Advertisement

The Hunter Biden Email Story

October 15, 2020

THE HUNTER BIDEN EMAIL

The New York Post obtained a 2015 email reportedly recovered from a computer Hunter Biden left for repairs and never picked up. It’s from Ukrainian businessman Vadym Pozharskyi, an adviser to the infamous Ukrainian energy company Burisma that paid Hunter $50,000 a month for his invaluable contributions as a board member. The email reads, ‘Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving me an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together.” In another email from May, 2014, Pozharskyi asks Hunter for “advice on how you could use your influence” on Burisma's behalf.

This was less than eight months before Joe Biden threatened to withhold foreign aid money to Ukraine if they didn’t fire a prosecutor who was looking into Burisma. It’s a big deal – or should be – because Biden has angrily denied having any ulterior motives or ever speaking to his son about his foreign business deals.

If you don’t hear about this, it could be because other outlets, from Facebook to the Washington Post, are doing everything possible not to report it and to keep others from sharing it. Not because they're biased and are treating any stories about Hunter as gingerly as radioactive waste. Perish the thought.

No, it's just that media outlets that have run countless anti-Trump fake news articles based on anonymous sources and “leaked” documents have suddenly become extremely concerned about repeating a story based on leaked documents. Facebook is limiting sharing of the story until its fact-checkers have time to verify it as genuine (I’m guessing that job will take until, oh…November 4th.) No bias, just standard operating procedure, you understand.

THE NY POST STORY EVERYONE IS SHARING (EXCEPT ON SOCIAL MEDIA)

For your convenience. If this is a hoax, someone went to a lot of effort to make it a good one, even creating a deep fake Hunter Biden sex tape, complete with crack smoking for added authenticity.

NAILED IT

Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana nails it again, this time on the Joe/Hunter Biden story and, in particular, the social media reaction:

"These accusations are as serious as four heart attacks and a stroke."

He went to praise the NEW YORK POST as a responsible, reputable news organization, subject to libel and defamation laws. Social media are trying to pick winners and losers, and that is wrong.

He said this story about then-VP Biden and his son suggests to the world that "the foreign policy of the United States can be bought and sold like a sack of potatoes." Because of its importance, every news organization around the world needs to be investigating the veracity of this story. We need to get this right, "and that's why we have the First Amendment, and why we have a free and fair --- supposedly fair --- media."

Emphasis on the word "supposedly."

ANTIFA Helps Trump Campaign

October 15, 2020

Sunday in Portland, Oregon, the “idea” of Antifa (it’s not a movement, just an “idea,” according to Joe Biden) held a “Day of Rage” (pretty much like every other day to them) and vandalized “non-friendly” businesses. One was a downtown café called the Heroes American Café (the name alone triggered them painfully, I’m sure.) The owner has photos of first responders on the walls and shares profits with police charities.

So the vague "idea” of Antifa hit one window with what was likely a baseball bat and shot out two others. Ironically, the restaurant owner, John Jackson, is black. He’s also an Army and Marine veteran, and if the radicals thought they’d intimidate him into mouthing their idiotic politics, they were wrong.

Jackson said, “When I first came here about 10 years ago, it was one of the most accepting cities that I knew of…We’re for all heroes and we don’t support zeroes. So if you’re a bad cop, we don’t really have time for you. If you’re walking your beat and you’re taking care of your people or you’re saving lives, we love you.”

And if the “idea” of Antifa can read (and that’s a big “if”), then they should learn how badly their bullying attempt failed. Jackson told Fox News that not only are good people supporting his restaurant as never before but the attack “solidified my Trump vote. I’m done with this weakness and we need some real strong leadership.”

On a side note, to all those “suburban moms” who are allegedly supporting Biden because they think this violent garbage will never come to the suburbs: they’re planning to bring it to your suburbs and already starting it in some places. Which party – both on the local and national levels - do you think will actually do anything to stop them?

