candide

Ooops! You're right about the amount. The title was misleading. It remains that 115 other Universities got money from China during the same period of time, and that it is very unlikely that there were classified documents stored in each of these universities. As about the ramping up, you would need have more information before drawing any conclusion. In particular whether there was a general trend affecting other universities or not. It seems you also acknowledge it as you have moved the target to "China looking for "goodwill" and "understanding" among the powerful voices of the Democratic Party..." (at the time of a GOP administration, but never mind). Same facts, if it is the case, they did it in 115 universities, so there is no particular relation to the Biden Center and even less with the fact that classified documents have been stored there (which is the subject of the thread). In addition, from what can be observed about Biden's position, it surely doesn't show a "goodwill" and "understanding" re China. Neither quid nor quo.

Is it not an unusual delay for predicating, launching and announcing an investigation, if we compare with Trump's case. For Trump, the NARA notified the DOJ on 9 February 2022, and the investigation was disclosed on 7 April by Reuters. 2 months later. For Biden the NARA notified the DOJ early November, and it came out in the news 2 months later, as you show. Same same. 2 months after being notified by the NARA. Actually not really same same as the NARA waited nearly one year before contacting the DOJ about Trump's document, and informed the DOJ a few days only after it got the information in the Biden case. https://www.voanews.com/a/timeline-of-the-trump-documents-inquiry-/6734453.html

Is it an unusual delay for predicating, launching and announcing an investigation? No, if we compare with Trumps case. For trump, the NARA notified the DOJ on 9 February 2022, and the investigation was disclosed on 7 April by Reuters. 2 months. For Biden the NARA notified the DOJ on 2 November and it came out early January. 2 months Same same. 2 months after being notified by the NARA. Actually not really same same as the NARA waited nearly one year before contacting the DOJ about Trump's document, and informed the DOJ a few days only after it got the information in the Biden case. https://www.voanews.com/a/timeline-of-the-trump-documents-inquiry-/6734453.html

Are you suggesting an ex-VP would betray his country just to help a University to get more funding? Really? 115 universities received donations from China, some of them much more than UPenn. So, following yourself conspiracy theory line, there should be someone providing secrets to China in each of these 115 universities. From this perspective, UPenn looks quite miserable, compared to Harvard which got nearly one billion from China. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-06/harvard-leads-u-s-colleges-that-received-1-billion-from-china?leadSource=uverify wall Harvard received almost $1billion in donations from China. https://www.logically.ai/factchecks/library/360e14a1 Harvard and Yale accused of failing to report millions in foreign gifts https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/13/harvard-yale-accused-failing-report-millions-foreign-gifts

My facts are what currently known. I don't make any conjecture about facts which may or may not come up later. Not my own facts, the facts as they are know as of today. All my analyses are made according to the facts as they have been displayed. On the other hand, your analyses or opinions are based on facts which are not currently as they don't exist. Also about known facts: nothing has been yet observed which shows that Joe Biden has benefited from anything from a foreign government (China in particular). No known facts showing Biden has done anything in favour of China (Actually, It's the opposite. He's been very tough on China). No qui pro quo because there is no qui and no quo. About Hunter - Burisma: it has been investigated by a Republican-led Senate Committee during 2 years. They found nothing. No known fact against him, - his China deals. No fact showing he has done anything illegal or that he may be a threat to national security. - in general: no fact showing he or his partners have benefited from a transaction with the government, actually no known fact that any such transaction occurred. Note again that transactions with government are not secret. Public procurement are known, drilling permits are known, JVs are officially registered, etc... As you yourself outlined, "my facts" are the facts as they are known as of today. So they are not "my facts", they are the facts. Unlike you, I don't make conjectures or use imaginary facts which are not yet known. My opinions (based only on known facts): - it is ridiculous to think that Hunter may be a spy, and in particular that he would have spied on his own father. - it is ridiculous to think that an ex-go would betray his country just to help UPenn to get money from the Chinese. In particular, considering the known facts that UPenn started receiving money from China in 2014, four years before the creation of the Biden Center, and that UPenn received more money from China before the creation of the Center, than after. And also that 115 other universities also received money from China. I maintain it is incoherent and laughable. In all your posts, you evoke imaginary facts or facts you hope maybe may pop up some days, who knows. Not me. The facts I evoke are the ones which are known yet. Not less, not more.

Wait a minute! Which facts are "my own facts?

So you start by mentioning that we don't know all what is in the laptop, and then you come up with assumptions about what may be in the laptop. Ahem... (BTW, I thought the right-wing NYPost had a copy for 2 years already. Strange that they did not find the incriminating evidence you wish) The NYT article provides some answers to your questions. Of course, It's your right not to be convinced by them. As concerns transactions with public entities, there is no need for the laptop, in order to know them. There are laws about transparency and this information is not secret. And even more transparent to the republican investigor dealing with his case. Fact is that Hunter was not invloved in public procurement, etc... The difference between you and me, is that I rely only on the facts which are currently known. According to what is currently known, you have nothing.

