Hunter Biden kom i nye vanskeligheder, da hans aftale med anklagemyndigheden i Delaware fladt sammen. Grundlæggende og stik imod almene retsprincipper, tilstod Biden nogle juridiske transgressioner og skulle så slippe for grovere forbrydelser. På den måde kunne man opretholde en fortælling om, at Bidens skam stod til ansvar for deres handlinger. Wall Street Journal skriver i deres leder
The plea deal between federal prosecutors and Hunter Biden has always looked fishy, and on Wednesday it was exposed in court. The legal fireworks make it harder to ignore fundamental questions about the integrity of the five-year investigation.
(…)
The question hovering over the plea is whether Joe Biden was also in on his son’s sleazy influence-peddling. Is the President the “big guy” famously mentioned in an email to Hunter from one of his business partners?
The press has given the President a pass on his repeated claims that he knew nothing about Hunter’s business, and the White House continues to stonewall. Shortly after the hearing, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre refused to clarify whether her new official line—that “the President was never in business with his son”—was a change from his many previous public claims that he never even discussed his son’s overseas business dealings with him.
No doubt the change in the official line reflects White House recognition of the growing evidence that contradicts Mr. Biden’s earlier statements. Americans may learn even more next week, when his son’s former business associate, Devon Archer, is scheduled to testify behind closed doors to the House Oversight Committee about then-Vice President Biden’s attendance at dinners and talks on speakerphone with Hunter’s foreign business associates.
Voters may not care much about the shady dealings of a dissolute son. But they will care if President Biden is shown to have lied about his knowledge of his son’s multi-million-dollar payments to Biden family members—and if Mr. Biden’s Justice Department blocked IRS and FBI investigators from learning the truth.
Rigsret er det logiske skridt, mener Margot Cleveland i The Federalist
The evidence of President Joe Biden’s corruption during his time as vice president is now so overwhelming and the implications so serious, the disparate investigations underway in the House and Senate can no longer suffice. Nor can the Department of Justice and the FBI — even under the auspices of a special counsel — be trusted to oversee the investigation given the overwhelming evidence that they obstructed the probe into the Biden family.
There is only one option left that can deliver truth and transparency to the American public, and that is an impeachment inquiry that investigates not just President Joe Biden, but Attorney General Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney David Weiss, and FBI Director Christopher Wray.
(…)
Over the last week, our country has learned not only that a “highly credible” confidential human source (CHS) had reported that then-Vice President Biden was involved in a $10 million bribery scheme to protect Burisma, but that portions of the CHS’s reporting had been corroborated, including by the CHS’s handler. The FD-1023 summary of the CHS’s reporting, released by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, last Wednesday, also confirms that Burisma’s founder, Mykola Zlochevsky, expressly referenced the firing of Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin in his discussions of the bribe paid to Joe Biden. That detail is huge because Biden had previously bragged that he prompted Ukraine to fire Shokin by threatening to withhold U.S. aid.
Then just yesterday, news broke that Hunter Biden’s former business partner and fellow Burisma board member, Devon Archer, was prepared to testify before the House that Hunter Biden put his father on the phone with business associates at least two dozen times while Joe Biden was vice president.
(…)
The overwhelming evidence now makes it impossible to trust the DOJ and FBI to handle any investigation into the Biden family or government officials involved in protecting the Biden family. Only a broad impeachment inquiry of Joe Biden, the DOJ, the FBI, and top officials will suffice.
John Solomon fra Just the News
“Back in 2019, I got to interview Victor Shokin. And he was completely unaware of what the FBI was saying, but here’s what he told me. When President Poroshenko came to him, he said Joe Biden wants me to fire you. I don’t really have a reason, but I’m going to have to do it.
He’s upset that you won’t stop investigating Burisma. Just think about that. That was mocked at the time, but now the FBI was being told something exactly the same and it wasn’t getting it from Shokin, but it was getting it from the owner of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, and his top lieutenant.
This was in the Fall of 2019 before the impeachment of Donald Trump. Keep in mind Donald Trump got impeached for asking Ukraine to investigate the things that the FBI now should have investigated. It’s pretty remarkable.”
Burisma var bekymret for, om Shokins undersøgelser ville forhindre et køb af et amerikansk energiselskab og betalte derfor Hunter og Joe “the big guy” Biden 5 mio. dollars hver. Burismas direktør Vadym Pozharsky mente at Hunter var lidt dummere end hans hund. Overraskende, da faderen Joe Biden mener, at Hunter er det mest intelligente menneske, han kender. Apropos hunde, så fortsætter Joe Bidens hund med at bide alle omkring sig. Og så Cesar Milan siger, er der ingen dårlige hunde, kun dårlige mennesker.
Som Peter Schweizer spørger om ukrainske præsident Zelinsky bruger sin viden om Bidens korruption i Burisma, som pression mod at få flere våben, skriver Gateway Pundit
Peter Schweizer: We’ve been at this since 2018.
** They initially said there were no foreign deals.** Then they shifted and said there were. There might have been foreign deals, but the Bidens made no money.
** Then it became Joe Biden didn’t know about any of the deals.
** Then it became Joe Biden didn’t participate in any of the deals.
** And now it’s that he was not in business with his son.
Look, the implications for this are huge, Jesse.
If you look at that 1023 form that the FBI released, if that document is true, that document reveals that one of the people that was at those meetings that heard the conversations about bribing the Bidens worked for – President Zelensky. Who really wants to believe, if that meeting took place and that document is accurate, that that individual did not go and report to President Zelensky what he heard?
(…)
And again, if that document is true, who wants to believe that President Zelensky and his administration have not used that as leverage over Joe Biden when it comes to negotiations on Ukraine policy?
We may all have to start learning the Ukrainian word for compromise because this is a very clear indication of how this has shaped this administration’s policy towards Ukraine and also towards China.
Jeg tror ikke på, at den tidligere skuespiller Zelinsky er meget andet end en marionet. Jeg tror mere på skumle kræfter i CIA, der på vegne af Pentagon og de tilknyttede pengeinteresser, har skubbet til den affældige præsident og at de har udløst, mere end de kan overskue, inkompetente som korrupte mennesker altid er.
Det er CIA og FBI, der har al snavset på Biden og Justitsministeriet dækker over ham. Lige indtil han ikke længere kan bruges, altså. “And just remember, they impeached Trump for asking questions about it.” skrev Lauren Boebert.
Tilbage til Hunter. “The sentencing hearing was a moment that made the Hindenburg disaster look like a seamless landing” skriver Jonathan Turley.
A FARA charge could further expose Hunter’s alleged influence-peddling operations, with what House GOP investigators say were millions in foreign payments from a virtual rogue’s gallery of foreign officials. The Justice Department also would face pressure to seek the same long jail sentence given to Manafort; he was sentenced to 73 months of imprisonment, which included the statutory maximum 60 months for a conspiracy to violate FARA. (That same year, political consultant W. Samuel Patten pleaded guilty to lobbying and consulting on behalf of the Opposition Bloc, a Ukrainian political party, and received 36 months of probation.)
That is not even including potential felony charges for the original gun violation, money laundering, or other crimes. If the Justice Department were to show the same aggressive effort toward Hunter Biden that was shown to figures like Manafort, Hunter could be looking at a real possibility of years in jail.
There is, however, the ultimate “break-the-glass” option that I raised previously if the Bidens and their supporters could not rig the process: Joe Biden could pardon his son and then announce that he will not run for reelection.
Facing an impeachment inquiry, low public support, and a son in the legal dock, Biden could use the case to close out his political career. Of course, a pardon would be what I consider another abuse of the pardon power for personal benefit. President Bill Clinton waited until the end of his second term to pardon his half-brother. Biden could do the same by acknowledging that the pardoning of his son is a form of raw self-dealing. However, as he has said throughout the scandal, he loves his son and blames his crimes on his struggle with addiction and grieving.
With that, Biden could bow out of the election without admitting (as many on both sides are saying) that old age has taken its toll on his mental and physical capacity. He would end his political career with an act as a father, which some would condemn but most would understand. That would clear the way for a new generation of Democratic candidates who would have a better chance of defeating Donald Trump or another Republican presidential candidate.
President Biden could even give Hunter a preemptive or prospective pardon. That would effectively end any federal investigation, although the pardon would need to cover the waterfront of possible charges. By resigning and becoming a lame-duck president, Biden also would undermine congressional Republicans’ impeachment calls. And it would allow his own allies to declare the scandal over, with Biden taking responsibility by giving up a second term in office.
Det ser altså alvorligt ud for præsident Joe Bidens fremtid, som hans søn Hunter viser sig stadigt mere kompromitteret. Så man skal nok læse det som et tegn, at da Senator Chuck Grassley fremlagde nye beviser mod Hunter Biden i Burisma sagen, skyndte Hunter sig ud til sin advokat, der fluks skulle og ryge en stimulerende ‘bong’ på altanen. Og en løsning han fremkom med, var at lade en assistent ringe til dommerens kontor og udgive sig for en Republikansk repræsentant, der havde fortrudt noget bevismateriale.
New York Post fortæller
The drama began in the morning when the House Ways and Means Committee filed an amicus brief to Delaware US District Judge Maryellen Noreika arguing that the 53-year-old had benefited from “political interference which calls into question the propriety of the investigation” into alleged crimes including money laundering, felony tax evasion and failure to register as a foreign agent.
The filing included testimony by two IRS whistleblowers who sat for transcribed interviews on May 26 and June 1.
What happened next was outlined in a letter sent to the judge Tuesday afternoon by the committee’s top lawyer, Theodore Kittila.
“[A]t approximately 1:30 p.m., we received word that our filing was removed from the docket,” Kittila said. “We promptly contacted the Clerk’s office, and we were advised that someone contacted the Court representing that they worked with my office [emphasis original] and that they were asking the Court to remove this from the docket. We immediately advised that this was inaccurate. The Clerk’s Office responded that we would need to re-file. We have done so now.”
Kittila included email exchanges with court officials and Hunter Biden’s attorneys in the fresh filing.
“Hi Ted, Following up on our recent telephone conversation, the woman who called was a Jessica Bengels,” confirmed court official Samantha Grimes. “… She said she worked with Theodore Kittila and it was important the document was removed immediately or they could file a motion to seal. I do deeply apologize for all the confusion on our part.”
Bengels is the director of litigation services at the New York-based law firm of Latham & Watkins, where Hunter Biden attorney Chris Clark was formerly a partner.
When Kittila confronted the first son’s legal team, Hunter’s attorneys tried to claim the filing contained confidential tax and identifying information, even though the whistleblower testimony has been public for more than a month.
Tør jeg sige det? The walls are closing in? Eller er det tick, tock, tick, tock?
MONOKULTUR 
Skriv en kommentar