The Biden Burisma Connection...

[LiconaFan97]

Do you seriously believe someone who illegally collected money would declare it on his taxes?

Yes, people do that. Even if the police can't bust you for a crime the IRS certainly can. It can be a lot easier to prove someone has unreported income than to actually catch them. But let's say he lied. Surely you will be consistent and not insist that his taxes be further investigated, right?

One place the investigation can look is into the corroborating email connections with Hunter's business associates (two have come forward). But I am not an investigator so I don't know all of the rocks that can be looked under.

That's why I said to take the most negative spin on those emails. There is no illegality in them and without a money trail it will be very unlikely that you would connect Joe Biden to a crime (and it would take more than just a money trail but there is none in any case). The China deal fell through so there is no money trail there. What is the evidence that Joe Biden received money from Ukraine? There is none.

[seanD]

I wonder what ever happened to that democrat establishment shill LiconaFan, and what other forum sites he's disseminating false info at now...

The NYT Now Admits the Biden Laptop -- Falsely Called "Russian Disinformation" -- is Authentic

One of the most successful disinformation campaigns in modern American electoral history occurred in the weeks prior to the 2020 presidential election. On October 14, 2020 — less than three weeks before Americans were set to vote — the nation's oldest newspaper, The New York Post, began publishing a series of reports about the business dealings of the Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, in countries in which Biden, as Vice President, wielded considerable influence (including Ukraine and China) and would again if elected president.

The backlash against this reporting was immediate and intense, leading to suppression of the story by U.S. corporate media outlets and censorship of the story by leading Silicon Valley monopolies. The disinformation campaign against this reporting was led by the CIA's all-but-official spokesperson Natasha Bertrand (then of Politico, now with CNN), whose article on October 19 appeared under this headline: “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”

These "former intel officials" did not actually say that the “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo." Indeed, they stressed in their letter the opposite: namely, that they had no evidence to suggest the emails were falsified or that Russia had anything to do them, but, instead, they had merely intuited this "suspicion" based on their experience:

We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement -- just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.

But a media that was overwhelmingly desperate to ensure Trump's defeat had no time for facts or annoying details such as what these former officials actually said or whether it was in fact true. They had an election to manipulate. As a result, that these emails were "Russian disinformation” — meaning that they were fake and that Russia manufactured them — became an article of faith among the U.S.'s justifiably despised class of media employees.

Very few even included the crucial caveat that the intelligence officials themselves stressed: namely, that they had no evidence at all to corroborate this claim. Instead, as I noted last September, “virtually every media outlet — CNN, NBC News, PBS, Huffington Post, The Intercept, and too many others to count — began completely ignoring the substance of the reporting and instead spread the lie over and over that these documents were the by-product of Russian disinformation.” The Huffington Post even published a must-be-seen-to-be-believed campaign ad for Joe Biden, masquerading as “reporting,” that spread this lie that the emails were "Russian disinformation.”

This disinformation campaign about the Biden emails was then used by Big Tech to justify brute censorship of any reporting on or discussion of this story: easily the most severe case of pre-election censorship in modern American political history. Twitter locked The New York Post's Twitter account for close to two weeks due to its refusal to obey Twitter's orders to delete any reference to its reporting. The social media site also blocked any and all references to the reporting by all users; Twitter users were barred even from linking to the story in private chats with one another. Facebook, through its spokesman, the life-long DNC operative Andy Stone, announced that they would algorithmically suppress discussion of the reporting to ensure it did not spread, pending a “fact check[] by Facebook's third-party fact checking partners” which, needless to say, never came — precisely because the archive was indisputably authentic.

The archive's authenticity, as I documented in a video report from September, was clear from the start. Indeed, as I described in that report, I staked my career on its authenticity when I demanded that The Intercept publish my analysis of these revelations, and then resigned when its vehemently anti-Trump editors censored any discussion of those emails precisely because it was indisputable that the archive was authentic (The Intercept's former New York Times reporter James Risen was given the green light by these same editors to spread and endorse the CIA's lie, as he insisted that laptop should be ignored because “a group of former intelligence officials issued a letter saying that the Giuliani laptop story has the classic trademarks of Russian disinformation.") I knew the archive was real because all the relevant journalistic metrics that one evaluates to verify large archives of this type — including the Snowden archive and the Brazil archivePolitico, Ben Schreckinger, published a book last September, entitled "The Bidens: Inside the First Family’s Fifty-Year Rise to Power," in which his new reporting proved that the key emails on which The New York Post relied were entirely authentic. Among other things, Schreckinger interviewed several people included in the email chains who provided confirmation that the emails in their possession matched the ones in the Post's archive word for word. He also obtained documents from the Swedish government that were identical to key documents in the archive. His own outlet, Politico, was one of the few to even acknowledge his book. While ignoring the fact that they were the first to spread the lie that the emails were "Russian disinformation,” Politico editors — under the headline “Double Trouble for Biden”— admitted that the book “finds evidence that some of the purported Hunter Bidenlaptop material is genuine, including two emails at the center of last October’s controversy.”

