Tumgik
#Leaked Hunter Biden Emails
1americanconservative · 7 months
Text
BOMBSHELL: Leaked secret emails reveal Hunter Biden traveled with VP Joe Biden to 15 COUNTRIES on Air Force 2, Jessie Watters files FOIA request for Biden flight manifests
Tumblr media
21 notes · View notes
naturalrights-retard · 7 months
Text
According to documents leaked to Politico, Hunter Biden was involved in Donald Trump’s impeachment over Ukraine
Lawyers for the presidents son leaked the entire case file related to the DOJ’s 5-year investigation.
Both the New York Times and Politico published leaked documents revealing new information about Hunter Biden’s case and the inner workings at the Justice Department.
TGP reports: According to emails leaked to Politico, Hunter Biden met with impeachment lawyers in January 2020.
Recall, in September 2019 then-Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats launched an impeachment inquiry into President Trump over his phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
President Trump’s phone call with Zelensky was cordial and there were no threats, no pressure and no quid pro quo as Adam Schiff and the Democrats liked the public to believe.
Hunter Biden met with impeachment lawyers as Pelosi and Schiff were on the House floor lying about Trump’s phone call with Zelensky.
It is important to note that the FBI was in possession of Hunter Biden’s laptop from hell which documented numerous crimes related to the Bidens’ work in Ukraine while Democrats were persecuting Trump with an impeachment investigation.
Trump asked Zelensky to ‘look into’ Joe Biden’s threats to withhold money from Ukraine as well as Hunter Biden’s shady business with Burisma.
President Trump wanted Zelensky to look into the firing of Viktor Shokin, the prosecutor general who was investigating Ukrainian oligarch Mykola Zlochevsky, Hunter Biden and Burisma Holdings.
On January 26, 2020, Hunter Biden’s advisors said they would need Biden to set aside several hours to go through documents to settle his tax bill.
Hunter replied, “I have a meeting tomorrow with impeachment lawyers for the day. It will have to wait until Tuesday I’m afraid.”
20 notes · View notes
beardedmrbean · 3 months
Text
First, ignore. Then deny and dismiss. Then blame others.
This is Boston Mayor Michelle Wu’s playbook for responding to a crisis or controversy.
After taking an international drubbing over her holiday party excluding white elected officials, Wu is now blaming her political enemies for leaking the exclusive party invitation – ignoring the real issues the party brought up.
“I’ve now been part of several news cycles where those with a particular motive will sort of cast the facts as they see them, sometimes that is a little further from the truth than it actually is,” she said in an interview on WBUR’s Radio Boston.
The mayor’s defense rings as hollow as Hunter Biden blaming MAGA Republicans for his legal problems.
She’s been down this road before, like in the car accident involving her police driver.
But none of those issues went global to the point of TMZ picking it up.
Wu was clearly floored by the reaction and condemnation she received.
“I think the email situation (where the email invitation was mistakenly sent to white city councilors) is what got it on the national radar when it was leaked by someone who wasn’t invited because they weren’t part of this group,” she said. “But this (electeds of color) is a well-established group that’s been in place for a long time…and there’s a little bit of a political motive in terms of leaking it and then following through on a national scale.”
The story could even damage Wu’s statewide prospects should she decide to run for higher office.
The question is can she extricate herself from the controversy by smiling through it and insisting it’s a non-story?
But even Wu and the journalists in her cheering squad can’t paper over the damage she’s suffered for hosting the party at the taxpayer-owned Parkman House.
And blaming her political enemies will only make it worse and will fuel more reaction.
It doesn’t matter who leaked the errant emails. The real issue is should a mayor who is supposed to unite the city be hosting a party that excludes people along racial lines?
It’s not just about a holiday party, it’s about the message her administration is sending to voters.
In one fell swoop, Wu has now veered so far to the left that she’s almost off the grid.
The party damage could affect how the public looks at her policies. City grants or contracts that favor minority applicants over white applicants will all be under scrutiny.
The Wu administration still refuses to say who paid for the party, if the city didn’t as they claim.
Any texts or emails sent by her aides about the party will face scrutiny.
So the story is far from over. _____________________
Sure I held a segregated party, but you know who the real bad guy is, the person that told other people about it.
9 notes · View notes
mightyflamethrower · 3 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
At the end of the year, we are on the razor’s edge of many things that soon may blow up.
Americans are far beyond President Joe Biden’s serial untruths of some eight years that he never discussed Hunter Biden’s various get-rich-quick schemes.
All were predicated on the perception of foreign interests purchasing from the Biden family the influence of then-senator, vice president, and possibly soon-to-be President Joe Biden.
The Bidens now risk exposure to criminal charges of multimillion-dollar tax fraud, perjury, influence selling, and bribery as congressional committees and a special prosecutor unravel years of tangled-up quid pro quos.
A newly indicted Hunter remains reckless and unpredictable. He continues to publicly blame his mounting legal problems on everyone and everything other than his own selfish excesses.
Hunter deliberately involves his family and may even bring down his own father. His tax lawyers have previously threatened to call President Joe Biden to testify on his behalf under oath.
He continues to court public scandal by hawking amateurish “representational” paintings to the quid-pro-quo wealthy and wannabes wishing clout with the White House.
His laptop messages reveal a prodigal son angry that his bagman services were never fully appreciated by his familial beneficiaries.
Hunter’s wayward laptop is a felonious trove of drug-addled, illicit Petronian excess and sex, interspliced with his self-incriminating family communications on the distributions of pay-for-play payoffs.
Hunter’s business aides will be called back to elaborate on their already incriminating testimonies.
The contents of Joe Biden’s various alias emails will soon see new scrutiny.
Given Biden’s physical and ethical frailties, age, and bad polling, the left-wing media and Democratic hierarchy may cease circling the wagons around him. Instead, some may fuel the effort to sandbag a 2024 Biden candidacy by releasing or even leaking incriminating evidence.
Harvard President Claudine Gay’s tenure is even more tenuous than Biden’s. Harvard can either claim to be the nation’s preeminent academic institution or continue to protect a plagiarist as president—not both.
It can profess to be at the center of academia’s moral and intellectual universe, but not if its president cannot punish those on campus who daily call for the destruction of Israel and the genocide of the Jewish people. Gay cannot lie to Congress that Harvard in the past has also allowed “hate speech” against entire groups the way it now allows against Jews.
Nor is it sustainable for Gay to fob off calls for her resignation as “racist.” In fact, the more the public learns about her academic career, the more she seems to be a lifetime beneficiary, not a victim of racially-weighted policies.
Since the October 7 Hamas massacre of 1,200 Jews, anti-Israeli/pro-Hamas protests, often violent, have swept the Western world, particularly in the big cities and on campuses of America.
Protestors no longer distinguish being anti-Israeli from being anti-Jewish. Now they just openly mouth anti-Semitic chants and harass individual Jews.
Almost every hallowed monument—from the Lincoln Memorial to the White House gates, nearly every cherished national icon from the famed Christmas tree in New York’s Rockefeller Center to New York’s Naivety scene, and our most famous infrastructure from the Manhattan Bridge to the Golden Gate Bridge—has either been swarmed, defaced, or disrupted by pro-Hamas demonstrators.
Americans are growing weary of these escalating protests for a variety of reasons. Most remember that the October 7 war started not with Israeli preemptive attacks on an independent Gaza, but only after Hamas killers launched a sneak attack to commit atrocities against Jews residing in Israel.
The current war is waged between a constitutional state of free elections and a cruel, autocratic terrorist clique.
Indeed, Hamas has refused negotiations over a ceasefire that would have led to internationally conducted free elections for the people of Gaza—something forbidden by enriched Hamas kingpins ensconced in luxury abroad.
Many of the loudest and most violent anti-Jewish protestors in the U.S. are immigrants, green card holders, or on student visas. That fact is confusing to Americans.
Why would those who have fled despotic regimes in the Middle East to study, work, or reside in a free America, once safely here, rally for the very dictatorships they left behind and apparently do not wish to return to?
Why trash the very foundation and values of their American hosts that ensure their newfound freedoms?
For weeks, the American people have been relatively silent as they digested these ongoing catastrophes. But at some point, their patience will run out.
Americans will then collectively conclude that Joe Biden has never been truthful about vast ill-gotten funds that have enriched his family; that Harvard is no longer preeminent or even prestigious; and that people who do not like us, our laws, and our values should try cheering on the work of Hamas from their own homes.
Tumblr media
2 notes · View notes
thecynicspensieve · 11 months
Link
8 notes · View notes
89845aaa · 11 months
Text
3 notes · View notes
jerseydeanne · 2 years
Text
Seriously, libtards? Seriously?
Occupy Democrats
@OccupyDemocrats
· 1h
BREAKING: Ivana Trump, Donald’s first wife and the mother of the monstrous Ivanka, Don Jr, and Eric dies at age 73.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No matter what you think about Trump and his children, no one of them can be compared to Hunter Biden and his dad Pedo Peter. Imagine Don Jr. leaving his laptop in a repair shop and having the FBI to discover the content of it? All the emails and photos of drunk and drugged Hunter surrounded with prostitutes would've leaked to the press by now. The left media would've talked about it days in and days out.  "Worse than Watergate!", "Impeach the m .. f ..ker", "The wall are  closing in on the Trump family!" 
What F**king assface!
Ivana was a big part of Trump Plaza in AC and NY. She was a remarkable woman. She had a strong work ethic which she helped pass on to her kids along with the Donald,
She also was a stunning woman, no dumb blonde there.
There is a crossing the line, and I think it is incredibly bad taste.
Ivanka was the one that came up with opportunity zones in the poorest of neighborhoods. BLM went and burnt it down to the ground.
Hardworking kids and that's something to tear down?
Okay, sure, Jan, and let's compare them to Hunter Biden, drug addict, sex trafficker, corrupt, kickbacks, money launderer, pedo, and he is a drunk. Oh, wait, Hunter was dishonorably discharged for crack.
Love, JD 💋😜🤬🤬
Tumblr media Tumblr media
@OccupyDemocrats
13 notes · View notes
nsomniacsdream · 1 year
Text
I ignore fact checking usually, but this one tickled me. They rated the claim, that 51 former intelligence officials told us that the Hunter laptop was disinformation, as needs context, which is one step below true. Here's an except of the letter in question:
"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," the letter said.
It's flat out untrue. The intelligence officials were claiming that the timing of the leak, along with the fact that it was coming from Rudy Guiliani, made them believe it had a chance of being disinformation but they weren't able to verify it.
In short, fact checks have been weaponized against us, just like everything else.
2 notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media
Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday held a belated press conference to explain that he had personally approved the FBI’s raid of Donald Trump’s Florida residence to seize documents deemed U.S. government property. 
A clearly agitated and nervous Garland sought to exude confidence in the raid. He went on to heatedly defend the professionalism and integrity of the Justice Department and FBI. 
But almost immediately after his sermon, the Justice Department and its affiliates were back to their usual selective leaking (“sources say” . . . “according to people familiar with the investigation”) to liberal newspapers. 
In no time, the Washington Post claimed the raid was aimed at finding Trump Administration documents relating to “nuclear secrets.” The now-familiar desired effect was achieved. “Presidential historian” Michael Beschloss quickly tweeted a picture of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, noting that in the past revealing such nuclear secrets had led to the death penalty. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden, previously known for comparing Trump’s border detention facilities to Auschwitz and falsely claiming the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian “disinformation,” replied: “Sounds about right.” That is, without any proof, it was legitimate to imagine that the former president of the United States, like the Rosenbergs, should be executed for passing nuclear secrets.
So, as intended, the Justice Department and FBI leaks touched off a round of intended liberal hysteria of the sort we saw during Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into alleged Russian collusion with Trump’s 2016 campaign aimed at disguising government misdeeds or overreach. 
Sources Tell Us
Despite Garland’s pious assertions, we know the modus operandi of selective leaking from the career of Andrew McCabe. The disgraced former interim FBI director admitted to lying to federal investigators about his role in leaking to the Wall Street Journal. And the inspector general found McCabe lied on several other occasions about his efforts to leak to and massage the media. At this point, we should assume that “sources tell us” and “according to unnamed sources” are indications that the sources are Justice Department and FBI contacts who were given the green light to manipulate the news by their superiors.
Let’s put Garland’s decision to approve the raid on Mar-a-Lago in the context of the past seven years. The Justice Department and FBI in 2016 interfered in a presidential election in two major ways: They exonerated Hillary Clinton’s clearly illegal use of a private server and her destruction of subpoenaed data. The FBI hired Clinton operative Christopher Steele as an informant and gave its “Crossfire Hurricane” imprimatur to the entire Russian collusion hoax, feeding a 2016 left-wing mantra that Trump was a Russian “asset.” 
In 2015, we learned that candidate Hillary Clinton, as Barack Obama’s secretary of state, had emailed classified government materials using her own private server, likely as a way of skirting Freedom of Information Act requirements. 
In the thick of the 2016 campaign a year later, FBI Director James Comey reported that Clinton had, in fact, broken the law. Yet he assumed a role of federal attorney that was not his own, deciding Clinton’s wrongdoing should not lead to an indictment. 
In that improper role, Comey, not U.S. attorneys, declined to hold Clinton accountable. We learned later that Attorney General Loretta Lynch had met secretly on an airport tarmac (“a brief, casual, social meeting”) with Bill Clinton. 
Somewhere within this tangle of lies (both said they met only to talk about their grandchildren, not about whether the Justice Department would charge Hillary Clinton), we learned: 1) Lynch abdicated her role and simply let Comey play the role of investigator and prosecutor, and 2) Hillary Clinton had “bleached” thousands of emails, some of them under federal subpoena, and destroyed her communication devices and records—all federal felonies.
Trump won the election in 2016, but he never controlled the federal government. For 22 months, at a cost of $40 million, Robert Mueller investigated whether Trump had “colluded” with the Russians to take the White House. Ironically, there was ample evidence to show that Hillary Clinton may, in fact, have done exactly that. 
After all, Clinton worked with the Democratic National Committee,  which, in turn, hired the Perkins Coie legal firm, which hired Fusion GPS, which hired ex-spy Christopher Steele, who hired Russian disinformation source Igor Dyachenko, who used Moscow-based former Clintonite Charles Dolan to find dirt on Trump. Where Dyachenko and Dolan located their false dirt for Steele, no one knows for certain. Some Russian source is most likely the culprit. 
In the end, the ruse was exposed. But in the process of exposing that scandal, the Justice Department’s inspector general found that FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith had altered an application for a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to make it appear Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page was a Russian agent. (In reality, Page was working with the CIA.) Clinesmith’s FBI superiors had signed off on that fraudulent document that contained legions of errors. 
We learned also that two of the FBI investigators working for Mueller in 2017 were rank partisans and in their amorous exchanges before the 2016 election had texted about how to “stop” Trump amid  slanders and slurs about his candidacy and supporters. Until they were “reassigned,” both had played key roles in investigating Trump.
We also learned that the FBI had “lost” key cell phone data under court request. We were told that the point man of Mueller’s “dream team,” “all-stars,” and “hunter-killer team”—as the Left gushed of the liberal legal ensemble—former Justice Department attorney Andrew Weismann, before, during, and after his tenure on Mueller’s team was a self-admitted anti-Trump partisan. 
Mueller closed shop in 2019, finding no evidence of collusion, after putting two years of a presidency under a constant cloud of implied criminality. Mueller under oath admitted he knew nothing of the Steele dossier or the role of Fusion GPS in disseminating the fraud. No sane person could believe Mueller, given that the role of the dossier and Fusion GPS were the two chief catalysts leading to his own appointment. Was Mueller addled or simply not telling the truth?
The Walls Are Forever Closing In
Throughout this sordid nightmare, the FBI and Justice Department routinely leaked details the left-wing media serially blared were “bombshells” and evidence that the “walls are closing in.” All assured the public that Trump and his family would soon be behind bars for their ties to Russia and sundry other crimes 
No one has been held accountable for these lies. James Comey hired the lying Christopher Steele as an informant. The FBI fired him when they discovered he kept leaking secret information to his own media friends. When Comey was finally called to testify by Congress, he swore under oath 245 times that he had no memory or knowledge of the questions asked. 
Comey did admit, however, that after a private one-on-one conversation with President Trump, he immediately memorialized his version of the confidential discussion using FBI time and devices. He then acknowledged that he later leaked his version of events to the media through a third party. The goal was to prompt the appointment of a special counsel, eventually to be his friend Robert Mueller. Comey went to great but vain lengths to explain how leaking a government memo of a confidential presidential conversation, which was either classified or confidential, was not illegal. 
Comey also later bragged publicly how he sent agent Peter Strzok on a preplanned mission to surprise National Security Advisor Michael Flynn in hopes of finding Flynn in violation of the Logan Act, a 1799 law that has never been prosecuted successfully. Nevertheless, the threat of prosecution was enough to take down a high-profile Trump appointee.
After Comey was rightly fired, his deputy Andrew McCabe assumed control of the FBI. Again, he lied serially to federal investigators. McCabe oversaw the notorious email investigation that exonerated Hillary Clinton—at the very time his wife was running for office in Virginia, aided by funding from a political action committee with ties to the Clintons. McCabe, remember, also purportedly discussed wearing a wire stealthily to monitor Trump, in hopes of recording embarrassing private conversations that would help convince the cabinet to remove him under the 25th Amendment.
In 2020, the FBI sat on the Hunter Biden laptop and its analysts helped feed leaks protecting Joe Biden’s presidential campaign  from otherwise damaging disclosures. 
Some of the laptop’s contents, however, were in the public domain prior to FBI confiscation, and they had variously suggested that Joe Biden and his family were likely involved in selling influence for sizable sums to foreign governments. The laptop evidence suggested, additionally, that Hunter Biden had committed a series of tax, drug, and sex felonies. 
Yet somehow, 50 former CIA and other intelligence officials—among them prior intelligence heads John Brennan, Leon Panetta, Michael Hayden, and James Clapper—believed they had enough knowledge of the laptop on the eve of the election to assure the country it was “Russian disinformation.” Note that Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and other senators believe that an FBI agent and or analyst had deliberately mischaracterized the laptop as “disinformation” to protect Biden.
Merrick Garland can defend but cannot explain the strange role of the FBI informants. Aside from the infamous Steele, informants keep reappearing in almost every sensationalized political event. Twelve of them apparently were the de facto architects in a plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. 
Their nefarious role is one of the reasons why two of the charged defendants were acquitted and two were not found guilty due to mistrials. 
Nor could Garland explain the strange statement from New York Times reporter Michael Rosenberg: “There were a ton of FBI informants among the people who attacked the Capitol” on January 6, 2021. 
There is also the strange asymmetry of the FBI. It routinely now resorts to pre-dawn SWAT raids, shackling the legs and hands of elderly men, and swooping in on would-be targets on the street. Trump associates Peter Navarro, Rudy Giuliani, and John Eastman have all been confronted by the FBI, and either arrested, had their offices searched, or had their phones seized, or all three. But so far only Roger Stone, the target of an FBI SWAT team—which CNN just happened to be on hand to cover—was charged and convicted of a crime. 
Last week’s events at Mar-a-Lago are part of this pattern—raiding the home of the current Republican presidential frontrunner who would beat Joe Biden and Kamala Harris if the general election were held today.
The FBI: What Not to Do
So, to answer Merrick Garland’s scolding, how might the FBI not have lost the faith of the American people? 
It might not have altered documents to ruin the life of an American citizen. When subpoenas arrived for phone records, it could have submitted them rather than wipe them clean.
Its directors might not have stonewalled Congress while under oath or lied to federal investigators or leaked confidential government memos to the press. The FBI did not have to mislead about the contents of a controversial laptop. There was no need to hire foreign nationals during a presidential election to supply dirt on one of the two candidates. 
The attorney general did not need to meet secretly with the husband of someone under FBI investigation. Just as the FBI apparently did not need to raid Kevin Clinesmith’s home to find information about his doctoring of an email, or to put legs irons on Andrew McCabe for lying to a federal prosecutor, or to ambush Christopher Steele and grab his cell phone to ensure he stopped leaking FBI information and lying to the bureau, so too it had no need of shackling Peter Navarro or publicly seizing the phone of Representative Scott Perry (R-Pa.).
Finally, there are existential threats to the United States on the open southern border, from cartel drug runners and terrorists to child traffickers. For 120 days in 2020, Antifa and Black Lives Matter coordinated violent riots that led to over 35 dead, $2 billion in property damage, and over 1,500 law enforcement officers injured. A federal courthouse, a police precinct, and the historic St. James Episcopal Church in Washington were at various times torched. Rioters attempted to storm the White House grounds and sent the Secret Service scrambling to a secure bunker with the president. 
All of the above were mostly ignored by the FBI. Yet these and other violence and illegality posed far more dangers to the American people than do the worried Virginia parents upset about the critical race theory indoctrination of their children.
Finally, Garland has failed to explain why he had sought out a particular federal magistrate to approve the warrant to raid Mar-a-Lago—a magistrate who earlier had recused himself from another case involving Trump. Apparently, Magistrate Bruce Reinhart felt that either his own past partisanship or prior legal work made it impossible for him to remain unbiased in cases involving the former president—except on the present occasion to empower the FBI to raid Trump’s home.
But again, Garland did give a spirited, almost angry defense of the Justice Department and FBI. He was in hot denial that they were anything but professional civil servants. Yet he did not explain why “nuclear secrets,” long sitting in a locked room at Mar-a-Lago, were suddenly putting the nation in harm’s way in a manner they had not eight or 18 months ago.
That raises the question whether Garland is disingenuous or simply naïve. After all, the American people have long trusted their FBI. They want to remain confident in its leadership. Yet it was not the public, but high-ranking Justice and FBI officials themselves—among them most recently Merrick Garland himself—who squandered that confidence. And they should now look inward rather than blast critics for what they have done to themselves and to the country.
Tumblr media
1 note · View note
mitchipedia · 2 years
Text
Hunter Biden’s emails “didn’t dominate mainstream media because, at least so far, they didn’t have the goods.”
Andrew Prokop at Vox.com:
Even though the story of [Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop is bizarre, speculation that there’s more to it remains just speculation.
Media outlets, for their part, didn’t block anything — there was ample coverage of all this in the conservative press and, albeit more slowly, in mainstream media outlets. There is no obligation for media outlets to run with conveniently timed opposition research pushed by one presidential candidate’s team shortly before an election. (For example, most media outlets did not cover the Steele dossier allegations before the 2016 election — only Mother Jones and Yahoo! News did. The dossier itself was eventually published by BuzzFeed News after Trump won, the following January.)
Some commentators did go too far in asserting that this was part of a Russian plot, when the evidence hasn’t emerged to back that up. The Biden campaign similarly sought to cast doubt on the story by alluding that it could be Russian misinformation — when the underlying emails appear to be authentic. But in general, major journalism outlets did try to assess whether there was genuine news there.
Trump supporters claim the leaked materials prove Joe Biden was corrupt.
If you think that’s what’s being covered up, of course it seems outrageous that the mainstream media wasn’t devoting more attention to it.
But that case is weak.
Of two supposed “smoking gun” emails, the first shows that Biden went to a dinner with about a dozen people, one of whom was a corrupt prosecutor general in Ukraine. In the email, a Burisma executive thanks Hunter for the “opportunity to meet your father”—supposedly undermining Joe Biden’s claim to have known nothing about Hunter Biden’s Ukrainian work. However, the email doesn’t show Joe Biden knew what Hunter Biden was doing.
In another email, Hunter Biden is trying to set up a business venture with a Chinese energy tycoon in 20177, which would have involved Joe Biden. The elder Biden turned the deal down, and he wasn’t even VP then, and did not hold any government office.
All of this was indeed covered in the press in October 2020
​…
Hunter’s emails contained a whole lot of embarrassing and arguably newsworthy material about himself, and the shady foreign business interests of the son of the potential next president are certainly a worthy topic of media coverage. But as for the Biden who was actually on the ballot, there was very little from him personally in those messages (other than an exchange where he comforts his despondent, drug-addicted son). The emails didn’t dominate mainstream media because, at least so far, they didn’t have the goods.
The American political and economic system is corrupt, and both Joe Biden and Donald Trump have spent their lives immersed in that system. Of the two, I vastly prefer Biden, but the system itself needs reforming.
The whole story about how the laptop leaked is a trip. Hunter Biden dropped it off to a repair shop in Delaware. He identified himself as Hunter Biden at the time, but the repair shop owner had no way of verifying, in part because the repair shop owner is blind. Then Hunter Biden never picked the laptop up. This is not surprising behavior, given Hunter Biden is an addict with a history of bad choices.
Eventually, the repair shop owner decided the laptop was abandoned property and examined the hard drive, finding the emails and leaking them.
And yes Twitter and Facebook probably should not have blocked the original New York Post reporting about the articles. But there is no free speech issue here. Twitter and Facebook are private platforms, and the story had plenty of other places to circulate. Free speech means you don't have the right to compel other parties to amplify speech they don't like.
1 note · View note
naturalrights-retard · 7 months
Text
Wikipedia has been completely infiltrated by the CIA and is secretly run and operated as an arm of the ‘Deep State’, according to a bombshell email leaked from Hunter Biden’s laptop.
Recent revelations from a trove of emails from Biden’s ‘laptop from hell’ have shed light on a murky world of powerful people resorting to stealthy techniques to manipulate the way they are perceived on Wikipedia.
15 notes · View notes
beardedmrbean · 11 months
Text
Hunter Biden has become the center of renewed political controversy after it emerged former acting CIA director Mike Morell helped organize a letter by 50 intelligence community figures, ahead of the 2020 presidential election, suggesting leaked emails from Hunter's laptop were Russian disinformation.
Morrell made the confession in private sworn testimony to the House Judiciary Committee, saying he acted after speaking to Antony Blinken, then part of the Biden campaign and now secretary of state, because he wanted Joe Biden to "win the election."
In response to the claims, the White House told Newsweek that House Republicans are "weaponizing their power to go after" opponents and "re-litigate the 2020 election with misleading claims."
Allegations of Russian collusion sparked major controversy after the 2016 presidential election, when embarrassing emails from the Democratic National Committee were revealed by Wikileaks. An investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller later concluded the hack was conducted by Russian military intelligence officers, in an effort to boost then-Republican candidate Donald Trump.
Just weeks before the 2020 election the New York Post published what it said were emails from Hunter Biden's laptop, recovered by a computer repair shop owner, which they claimed showed improper business relationships. In response more than 50 former intelligence officials, including ex-CIA chiefs John Brennan and Mike Hayden, signed an open letter suggesting "the Russians are involved in the Hunter Biden email issue."
John Ratcliffe, then Director of National Intelligence, contested this assessment. During an interview with Fox Business he said: "We shared no intelligence with Chairman [Adam] Schiff or any other member of Congress that Hunter Biden's laptop is part of some Russian disinformation campaign."
Schiff, a Democrat, was then chair of the House Intelligence Committee.
In March 2022 analysis by The Washington Post concluded thousands of the emails were "authentic communications," and no evidence has been found of any Russian role in their release.
Appearing before the House Judiciary Committee Morell said he was contacted by Blinken "on or before" October 17, 2020, which "triggered...that intent" leading him to organize the letter, which was provided to Politico.
Morell admitted he acted because "I wanted him [Biden] to win the election."
He added that Biden campaign chairman Steve Ricchetti later called to "thank me for putting the statement out."
19 notes · View notes
bllsbailey · 3 months
Text
Oh, We Have Some New White House Intrigue...And It Doesn't Involve Hunter Biden
Tumblr media
What in the fresh hell is this? An imposter might have infiltrated a White House intern group chat, collected signatures, and sent a letter to President Joe Biden demanding a ceasefire in Gaza. That appears to be the case, and yet another chapter of White House intrigue, though one that doesn’t involve Hunter Biden, his drug use, his tax evasion shenanigans, his gun charges, his prostitutes, or Joe Biden’s mental decay. Then again, who is this person? We have a name, but no one knows who she is—who is ‘Thara Nagarajan?’ 
Her alleged behavior in this story is incredulous. She posted a message into the GroupMe White House intern chat, hoping to solicit support for a letter demanding a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war. She gave interns in the chat until that evening to submit their names but added that they wouldn’t be revealed. Nagarajan then left the chat. The letter was leaked to the press, with NBC News reporting. 
The ballsy move was dismissed, even mocked, as it should—did a group of interns demand Biden push Israel to halt the war? Interns are meant to be seen, not heard. Politico posted about this on Wednesday, following a deep dive into what The Hill reported about this letter and Ms. “Nagarajan,” a woman who is not “directly affiliated with the White House.” It might not have been a White House intern initiative after all, and we don’t know if “Nagarajan” was the brainchild or the pawn in this little act of guerilla activism. 
The White House also doesn’t run or manage the group chat either—interns use it to communicate and stay in touch. Luckily, some read the post and were wary of it. With the Fall semester about to end, the window to figure out the identity of “Nagarajan” is rapidly closing. Even if they don’t know who this person is, Politico adds that the interns’ consensus position is that the letter outlined their views on the matter, and this cloak-and-dagger twist shouldn’t take away from that (via Politico): 
Recommended
When NBC News published a piece last week about a letter White House interns sent to President JOE BIDEN pressuring him to call for a permanent cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, some on social media mocked the staffers for their gall to anonymously challenge the president and then leak the effort to the media. Others applauded their boldness.  And some cast doubt on the legitimacy of the entire thing. Rumors started to circulate that the letter wasn’t actually organized by White House interns, but rather someone outside the administration. A day after the NBC story published, The Hill’s BRETT SAMUELS reported a “source familiar with the letter pushed back on its significance, saying it was organized by a woman named Thara [Nagarajan] who is not directly affiliated with the White House.”  According to a screenshot reviewed by West Wing Playbook, a user named THARA NAGARAJAN mysteriously popped into the White House intern GroupMe chat the Sunday before the letter became public.  “Hi all, as the genocide of Palestinians continues, there is a public letter for White House interns to sign anonymously for those who stand with Palestine,” Nagarajan wrote, along with a link to the letter on a Google Form. She said that interns had until 6 p.m. the following day to “sign” by noting the offices that they work in — but assured everyone that no actual names or emails would be collected or revealed.  There’s no evidence suggesting that Nagarajan orchestrated the letter. Nor has anyone cast doubt that a sizable number of White House interns feel distraught about the president’s handling of the Israel-Hamas conflict.  But still, no one could figure out who Nagarajan was — or how she got access to the intern chat. After Nagarajan sent that message, she immediately left the group.  The White House doesn’t run the intern GroupMe, which serves as an informal way for the roughly 150 20-somethings to stay in touch throughout the course of their program.  So, understandably, some interns were weirded out by the situation and flagged Nagarajan’s request to their supervisors. Some who did not want to be associated with the letter’s content said they were uncomfortable with the way they were approached.  […]  West Wing Playbook attempted to get in touch with Nagarajan — or, at least, who we believe to be the same Nagarajan in the GroupMe. But our multiple calls, emails and texts went unanswered.  The same intern, one of the roughly 40 who signed the letter, said that Nagarajan’s involvement shouldn’t undercut the message they were trying to relay. The person stressed that the letter was organized by interns and not written by Nagarajan. And the person argued the letter exposed real tensions that have rippled throughout the Biden administration in the wake of the Oct. 7 attack.  The 2023 fall internship program ends this month. Some interns are coming to terms with the fact that they might leave campus without any answers about Nagarajan’s identity.
Interns organized it, but it might not have been. What is this, Abbott and Costello? As for full-time staffers, a few of them protested outside the White House recently, calling for the same thing. Does anyone have control over their respective staff within this administration? What is going on? 
Was this a fake letter?
Recommended
Trending on Townhall Videos
0 notes
dragonwingfly-blog · 7 months
Link
Breaking News
0 notes
gusty-wind · 7 months
Text
FBI Lies About ‘Highly Credible’ Source Claims Were Leaked To NYT And Spoonfed To Weiss
The emails confirm David Weiss and his top deputies were fed the false New York Times story --- which raises the question: Which FBI agent fed the Times the lies?
Emails obtained by the Heritage Foundation following a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, and shared exclusively with The Federalist, reveal that lies leaked to The New York Times about the origins of damning evidence implicating Hunter and Joe Biden in a bribery scandal were fed to Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss.
As I previously detailed, The New York Times reported those lies in its Dec. 11, 2020, article, “Material from Giuliani Spurred a Separate Justice Depart. Pursuit of Hunter Biden” --- just a week after Americans first learned of the investigation of the now-president’s son. The Times’ reporting was “replete with falsehoods and deceptive narratives,” but “Americans just didn’t know it at the time.”
However, earlier this year, thanks to “whistleblower revelations and statements by former Attorney General William Barr,” the country learned that the Times’ claims --- that evidence implicating the Bidens was derived from Giuliani — were false. Rather, a separate investigation had uncovered reporting from a “highly credible” FBI confidential human source (CHS) implicating Hunter and Joe Biden in a bribery scandal.
Now the FOIA-produced emails reveal even more: The FBI lies, laundered through The New York Times, were fed directly to Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss.
The Emails
The never-before-seen emails provided late last week by the Department of Justice to the Heritage Foundation and its Oversight Project director, Mike Howell, in response to a court order, included an email thread revealing how the Times story landed in Weiss’s lap.
“Ladies, here you have attached the NYT’s story ‘Material from Giuliani Spurred a Separate Justice Depart. Pursuit of Hunter Biden’ which posted a bit ago. Link here,” a Dec. 11, 2020, 6:44 p.m. email from the FBI Office of Public Affairs’ National Press Office read.
The names of the two email recipients were redacted. But the “(PG) (FBI)” and “(BA) (FBI)” coding suggests the National Press Office had forwarded the Times’ article, which spun evidence obtained by the Pittsburgh office as originating from Giuliani disinformation, to the Pittsburgh FBI office and the Baltimore FBI office --- which provided support for the Delaware U.S. attorney’s office.
Within two hours of the FBI’s National Press Office sharing the false narrative about evidence of Biden family corruption, the link had been forwarded to a variety of Baltimore FBI agents, from there to Weiss’s top deputies Lesley Wolf and Shawn Weede, and further on by Weede to fellow Assistant U.S. Attorney Shannon Hanson and Weiss. Weiss himself then forwarded the Times article to another member of the Delaware U.S. attorney’s office, whose name was redacted in the FOIA-provided documents.