Let’s set aside for the moment the blatant censorship of the Joe/Hunter Biden story by the Ministry of Truth –- I mean, Twitter, Facebook and the rest of the anti-Trump media. That issue looms large, to be sure, but as the election nears, we can’t let it detract from what it is they’re trying so hard to bury: evidence of what Joe Biden DID while Vice President to help his son peddle influence in foreign countries. (Ironically, by trying so hard to hide it, Twitter and Facebook have succeeded in calling more attention to it. This is an example of the “Streisand Effect,” to be discussed separately.)

By now you know the story about the laptop, first reported in the NEW YORK POST. A computer repair technician in Delaware was left with a MacBook Pro that no one had ever come back to his shop to claim; it apparently belonged to Hunter Biden. As reported by the POST, it had a sticker on it from the Beau Biden Foundation and contained video of Hunter having sex with an unidentified woman and also smoking crack. It’s hard to even imagine this could have been created as part of a hoax, and the Biden campaign has not disputed the authenticity of the emails.

This discovery is important in light of what we already knew about Hunter Biden, who, with no relevant experience, was paid $50,000 a month starting in April, 2014, to sit on the board of Burisma, a corrupt Ukrainian oil and gas company. At the time, his dad, Joe Biden, was Vice President of the United States and had been appointed by Obama for some reason to be “point man” on U.S. policy in Ukraine. So the question naturally arises, what did Burisma plan to get for its investment? And did it get that? These emails suggest that it did.

According to the messages, on May 12, 2014 –- mere weeks after Hunter was asked to join the board –- a top executive at Burisma emailed him to ask him to use his “influence” to quell Ukrainian officials whom he claimed were trying to extort the company. This was the very day that Burisma publicly announced that Hunter Biden had joined its board and would be running its “legal unit and...provide support for the Company among international organizations.” But according to the POST story, Hunter Biden’s attorney says he’s never been in charge of Burisma’s legal affairs.

On April 17, 2015, the same executive emailed Hunter to thank him for the meeting he’d had with the Vice President and for getting to “spend some time” with him. Joe Biden’s campaign spokesperson disputes that the meeting took place, saying it wasn’t on his official calendar, as if that proved they didn’t meet.

We know (because he bragged about it in 2018 in front of a live audience of the Council on Foreign Relations) that just a few months later, in December of 2015, Joe Biden threatened the Ukrainian president and the prime minister that $1 billion in aid would be withheld unless their prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin, was fired. Apparently, that was what it took to put Shokin in the unemployment line.

Legal analyst Andrew C. McCarthy outlines in more detail what we know and can piece together about the various meetings and communications. These also involve Hunter’s business partner Devon Archer, who used to work as a senior adviser to Joe Biden’s close friend John Kerry and was convicted in 2018 of fraud and conspiracy. (Evidence in the case also implicated Hunter, but he was not charged.) McCarthy touches on how the laptop came to be in the possession of the FBI and how a copy of the hard drive got to Trump attorney Rudy Guiliani, who passed it on to the POST on Sunday. The POST had been told about it by Steve Bannon.

McCarthy says it’s “unclear” why these emails are just now coming to light. Seems like the typical “October surprise” to me, though instinct tells me there's much more backstory to be learned.

For example, how did the computer technician come to be subpoenaed by the U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware to produce the laptop for a grand jury? Yes, grand jury proceedings are secret, but what was that about? This is when the FBI apparently took custody of the laptop. As McCarthy points out, this was December, 2019, when the Democrats were just wrapping up their (phony) impeachment proceedings. It sure would have been fun for Trump to use this back in January during his Senate trial. Just imagine Trump’s attorneys putting those emails up on a big screen and saying, “HEY! You wanna talk about corruption??”

Of course, Joe Biden has maintained that he pressed for Shokin’s firing only because of claims by European leaders that Shokin was corrupt. No, no, it had nothing to do with any personal agenda that involved Biden's own son. That doesn't cut it. An honest, ethical VP would have said, "Look, son, with me in charge of our policy towards Ukraine, you can't be on the Burisma board."