The vital revelations in Schreckinger's book were almost completely ignored by the very same corporate media outlets that published the CIA's now-debunked lies. They just pretended it never happened. Grappling with it would have forced them to acknowledge a fact quite devastating to whatever remaining credibility they have: namely, that they all ratified and spread a coordinated disinformation campaign in order to elect Joe Biden and defeat Donald Trump. With strength in numbers, and knowing that they speak only to and for liberals who are happy if they lie to help Democrats, they all joined hands in an implicit vow of silence and simply ignored the new proof in Schreckinger's book that, in the days leading up to the 2020 election, they all endorsed a disinformation campaign.

It will now be much harder to avoid confronting the reality of what they did, though it is highly likely that they will continue to do so. This morning, The New York Times published an article about the broad, ongoing FBI criminal investigation into Hunter Biden's international business and tax activities. Prior to the election, the Times, to their credit, was one of the few to apply skepticism to the CIA's pre-election lie, noting on October 22 that “no concrete evidence has emerged that the laptop contains Russian disinformation.” Because the activities of Hunter Biden now under FBI investigation directly pertain to the emails first revealed by The Post, the reporters needed to rely upon the laptop's archive to amplify and inform their reporting. That, in turn, required The New York Times to verify the authenticity of this laptop and its origins — exactly what, according to their reporters, they successfully did:

People familiar with the investigation said prosecutors had examined emails between Mr. Biden, Mr. Archer and others about Burisma and other foreign business activity. Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.

That this cache of emails was authentic was clear from the start. Any doubts were obliterated by publication of Schreckinger's book six months ago. Now the Paper of Record itself explicitly states not only that the emails “were authenticated” but also that the original story from The Post about how they obtained these materials — they “come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop”— “appears” to be true.

[rogue06]

I wonder what ever happened to that democrat establishment shill LiconaFan, and what other forum sites he's disseminating false info at now...

The NYT Now Admits the Biden Laptop -- Falsely Called "Russian Disinformation" -- is Authentic

The NYT confirmed it Wednesday night. The networks, FWICT, have been silent

[seanD]

The NYT confirmed it Wednesday night. The networks, FWICT, have been silent

And remember, Biden, Psaki, house representatives, MSM, and democrats abroad all claimed this was "russian disinformation." IOW, at the time, if you were disseminating this report, you were smeared as a "russian propagandist" by these corrupt, lying cretins.

[CivilDiscourse]

And remember, Biden, Psaki, house representatives, MSM, and democrats abroad all claimed this was "russian disinformation." IOW, at the time, if you were disseminating this report, you were smeared as a "russian propagandist" by these corrupt, lying cretins.

You guys are wrong. The people in the US who tell us its disinformation can be trusted, therefore its not censorship because disinformation isn't information. Right Roy, oxmixmudd?

[Starlight]

It does seem to be Hunter Biden's actual laptop, which is somewhat surprising given how suspect the right wing made it seem initially.

The laptop appears to exonerate Joe Biden of any wrongdoing as in a message on the laptop Hunter says they should pretend to have influence over his dad but "what he will say and do is out of our hands.”

[seanD]

It does seem to be Hunter Biden's actual laptop, which is somewhat surprising given how suspect the right wing made it seem initially.

The laptop appears to exonerate Joe Biden of any wrongdoing as in a message on the laptop Hunter says they should pretend to have influence over his dad but "what he will say and do is out of our hands.”

You're concluding something based off of one vague email statement. There's another statement in the emails that mentions a percentage of ill gotten gains to the "Big Guy," which could very easily be a reference to Joe. Bobulinski, an associate of the Bidens and a direct witness, confirms Joe was involved in these shady deals.