Given the sweetheart deal Weiss’s top Assistant U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf later tried to gift to Hunter Biden, this latest revelation raises the question of whether (and, if so, when) Weiss’s staff informed him of the CHS’s reporting that Burisma paid $5 million each in bribes to both Hunter Biden and Joe Biden.
These questions are now more important than ever because the just-released emails show Weiss’s staff sharing with him The New York Times’ false reporting that portrayed evidence coming from the Pittsburgh FBI office as sourced solely to Rudy Giuliani. But that’s not true --- not by a long shot. At a minimum, Wolf and others in the Delaware office knew that — but Weiss might not have.
0 notes
mightyflamethrower · 7 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Two sets of laws now operate in an increasingly unrecognizable America.
Consider the matter of unlawfully removing and storing classified papers.
Donald Trump may go to prison for removing contested White House files to his home.
So far Joe Biden seems exempt from just such legal jeopardy.
But as a senator and Vice President with no right, as does a president, to declassify files, Biden removed and, as a private citizen kept for years classified files in unsecure locations.
Biden’s team strangely revealed the unlawful removals after years of silence.
It did so because the Biden administration found itself in the untenable position of prosecuting the former president for “crimes” that the current president committed as well—albeit far earlier and longer.
Impeachable phone calls?
Donald Trump was impeached by a Democratic House for delaying foreign aid until the Ukrainian government guaranteed that Hunter Biden and his family were no longer engaged in corrupt influence peddling in Kyiv.
In addition, the Left charged that Trump was targeting Joe Biden, his possible 2020 rival.
Yet Biden, with impunity, bragged that he had fired a Ukrainian prosecutor looking into his own son’s schemes by promising to cancel outright American foreign aid.
And the Biden administration’s Justice Department is now targeting Trump, currently the frontrunning challenger to Biden in 2024.
Election denialism?
Trump was indicted by Special Counsel Jack Smith, in part for supposedly conspiratorially “unlawfully discounting legitimate votes.”
Will Smith then also indict Stacey Abrams? For years Abrams falsely claimed that she was the real governor of Georgia. She toured the country in hopes of “discounting” the state vote count.
Or maybe Smith was referring to the conspiracist and former president Jimmy Carter.
He alleged that Trump in 2016 “lost the election, and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf.”
Will Smith charge Hillary Clinton?
She serially libeled Trump as an “illegitimate” president.
Clinton hatched the Russian collusion hoax, and bragged she joined the “Resistance” to continue her attacks on an elected president.
Or maybe Smith meant the Hollywood crowd.
Lots of actors cut commercials after the 2016 election—begging viewers to pressure the electors to ignore their constitutional duties to honor their states’ popular vote and instead swing their ballots to Hillary Clinton?
Was not that “insurrectionary?”
Or was Smith thinking of January 2005?
Then 32 Democratic House members and Sen. Barbara Boxer tried to nullify the legally certified vote in Ohio—to thereby elect the loser John Kerry.
How about destroying evidence?
Trump was also indicted for allegedly attempting to erase video material from his own cameras in his own house.
Yet Hillary Clinton with impunity eliminated subpoenaed communication devices and thousands of emails.
Violations of security? Trump was indicted for supposedly loosely talking about classified material to visitors at his home.
So will prosecutor Smith’s indictments also extend to Hillary Clinton? She sent classified documents illegally over her unsecure private server.
FBI Director James Comey memorialized a confidential president conversation.
Then he deliberately leaked what properly was a classified document to the media. It was all part of Comey’s Machiavellian gambit to prompt the appointment of a favorable special prosecutor.
What about subversion of the electoral process?
Donald Trump was indicted for supposedly undermining the election of 2020 by questioning the integrity of the balloting.
In 2016, Hillary Clinton’s campaign illegally hired two foreign nationals Christopher Steele and Igor Danchenko to compile falsehoods about her opponent Trump.
Clinton hid her payments behind three paywalls.
Her team, along with the FBI, helped leak the counterfeit dossier to the media and high officials to undermine her opponent—and thus subvert the election itself.
Lying and perjury?
Two Trump aides and Trump himself are indicted for supposedly stonewalling federal investigators by claiming either amnesia or ignorance.
That tact is exactly what James Comey did 245 times while under oath before Congress.
What do former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former Director of the CIA John Brennan, and former interim FBI Director Andrew McCabe all have in common?
All three admitted they flagrantly lied either under oath to Congress or to federal investigators.
The three were never indicted for their false and perjurious testimonies.
We have now serially devolved from the 2016 election “Russian collusion” hoax, to the 2020 election “Russian disinformation” laptop hoax, and down to the 2024 election weaponized indictments.
Out of pathological hatred or fear of Donald Trump, the Left has crafted one set of laws for themselves, and another for all other Americans.
They smugly believe their own moral superiority grants them such a right to apply laws unequally—or to ignore them altogether.
To retain power at all cost, and to destroy a political rival, leftwing Democrats are systematically dismantling the constitutional foundations of the United States as we once knew them.
0 notes