukrainians and the Chinese. You center in on the artwork but you know that the relationships with foreign nations is where the questioning will be going. Your artwork is in the art of distraction and you are an expert at it. As I began this post, you know full well that this is not about the artwork. With these things in mind we have a dilemma. Is Professor Turley being dishonest or are you being dishonest. It’s an easy call.

    4. No one cares about Hunter Biden’s “art”.

      What they care about is the likelyhood that Hunter Biden paint by numbers artwork selling for the price of a minor picaso is almost certainly “money laundering” for the Biden Crime Syndicate.

      How about if Hunter Biden exhibits his work anonymously – and lets see if anyone buys it.

      1. John B. Say, people buying artwork for more than what pelt think is worth has always been what has transpired in the world of art.

        The problem is republicans want to force the art dealer to disclose the buyers which would not be possible. Republicans know that disclosure of the buyers requires extraordinary proof that they are engaged in money laundering. They don’t have any proof. Just mere speculation. That’s not enough to force anyone to reveal the buyers.

        You keep saying “crime syndicate” without being able to articulate what evidence of a crime or law has been violated. You keep accusing the Biden’s of being criminals without ever showing the charges or convictions for anything. You’re judging them guilty before they’re found guilty.

        They’re innocent until PROVEN guilty in a court of law.

        This is just a badly run fishing expedition. They are looking for evidence of a crime they can’t articulate. They don’t have anything. Only speculation and conspiracy theories from MAGA nutties.

        1. Svelaz – You say: “Republicans know that disclosure of the buyers requires extraordinary proof that they are engaged in money laundering.” Can you refer me to the source of the privilege against disclosing the names of art buyers?

          1. Edward, the committee needs to show probable cause to be able to make such a request. Simply because they want to is not enough. John B. Say often argues that congress has no authority to investigate anything from private individuals. He’s quite silent all of a sudden.

            1. Edward, the committee needs to show probable cause to be able to make such a request.

              Nope. The new standard is the Pelosi Standard. Congress has unlimited power to get information in the pursuit of crafting legislation. Court decisions, have established that standard. Such as Releasing Trumps Tax records so congress could leak them to the media.

              1. That is not a new standard.

                All that is new is the extent to which congress under Pelosi would stretch plausibility regarding that standard.

                I do not have a problem with the standard. My problem is that there MUST be a clear distinction between what congress can demand of those in govenrment – which should be anything they want. And what they can demand of the purely private activities of people

            2. Nope. The standard for congressional investigation is a legitimate legislative or government oversight purpose – and the lattitude the courts have given regarding that is essentially infinite.

              We saw this in the various farcical efforts of congress to investigate Trump for actions that occured prior to his presidency, without any nexus at all with government. The courts allowed those, they allowed subpeona’s related to those.

              Turn about is fair play.

              I will be happy to agree that Congress requires probable cause of a crime to subpeona a private party – a standard that is BTW met in this instance. There is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt regarding criminal conduct by Hunter Biden
              His drug, trafficing, gun, tax and money laundering issues alone ALL are sufficient to investigate who is paying for his art.

              In fact the latitude allowed law enforcement in drug cases is so great that they likely could confiscate his artwork, and the funds that were paid for it – and do so without a criminal conviction.

              I personally oppose vigorously that standard – but it IS the current state of the law – whether I like it or You do.

              It is true of drug crimes on the street. It is true of Hunter Biden.

              While the real world evidence is that Hunter Biden has been nothing more that an well connected affluent addict, the amounts of drugs involved by his own admission, as well as providing them to others LEGALLY is drug dealing.

              Again I do not like that legal standard – but it is the current state of the law.

              Plenty of nobodies co to jail for DEALING drugs and have their homes, their cars, bank acoounts confiscated for sharing drugs with a friend.
              There is no special law that because Hunter is not a nobody he gets special treatment.

          2. There is none. Reasonable suspicion is sufficient to ask. Probable cause is sufficient to get a warrant.
            The requirements for a congressional subpeona to a private party fall between.

            I generally highly disfavor congressional power to compel anything from private actors.
            But private actors where there is some reason to beleive that their private acts are strongly tied to public corruption by those in govenrment is sufficient.

