Latest News

September 18, 2023

As we descend into today’s “Biden Inc.” update, it’s necessary to ask again, “What is up with FOX NEWS host Arthel Neville?”  Not meaning to pick on her, but on FOX NEWS LIVE this weekend, during an interview with South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman, a member of both the House Financial Services and House Budget Committees, she interrupted him, right out of the gate, when he said one of the “facts” the public deserves to know is that “20 million went to somebody in the Biden family, according to a 2020 witness from the FBI.  Now, we don’t know whether---”

Instead of letting him complete his sentence, which did sound like it was going to be some sort of qualification, Arthel began repeatedly interrupting him and finally stopped him from proceeding so she could ‘correct’ him.  “I’m gonna interject with you,” she said, “hang on one second, Congressman, forgive me, I have to interject, because that number’s now a third less of that, which is 7 million, and there’s no proof that any of that money went to the---Mr. Biden himself, the elder.  It went to OTHER members of the Biden family.  [Big smile.]  Continue, sir?”

“Okay,” he responded, “let’s say 7, $7 million,” setting the amount aside to make his larger point.  “Does the public deserve to know exactly who it went to?  The facts will determine that.  The 20 LLCs that were set up --- the public deserves to know where---why those were set up.  That just didn’t appear out of air.  Look at the---”

“Absolutely,” she interrupted again, “and you can note to that the other counterpoint to that, sir, is that when President Trump was President, his daughter received multiple patents from China.  So, just pointing out...[making the “balance” sign with her hands]...both ways.  But continue, sir, thank you.”

“I agree it goes both ways, Arthel,” the congressman said, “but all this is doing is uncovering all of the facts.  All an impeachment inquiry does is let the committees have subpoena power.  And let’s gain the evidence.  And you know who the jury is?  It’s the American people…”

They went on to look at a FOX NEWS poll suggesting the country was evenly split on whether the impeachment of Biden was “legitimate” (47 percent) or “bogus” (48 percent).  The idea, of course, was to use this poll to suggest to Rep. Norman that the Republicans weren’t making the case to the American public.  But he said he thought they were.  “And I think as it goes on,” he continued, “depending on what’s uncovered, Arthel, this is just a fact-finding mission.  Now, if people don’t want the facts to come out, they sure wanted it to come out on President Trump…”

Arthel interrupted him again, showing an apparent lack of understanding of what an impeachment INQUIRY is.  “I just have a question --- do you conduct impeachment on question or actually proof?” she asked, adding that proof hasn’t been shown.

“Let’s see where it goes from here on,” Rep. Norman said.  “If it’s worthy of going over to the Senate, they will decide that.  But why are they more scared of having more facts out there?  This President promised to be the most honest President, and transparent President, in history.  And why doesn’t he want to clear his name?”

She moved on to a related issue.  “Former President Trump said that had they not done it to him, perhaps you wouldn’t have it being done to them.  Do you disagree with Mr. Trump?...The former President is implying revenge.”

Ah, the R-word, another talking point.  And this is one of those “when-did-you-stop-beating-your-wife” questions.  Whichever way he answers it, it’s designed to make Trump look bad. 

“I think [Trump] is upset,” replied Rep. Norman, “over a January 6 hearing that Nancy Pelosi would not be called or would not be subpoenaed to appear...they were after President Trump.  He was upset about THAT.  I guess if he wants revenge for THAT, he’s justified.  But as far as President Biden goes, there’s enough smoke there to see where the fire is.  And what’s wrong?  This ought to be done regardless of who is in office, Democrat or Republican...”

They went on to another topic.

So, let’s go back and look at Arthel’s initial quibble, that the over-$20 million is ‘only’ $7 million --- as if $7 million wouldn’t be such a bad thing.  She’s chosen to use the figure not from the Oversight Committee but, as far as we can tell, from a WASHINGTON POST analysis.  In fact, the Oversight Committee has said that the $20 million is likely much higher, over $30 million.  They’re awaiting subpoenaed bank records, so everyone needs to understand that all these numbers are preliminary.  We’re in an impeachment INQUIRY, not an impeachment.

The statement that there is no evidence Joe Biden received money is another talking point, as it suits the Democrats’ narrative but depends on what you decide to call “evidence.”  There’s definitely a growing pile of circumstantial evidence.  So for Arthel to gratuitously toss in such a remark is not the best look.  Again, she’s disregarding what an impeachment inquiry is, as opposed to an impeachment.

If she’s saying we don’t have incontrovertible evidence of powerful foreign interests personally handing Joe Biden a big suitcase with flashing dollar signs on it, no, we don’t have that.  But to anyone who knows how this sort of thing works, what we have now suggests highly suspicious activity.

We looked at a few so-called “fact check” sites, such as, in preparation for this commentary, but they struck us as working way too hard as advocates for President Biden to be taken seriously.  If we’d linked to them, we would’ve had to add another layer of fact-checking (especially on the firing of Viktor Shokin, good heavens).  As much satisfaction as we sometimes get fact-checking the fact checkers, there are only so many hours in the day.

And regarding the comparison of Ivanka Trump’s patent applications granted in China to the Bidens’ foreign deals, that’s not apples to oranges; that’s grapes to watermelons.  Both Trump and Ivanka applied for numerous patents in China in 2016, but, as FOX BUSINESS NEWS reported in November 2018, Ivanka’s approvals came three months after she announced she was dissolving her namesake brand to focus on government work.  A spokesperson for Ivanka said the trademarks she applied for in 2017 were “filed defensively to prevent counterfeiters or squatters from using her name.”

This issue might be something to look into, but it’s very different from the Biden family being paid millions of dollars for essentially nothing except access to the Vice President.  So why would this, of all things, be brought up in an interview about the Bidens, except just to muddy the water?

(Incidentally, one of my writers says she has a dress she bought in New York in 2016, with an “Ivanka Trump” label that also says “Made In China.”  This writer no longer buys clothing made in China, and Ivanka no longer makes clothing in China.  Or anywhere else.  That dress is a collector’s item!)

Anyway, the $20 million figure cited by Rep. Norman did come from a 2020 FBI witness, just as he said.  He was on the show only to stress the importance of an impeachment inquiry, and he didn’t need to be interrupted and “corrected,” however pleasantly, when everything he said was measured and truthful.  If he wants to do that, he can always go on MSNBC.

Arthel, you’re from the South, so you know what we mean when we say...bless your heart.  Perhaps everyone at FOX NEWS should bone up on the indicators of Joe Biden’s likely involvement in his family corruption and the need for inquiry.  Those who read this newsletter regularly already know it...

Neville has used this technique before, and we weren’t the only ones to notice it.

This also wasn’t the first time Neville has compared the Bidens’ “business” in China with Ivanka’s legitimate business selling actual products.  Again, her business was worthy of examination (and as far as we know, she was transparent), but not comparable to influence peddling and money laundering.


RELATED:  Alan Dershowitz says Hunter won’t stand trial on the gun charges.  He also says David Weiss shouldn’t have been appointed special counsel.  “He’s a Delaware guy,” Dershowitz said.  “People say he was appointed by Donald Trump.  [Aside:  fact checkers point that out a lot.]  It’s nonsense.  He was appointed essentially by the two Democratic senators in Delaware.”

Recall that IRS lead investigator Gary Shapley and his entire team were removed from the Hunter Biden tax/finance case before he went public with his allegations.  Testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee now tells us why.

Apparently, Shapley was removed after a recommendation from Darrell Waldon, the IRS special agent in charge of the criminal inquiry at that time.  Waldon, according to his own testimony, suggested that he be removed “primarily due to what I perceived to be unsubstantiated allegations about motive, bias, intent.”

He said he was trying to “protect” the investigation.  From what --- unsubstantiated allegations???  And these were from whom???   Sounds like the DOJ.  Must-read details here…


Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

No Comments