The huge irony here: President Trump was impeached over a phone call in which Democrats claimed he was threatening to withhold aid if Ukrainians didn’t act to further his own personal agenda. Trump did NOT do that –- Biden DID. Trump got impeached. Biden became the Democrat nominee for President. Talk about a two-tier justice system.

And again, as we’ve said for years, what Democrats accuse Republicans of doing is always what they themselves have done (or are doing, or plan to do).

Joe Biden has insisted over and over that he “never, ever, ever, ever” (yes, that’s a quote) talked with his son about his foreign business dealings. If these emails reflect actual events, he is either thoroughly corrupt and lying his head off or else is having even more serious memory lapses than we knew. Or both.

“How Dare You Question Your Queen, Peasant?!” Wolf Blitzer of CNN committed the ultimate media sin by actually asking a top Democrat a tough question. He learned one reason why reporters never do that (you know the other reason.) House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went into full-on huff mode when Wolf dared to ask her why she refuses to negotiate with Republicans to pass a coronavirus relief bill and keeps holding out for her far larger version, even as businesses are going bankrupt and Americans are losing their jobs and standing in food lines.

At the link, you can read quotes or watch on video as Pelosi haughtily lectures Blitzer that he’s wrong and should “respect the committees” and that the paltry $1.8 trillion offered by the Republicans is not even close to good. As for the people standing on corners begging for change, she claimed that “we see them,” although it might be hard through the smoked glass windows of her limo. Maybe $1.8 trillion just doesn’t seem like that much when you have $120 million and eat artisan ice cream out of two high-end freezers in your mansion.

Pelosi became so outraged at the effrontery of one of her house lackeys daring to question her that at one point, she said, "I don’t know why you’re always an apologist and many of your colleagues are apologists for the Republican position." Yes, she’s actually so far left that she thinks CNN anchors are spokespeople for the GOP!

This article also lists some of the vitally important demands that she’s holding up the virus relief bill over. They include $1 trillion for (blue) cities and states with no restrictions on how they use it, other than it can’t be spent on policing (as if it would be!); lots of climate change pork; revoking voter ID laws and legalizing ballot harvesting; funding pot shops and public broadcasting; racial quota enforcement on corporate boards; and taxpayer-funded free healthcare for illegal immigrants.

All obviously necessary actions to fight the virus and help Americans survive the endless lockdowns that Democrat politicians are enforcing, even though the WHO has now said they’re doing more harm than good and shouldn’t be the primary way of fighting the coronavirus. Ladies and gentlemen, the Party of “SCIENCE!” I assume that means “the science of picking the taxpayers’ pockets to increase your own power.”

If you think about it, when you hear Democrats complain about all the horrible things wrong with America, how many of those problems are largely caused by the same people complaining about them? We had a booming economy that was knocked for a loop by a virus from China (for whom they are boosters and apologists) and that continues to suffer due to lockdowns they enforced and refuse to lift. Racial divisiveness that was on the decline before they did everything possible to promote more of it. We have riots, crime and street violence in cities they run. They claim the riots are sparked by racist brutality by police forces they’ve controlled for, in some cases, up to 70 years. And after years of endless wars and growing terrorism, peace is breaking out all over the Middle East and they seem downright upset by it because Trump arranged it.

That’s why, when Chuck Schumer threatened for all the Senate Democrats to refuse to come to work, my first thought was, “Can you get the House Democrats to do that, too?” Imagine how many problems could be fixed in a week if they weren’t there to “help!”

U.S. Attorney John Bash of Texas, who was tasked by Attorney General Bill Barr with looking into the repeated unmaskings of associates of Donald Trump, resigned his office and left the Justice Department last week, without even issuing a report.

So far, the Department has declined to release any of Bash’s work.

News media are reacting as one might imagine, affirming that unmasking the names of American citizens caught up in surveillance of foreign targets was “a common and appropriate” practice exploited by conservatives to create a political conspiracy. (In reality, it used to be relatively uncommon.) According to the predictably predictable WASHINGTON POST, “Legal analysts feared that Bash’s review was yet another attempt by Trump’s Justice Department to target political opponents of the President. Even if it ultimately produced no results of consequence, legal analysts said, it allowed President Trump and other conservatives to say Obama-era officials were under scrutiny, as long as the case stayed active.” Here’s their take in full, if you really want to subject yourself.

Bash and his team were looking not only at the unmasking but also at the leaking of information to reporters, which we know was done. But the AG’s office chose not to release any findings publicly. According to WAPO, “the WASHINGTON POST was unable to review the full results of what Bash found.”

According to the WAPO story, Bash accepted a job offer in the private sector and told Barr of this about a month ago. He surprised many at the DOJ when he announced his departure last week, making no reference to the unmasking investigation he’d been working on.

The U.S. attorney replacing him in the San Antonio office will be Gregg Sofer, and it’s hard to tell if any leftovers from the investigation will be transferred to him, or if it will just be closed.

Bash had no comment. A spokesman for the DOJ’s San Antonio office had no comment. So far, Barr has had no comment. It’s not clear why the Department is holding back Bash’s findings --- even WAPO acknowledged that.

But Bash’s probe is just one part of this look into unmasking. Reportedly, U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation includes unmasking as well, and it’s hard to know how the two investigations overlapped. Barr has said that no report of Durham’s findings will be released before the election. But he’s also said he wouldn’t delay Durham’s findings over concerns about the election being so close. Well, that’s confusing; I guess he’s saying he won’t delay the findings but knows they won't be ready, anyway. So the question is, why the heck won't they?

We know, thanks to the efforts of then-acting Director of National Intelligence Ric Grenell, that unmasking requests skyrocketed under Obama, with more than three dozen former Obama administration officials on the list of those who made those requests. These include presidential candidate and then-Vice President Joe Biden, former FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough.

But Bash will be providing details on none of this. As Trump said of a similar review conducted by U.S. Attorney John Huber in Utah, “He was a garbage disposal for important documents & then tap, tap, tap, just drag it along and run out of time.”

Since there's no report, it’s not known if Bash collected evidence that supported the allegations of Michael Flynn's attorney Sidney Powell, but on Monday, Powell appeared on FOX Business News with Maria Bartiromo to allege that the Obama administration participated in the smear campaign against her client.

Democrats are braying that, absent the indictments (well, there's been one), all of this is a big “nothingburger.” But we already know enough about it to say they're as wrong about this as they are about most things, which is saying a lot.

One thing noted by THE CONSERVATIVE TREEHOUSE last June is extremely pertinent to this perplexing new development: that Flynn’s conversation with Russian Ambassador Kislyak was NOT obtained by unmasking his name. Flynn himself had already been put under surveillance. The targeting of Flynn is something Durham should definitely be looking at. For when you have time, this detailed piece explains it all.

We know this is true from the Mueller report, which says that before Flynn’s phone call with Kislyak, “the FBI had opened an investigation OF FLYNN [emphasis mine] based on his relationship with the Russia government.” This is why there’s no paper trail of an unmasking request on this phone call with Michael Flynn. No unmasking necessary! They were getting that information anyway.

One piece of evidence that finally did come out on Tuesday was the FBI’s Steele dossier “spread sheet,” showing what was included vs. what was actually verified. Virtually nothing was verified. Finally declassified, this 94-page document supports –- one might say “verifies” –- just about everything we already knew about the phony Trump/dossier. It was a big pile of nothing. The “verification” was hearsay and circular reporting.

CONSERVATIVE TREEHOUSE also has an excellent, very detailed report for when you have time, including a link to a pdf of the spreadsheet.

Finally, Drew Holden at THE FEDERALIST said it well: “In hindsight, the allegations range from overeager to merely comical. But it’s important to remember that they have had a real, lasting impact on American politics, and that those chiefly responsible have yet to be held accountable.”

