Hunter Biden Faces Evidence That he Was Hired by Romanian to Seek US Policy Influence

[placeholder]

5 hours ago, JustMyOpinion said:

So you approve of hunter and joe being bought off... JONATHAN TURLEY: It's very frustrating for many of us who have been writing for years, that we don't understand why there was not a charge under FARA for being an unregistered foreign agent. This record is replete with contracts, so it seemed to meet the standard used in earlier cases during the Trump administration. You couldn't have an official go to Epcot without getting a FARA charge from the Justice Department. It seemed to be one of the most ubiquitous charges coming out of that department. With Hunter Biden, they have consistently ignored overwhelming evidence that he was receiving millions to influence policy. So now, after all that time, Weiss files this thing with the courts saying, oh, well, yeah, we know that he was directing this stuff because he was getting money to influence U.S. policy from this Romanian. And it left everyone scratching their heads. It's like saying we can prove auto theft because we know he used it in the kidnaping. And the question is, well, why didn't you charge him on the kidnaping?

Poor Jonathan Turley. He's the same guy who, unlike the big majority of legal experts, including conservative ones,  thought that Barr and Durham had developed 2 strong cases in its FBI investigations. Both ended in ignominious failure. He repeatedly tried to cast suspicion on James Biden's payments to Joe Biden even after it was shown that these were just repayments of loans. He gave credence to reports of Burisma corruption on Joe Biden's part even though there was no hard evidence and the vague incriminating evidence that was referenced was finally exploded as fake. So, in this case, he's trying to cast suspicion on Joe Biden because of the way the case against his son was prosecuted. He has no real evidence to offer so he just indulges in casting suspicion. Turley's got nothing.

[metisdead]

Removed a post (and responses) that claimed others were paid to post. If you have any actual evidence please forward it to support. If it's just a lame debating tactic, further references like that may find you without posting rights. 

[Roo Island]

15 hours ago, JustMyOpinion said:

So you approve of hunter and joe being bought off... JONATHAN TURLEY: It's very frustrating for many of us who have been writing for years, that we don't understand why there was not a charge under FARA for being an unregistered foreign agent. This record is replete with contracts, so it seemed to meet the standard used in earlier cases during the Trump administration. You couldn't have an official go to Epcot without getting a FARA charge from the Justice Department. It seemed to be one of the most ubiquitous charges coming out of that department. With Hunter Biden, they have consistently ignored overwhelming evidence that he was receiving millions to influence policy. So now, after all that time, Weiss files this thing with the courts saying, oh, well, yeah, we know that he was directing this stuff because he was getting money to influence U.S. policy from this Romanian. And it left everyone scratching their heads. It's like saying we can prove auto theft because we know he used it in the kidnaping. And the question is, well, why didn't you charge him on the kidnaping?

JONATHAN TURLEY? A horrible person who spews misinformation.

 

Any politician who has family members profiting off their connections isn't good. Trump’s family did it more than any other

[JustMyOpinion]

18 hours ago, placeholder said:

Poor Jonathan Turley. He's the same guy who, unlike the big majority of legal experts, including conservative ones,  thought that Barr and Durham had developed 2 strong cases in its FBI investigations. Both ended in ignominious failure. He repeatedly tried to cast suspicion on James Biden's payments to Joe Biden even after it was shown that these were just repayments of loans. He gave credence to reports of Burisma corruption on Joe Biden's part even though there was no hard evidence and the vague incriminating evidence that was referenced was finally exploded as fake. So, in this case, he's trying to cast suspicion on Joe Biden because of the way the case against his son was prosecuted. He has no real evidence to offer so he just indulges in casting suspicion. Turley's got nothing.

Their you go again with attacking the source because you do not like it... typical lame brained liberal left response.

[JustMyOpinion]

7 hours ago, Roo Island said:

JONATHAN TURLEY? A horrible person who spews misinformation.

 

Any politician who has family members profiting off their connections isn't good. Trump’s family did it more than any other

Roo Island?  A horrible person who spews misinformation.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, JustMyOpinion said:

Their you go again with attacking the source because you do not like it... typical lame brained liberal left response.

There you go again making personal comments about members rather than addressing the issues. 

 

In this case I addressed not only turley's previously sorry track record, but in this case his take on a current situation

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, JustMyOpinion said:

Roo Island?  A horrible person who spews misinformation.

And still more nasty personal comments about an aseannow member.

[candide]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

And still more nasty personal comments about an aseannow member.

MAGA fans often do that when they have nothing! 😁

[Purdey]

Beginning to sound like the Biden Briefcase Affair. 

Expect it to evaporate likewise.

[JustMyOpinion]

20 hours ago, placeholder said:

And still more nasty personal comments about an aseannow member.

And yet the scale heavily leans toward the nasty vile rhetoric from the liberal leftists... go figure.

[john donson]

pocket money compared what the bidens got from UKRAINE

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, JustMyOpinion said:

And yet the scale heavily leans toward the nasty vile rhetoric from the liberal leftists... go figure.

Just another baiting comment from you. 

[JustMyOpinion]

24 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Just another baiting comment from you. 

Deflection from the truth from you... 

[placeholder]

11 minutes ago, JustMyOpinion said:

Deflection from the truth from you... 

No. I just have no respect for what you're offering which is truthiness:

"Truthiness is the belief or assertion that a particular statement is true based on the intuition or perceptions of some individual or individuals, without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.^[1][2] Truthiness can range from ignorant assertions of falsehoods to deliberate duplicity or propaganda intended to sway opinions.^[3][4]"

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness}

Get back to me when you can offer evidence backed by a link to a credible source:

From the landing page of the World News Forum:

"Any alleged factual claims must be supported by a valid link to an approved credible source."

https://aseannow.com/forum/158-world-news/

 

[billd766]

On 8/11/2024 at 9:04 AM, placeholder said:

And still more nasty personal comments about an aseannow member.

SOP for some posters.

 

When you have nothing, make personal attacks on the poster.

[Emdog]

"The businessman sought to sway U.S. public opinion and influence an American investigation into a Romanian investigation targeting him, according to the prosecution."

"The prosecution's case will not allege that Hunter Biden engaged in lobbying activities as part of this compensation."

So the Romanian spent his cash thinking somehow Hunter could influence US policy, right? He sought to sway opinion etc. Sounds normal corruption so far.

But "case will not allege that Hunter Biden engaged in lobbying activities" seems Hunter did nothing.

"Money for nothing and the chicks for free"

[placeholder]

24 minutes ago, Emdog said:

"The businessman sought to sway U.S. public opinion and influence an American investigation into a Romanian investigation targeting him, according to the prosecution."

"The prosecution's case will not allege that Hunter Biden engaged in lobbying activities as part of this compensation."

So the Romanian spent his cash thinking somehow Hunter could influence US policy, right? He sought to sway opinion etc. Sounds normal corruption so far.

But "case will not allege that Hunter Biden engaged in lobbying activities" seems Hunter did nothing.

"Money for nothing and the chicks for free"

It is puzzling:

" Instead, the special counsel's office contends that Biden performed minimal work for the substantial sums of money he received from these entities. The details surrounding these financial arrangements are expected to play a crucial role in the upcoming trial."

I'm guessing that money was transferred to him in turn to transfer a part of it to someone else who didn't want to be directly tied to the Romanian govt. But that's just an uninformed guess. But why should only Biden haters be allowed to make evidence-free suppositions? That hardly seems fair.

Edited August 12 by placeholder

[JustMyOpinion]

16 hours ago, placeholder said:

It is puzzling:

  But why should only Biden haters be allowed to make evidence-free suppositions? That hardly seems fair.

Seems fair when trump haters do it to trump and to half of the citizens of the USA though... right... go cry me a river.

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, JustMyOpinion said:

Seems fair when trump haters do it to trump and to half of the citizens of the USA though... right... go cry me a river.

Evidence-free? His company was found to be a criminal enterprise. 17 counts were brought against it and it was convicted on only...wait for it...17 counts. He has been found guilty of a felony by a jury.