            While the spouses and family of those in government should enjoy absolute protection from Congressional investigation of there completely private acts, there is zero protection when those acts are sufficiently entangled with the public actions of that government official.

        2. “John B. Say, people buying artwork for more than what pelt think is worth has always been what has transpired in the world of art.
          The problem is republicans want to force the art dealer to disclose the buyers which would not be possible. Republicans know that disclosure of the buyers requires extraordinary proof that they are engaged in money laundering. They don’t have any proof. Just mere speculation. That’s not enough to force anyone to reveal the buyers.”

          Nonsense. Democrats demand that every penny of even rfemotely political donations are made public – despite real constitutional rights being abridged.

          In this instance there are very real and legitimate questions concerning the Biden syndicate.

          “You keep saying “crime syndicate” without being able to articulate what evidence of a crime or law has been violated. You keep accusing the Biden’s of being criminals without ever showing the charges or convictions for anything. You’re judging them guilty before they’re found guilty.”
          Really ? Your argument is absolute nonsense.
          First there are about half a dozen crimes that Hunter Biden is inarguably guilty of.
          Lying on his firearms purchase.
          Illegally disposing of a firearm.
          Illegal Drug use.
          Illegal drug distribution.
          A wide variety of human traficking violations.
          Sexual abuse of minors.
          Most of these are either proven or provable beyond a reasonable doubt.
          Some are less or offenses that might have minor punishment,
          others are very serious offenses that could result in serious imprisonment.

          That said – you would be absolutely correct if you asserted that Republicans are not investigating Hunter Biden specifically for that.

          In the US the police pull people over everyday for an assortment of traffic violations.
          That process is used as the means to catch people for other crimes.

          We stop people for broken taillights. But we frequently catch people with outstanding warrants for violent crimes because they ran a red light. We frequently catch people transporting drugs because their taillights are out.
          We frequently catch people who are driving drunk. because they did not stop at a stop sign.

          Hunters Actual known proven beyond a reasonable doubt criminal condict, provide the foundation for far deeper inquiry.

          And that completely ignores the separate FACT that the Biden syndicates conduct throughout the world also provides the basis for the same inquiry.

          VP Biden bragged about threatening Ukraine with a loss of over a Billion in aide if they did not sack the prosecutor investigating his Son’s company.

          We are way beyond the stupid claims that Joe Biden was not aware that Hunter was involved with Burisma.

          Has it been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Joe and Hunter Conspired to commit the crime of abuse of public power for personal gain ? Nope. that has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt yet.
          But it has been proven to far more than the degree necescary to subpeona financial records.

          “They’re innocent until PROVEN guilty in a court of law.”
          Correct – but we are not in court of law.
          We are in the house of representatives.
          And we should be in the midst of a criminal investigtation.

          Beyond a reasonable doubt is not even the standard that must be met for the house of representatives to refer an allegation to DOJ for prosecution. It is certainly not the standard necescary to investigate.

          There is some undetermined large number of suspicious transaction reports involving Hunter Biden that are being secreted by the Treasury department. Those are obviously within the purview of Congress to investigate. Remember these are reports of potentially criminal conduct that financial institutions are OBLIGATED to file. ONE is sufficient to justify an investigation – there are allegedly hundreds.

          Can the house subpeona the records of Hunter Biden’s art sales ? Certainly Just as they could anyone who has committed the assorted actual crimes Hunter is beyond a reasonable doubt guilty of, much less then more numerous and more important ones where the standard of proof that has been met so far is lower.

          Should Congress make public the identitity of those buying Hunter’s artwork ? Unless the transactions are likely to be shams, Congress is obligated to protect the confidentiality of those transactions to the same extent they protected the confidentiality of Trump’s tax returns.

          “This is just a badly run fishing expedition.”
          In a pond where there is more fish than water.

          “They are looking for evidence of a crime they can’t articulate.”

          Did Biden as VP (or Senator) misuse the power of his office for personal benefit or for the benefit of his family or BOTH.

          I would note further that even without criminal allegations – of which there are plenty, that question falls entirely and legitimately into the government oversight responsibility of the House.

          Vice president’s Biden’s acts as VP are NOT personal, are not private, are not subject ot 4th or 5th asmendment protections.
          Investigating those does NOT require ANY evidence of criminal conduct.
          Congress is free to investigate the perfectly legal conduct of the Vice President – not just to determine if it really was legal,
          But if it SHOULD be made illegal. Or if it was impeachable.

          Democrats have established with their impeachment of Trump that no actual crime needs to be committed to impeach.

          “They don’t have anything. Only speculation and conspiracy theories from MAGA nutties.”

          False, They do not have at this moment prooff beyond a reasonable doubt of a Crime by Joe Biden involving Hunter Biden.
          By the standards that House democrats have already set – they have more than enough to impeach Joe Biden should they wish to.
          And far more than needed to investigate as deeply as they wish.

          This is a losing fight for you.

          There are certainly elements of this that are political. But Democrats have already established that as more than sufficient.

          The real question is not why is the House investigating this.

          It is why there is not a special Counsel investigating the Joe Biden’s conduct as VP.

          There is no faux steele diary here.
          There is the actual public conduct and remarks of VP Biden.
          There is actual court documents from Ukraine.
          There is actual documents from the VP’s office and the State department aquired by FOIA request.
          There is beyond doubt probable cause that a crime has been committed.

          Beyond a reasonable doubt ? Not yet. But more than enough to investigate, more than enough to impeach.

    5. “Well, who ya gonna believe me or your own eyes?’

      – Chicolini

      Such mellifluous prevarication.

      How many pièces de ré·sis·tance of the imitable artist, Hunter Biden, do you own?

      How many conservatives are on the buyers list?

      Work real hard on that venue.

      All you have to do now is “fix” the jury; you could put NUTCHACHACHA on it.

      Is O.J. Simpson similarly innocent – we know he’s still focused like a laser on finding the real killer?

      Just be sure you don’t “…awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”

    6. “concern”, without any evidence, is not a legitimate justification for a congressional investigation
      Congress had the power to get Trumps taxes, a much higher bar than trying to gather information needed to close loop holes in money laundering law’s

      You Leftists now have to live with the many precedent setting actions of the Pelosi Congress. She has shattered norms and removed the guard rails of comity. In the past Congress understood if they used their power to go after political foes, mutual assured destruction was triggered, and payback was a certainty.

      1. Iowan2. Hunter Biden is not a political foe. He’s a private citizen. They have no justification for seeking the information they want. Especially when it’s all based on speculation.

  14. I am literally failing to see how Al Capone was any different from the Bidens. There has never been a more corrupt family in charge of anything with weight in this country than these people – the Clintons are the devil, but even they had a smidgen of nuance. My tinfoil -hat-self almost wonders if the last democrat presidential primary was more of a focus group to determine who to install, given that all of those people were given jobs after the fact. I have zero respect for the Bidens, I have zero respect for the modern dem party as an Independent, and I am not intimidated by them in the slightest, they can get bent. Dollars are not, it turns out, the only factor to consider.

    This is all so, so obvious, even without their transparency, and it is effing ridiculous. They think they are mobsters when in fact they are clowns, and we are laughing at them. Actual clowns could run the country better. This is globalism/fascism 101 (see the UN’s latest censorship efforts, to get ‘solidarity’ around cataclysmic climate change that is not happening and never will, but the young and naive believe it), and we have not seen this level of *global* fascism, ever, in Western history, not even WWII. This is all of Western society. Stop. Voting. Dem. Period. For anything whatsoever, even your PTA. We do not need to be beholden to a generation of spoiled, privileged little p****s nor the people that indoctrinate them, but you’d better find your courage and step up NOW.

    1. great comment James, I believe the idea of everything is important is finally sinking into the fabric of the Repub party..perhaps if people were able to witness the craziness happening all around them, they’d be more eager to vote R…thank you msm for that coverage/ or lack thereof….demonstrating the easiness of removing “hurtful -any noun goes here” it from internet history etc etc…we must fight in every distric
      t for everything- our whole way of life is fading and only a few of us are witnessing this devastation happening live

Leave a Reply