(Note. The House has opened up an impeachment "inquiry" into President Joe Biden. In the 9/3/23 post, "Meanwhile, Back at the Bidens..." I discussed some of the facts that should warrant further inquiry - even by the D-MSM. Things like Hunter flying to China with his father multiple times, Hunter setting up numerous shell corporations, Joe having multiple anonymous email accounts, Hunter collecting millions of dollars from foreign countries while his father was VP. And what may have continued even after Joe Biden was elected president. Although, I just heard today from someone on the left with no interest in any of those matters. So let's see what the conservative media thinks.)
"...even if he (Joe Biden) never received a nickel from his son's businesses, his cooperation in Hunter's selling of the Biden brand was corrupt. Ditto for President Biden's Justice Department, which repeatedly sabotaged the federal investigation into Hunter." And: "It's disingenuous to argue there's no evidence while you are working overtime to thwart any attempt to find evidence." (From an Op-Ed by William McGurn in the 9/12/23 Wall Street Journal.)
McGurn goes on to discuss evidence uncovered by the House committees investigating Biden. "This includes learning that Joe Biden lied during the 2020 debates when he categorically denied Hunter was paid millions from China and said the laptop was Russian disinformation. And that the then-vice president had dinners with his son's business partners, and spoke to them on speaker-phone when Hunter called." I understand that an argument can be made that a president may not be impeached over acts done prior to assuming office. I question whether that should apply to lies covering up possible corruption while campaigning for that office.
After noting that House Oversight Chairman, James Comer, was a banker, Kimberley Strassel told us that "His team started by going through the U.S. Treasury's 'suspicious activity reports' related to the Biden family (including Hunter and his uncle James) or Biden associates." According to Strassel, these reports are generated "when they see a transaction fishy enough to suggest possible illegal activity." While acknowledging that banks may over-report such transactions, she asks how many such reports the average American, even top business people, might generate. "Hunter and his pals racked up 170." (From Strassel's Op-Ed in the 9/15/23 WSJ.)
Strassel: bank records allowed Comer's committee "to nail down the many shady sources of some $20 million in foreign payments - Ukrainian energy firm Burisma, a Chinese entity, Russian oligarchs, Kazakh and Romanian businessmen. It also allowed them to document how money flowed first to Hunter associates, then on to Hunter via more shell companies." If these allegations are proven to be true, it would seem to me that what we are talking about might be the largest case of government corruption in US history. Bigger than Teapot Dome.
But, as Strassel opines: "The White House (and the media) keep changing the definition of what counts as Joe Biden's culpability in aiding his son's influence peddling, and have now settled on the line that there is no evidence 'directly linking' Hunter's business dealings with his dad." Sadly, there is no reason to expect better from the D-MSM. There is no reason to expect the type of investigative journalism that would likely occur if the people involved had the last name Trump.
In their lead editorial in the 9/13/23 edition of the paper, the WSJ made it clear that they were not fans of endless impeachments. But they did tell us this: "Some $20 million has already been found to have gone to Biden family members and associates via shell companies. Shell companies are what you use when you don't want anyone to know what you are doing." Indeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment