when the news broke last September that Trump had asked Ukraine’s newly elected president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to look into the matter, the Washington Post wasted no time in pushing a funny narrative about Biden’s motive.
The reason Biden wanted Shokin fired, the newspaper kept insisting, had nothing at all to do with the more than $3.5 million his son Hunter’s consulting firm was paid by a Ukrainian company called, Burisma Holdings, that Shokin just so happened to be investigating at the time.
In the two weeks after we first learned of Trump’s request, the Washington Post ran no less than 30 stories claiming that Burisma had no reason to want Shokin ousted since his investigation had been “dormant.” Every single one used that same exact phrase. //
Do a Google search for the words “Shokin” and “dormant” from September 21 to October 5, 2019, and you’ll find over 120 articles parroting the Washington Post’s attempt to exonerate Biden, verbatim— including at least one from each of the Post’s elite media brethren such as the New York Times, CNN, CBS, NBC, Politico, AP News, Reuters, and The New Yorker. //
Bottom line: In the two weeks after news of Trump’s phone call with Zelensky broke, well over 100 news articles were published that tried to convince the American people of Biden’s innocence and, hence, Trump’s guilt by claiming that neither Burisma nor Hunter Biden had any reason whatsoever to want Viktor Shokin fired.
And every single one of those stories was a despicably deceitful insult to the intelligence of anyone unfortunate enough to be reading it.
As Thomas Jefferson said in response to the fake news of his day:
The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.
On Nov. 2, 2015, at 4:36 p.m., a Burisma executive called Vadym Pozharskyi emailed Hunter Biden and his business partner, Devon Archer. The purpose of the email, Pozharskyi explains, is to “be on the same page re our final goals … including, but not limited to: a concrete course of actions.”
So what did Burisma want, exactly? Well, good PR, for starters. Pozharskyi wanted “high-ranking US [sic] officials” to express their “positive opinion” of Burisma, and then he wanted the administration to act on Burisma’s behalf.
“The scope of work should also include organization of a visit of a number of widely recognized and influential current and/or former US [sic] policy-makers to Ukraine in November, aiming to conduct meetings with and bring positive signal/message and support” to Burisma.
What was the goal of all this? According to Pozharskyi to “close down for [sic] any cases/pursuits” against the head of Burisma in Ukraine.
Whoops. If that’s true, sure sounds like Hunter Biden using his name/position with his father to help get Burisma out of legal trouble.
Then indeed, as we have reported, that’s what followed. That suddenly, Blue Star Strategies, which was a P.R. firm hired by Burisma, was on a White House conference call about Joe Biden’s trip to Ukraine. Tucker Carlson had an email telling Hunter about the conference call in Dec. 2015 with a memo of the minutes.
More emails involving Hunter Biden and the administration his father served in under Barack Obama have been revealed. This time, though, they are unconnected to the laptop that was left at a computer repair shop in 2019. //
This time around, the emails come from a former Hunter Biden business associate. Per Breitbart, who has the exclusive story and is providing the copies of the emails for any doubters, these associates traded on Hunter’s connections to secure meetings with White House officials for Chinese representatives.
Actor, Rapper, and Activist Ice Cube (O’Shea Jackson, Sr.) took to Twitter on Wednesday with a video post titled, “Don’t Kill the Messenger #CWBA #ContractWithBlackAmerica”
Sounds like the hiring of Hunter Biden and Blue Star Strategies was money well spent.
Sean Davis
@seanmdav
Under Twitter’s current policy, the terrorist Ayatollah of Iran can threaten genocide against the only Jewish country on earth, while the President of the United States of America is banned from linking to a story in an American newspaper founded by Alexander Hamilton in 1801.
Josh Hawley
@HawleyMO
.@Twitter @jack this is not nearly good enough. In fact, it’s a joke. It’s downright insulting. I will ask you - and @Facebook - to give an explanation UNDER OATH to the Senate subcommittee I chair. These are potential violations of election law, and that’s a crime.
Saagar Enjeti
@esaagar
Biden campaign responds to the NY Post story. Critically they only say that such a meeting never took place and do not challenge the veracity of the emails or photos
Someone want to tell Facebook?
Abigail Marone 🇺🇸
@abigailmarone
🚨📩 INBOX —> @TeamTrump statement on Biden response to NY Post Bombshell:
“The Biden campaign does not dispute the authenticity of the emails published by the New York Post, which serves to confirm that they are real,” says @TimMurtaugh
Andrew Surabian
@Surabees
It's amazing how fast the press transforms into the Biden Rapid Response Team the moment a damaging story on him comes out. Instead of spinning for Joe, how about doing your job as a journalist & demanding he answers some on the record questions & let voters judge for themselves?
