To Hunter Biden? The list is long. The Chinese Communist Party provided $1.5B, but Hunter's take of that was less than $5 million. Chinese Energy Company CEFC founder Ye Jiianming offered Hunter $10M annual for "introductions". Hunter was directly wired $3.5M by Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia, and the wife of close Putin ally Yuri Luzhvov. Hunter also received over $10M from Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky, said to be the most corrupt man in Ukraine. Hunter's laptop also reveals details of "business" deals in Iran, Romania, and elsewhere -- all in exchange for access to, or acts by his father.Which ones provided money?
We probably have Obama to thank for that, he got pretty chummy with big tech. Trump may be an ***, but he's at least he's critical of big tech abuses. It pretty much explains why the tech giants lean toward fighting against disinformation on certain subjects but not others: they're absolutely incentivized to have Biden win.
Protecting Trump by currently blocking entirely the NY Post's stories on the corruption revealed in Hunter Biden's emails, along with literally hundreds of other cases of censorship and "shadow bans" for the thinnest of excuses, meanwhile allowing and even promoting countless non-verified anonymous-sourced anti-Trump reports. Or how about Facebook moderators openly discussing ways to censor Trump supporters, while giving exemptions to Facebook policy violations for content that attacks Trump? Or the handpicked stories on Facebook News? (The top story as I write this is an anti-Trump piece on immigration). This qualifies as "protection" only to a Mafia don, perhaps.??No. For a start, Facebook has been protecting Trump during this whole thing
You may not realize that the antitrust case against Google is almost entirely driven by its ad-sales, search, and product promotion policies. The browser angle is only a small ancillary -- one might almost say nearly irrelevant -- element of that.Here's my comment, I pick and choose whatever browser I want nobody forces my hand...if I get tired of one browser I move on to another it makes no difference to me...
You are right but the big picture is in the end you can't have one without the other it's the way they work.You may not realize that the antitrust case against Google is almost entirely driven by its ad-sales, search, and product promotion policies. The browser angle is only a small ancillary -- one might almost say nearly irrelevant -- element of that.
Your list is long. The list of facts is empty. Your list is Donnie's list. Its self-serving, disproved and laughable.To Hunter Biden? The list is long. The Chinese Communist Party provided $1.5B, but Hunter's take of that was less than $5 million. Chinese Energy Company CEFC founder Ye Jiianming offered Hunter $10M annual for "introductions". Hunter was directly wired $3.5M by Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia, and the wife of close Putin ally Yuri Luzhvov. Hunter also received over $10M from Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky, said to be the most corrupt man in Ukraine. Hunter's laptop also reveals details of "business" deals in Iran, Romania, and elsewhere -- all in exchange for access to, or acts by his father.
Huh? Of course you can. Even if Chrome didn't exist, Google the search engine still would -- and Google's antitrust violations based on that engine would still be as heinous.You are right but the big picture is in the end you can't have one without the other it's the way they work.
The facts are correct. Hunter Biden took tens of millions of dollars from US enemies, as his father was taking actions that benefitted those donors. That alone smells to high heaven, especially -- as you yourself admit -- those actions his father took were all terrible decisions on his part, with or without a payoff involved. But the emails recently discovered on Hunter's laptop proves a linkage between the acts and the payoffs, rather than just the circumstantial evidence we had before. Those emails demonstrate that not only was Hunter getting vast sums, but he was passing along a portion of that directly to his father.Your list is long. The list of facts is empty.
I don't think he is innocent. But I also know there was no crime.if you believe Joe Biden is innocent of all this
Very few believe if it were actually a crime (you know, based on facts) that Bill Barr would just be sitting it out.
What is a self serving prick?tRUMP has taken nearly every last cent held up in front of him. Only he and his Trumpanistas deny that but the proof is so easy to find its sad. Ill even get you started.
![]()
The Swamp That Trump Built (Published 2020)
A businessman-president transplanted favor-seeking in Washington to his family’s hotels and resorts — and earned millions as a gatekeeper to his own administration.www.nytimes.com
But my post was not political. My only concern with tRUMP is that the most corrupt, dishonest, Pro Russia, Pro China group of self-serving pricks is swept from American office for good. donald trump OR America. Bottom line.
According to Forbes Magazine, Trump has lost somewhere between $1B and $2B by being President
You're actually comparing Biden taking tens of millions of dollars to alter US foreign policy, with Trump decades before he was in office telling a reporter he was worth more than he really was (if that reporter is even telling the truth, that is).Stuff
www.stuff.co.nz
He even gave himself a new name (John Barron) to talk himself up anonymously. And now you think his finances are suddenly all on the level. Pitiful.
You really should have read the article.You're actually comparing Biden taking tens of millions of dollars to alter US foreign policy, with Trump decades before he was in office telling a reporter he was worth more than he really was (if that reporter is even telling the truth, that is).
The facts on the recent Trump decline in personal net worth don't come from Trump anyway, but from Forbes (and many other sources). Similarly, the facts on Biden accepting bribes don't come from Biden himself...but interestingly enough, he has so far not denied the emails are indeed his son's.
You haven't provided proof that happened. I figured you guessed because I respect you and don't want to call you a liar again.You're actually comparing Biden taking tens of millions of dollars to alter US foreign policy
And I will not tell you again. I don't think they are innocent, only that a crime was not committed. If you think there was dont tell me, tell Bill Barr..but interestingly enough, he has so far not denied the emails are indeed his son's.
Thanks for the quote and clearing that upThis is. Synonym of a selfish prick.
![]()
The payments are well documented, and aren't denied by Joe Biden. If you recall, Joe claimed those payments were kosher because he "didn't know" any details of his son's deals, and therefore wasn't responsible for them. However, his son's recently released emails (read the link provided earlier) demonstrate that not only was Joe well aware of each of these deals, but was himself profiting from them.You haven't provided proof that happened.
Crimes get prosecuted. None yet. You may find this surprising for some reason but if this turns up prosecution and conviction I will be on your side of it. Somehow though I doubt you will extend me the same courtesy if the Bidens are cleared. CONS never do.The payments are well documented, and aren't denied by Joe Biden. If you recall, Joe claimed those payments were kosher because he "didn't know" any details of his son's deals, and therefore wasn't responsible for them. However, his son's recently released emails (read the link provided earlier) demonstrate that not only was Joe well aware of each of these deals, but was himself profiting from them.
I have been watching. But in a typical style, there is a lot of ambiguity in the story. Even the article states "It is unclear, at this point, whether the investigation is ongoing or if it was directly related to Hunter Biden". It is not a solid bit of information for most of us. At least not yet.
In my opinion, it's because there are more than a few lobbyists greasing enough palms of the US House and Senate to keep them looking the other way.Google is "accused"... so in twenty years, they MIGHT get convicted.
Here's a crazy idea, why doesn't the US government actually ENFORCE these laws before things get to where they are? They sure are good at enforcing laws on poor people and throwing them into private prison slave labour.
Oh absolutely. There can be no doubt, no doubt at all.In my opinion, it's because there are more than a few lobbyists greasing enough palms of the US House and Senate to keep them looking the other way.