You and Riclag have clearly suggested that Hunter may have accessed the documents in order to provide their content to the Chinese. That's called spying. So you suggested he may have spied on his father, which is ridulous. You and the fact-based Riclag have nothing. What has been made public about the laptop doesn't prove any illegal activity of the Biden familly in relation to China. It shows Hunter had business relationship with a Chinese firm, like thousands of businesses (including trump). It shows there was a discussion about the creation of a JV, and the possibility for the Big Guy (not even proven It's Joe to become a stakeholder (It means to invest money, not receive money), which is not illegal nor would have been a conflict of interest at that time. The JV has been created and Joe is not a shareholder anyway. The NYT article provides further explanation about why Hunter worked with the Chinese oil company and There is nothing suspect about it. Again, at the end of your post, you take it the wrong way. It's the accuser who must prove his accusations, and you have nothing but lame conspiracy theories.

The "fact-based poster" (????) suggested, like you, that Hunter may be a spy who spied on his own father. MAGA fans are so hopeless that they have to resort to ridiculous and incoherent theories. The two main being: - the one you and Riclag just suggested - the other is that an ex-VP could have betrayed his country in order to help UPenn get less money from China than before the Biden Center was created! ????, It would be pathetic if it wasn't that laughable!

Are you suggesting that Hunter may be a spy, and that he would have spied on his father, really? ????

Why that? As explained many times, including on Fox News, the two cases are not comparable. The case of Trump is much worse as there was obstruction, among other differences.

Again, assuming he had access to the house, how does it really matter?

Excuse for what? How does it matter that Hunter may or may not have had access to his father's house. Please tell us.

So what? How many voters from Lancashire voted to elect Sunak as MP?

So what? Didn't Trump's familly have access to Mar-a-lago, including his office and bedroom where documents have been found?

It depends what you are talking about. Trump and Biden did not do the same thing, as has been explained many times, even on Fox News. The FBI did the same thing: not search locations on which they had no information that documents were knowingly hidden from them. For both Trump and Biden. For example they let Trumps lawyers search by themselves in other locations Trump lawyers hire outside team to search four properties for classified info https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/donald-trump-lawyers-outside-team-search-properties-classified-information/ Search by ‘outside firm’ found more classified documents in Trump storage unit, report says https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-lawyers-tower-bedminister-search-b2240675.html

The reason why Mar a Lago was searched is because they had insider information that Trump was lying and was hiding documents. It was a key information to predicate the search warrant (there was also a video, if I remember well). It wasn't a fishing expedition. In other locations, they did not search them and let Trumps lawyers do it by themselves. Trump lawyers hire outside team to search four properties for classified info https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/donald-trump-lawyers-outside-team-search-properties-classified-information/ Search by ‘outside firm’ found more classified documents in Trump storage unit, report says https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-lawyers-tower-bedminister-search-b2240675.html In the Biden case, no suspicion of hiding anything. The lawyers found some documents, then they made an extensive search in any possible location, and found the others. They gave back the documents without even being asked to.

Right. Not only that, but neither Hunters businesses nor his partners, such as the Chinese oil company, have been involved in any transaction with the U.S. government, or anything the government could have influenced in their favour.

Come on, not that ridiculous and laughable conspiracy again! Facts are: - China started giving money to UPenn 4 years before the creation of the Biden Center, and gave more money before than after its creation according to the NYPost article linked many times by MAGA posters), - 115 universities received money from China, some of them, such as Harvard, received much more than UPenn, - this money was not given to the Biden Center.

Lol. You are doing it the wrong way. It's the accuser who must prove his accusations., not the opposite. The GOP has nothing, and this article you probably did not read confirms it once more.

As you mentioned him I guess I am now allowed to talk about him? ???? Actually he's not happy at all! Trump seethes on Truth Social after Fox News analyst debunks his lies about Biden classified docs https://www.salon.com/2023/01/11/seethes-on-truth-social-after-fox-news-analyst-debunks-his-lies-about-biden-classified-docs/ Trump news – live: Trump posts vicious tirade against special counsel as first 2024 campaign event announced https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/trump-news-live-trump-lashes-out-as-fox-news-says-biden-s-classified-papers-not-as-bad-as-mar-a-lago-stash/ar-AA16cLn9 A stark contrast with the confidence, as well as the respect for the law and justice institutions, shown by Biden.

The main reason he's still there, is that he was elected during fair and clean elections.

Prigozhin is becoming too famous. He should be careful. There are many dangerous staircases and balconies.

Actually, if I remember well, It's Trump himself who first announced the raid to the public

Have you read the article? It doesn't seem to support the GOP's lame allegations.