In Biden’s laptop, there are hundreds of e-mails detailing work with “foreign principals,” which can include not just foreign governments or foreign agencies, but foreign-based companies, nonprofits and individuals, including Americans living in foreign countries. That would covers companies like CEFC, which had close ties to the Chinese government.
Biden does not appear to have done much, if any, conventional legal work for these foreign sources, despite his high fees. Indeed, there is no record Hunter did anything to earn the cool $1 million given to him to “represent” CEFC’s Patrick Ho, who was later convicted and sentenced to three years in prison.
Instead, the record shows Biden advising and facilitating access for foreign clients, including meetings with his father. That includes, like Manafort, dealings with Ukrainian officials and businesses.
There was nothing subtle about the alleged influence-peddling effort of Hunter Biden or his uncle James. In Washington, influence peddling is a virtual cottage industry. However, there was a little sophistication in these e-mails to hide the corruption. The Hunter dealings were more like influence peddling by eBay in terms of the raw pitches and open admissions.
On May 1, 2017, Hunter Biden recognized how his work with CEFC at a minimum could trigger FARA and acknowledged that his uncle was also aware of the danger:
“No matter what it will need to be a US company at some level in order for us to make bids on federal and state funded projects. Also We [sic] don’t want to have to register as foreign agents under the FCPA which is much more expansive than people who should know choose not to know. James has very particular opinions about this so I would ask him about the foreign entity.”
The e-mail is a prosecutor’s dream. FARA violations, like tax violations, can be viewed as cut-and-dried charges for jurors. In this case, the potential defendant not only incriminated himself under the law, but his associates and family, as well.
That is why, if the Justice Department applies the same standard applied to figures like Manafort, Biden would likely be indicted.
Hunter Biden should be prosecuted. If there's any justice, he will be.
But would it really matter if he was? Scott Ritter was arrested three times and convicted and sent to prison as a sex offender but it doesn't appear to hurt him.
So let me try to get this straight, Jackson Hinkle, Jimmy Dore and others have time to whine about registered sex offender Scott Ritter getting (briefly) suspended by Twitter but they don't have time to ever cover the ongoing Iraq War. Do I have that right?
We do realize that Iraq held elections October 10th and they still don't have a president or prime minister yet, right?
Yet, they've got time for moaning about Scott Ritter.
I'm all for free speech. I will dfend speech I hate and strongly disagree with. But a registered sex offender being briefly taken down by Twitter is not something I'm goning to fret over. I'm also the last one to call for more laws in most cases; however, since Ritter was arrested three times for attempting to reach out to girls (underage) for sex online, was convicted for it and was put in prison for it, maybe we do need laws for people like him with regards to social media? Maybe if you used the net to try to commit crimes, as part of your punishment, you are limited in what you can do online?
I don't care for Ritter. But my main concern is that he is an ongoing threat to girls. You don't get arrested three times -- as he did -- for this without people realizing that you are a threat.
When C.I.'s dictating the snapshot, she and I are usually on the treadmills or the stepper and I heard her Tuesday morning. She ended up scrapping it because she was angry and she didn't want to be that angry. She shouldn't have to be.
Where is the grown up in the room? Not Richard Medhurst, not Jimmy Dore, not Jackson Hinkle, not THE CONVO COUCH, not . . . Why does she have to speak up to begin with? People should have enough common sense to not promote a registered sex offender. If they really needed to have him on their programs (and they don't), they should list "registered sex offender" as part of his credits because that's what he is.
I'm very proud of C.I. for (yet again) stepping up.
But I question in what world we live where people of the left, supposed great thinkers, require C.I. -- or anyone -- to point out the obvious fact that a registered sex offender who repeatedly targeted young girls (three arrests) is not someone you want to promote -- unless you want to be seen as an accessory to his next crime. That could happen. I never would have thought a woman would be legallly punished because she told a man to kill himself and he did. But it happened. By the same token, I guess if you have been promoting the 'wisdom' of registered sex offender and he ends up raping a young girl, you could be charged as an accessory.
"TV: The Myths" (Ava and C.I., THE THIRD ESTATE SUNDAY REVIEW)l
OUR GREAT NATIONAL PARKS.
A NETFLIX friend asked Sunday if we wanted to see it ahead of its premier on NETFLIX this Wednesday?
Sure. For those who don't know, former President Barack Obama, who has
never created content for TV, signed a multi-million dollar contract
with NETFLIX after leaving the White House. For those keeping track,
true original John Waters can't catch a break, The great Allison Anders
is sidelined as well. But by all means, let's give millions to a
politician with no track record in the entertainment field instead of
giving working artists the breaks that they actually deserve and need.
OUR GREAT NATIONAL PARKS?
In terms of artistry, it's garbage. NETFLIX spent millions for visuals
that would be obvious and uninspiring in a child's VIEWMASTER. There is
no sense of art, no sense of majesty. How do you do that? How do you
have something as gorgeous as a national park and present it in a
perfunctory manner? It's robotic and lacks wonder and amazement.
But then Barack's never been that entranced with the world of nature.
It's cute to watch him try to do, post-presidency, what most try to do
in the last year or two of their second term -- create a legacy.
There are many subjects Barack was qualified to make a documentary series on.
For example, he could have done with on drone murders. Barack oversaw the deaths of many (including American citizens) with drones. He appeared to have a special affinity for murdering guests at weddings.
How about HITCHED AND DITCHED where Barack picks out weddings and, after
the I dos are exchanged, Barack takes out one of the spouses with a
drone?
Human Rights Watch noted:
On December 12, 2013, a United States aerial drone launched four
Hellfire missiles on a convoy of 11 cars and pickup trucks during a
counterterrorism operation in rural Yemen. The strike killed at least 12
men and wounded at least 15 others, 6 of them seriously.
Yemen authorities initially described all those killed in the attack
outside the city of Rad`a as “terrorists.” The US government never
officially acknowledged any role in the attack, but unofficially told
media that the dead were militants, and that the operation targeted a
“most-wanted” member of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) who was
wounded and escaped.
Witnesses and relatives of the dead and wounded interviewed by Human
Rights Watch in Yemen said the convoy was a wedding procession. They
said everyone in the procession was a civilian, including all of the
dead and injured, and that the bride received a superficial face wound.
Or he could do a series about broken promises. NAME THAT BROKEN
PROMISE! or HOW I LET US VETERANS DOWN could focus on Barack's promise
to end veterans homelessness Remember that? Barack grandstanding in
2010 that he was going to end veterans homelessness by 2015? Never
happened, did it? In fact, Jennifer McDermott (AP) reported
at the start of 2017, "Pledges by President Barack Obama and a national
nonprofit organization to end homelessness among veterans did not meet
their goal."
You don't give millions to someone to make content when they're not directors or producers or even an actor. This was just a bribe. Barack is as unethical as Joe Biden and that's probably why the two worked together so well.
"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Wednesday, April 13, 2022. The left hurts itself by embracing a registered sex offender and presenting him as a trusted source and friend.
I thought we'd rogressed. I hoped we had. But instead, here we are again, having to discuss Pig Boy.
And maybe that's my fault. When he started slinking back in, via CONSORTIUM, my attitude was that they just needed to stop lying for him. Joe couldn't stop lying which is why we no longer note CONOSRTIUM.
Joe did a video where he praised Pig Boy. Pig Boy was an innocent. His only crime was that he told the truth a bout the Iraq War and for that the media turned on him.
No.
That's not the truth,
Right now, Johnny Depp is in court with Ambr Heard. The knee jerk reaction is to believe Amber. Why?
She's perjured herself in a pre vious court appearance. She has not been forthcoming about whether or not she donated over #3 million to the ACLU. She got headlines for doing that. Several years ago. The headlines proclaimed that she did it. But she didn't. And instead of being honest about it, the ACLU tried to insist some sort of 'private communication' standard.
I'm sorry, ACLU, private? When she grand standed for publicity, she threw away privacy. I'm told she didn't donate the money.
Doesn't surprise one bit.
When Johnny decied to marry her, I told her she would ruin his life. Because she's trash and I knew she was. When I spoke to Amber after learning of the marriage plans, I asked what she was thinking?
Did she love him?
Was this something that was supposed to last forever? If so, did that mean that they were going to have an open marriage because she was a declared bisexual.
How exactly did she a happy marriage?
She couldn't answer the question and she couldn't because she was a user who was about to take Johnny for all she could.
Now you can argue that this is a he-said.she-said issue and that no one can know (the audio clips make it pretty clear she abused Johnny). You can do that.
And we can disagree based on our own interpretations.
Will Smith assaulted Chris Rock and some idiot who is not in the industry but got a paper degree barely wanted to tell the press that no one stripped Kevin Spacey of his Oscar.
When was Kevin convicted?
In a court of law, when was Kevin convicted? He hasn't been. We have an actor on a STAR TREK show insisting that when he was 14 or 15, he went to a party at the then-20something Kevin Spacey's apartment -- without his parents, without a guardian -- and the kid was bored and went to Kevin's bedroom and got on his bed. After midnight, when all the normal guests had the decency to go home, Kevin walks into his bedroom and finds the guy on his bed. He kisses the guy.
The guy does not want to be kissed. The guy leaves. Years later, the guy tries to turn it into an assault. Not by the rules in play then and not by the rules today either.
Maybe next time, don't go to strenage men's apartments, don't stay there alone after midnight and don't get on their bed.
If you do those things and a man kisses you and you object and that's the end of it, count yourself lucky
You didn't raped.
You're a drama queen who needs the world's attention.
I don't care bout Richard Dreyfuss' kid, either. He groped you, did he? In front of your dad? What does that say about relationship you and your father have?
Kevin's not ben convicted of anything.
He may hve used his position in London to harass men and I would find that objectionable but where are the results to that investigation> To that announced investigation?