[JustMyOpinion]

20 hours ago, placeholder said:

Evidence-free? His company was found to be a criminal enterprise. 17 counts were brought against it and it was convicted on only...wait for it...17 counts. He has been found guilty of a felony by a jury.

Wait for the overturning of the verdict due to the lawfare being used by the democrats... rule of law under the demos has become... whomever controls the venue controls the verdict... has nothing to do with the truth.

[thesetat2013]

On 8/12/2024 at 12:58 PM, Emdog said:

"The businessman sought to sway U.S. public opinion and influence an American investigation into a Romanian investigation targeting him, according to the prosecution."

"The prosecution's case will not allege that Hunter Biden engaged in lobbying activities as part of this compensation."

So the Romanian spent his cash thinking somehow Hunter could influence US policy, right? He sought to sway opinion etc. Sounds normal corruption so far.

But "case will not allege that Hunter Biden engaged in lobbying activities" seems Hunter did nothing.

"Money for nothing and the chicks for free"

You assume hunter did nothing only because evidence has not surfaced or has been blatantly blocked about his fathers involvement. 

I am curious why Biden has been able to avoid investigations deeper into this. For a son who seemed to be getting a lot of money for influence surely there must have been some source that saw results of actual influence being made. An example Hunter used as to his ability. Yet, everything read with his fathers name attached has been averted or removed. Especially reports how Biden was in conference calls during negotiations with some of these people and even how Biden met his son with another person giving money for influence. Swept under the carpet. 

[placeholder]

45 minutes ago, JustMyOpinion said:

Wait for the overturning of the verdict due to the lawfare being used by the democrats... rule of law under the demos has become... whomever controls the venue controls the verdict... has nothing to do with the truth.

Apparently, predictions are valid evidence according to your way of thinking. 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, thesetat2013 said:

You assume hunter did nothing only because evidence has not surfaced or has been blatantly blocked about his fathers involvement. 

I am curious why Biden has been able to avoid investigations deeper into this. For a son who seemed to be getting a lot of money for influence surely there must have been some source that saw results of actual influence being made. An example Hunter used as to his ability. Yet, everything read with his fathers name attached has been averted or removed. Especially reports how Biden was in conference calls during negotiations with some of these people and even how Biden met his son with another person giving money for influence. Swept under the carpet. 

This is like Donald Rumsfield all over again re: weapons of mass destruction. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." 

[candide]

8 hours ago, thesetat2013 said:

You assume hunter did nothing only because evidence has not surfaced or has been blatantly blocked about his fathers involvement. 

I am curious why Biden has been able to avoid investigations deeper into this. For a son who seemed to be getting a lot of money for influence surely there must have been some source that saw results of actual influence being made. An example Hunter used as to his ability. Yet, everything read with his fathers name attached has been averted or removed. Especially reports how Biden was in conference calls during negotiations with some of these people and even how Biden met his son with another person giving money for influence. Swept under the carpet. 

Luckily, when MAGA fans have nothing, they still have plenty of lame conspiracy theories at hand! 

[placeholder]

On 8/12/2024 at 8:41 AM, john donson said:

pocket money compared what the bidens got from UKRAINE

Which Bidens and how much did they get?

[placeholder]

9 hours ago, thesetat2013 said:

You assume hunter did nothing only because evidence has not surfaced or has been blatantly blocked about his fathers involvement. 

I am curious why Biden has been able to avoid investigations deeper into this. For a son who seemed to be getting a lot of money for influence surely there must have been some source that saw results of actual influence being made. An example Hunter used as to his ability. Yet, everything read with his fathers name attached has been averted or removed. Especially reports how Biden was in conference calls during negotiations with some of these people and even how Biden met his son with another person giving money for influence. Swept under the carpet. 

Right. The Republicans in the House labored for months to come up with something and came up empty. Biden didn't have to avoid anything. Evidence is needed to justify an investigation. Remember when the Republicans put great hopes on Archer's testimony? He said over and over again that Hunter Biden told him that he had no influence over his father but he was playing to the belief of the Burisma execs that he did. He also testified that Burisma executives told him that the prosecutor who Biden removed at the request of Obama and the State Dept was actually an ally of Burisma.