[rogue06]

It does seem to be Hunter Biden's actual laptop, which is somewhat surprising given how suspect the right wing made it seem initially.

The laptop appears to exonerate Joe Biden of any wrongdoing as in a message on the laptop Hunter says they should pretend to have influence over his dad but "what he will say and do is out of our hands.”

There never was any doubt it was Hunter's laptop.

Hunter's lawyers blew all deniability away when they filed to have it returned to Hunter. You cannot request that something that wasn't yours be "returned" to you.

Among many things the emails confirm that old Joe lied about not knowing anything about Hunter's many shady business dealings since it show that he met with them. Of course the NYT still tried to play Praetorian Guard and obscure that with the line "It is not clear whether the Burisma executive attended the dinner." They of course skipped over the fact that the executive in question sent an email to Hunter expressly thanking him for the "opportunity to meet your father" -- which was also covered by the New York Post on their front page.

20688150-9c93-41c3-8131-0a4eb5ae248b.jpg

Somehow the much vaunted investigative reporting of the Dingy Lady failed to notice that.

But then so did most people not in the news business since social media suppression labeled it "misinformation" and it was censored.

[rogue06]

You're concluding something based off of one vague email statement. There's another statement in the emails that mentions a percentage of ill gotten gains to the "Big Guy," which could very easily be a reference to Joe. Bobulinski, an associate of the Bidens and a direct witness, confirms Joe was involved in these shady deals.

Yup. He was complaining to his sister (another Biden progeny that lives off her father's position) that he wouldn't have a bunch of money forever and how the "Big Guy" gets 10% of what he makes.

Interestingly, it is known that Hunter was paying many of old Joe's bills on his Delaware property for a time while he was VP.

[seanD]

Yup. He was complaining to his sister (another Biden progeny that lives off her father's position) that he wouldn't have a bunch of money forever and how the "Big Guy" gets 10% of what he makes.

Interestingly, it is known that Hunter was paying many of old Joe's bills on his Delaware property for a time while he was VP.

I'm wondering if an argument could be made that there's a conflict of interest here with the whole Ukraine situation, what they might be hiding, and the fact Biden was engaged in corrupt activity there, but maybe that's "russian disinformation."

[Gondwanaland]

It does seem to be Hunter Biden's actual laptop, which is somewhat surprising given how suspect the right wing made it seem initially.

How in the world did they make it 'seem suspect'? Anyone with a working brain knew it was Hunter's laptop from the start. I think what you mean is "I didn't want to accept it because it might have made my candidate look bad and lose"

[CivilDiscourse]

It does seem to be Hunter Biden's actual laptop, which is somewhat surprising given how suspect the right wing made it seem initially.

The laptop appears to exonerate Joe Biden of any wrongdoing as in a message on the laptop Hunter says they should pretend to have influence over his dad but "what he will say and do is out of our hands.”

You know for someone who claims to only be interested in the truth, you seem keen to blame the media, tech, and democrats attempts to spread misinformation and distrust of the laptop on the republicans.

[Ronson]

I wonder what ever happened to that democrat establishment shill LiconaFan, and what other forum sites he's disseminating false info at now...

Licona seemed to at least admit there was a laptop and it belonged to Hunter. He just refused to believe there was anything on it that could be construed as illegal, and didn't believe an investigation was warranted. Yeah, a Democrat shill.

[seanD]

Licona seemed to at least admit there was a laptop and it belonged to Hunter. He just refused to believe there was anything on it that could be construed as illegal, and didn't believe an investigation was warranted. Yeah, a Democrat shill.

There was a bunch of trolls in here, but most were just your typical cartoon variety tribal leftists that throw out ad homs and engage in juvenile arguments. LiconaFan was different. He was pretty bright and very meticulous in his arguments, which he did under other tweb pseudonyms in other threads. I especially remember arguments I had with him about the Tara Reade story (though I can't remember what pseudonym he used then). He was adamant about defending Biden no matter what the story was, and was an expert about it.

[rogue06]

There was a bunch of trolls in here, but most were just your typical cartoon variety tribal leftists that throw out ad homs and engage in juvenile arguments. LiconaFan was different. He was pretty bright and very meticulous in his arguments, which he did under other tweb pseudonyms in other threads. I especially remember arguments I had with him about the Tara Reade story (though I can't remember what pseudonym he used then). He was adamant about defending Biden no matter what the story was, and was an expert about it.

DivineOb?