I believe Michael Jackson assaulted children. Micaheal wasn't convicted of that. We can all disagree and argue over that.
We are thinking beings. We have a brain. And we have to look at what's put before us and come to our own conclusions.
I grasp that.
Except when you try to apply that to convicted offenders.
Pig Boy is Scott Ritter.
He's suddenly become very popular in the last few weeks with Jackson Hinkle, Aaron Mate, Max Blumenthal, Lee Camp, Richard Mehurst, the so-called 'Socialist' behind ENEMA OF THE STATE, Dan DeBar, Faran Fronczak, Franc Analysis, Comrade Misty, THE CONVO COUCH . . .
Exactly why are you bringing him on?
He's not an expert on Ukraine. He wasn't even enough of an expert on Iraq to justify Sy Hersh doing that embarrassing tour with him -- a promotional tour that cost Hersh dearly.
You'll want to pay the cost to?
Let's look at that list for a moment.
Jackson Hinke. I was surprised when you used your platform to try to pick up women. Mainly because I thought you were gay. But also because it was such an abuse of the power you had been given by your audience. You and your buddy were drunk and you brught on the two drunk women and produced a very shoddy episode and also disgraced yourself. I don't know how you thought that was journalism or something to share with the world, but you did.
It was sad to watch and it goes to, at the very least, a level of immaturity that you need to address and, at worst, some issues that you have.
Richard Medhurst? I defended you from the gossip. I won''t do that again.. I defended you from charges -- whispers -- that you'd assaulted women. I won't do that again. You have brought Scott Ritter on repeatedly in the last weeks.
I believe tht goes to your character and I no longer am comfortable defending you.
I think you all need to take a look at your actions.
Scott Ritter was arrested three times for attempting to find underage girls online and have sex with them. The first time, he largely talked his way out of it and was able to keep it quiet. The second time, he got a slap on the wrist and, after he began speaking of Iraq, his enemies in the Democratic and Republican parties leaked to the media that he'd been arrested twice for this pedophilia. And that he was on probation for it.
That's what got him kicked off the corporate media.
Joe tried to lie on a CONSORTIUM program and claim that Scott was kicked off because he was telling truths about Iraq.
No.
Kicked off because he was a pedophile.
And yet he was being promoted by Panhandle Media. And they never noted the arrests.
If Scott's behavior continued, and it tends to do so with pedophiles, we noted that these outlets were putting young girls at risk. They could say, "I read him at THE NATION so I thought I could trust him!" (Katrina vanden Heuvel, when it was put to her in terms of her own daughter, got it and stopped highlighting him at THE NATION), or "I saw him on DEMOCRACY NOW! so I thought I could trust him!"
No surprise, two times wasn't the end of it for Scott. After Barack Obama became president (Scott had previously insisted the Bush administration had targeted him and persecuted hm and he was innocent!!!), Scott got arrested again. He didn't get a slap on the wrist this time. He got put on trial. He was found guilty on multiple counts and was sent to prison.
He is now a registered sex offender.
If Twitter bans him, like Mike, I really don't care.
I think, as a registered sex offender, his Twitter account should note that. I think it should be dislcosed anytime someone's stupid enough to bring him on as a guest.
Three times.
What does this ay about the way the left sees women and girls?
We're just disposable. We don't matter. "Larger issues," you understand.
F**k that and anyone who operates under that.
You are condoing violence against females when you bring him on. You promote as a victim and as a trusted voice. Shame on you.
Now we made all these arguments in the '00s and managed to shut down his sphere of influence.
As he began popping back up recently, I was hoping someone else would step forward and that I wouldn't have to again be the bitch that has to rain on their party and point out the obvious.
But it's not happening. Monday night, for Hilda's Mix, I noted all the e-mails coming in on this topic asking me to speak to it. I didn't yesterday morning because I was too angry. If Hinkle and Medhurst think I was hard on them, they should read the unpublished version of yesterday's snapshot.
I don't get these people. But maybe their own vanity will save them?
Scott Ritter, convicted sex offender, is not an expert on Ukraine.
When you bring him on to make your case, ou're making a weak case because anyone watching can say, "He's a sex offender. Why listen to him?"
More to the point, he's a really dumb sex offender. In the '00s he was arrested for it three times. Three. Most crooks would have gotten smarter, not Scott.
What does that say about his 'great' mind and what he has to offer?
You look like an idiot bringing him on.
And you better believe that women and survivors of assault are notcing.
And it's going to be you who suffers. Not Scott, you.
You're harming yourself because you're sending out a message that someone convicted is a good guest. This is not a person done in by a whisper campaign. This is a man three times arrested, publicly tried, found guilty and sentenced to prison. A man who is a registered sex offender.
You're making your choices obvious. Don't be surprised when women decaide you don't have a voice worth listening to.
And don't be surprised that people decide not to listen to you or trust your jdugment when you're big witness is a convicted sex offender.
The following sites updated:
