Below is my column in the Messenger on the use of Hunter Biden’s addiction as the final line of defense to corruption allegations. This week, President Joe Biden is continuing to deny that he had any knowledge of his son’s business dealing despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In the meantime, pundits are insisting that this is really not a story of millions of dollars being sent to the Biden family from foreign sources or the direct use of Joe Biden to shake down (apparently successfully) a Chinese official with ties to foreign intelligence. Rather, it is now portrayed as “a story of a father’s love for his son.” In other words, it is just like “On Golden Pond” if the father and child were working together to extract millions in actual gold from the pond.
Here is the column:
In Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s 1890 story, The Sign of the Four, there is a scene in which Sherlock Holmes prepares to give himself an injection of cocaine in front of a curious Dr. Watson. Holmes explained: “It is cocaine, a seven-per-cent solution. Would you care to try it?” Watson wisely demurred — but the 7% solution has not lost its appeal to others as a diversion.
Last year, I wrote a column suggesting that there was a notable shift among Biden associates and some media figures in addressing the Hunter Biden scandal. In the wake of the release of new evidence of Hunter Biden’s alleged influence-peddling efforts, the Biden team has fully retreated to what I called the “Seven-Percent Solution” to the scandal.
In 2022, I wrote:
“The president and the press have been shifting to a new defense. As the father recently insisted of his son, ‘He fought an addiction problem. He overcame it. He wrote about it.’
“The family and the media have been cultivating the angle for months as they anticipated possible criminal charges. … With possible criminal conduct exposed, all that’s left is the addiction defense.”
One of the most vocal with this recent rollout was former U.S. senator Claire McCaskill (D.-Mo.), who became irate on MSNBC and declared that “Everybody needs to back off!” because Hunter was an addict and “suffering from these diseases.” Of course, such suffering did not prevent him from allegedly shaking down foreign figures for millions of dollars in exchange for access to his father.
The Biden defense team invoked much the same explanation when confronted with a story about a WhatsApp message that purportedly showed Hunter threatening a Chinese businessman with ties to China’s Communist Party if he did not send Biden millions of dollars. He repeatedly referenced the fact that his father was sitting next to him, and suggested his father would be involved in the threatened response if the money was not transferred.
According to testimony made public last week, IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley told the House Ways and Means Committee in May: “[W]e obtained a July 30th, 2017, WhatsApp message from Hunter Biden to Henry Zhao, where Hunter Biden wrote: ‘I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.’”
This past weekend, there were reports that, after the threatening WhatsApp message was sent, two payments totaling $5.1 million were sent to a law firm and another firm associated with Hunter Biden.
The response from Hunter Biden’s defense team seems telling with its conspicuous absence of an outright denial that Hunter sent the message. His lawyer, Chris Clark, first insisted that the release of the messages “are not only irresponsible, they are illegal.” (He did not explain why a message legally acquired by the government from the cloud account of his client would be illegal to include in the report of a congressional investigatory committee.)
He then added that any “verifiable words or actions of my client in the midst of a horrible addiction are solely his own and have no connection to anyone in his family.”
The 7% solution: It worked for Holmes, and it now appears to be working for Hunter.
The problem with this line of defense, however, is that it runs into some glaring contradictions.
In the first few years of the scandal, Biden associates — and Hunter himself — emphasized that he was a highly educated lawyer with executive-level experience to offer these companies. Back then, he was insulted by the notion that he was unqualified to sit on boards for companies like Burisma. He told ABC News reporter Amy Robach to “say it nicer” when she raised the subject of allegedly using his connections to his father.
Another problem is that Hunter did not appear to have any chemical-based challenge in allegedly maintaining what has been described by accusers as a global, multimillion-dollar influence-peddling scheme. As I noted last year, the fact is you can be an addict or an alcoholic and still be capable (or culpable).
Even more troubling is how members of the Biden family apparently continued to work with him on these deals despite his reported addiction. Before becoming the designated defendant of the Biden family, he was the conduit for millions in revenue, including alleged transfers to other Biden family members.
The Justice Department also appears to have latched on to the 7% solution. Rather than prosecuting Hunter Biden for a felony in lying on a federal gun form, it is sending him into a diversion program due to an addiction that he says he was able to break years ago.
Now, however, he is portrayed as a junkie emailing threatening messages to foreign figures, demanding (and apparently receiving) millions of dollars. It is little more than an elite version of an addict panhandling in Times Square — except that Hunter apparently panhandled effectively in different countries for almost a decade, reportedly using a web of more than 20 LLC corporations and banking accounts.
Hunter Biden’s 7% solution won’t do much to help the public resolve what really happened here — but it may help those in Washington who prefer to discuss addiction instead of corruption.
Jonathan Turley, an attorney, constitutional law scholar and legal analyst, is the Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law at The George Washington University Law School.
Statutes of Limitation may be “tolled” or extended for a large variety of reasons. See:
https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/RL31253.pdf
Pretty obvious that our beloved DOJ is totally unaware off the law in this area, or, more likely, decided not to pursue these criminals for obvious reasons.
OT
“Supreme Court Upholds University Of Texas’ Affirmative Action Program”
“The race-conscious admissions program in use at the time of petitioner’s application is lawful under the Equal Protection Clause,” the Supreme Court.
– National Public Radio
___________________
The antithetical and unconstitutional “Reconstruction Amendments” must have been struck down by Judicial Review in 1865/69, understanding that they were rammed through and improperly ratified in a brutal, post-war environment of military occupation and oppression and that they were moot, in any case, as the subjects of those amendments must have been compassionately repatriated under extant immigration law on January 1, 1863, the Naturalization Act of 1802, which denied them admission to become citizens.
The Supreme Court has no power to ignore statutory and fundamental law, and deny rights, freedoms, privileges, immunities and elections to Americans, while arbitrarily lavishing favor and artificial and illicit rights and freedoms, which are deleterious to actual, legitimate and valid American citizens, on illegal aliens.
The Supreme Court does not support and is not the arbiter of adherence to the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court is the enforcer for the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
Karl Marx is smiling today.
Normal, freedom-loving people adapted to and accommodated communism for 75 years in Russia.
Normal, freedom-loving people have adapted to and accommodated communism since 1949.
The Jewish people in Germany adapted to and accommodated the Nazis, to the degree that that was humanly possible.
Americans must suffer under communism until their rights, freedoms, privileges, immunities, elections and nation, under their Constitution, are restored.
“If they don’t stand for something, they will fall for anything.”
– Gordon A. Eadie, 1945
7% solution:
3% media propaganda
2% TDS (in reality, more like Trump Derailment Strategy)
1% political lies
1% naivete and gullibility
93% hot air
_________________
100% one-sided politics
Karine Jean-Pierre gets grilled by a cross section of journalists about this developing story, with nary a question on what flavor ice cream Joe Biden prefers.
https://youtu.be/yW8uPteivxI
it should be apparent to everyone by this point that Democrats lie. They simply lie. They do it effortlessly after decades of practice in politics; e.g. LBJ, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the consummate liar, Joseph Biden in politics ~ 50 years. Their number one goal is power. In order to achieve power they lie. Hunter is a lie, like father like son. Jill Biden’s EdD thesis is a lie, plagiarized. The defense of Hunter is a lie. Ive gotten to know many addicts who went through recovery successfully, and they are the most humble, non-judgemental, honest people of any because that is part of the 12 Step Program of AA/NA.
Hunter Biden isn’t anything even remotely close to reflecting the 12 Steps.
To wit, the infamous, black Democrat, Stacey Plaskett, who is a delegate to the US Virgin Islands, lied about her associations with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, per former The Intercept reporter, Lee Fang, who is left of center. Plaskett was one of the notorious impeachment managers juicing the lie of impeaching Trump. She also recently stated, Trump “needs to be shot” and threatened Matt Taibbi with prison. So the revelation by Lee Fang about this Marxist black darling enabling a pedophile like Epstein, is just another drop in the bucket in how Democrats lie to get ahead. They are soulless.
House Democrat Worked for Epstein’s Tax and Political Fixer
Court filings reveal that the Del. Stacey Plaskett, D-V.I., misled the public about her deep ties to the powerful pedophile.
The unsealed documents outline a decade-long association involving direct solicitations for money, personal meetings, and employment at a law firm deeply connected to Epstein’s shadowy network.
Plaskett not only repeatedly sought financial contributions from Epstein and had multiple face-to-face encounters with him, but she also worked directly for a St. Thomas-based law firm that played a role in cultivating influence for Epstein’s clandestine activities.
https://www.leefang.com/p/house-democrat-worked-for-epsteins
Hunter had allegedly involved multiple family members in his influence peddling scheme, including Joe Biden. This isn’t a crack addict who’s in another state, knocking over convenience stores. He funneled millions of dollars to various family members, with their knowledge and participation. This has the hallmarks of a corrupt crime family.
The real question was, who’s idea was it to sell Joe Biden’s political favors? Was it Joe Biden’s idea, and he shared his contacts with Hunter Biden? How did Hunter meet these foreign nationals, in order to provide Joe’s letters of recommendations for college applications, and whatever else of his father’s he was selling? Who approached whom? When did Joe Biden agree to participate, to the point that he was allegedly standing beside Hunter as he demanded money?
Did Joe Biden come up with a great money making idea after Hunter Biden was discharged from the Navy for a positive cocaine test?
How does the same Hunter Biden who took video of himself in drug orgies also know the contacts to get a job with Burisma, without his father’s direct involvement? He flew on Air Force Two with his father while Joe Biden was VP to conduct some of these deals.
Politicians network.
In other news: “PETA Slams Bud Light Rebate Campaign after Anheuser Bush Selects Bob & Doug McKenzie as Spokesmen”
Toronto, Great White North (UPI):
Reeling from cratering sales of Bud Light, the Bud Light beer maker joined forces with Canada’s most famous celebrities, Bob & Doug McKenzie to promote their upcoming July 4th
salesrebate event.The controversy stems from lack of participation in Bud Light’s gift card rebate over Memorial Day weekend. AB then contracted with the Brothers McKenzie to film a commercial showing a novel way to get free beer (eh?).
Buyers over the July 4th week can receive up to 144 bottles of beer free of charge from the purchase of one case of bottled Bud Light. For each bottle of beer in the original purchase, customers are required to place a “small baby mouse” inside each empty bottle, then feed it for a month until it grows. They can then present their mouse in a bottle to their local retailer or, preferably, the main brewery in Elsinore, Manitoba, and demand a free case of beer for each bottle.
PETA described the campaign as animal cruelty, but Doug McKenzie disagrees. “Like it was one happy mouse, eh. Especially if you leave some of the beer for it to drink.”
Oh NO! This great blog site may be overrun with drunken Anonymice!
Bud Light just hasn’t learned. It sponsored a Pride Parade in Toronto recently, in which fully nude men walked in the parade, and frolicked in a fountain, in full view of children. There was, of course, the ubiquitous peni$ costume. Someone always has to wear a peni$ hat or costume, or it’s not a Pride event. I do not at all understand this insistence for LGBTQ to have sexually themed events, even nudity, in front of children. I am not aware of any other group, other than NARAL, who demands access to children. The pushback when the minimum age to enter is raised to 18, indicates that the goal is, in fact, to have children view these age inappropriate shows.
Pride events reflect quite badly on all the perfectly normal gay and lesbian couples who would be appalled at public adult nudity in front of kids.