Kyle Cheney
@kyledcheney
Replying to @kyledcheney
Again, stipulating that the suspect email is real, there's literally nothing in it that says Joe Biden met with a Burisma adviser.
"The opportunity to meet," may just as easily have meant Hunter promised a meeting in the future that may never have occurred. //
David Harsanyi
@davidharsanyi
Most of these people are just Biden bodymen, nothing more.
Kyle Griffin
@kylegriffin1
No one should link to or share that NY Post 'report'. You can discuss the obvious flaws and unanswerable questions in the report without amplifying what appears to be disinformation.
Reagan Battalion
@ReaganBattalion
🚨🚨🚨🚨
Leaked audio of @NYGovCuomo admitting that the new COVID lockdowns in New York (targeting Orthodox Jews only) is not based on any science or medical expertise, but rather in his words is a “fear based response.”
The Constitution, the highest legal document in the land, has always been a guiding light for the nation, keeping its people protected from power-hungry people and schemes that would upset their liberties.
For Democrats, the Constitution is a thorn in their side. Their der wille zur macht is consistently thwarted by the stopping power of the document laid down by men far smarter and wiser than they are.
For the left, they found that the Constitution is something they can’t defeat. Even after decades of eroding the American people’s will to support it, Americans are still reluctant to toss it into the scrap heap. //
They attempt to find gaps in the Constitution’s reasoning, argue over comma placements, attempt to translate what the founders would have meant in today’s day and age, etc.
In order to do that, they must appoint Justices who will do this very thing when possible. The Justices have a constructionalist philosophy. Their method is to be presented with legislation and proceed to find a way to make it legal. //
For Democrats, Barrett is far from the kind of person they want on the Supreme Court. She’s a textualist, meaning she won’t be interpreting legislation and attempting to make laws fit. If they’re presented to her and they don’t fit within the boundaries of the Constitution, she’ll rule against it. //
Deep behind it all, however, is the fact that Democrats are lying about Barrett and dragging her through the mud because they don’t like her. She’s not one of them. She’s going to make it harder to subvert the American people and have their way. Their ability to increase in power has been staunched and they hate her for it.
And that’s fine. If it upsets the people who would rule over you and I and have their way with the country, then their anger is as revealing as it is pleasurable to see.
Jewish Deplorable 🇺🇸
@TrumpJew
“56% of Americans said that they are better off today than they were 4 years ago under the Obama-Biden administration. Why should they vote for you?”
Biden: Well if they think that, they probably shouldn’t //
Biden’s default is to insult the very people he claims to want to win over in this election cycle. That’s politically idiotic, which is why it’s so obvious that he simply can’t control himself. An inability to process and respond rationally is yet more evidence of his clear mental decline. No candidate in their right mind would tell 56% of the country to not vote for them, but Biden just did that because he can’t control himself, and we all know why.
Biden is not well. Period.
10/12/2020
Jewish Deplorable 🇺🇸
@TrumpJew
Biden forgets Romney’s name
“I got in trouble when we were running against that senator who was a Mormon, the governor”
Trump War Room - Text TRUMP to 88022
@TrumpWarRoom
Joe Biden: "I'm running as a proud Democrat for the Senate"
Jewish Deplorable 🇺🇸
@TrumpJew
“Visit http://iWill.com/Ohio”
“God protect thank you”
“Which way am I going?”
All in 14 seconds //
For the record, that website does not exist. It’s also extremely odd that he would have forgotten already which way he came in and where he’s supposed to go after the speech. That kind of stuff is self-evident to those with all their mental faculties. You came in the door on the side of the stage? That’s where you go out. It’s not a maze, it’s a small auditorium. //
What we do know is that there’s next to no chance he finishes a term if he wins in November. That means Kamala Harris is the defacto top of the ticket. Vote accordingly.
ABC’s Jon Karl committed some journalism today and asked Biden campaign co-chair Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA), almost apologetically, but he still asked, doesn’t Biden’s plan obviously raise taxes on most Americans if you repeal the Trump tax cuts? Not just those making more than $400,000?
Richmond responds that’s our “goal” but “on day 1” you’ll see our plan. So why can’t we see it now? How do they intend to repeal the tax cuts yet not raise taxes? That’s just obvious nonsense. They’ll tell you. After you elect them. You have to elect them to see what they’ll do. Are they kidding with this?