We're long past time to see accountability. It's now or never.

All I can say that's good about Day Two of the Senate Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett is that it allowed Americans to learn even more about why Barrett is such an incredibly gifted and qualified nominee. The Kodak Moment came when she was asked what she had in front of her, and she held up a blank notepad. All the Senators required copious notes to grill her, but she was calmly and expertly answering their questions, quoting cases and deflecting attacks, all without even looking at notes.

Meanwhile, Senate Democrats, realizing they had no substantive, or even fictitious, charges to level at her, chose simply to waste everyone’s time. Instead of asking Judge Barrett questions, which was the alleged reason for the hearings, Democrats like Kamala Harris droned on and on, making partisan campaign speeches and accusing Republicans of wanting to take health care away from families or make their payments skyrocket by getting rid of Obamacare (which actually made health care more expensive for most people.) If this is what her campaign speeches are like, I can see why nobody is showing up.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar was among several Senate Democrats who pulled the neat trick of wasting precious time by bemoaning that the hearings were wasting precious time that should be used to pass a coronavirus relief bill. Except that Republicans tried to pass such a bill three weeks ago and she and her fellow Democrats blocked it from even being debated. I did love when Judge Barrett told Klobuchar, “I don’t attack people, just ideas.” In that case, Sen. Klobuchar is safe on both counts.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse went off on a “dark money” conspiracy rant that looked like something out of “A Brilliant Mind,” minus the brilliance (note: Democrats are being greatly advantaged by dark money from a variety of sources, from Soros to Silicon Valley.)

But you can always count on Sen. Mazie Hirono to lower the bar of discourse to subterranean levels, which she did by asking Barrett (in front of her children), "Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?" To keep you off the edge of your seat, the answer was “no.” There was also a suggestion that she’s a racist, when her two adopted black children were sitting in the gallery behind her. Her only "score" was browbeating Barrett for causing pain and suffering to the LGBTQ community by using the "offensive" phrase "sexual preference" instead of "sexual orientation," for which Barrett apologized.

Judge Barrett was forced to explain over and over that she could not speculate how she would rule on future cases because she didn’t know the facts of the particular case and it would prejudice her ruling. Democrats assailed this as shifty and evasive, even though it’s exactly the philosophy Ruth Bader Ginsburg expressed during her hearing. It’s even called “the Ginsburg Rule.”

Luckily, as the mother of seven kids, she’s used to having to patiently answer the same obvious questions repeatedly for a series of different children.

Overall, I’d say that day two convinced me even more that Judge Barrett is incredibly qualified for the Supreme Court, but there are a lot of Senators who aren’t qualified to be dog catcher.

DIDN'T THINK THIS ONE THROUGH

A Democratic PAC wanted to promote the idea that voting by mail is trustworthy. So they hired “Seinfeld” star Wayne Knight to revive his role as the villainous, lazy, incompetent, scheming, dishonest postal worker “Newman” to deliver that message while eating cookies out of a package he opens illegally. “NEWMAN!!”

BIG CROWDS

On the first day of early voting, Georgia saw such big crowds that there were technical problems and waits in line of up to six hours.

This story mentions that there were big crowds in an area that supports Trump heavily, but most of these long lines it covers were in heavily Democratic DeKalb County. Unless those are Democratic Trump voters (a possibility), that tells us two things: (1) Democrats can’t run anything efficiently, and (2) there is a heavy anti-Trump vote (I’m not going to call it a pro-Biden vote because…well, you know.)

So to everyone who wants to see Trump reelected, take this as a warning that you need to vote and take every like-minded person to the polls with you. Bring along a book, an iPad and a beach chair if you have to, but get in line and vote!

PERFECT METAPHOR FOR LIBERAL GOVERNMENT

Philadelphia politicians voted to remove a statue of Christopher Columbus because he’s too politically incorrect to deserve to be honored. But when Columbus Day rolled around, they all took a paid day off work.