Beyond Obtuse – ABC’s Heavily Edited and Shaped Interview With Hunter Biden…


Amid the scandal of Joe Biden’s son receiving payments from business deals in Ukraine and China related to his family influence, ABC steps in to run defense with an exceptionally obtuse interview with Hunter Biden.

Either the interviewer doesn’t know anything about how Corporate Boards pay members and the structure of business ventures, partnerships, capital fee repayment, board fees etc; or the interviewer intentionally didn’t challenge some of these ridiculous obfuscations by Hunter Biden; perhaps both.

During the Chinese deal Hunter Biden was in a partnership. Hunter Biden paid $420,000 for a ten percent equity position (a “capital call”) in the new venture AFTER the Chinese invested $1.5 billion [a 10% equity purchase would be worth $150 million]. The partnership could then pay the board members “board fees” or “capital investment fees” as the investment matures. The big payout doesn’t come until after the investment matures and Biden -as a partner- then sells his equity position back. That payoff is coming.

So when Hunter Biden says he “hasn’t made a dime” off the China deal, that’s because the investment fund hasn’t matured yet. In essence, he’s fibbing; and counting on people not to know how this stuff works.

.

Here’s part two:

Advertisements

Part Two, BIDEN A SMOKESCREEN: Democrats covering Russia investigation origin in Ukraine


207K subscribers

PART TWO: Democrats and the media will try to make you believe the whistleblower complaint shows President Trump trying to gather dirt on Joe Biden in regards to his relationship with officials in Ukraine. But it goes way further. Glenn theorizes that Democrats within the DNC were working with the Ukrainian government before an entirely new — and unexpected president — took power there. Democrats likely thought everything was buttoned up…but now allegations (from The Hill’s John Solomon) show Ukrainian officials were IN COLLUSION with U.S. officials from the Obama administration to dig up dirt on Trump to begin the Russian investigation before the 2016 campaign. Glenn argues THAT’s the information Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and Attorney General Bill Barr were looking for.

Part One, COMPLAINT TIMELINE: Whistleblower accuses Trump, Giuliani of Ukraine Collusion


207K subscribers

SUBSCRIBE
PART ONE: Glenn and Stu explain the entire timeline of the President Trump administration’s dealings with Ukraine. Though the whistleblower doesn’t make his accusations clear in his complaint, it seems he (or she!) is alleging President Trump and Rudy Giuliani threatened to withhold funds from Ukraine until the president would “play ball”…or gather dirt on Joe Biden. And that’s what Democrats are trying to build a case around for impeachment. The guys detail exactly what happened over the last year, specifically in regards to Trump’s relationship with the former prosecutor general, Leshchenko.

Biden’s Ukraine Scandal Explained I Glenn Beck


442K subscribers

SUBSCRIBE
Glenn Beck uses the chalkboard to show how Joe Biden used his position as the vice president to help his son, Hunter, make a profit in the Ukraine — a very BIG profit.

 

Sunday Talks: NBC’s Chuck Todd Goes Bananas During Spastic Effort to Protect The Swamp…


Chuck Todd is fully vested in defending the overall CIA and FBI efforts in the 2016 election.  Throughout his “reporting” Todd has been one of the biggest defenders of corrupt political behavior by the intelligence apparatus and John Brennan.

Today, amid media marching orders that must be retained, Senator Ron Johnson appears on Meet The Press and Chuck Todd angrily confronts any effort to reveal the corruption.

Why all the Outrage? – President Trump Tweets The Heart of the Matter – A DC Tradition of Selling Influence for Personal Financial Gain…


As customary President Trump reminds everyone about the big picture.

The reason the DC system -writ large- is going bananas is because selling the influence of political office for financial gain is the custom and currency of DC affluence.

In the larger picture the severe reaction from DC is not about Joe Biden, but rather the accepted familiarity of what Joe Biden selling office represents….

Sunday Talks: Jim Jordan -vs- George Stephanopoulos…


Representative Jim Jordan was present during a closed-door interview with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Kurt Volker.  Jordan appears on ABC to debate George Stephanopoulos over the carefully selected excerpts, and subsequent spun narrative, by House democrats and media.

Notice ABC’s George Stephanopoulos and Fox’s Chris Wallace repeat the same defensive talking points in a united effort to protect the customary behavior of DC politicians who sell their political influence for personal financial gain.

At the heart of the matter, the selling of influence is the process that must be protected. The process of gaining wealth by selling influence is how/why most DC Senators and corrupt politicians run for the office.  President Trump is spotlighting this; hence the fury of the backlash from those the DC industry.

.

Part two below:

.

Rudy Giuliani: Media “Deliberately” Covering-Up Joe Biden Selling Public Office…


Rudy Giuliani appears on Media Buzz to discuss how the U.S. media has refused to dig into the details of Joe Biden’s corrupt activities.

.

Sunday Talks: Rep. Chris Stewart -vs- Chris Wallace…


Representative Chris Stewart (R-Utah) of the House Intelligence Committee debates the insufferable Chris Wallace over the issues of corruption in the swamp.

Obviously the tradition of politicians selling their office for financial gain political hits a nerve with Wallace who must defend the practice in order to defend the swamp.  The level of pearl-clutching pretzel logic by Wallace is off-the-charts…. In essence, all corruption must be accepted while politicians are running for office.

Biden & Violating the FCPA would give him 5 years in Prison if he was a Corporate Director


COMMENT: Mr. Armstrong thank you for your work and opinion.
RE: The Impeachment of Trump – Here We Go Again
Certainly the two Bidens deserve to be investigated by the countries where the sweet heart deals were made. This situation surfaced many months ago and there were no investigations by any country including the United States.

It can be said President Trump is merely pointing out the obvious that something corrupt was in play with the seat heart deals.

He’s in trouble in the eye’s of his political adversaries because he’s calling on the countries of (sweat heart deal) origins to look into these deals because Joe Biden is CURRENTLY running for the nomination of his part for President. I haven’t heard anybody address the idea of how would the situation change if Joe Biden WASN’T running for the Democratic nomination, or fails to win it.

Maybe Joe Biden is running for President to evade being investigated, but what I do know is his son isn’t running for any elected office. Maybe he should because you can’t be investigated by a foreign government if you are.

What a joke.

REPLY: This is a clear violation of the FCPA which states offering: “… payment, promise to pay, or authorization of the payment of any money, or offer, gift, promise to give, or authorization of the giving of anything of value to—…” The penalty in the private sector is 5 years in prison. They define it as:

“Any natural person that is an officer, director, employee, or agent of a domestic concern, or stockholder acting on behalf of such domestic concern, who willfully violates subsection (a) or (i) of this section shall be fined not more than $100,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”

I am sure Biden will claim he made no such offer, but his son was hired knowing it would benefit with access to his father. If his son made such a suggestion, and his father was a director of a corporation, Biden would be in prison. It’s no different than the Clinton Foundation. Saudia Arabia even donated until she lost the election and then the donations stopped. They were clearly to “buy” influence. Biden’s son was hired for the same reason. The Statue reads:

A person’s state of mind is “knowing” with respect to conduct, a circumstance, or a result if—

(i)such person is aware that such person is engaging in such conduct, that such circumstance exists, or that such result is substantially certain to occur; or
(ii)such person has a firm belief that such circumstance exists or that such result is substantially certain to occur.

In the private sector, claiming your son made the offer not you would not cut it. They would call it still a conspiracy. The jury would find you guilty and off you go. But for politicians, playing word-smith with statutes works.