They think they can get him in without having to be straight or go on record with anything.
REPORTER: “Sir, don’t the voters deserve to know” your position on court packing?
BIDEN: “No, they don’t deserve” to know.
Matt Walsh
@MattWalshBlog
Biden: voters deserve to know about the president’s personal finances which have no effect on anyone but not his policies which could reshape the country for generations to come
Jennifer Epstein
@jeneps
Biden is again asked why voters don’t deserve to know his views on court packing. He responds: “The only court packing going on right now is going on with Republicans packing the court right now ... I’m going to stay focused on it so we don’t take our eyes off the ball here."
Chris Wallace Calls Out Biden for Dodging on Court-Packing: 'Foolish' and 'Impossible' for Him Not To Go on Record Before Election
Of course, we all know the answer that Biden won’t provide. If he had no intentions of packing the court, he’d just say so. There’s no risk to him making moderates like him even more, and we all know the rabid Democrat base will show up to vote against Trump anyway. That Biden refuses to answer such a simple question provides all the context we need to ascertain what he really thinks.
Newt Gingrich
@newtgingrich
The openness of a basement campaign: “Well, sir, don't the voters deserve to know?" DiMattei asked before Biden cut him off.
"No, they don't," Biden said. "
Every Democratic candidate for House or Senate should be challenged: yes or no on Court Packing
It’s a silly idea, of course. A pointless waste of time and taxpayer money. But the Democrats don’t have a monopoly on those tactics, and we can go back and forth on the history of each party trying to one-up the other with these types of stunts. But the fact of the matter is that the Democrats are so broken by the existence of Trump that they are not thinking clearly, and haven’t been for a while. The whole idea that they can do this with any shred of credibility is absurd, and it will be just as absurd when the Republicans try it in the future.
there’s a reason Democrats are panicking. They were reminded all over again Tuesday of what Trump did in the 2016 debates. He bought up issues about his opponent that he knew moderators wouldn’t. He kept on talking and trying to fact check his opponent because he knew the moderator would otherwise give him a pass, as happened numerous times Tuesday night.
Also, people who believe their candidate “won” a debate don’t typically go around advocating that they no longer participate in future debates or for moderators to have the ability to cut their opponent’s mic.
The left likes to label everyone to their right as racist whether they are or not as they have done with virtually every Republican or Republican president.
We should not play this game of defense when the media, including Fox News, starts this nonsense. It’s an illegitimate question to begin with. //
Any time they start this nonsense, the question should be “Check the 457 times I previously said this, I’m done. Now when will you be calling Joe Biden out on his support for rioters? When will he denounce the violence connected to BLM/Antifa specifically by name?” Then move on to all the positive things that Trump has done. This is what the media wants to avoid getting out there, they want the GOP constantly on the defense. //
On the other hand, Biden endorsed the BLM at his convention, even having a musical number in support of them, while casting the riots as “peaceful protests.” He didn’t denounce the violence until he saw that the failure of Democrats to call it out and to not do anything to stop it in Democratic cities was hurting him in the polls. But even then he just talked about ambiguous violence. He hasn’t denounced the violence of BLM/Antifa by name. Where is his condemnation of their connection to 91% of the riots?
Where is the media asking Joe and Kamala to denounce BLM/Antifa by name? Kamala Harris and 13 Biden staffers contributed to a bail fund to help get people arrested during the riots out of jail. That resulted in more people allegedly being hurt. But it also indicates support for their radical actions. Why have they not been asked to rebuke that? Why has no one in media asked Biden and Harris why they/their people donated to get rioters out?
To help refresh our leftist buddies’ recollections, here are a few high (low) -lights from the person they’re so revved up about:
Kamala Harris gets wrecked by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (HI) in a late July ’19 debate:
For the last 30 years, Republican nominations for the Supreme Court have faced personal, ugly, defamatory attacks from Democrats. //
Every time a Republican president has nominated someone to the Supreme Court in the last 30 years, with one notable exception, Democrats have responded by smearing the nominee with accusations of ideological extremism, racism, misogyny, sexual harassment, plagiarism, and, most infamously in Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s case, gang rape. //
But the Kavanaugh hearings were not a break with the Democrats’ norms, they were merely an extreme manifestation of a 30-year tradition that began with Robert Bork, President Reagan’s nominee in 1987, whose confirmation hearing was the most divisive and partisan in Supreme Court history up to that point.