TDS: Trump’s Dell Scheme - Buy $5M in stock and pump it as President

Are you admitting that any accusations against Trump are unjust if he has not been found guilty of the crimes in court?
Let's make a distinction between the court of public opinion and a court of law. I can hold the opinion that Trump is guilty, that is the right of the court of public opinion. But, you could rightfully demand that I prove it, and I would give you the only proof that is available, which are court documents that inventory the proof. That is more proof that you are giving me for your accusation. You can hold your opinion, but the onus is on YOU to prove it. So, prove it.
 
Both are false, and Epoch Times is not a reliable source. You haven't prove squat, that's just a list.

NYPOST is not a reliable source, but I'll debunk it for you:
The NY Post article reported on the July 20, 2023 release of an FBI document (known as an FD-1023) by Sen. Chuck Grassley, framing it as evidence that Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky told an FBI informant that he paid Joe and Hunter Biden $5 million each in bribes.

Leftists claim news sources not approved by the democrat party are to be considered lying fake news outlets. Democrats lie to protect democrat lies and lying leftist propaganda news.

1780332652857.webp
 
Are you claiming Biden did not threaten to withhold guaranteed US aid to Ukraine if Poroshenko did not fire the prosecutor investigating Hunter's criminal boss in Ukraine?
Factoid: We wanted Shokin out BECAUSE he was NOT investing corruption, including Burisma. Let's get that straight. Now then:

The premise of your question is factually incorrect. While then-Vice President Joe Biden did leverage one billion dollars in US loan guarantees to pressure Ukraine into firing Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, he did so to combat corruption, not to protect his son.

Biden was executing an official, coordinated policy supported by the US State Department, the European Union, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank, with the approval of both Democrats and Republicans in the senate at the time. Western allies demanded Shokin's ouster because he was actively refusing to investigate corruption, not because he was aggressively pursuing it. In fact, the investigation into Burisma, the company connected to Hunter Biden, had already been shelved and was dormant under Shokin's leadership.

By forcing Shokin out, the United States and its allies were trying to install a prosecutor who would actually investigate oligarchic corruption. This pressure increased, rather than decreased, the legal scrutiny on Ukrainian energy companies.
 
Problem 1: The document is unverified hearsay — by design

FD-1023 forms are specifically used to record unverified information. All the document does is confirm that someone said that Zlochevsky made an accusation. It doesn't actually provide concrete proof. Republicans Release FBI Doc at Heart of Biden Bribery Claims—And It Shows Nothing

The release of the document confirms only that an informant told the FBI these things and an agent wrote them down. It does not offer anything outside of hearsay as evidence. Does Newly Released 'FD-1023' Document Prove Burisma CEO Gave Two $5M Bribes to Bidens?
Nobody should trust lying leftist claims that democrats did not commit serious crimes.

Biden Family Investigation - United States House Committee on Oversight and Accountability 2-12-24

Summary

Chairman James Comer and Oversight Committee Republicans are investigating the Biden family’s domestic and international business dealings to determine whether these activities compromise U.S. national security and President Biden’s ability to lead with impartiality. Members of the Biden family have a pattern of peddling access to the highest levels of government to enrich themselves, often to the detriment of U.S. interests. We are committed to following the Biden family and associates’ money trail—consisting of many complex, international transactions worth millions of dollars—and providing answers to the American people. The American people deserve to know whether the President’s connections to his family’s business deals occurred at the expense of American interests and whether they represent a national security threat.​

Evidence obtained by Committee Republicans reveals Joe Biden lied to the American people about his involvement in his family’s business schemes. The Biden family business model is built on Joe Biden’s political career and connections with Joe Biden as the ‘chairman of the board.’ Biden family members sold access for profit around the world to the detriment of American interests. If President Biden is compromised by deals with foreign adversaries and they are impacting his decision making, this is a threat to national security. The American people deserve transparency and accountability about the Biden family’s influence peddling. With the new Republican majority, Oversight Committee Republicans will continue pressing for answers to inform legislative solutions to prevent this abuse of power.

-CHAIRMAN JAMES COMER


Key Evidence:


 
Leftists claim news sources not approved by the democrat party are to be considered lying fake news outlets. Democrats lie to protect democrat lies and lying leftist propaganda news.

View attachment 1264001
It's about about facts. Either you have them or you don't. I won't deny NYPOST reportage and I will take the time to rebut any story they print. But they are hard left leaning, this is certain.
 
Phoney baloney, all of it. To wit:

Let's dispense with the insinuations, headlines, and endless repetition of the same allegations and focus on what the investigation actually produced.

After years of investigations, subpoenas, bank records, witness testimony, FBI interviews, IRS inquiries, laptop examinations, and a formal impeachment inquiry conducted by Joe Biden's political opponents, the following facts remain:

• Not one document produced by the Comer investigation establishes that Joe Biden participated in a corrupt business scheme.

• Not one financial record shows Joe Biden receiving proceeds from Hunter Biden's foreign business dealings.

• Not one bank account has been identified as receiving foreign payments on Joe Biden's behalf.

• Not one business entity has listed Joe Biden as an officer, director, partner, beneficiary, or signatory.

• Not one LLC has been proven to have been created for an unlawful purpose. Republicans routinely describe them as "shell companies," but LLCs are commonly used for numerous legitimate business, legal, tax, liability, and estate-planning purposes.

• Not one recorded phone call captures Joe Biden discussing a corrupt arrangement, requesting payment, promising favors, or directing business activity.

• Not one email presented to the public shows Joe Biden participating in the alleged schemes.

• Not one text message shows Joe Biden participating in the alleged schemes.

• Most references to Joe Biden in emails and texts are third-party statements, assumptions, boasts, or hearsay by other individuals—not evidence of Joe Biden's actions.

• Not one member of Joe Biden's staff has testified that he engaged in corruption.

• Not one member of Joe Biden's family has testified that he engaged in corruption.

• Not one witness claiming wrongdoing has produced documentary evidence proving Joe Biden accepted a bribe or altered policy in exchange for money.

• The checks written to Joe Biden by James Biden were documented as loan repayments. If they were something else, proof has never been produced.

• Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) are not findings of wrongdoing. The government explicitly states that SARs are investigative leads, not evidence of criminal conduct.

• FBI FD-1023 reports are not evidence. They are records of what a source claims. Such claims require independent corroboration.

• The most heavily promoted confidential source used by Republicans, Alexander Smirnov, was later indicted for allegedly fabricating significant portions of his allegations.

• Disagreements by IRS agents with prosecutorial decisions do not automatically establish corruption. Prosecutorial disagreements occur routinely within the Department of Justice.

• Hunter Biden's foreign business activities may have been unsavory, embarrassing, or opportunistic. None of those things are crimes by Joe Biden.

• Hunter Biden making money because he was the son of a famous politician is not proof that the politician himself participated in wrongdoing.

• The evidence unquestionably shows that Hunter Biden conducted foreign business.

• The evidence unquestionably shows that Hunter Biden traded on his family name.

• The evidence does not establish that Joe Biden sold U.S. policy, accepted bribes, directed Hunter's business dealings, or knowingly participated in a criminal enterprise.

That is the central problem with the entire narrative.

Every major allegation ultimately depends on inference piled upon inference.

Joe Biden was on a phone call, therefore he must have been involved.

Someone mentioned Joe Biden in an email, therefore he must have approved it.

Someone claimed access to Joe Biden, therefore Joe Biden must have been selling influence.

A business associate suspected something, therefore it must be true.

That is not how evidence works.

After years of investigation, the conclusion remains exactly where it began:

The evidence proves Hunter Biden engaged in foreign business dealings.

The evidence proves Hunter Biden leveraged his family name.

The evidence does not prove Joe Biden engaged in corruption.

Not one document.

Not one payment.

Not one email.

Not one text.

Not one recording.

Not one witness corroborated by hard evidence.

Not one smoking gun.

And after all this time, if such evidence existed, we would have seen it.
Your exonerations of the Biden crime family remain unproven and debatable.
 
Nobody should trust lying leftist claims that democrats did not commit serious crimes.

Biden Family Investigation - United States House Committee on Oversight and Accountability 2-12-24

Summary


Chairman James Comer and Oversight Committee Republicans are investigating the Biden family’s domestic and international business dealings to determine whether these activities compromise U.S. national security and President Biden’s ability to lead with impartiality. Members of the Biden family have a pattern of peddling access to the highest levels of government to enrich themselves, often to the detriment of U.S. interests. We are committed to following the Biden family and associates’ money trail—consisting of many complex, international transactions worth millions of dollars—and providing answers to the American people. The American people deserve to know whether the President’s connections to his family’s business deals occurred at the expense of American interests and whether they represent a national security threat.​

Evidence obtained by Committee Republicans reveals Joe Biden lied to the American people about his involvement in his family’s business schemes. The Biden family business model is built on Joe Biden’s political career and connections with Joe Biden as the ‘chairman of the board.’ Biden family members sold access for profit around the world to the detriment of American interests. If President Biden is compromised by deals with foreign adversaries and they are impacting his decision making, this is a threat to national security. The American people deserve transparency and accountability about the Biden family’s influence peddling. With the new Republican majority, Oversight Committee Republicans will continue pressing for answers to inform legislative solutions to prevent this abuse of power.

-CHAIRMAN JAMES COMER


Key Evidence:


Links are not proof. Show me anything that I'm claiming Comey, et al, has not provided. Links are not it, you have to show us the docs.

After years of investigations, subpoenas, bank records, witness testimony, FBI interviews, IRS inquiries, laptop examinations, and a formal impeachment inquiry conducted by Joe Biden's political opponents, the following facts remain:

• Not one document produced by the Comer investigation establishes that Joe Biden participated in a corrupt business scheme.

• Not one financial record shows Joe Biden receiving proceeds from Hunter Biden's foreign business dealings.

• Not one bank account has been identified as receiving foreign payments on Joe Biden's behalf.

• Not one business entity has listed Joe Biden as an officer, director, partner, beneficiary, or signatory.

• Not one LLC has been proven to have been created for an unlawful purpose. Republicans routinely describe them as "shell companies," but LLCs are commonly used for numerous legitimate business, legal, tax, liability, and estate-planning purposes.

• Not one recorded phone call captures Joe Biden discussing a corrupt arrangement, requesting payment, promising favors, or directing business activity.

• Not one email presented to the public shows Joe Biden participating in the alleged schemes.

• Not one text message shows Joe Biden participating in the alleged schemes.

• Most references to Joe Biden in emails and texts are third-party statements, assumptions, boasts, or hearsay by other individuals—not evidence of Joe Biden's actions.

• Not one member of Joe Biden's staff has testified that he engaged in corruption.

• Not one member of Joe Biden's family has testified that he engaged in corruption.

• Not one witness claiming wrongdoing has produced documentary evidence proving Joe Biden accepted a bribe or altered policy in exchange for money.

• The checks written to Joe Biden by James Biden were documented as loan repayments. If they were something else, proof has never been produced.

• Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) are not findings of wrongdoing. The government explicitly states that SARs are investigative leads, not evidence of criminal conduct.

• FBI FD-1023 reports are not evidence. They are records of what a source claims. Such claims require independent corroboration.

• The most heavily promoted confidential source used by Republicans, Alexander Smirnov, was later indicted for allegedly fabricating significant portions of his allegations.

• Disagreements by IRS agents with prosecutorial decisions do not automatically establish corruption. Prosecutorial disagreements occur routinely within the Department of Justice.

• Hunter Biden's foreign business activities may have been unsavory, embarrassing, or opportunistic. None of those things are crimes by Joe Biden.

• Hunter Biden making money because he was the son of a famous politician is not proof that the politician himself participated in wrongdoing.

• The evidence unquestionably shows that Hunter Biden conducted foreign business.

• The evidence unquestionably shows that Hunter Biden traded on his family name.

• The evidence does not establish that Joe Biden sold U.S. policy, accepted bribes, directed Hunter's business dealings, or knowingly participated in a criminal enterprise.

That is the central problem with the entire narrative.

Every major allegation ultimately depends on inference piled upon inference.

Joe Biden was on a phone call, therefore he must have been involved.

Someone mentioned Joe Biden in an email, therefore he must have approved it.

Someone claimed access to Joe Biden, therefore Joe Biden must have been selling influence.

A business associate suspected something, therefore it must be true.

That is not how evidence works.

After years of investigation, the conclusion remains exactly where it began:

The evidence proves Hunter Biden engaged in foreign business dealings.

The evidence proves Hunter Biden leveraged his family name.

The evidence does not prove Joe Biden engaged in corruption.

Not one document.

Not one payment.

Not one email.

Not one text.

Not one recording.

Not one witness corroborated by hard evidence.

Not one smoking gun.

And after all this time, if such evidence existed, we would have seen it.

 
Your exonerations of the Biden crime family remain unproven and debatable.
They are not exonerations they are requests for proof, you have not provided it. Links are not proof. Show us the docs. Put up or shut up.
 
Right wingers refuse to condemn outright thievery of this administration and instead want do dredge up lies about the last one as deflection. As long as the guy they voted for is stealing its ok? Fcking crazy.


Are government loans to private businesses evidence of presidential corruption?




Public Integrity closed its doors. POGO Investigates, the newsroom of the Project On Government Oversight, is preserving this website as an archive. Learn more

Center for Public Integrity
Center for Public Integrity



Investigating inequality


Open Search

Posted inDemocracy, Profiles in Patronage, Solyndra, The White House

Obama administration agreed to Solyndra loan days after insiders foresaw firm’s failure

greene_fox-100x100.jpg
Avatar photo
by Ronnie Greene and Matthew MoskSeptember 14, 2011

pic_release_2009.jpg
At the September 2009 groundbreaking for Solyndra's new "Fab 2" plant" were Arnold Schwarzenegger (center, lighter suit) and Energy Secretary Steven Chu (to the then-governor's right). A $535 million taxpayer-backed loan helped pay for construction. The government agreed that in the event of default private investors could try to recoup losses before taxpayers. Solyndra
Reading Time: 6 minutes
On August 20, 2009, an Energy Department staffer examining a pending loan to a California clean energy start-up came to a startling conclusion: The company would run out of money by September 2011. The government would, in effect, be placing taxpayers on the hook for a business likely to founder.



Still, things moved – and fast.



Only 15 days after the staffer’s warning, the Obama administration announced its commitment to lend Solyndra Inc., a California manufacturer of rooftop solar panels, $535 million as part of the stimulus program to spark the nation’s sagging economy and put Americans back to work.
 
Let's make a distinction between the court of public opinion and a court of law. I can hold the opinion that Trump is guilty, that is the right of the court of public opinion. But, you could rightfully demand that I prove it, and I would give you the only proof that is available, which are court documents that inventory the proof. That is more proof that you are giving me for your accusation. You can hold your opinion, but the onus is on YOU to prove it. So, prove it.
Biden has been found guilty of quid pro quo corruption in the court of public opinion.
 
Right wingers refuse to condemn outright thievery of this administration and instead want do dredge up lies about the last one as deflection. As long as the guy they voted for is stealing its ok? Fcking crazy.

Right wingers refuse to condemn outright thievery of this administration and instead want do dredge up lies about the last one as deflection. As long as the guy they voted for is stealing its ok? Fcking crazy.


Of course you don’t want to develop a rare earth mineral magnet for America and compete with the Chinese

It should be noted the company already got a 50’million dollar loan from xiden’s chip act
 
Are government loans to private businesses evidence of presidential corruption?

One or two things at a time, don't gish gallop me, please. To; your URL, sorry, Solyndra was investigated by Congress, the GAO, and the DOE Inspector General. After years of scrutiny, no criminal charges were filed against any government officials. The findings pointed to bad judgment and political pressure — not corruption or personal enrichment.
 
Factoid: We wanted Shokin out BECAUSE he was NOT investing corruption, including Burisma. Let's get that straight. Now then:

Nobody should believe that if Biden was guilty of the crime he would admit it. The fact is that Biden and all his leftwing supporters in the leftist news and democrat party lie about the facts and attempt to cover up the evidence. Biden claimed he had Shokin fired because Shokin was not doing enough to investigate Burisma and its owner and employees, including Hunter Biden. Joe Biden did not force Poroshenko to fire Shokin for not investigating Hunter but for moving ahead with his investigation of Burisma.

Shokin seized Burisma's assets in Feb 2016 and Joe Biden had Shokin fired in Mar 2016. Joe Biden had no business telling a sovereign nation to fire a prosecutor he was not happy with, but Joe did what Joe wanted and needed to do to protect his son.

February 2, 2016 - Bloomberg's report that Burisma investigation was dormant when Biden had prosecutor fired, is incorrect - The Clinton Foundation Timeline

February 2, 2016 – Bloomberg’s report that Burisma investigation was dormant when Biden had prosecutor fired, is incorrect

In Email/Dossier/Govt Corruption Investigations, Independent Researchers by Katie WeddingtonFebruary 2, 2016

If Shokin had seized Burisma property on Feb 2, 2016, then the Prosecutor General’s investigation of Zlochevsky and Burisma was obviously not “dormant” as reported by Bloomberg. So … can seizure of Zlochevsky property on Feb 2, 2016, be confirmed or not?
 
It's about about facts. Either you have them or you don't. I won't deny NYPOST reportage and I will take the time to rebut any story they print. But they are hard left leaning, this is certain.
For as long as you refuse to believe facts reported by honest news sources and blindly believe lies propagated by corrupted news outlets then you will remain stuck on blindness and stupidity.
 
Links are not proof. Show me anything that I'm claiming Comey, et al, has not provided. Links are not it, you have to show us the docs.

After years of investigations, subpoenas, bank records, witness testimony, FBI interviews, IRS inquiries, laptop examinations, and a formal impeachment inquiry conducted by Joe Biden's political opponents, the following facts remain:

• Not one document produced by the Comer investigation establishes that Joe Biden participated in a corrupt business scheme.

• Not one financial record shows Joe Biden receiving proceeds from Hunter Biden's foreign business dealings.

• Not one bank account has been identified as receiving foreign payments on Joe Biden's behalf.

• Not one business entity has listed Joe Biden as an officer, director, partner, beneficiary, or signatory.

• Not one LLC has been proven to have been created for an unlawful purpose. Republicans routinely describe them as "shell companies," but LLCs are commonly used for numerous legitimate business, legal, tax, liability, and estate-planning purposes.

• Not one recorded phone call captures Joe Biden discussing a corrupt arrangement, requesting payment, promising favors, or directing business activity.

• Not one email presented to the public shows Joe Biden participating in the alleged schemes.

• Not one text message shows Joe Biden participating in the alleged schemes.

• Most references to Joe Biden in emails and texts are third-party statements, assumptions, boasts, or hearsay by other individuals—not evidence of Joe Biden's actions.

• Not one member of Joe Biden's staff has testified that he engaged in corruption.

• Not one member of Joe Biden's family has testified that he engaged in corruption.

• Not one witness claiming wrongdoing has produced documentary evidence proving Joe Biden accepted a bribe or altered policy in exchange for money.

• The checks written to Joe Biden by James Biden were documented as loan repayments. If they were something else, proof has never been produced.

• Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) are not findings of wrongdoing. The government explicitly states that SARs are investigative leads, not evidence of criminal conduct.

• FBI FD-1023 reports are not evidence. They are records of what a source claims. Such claims require independent corroboration.

• The most heavily promoted confidential source used by Republicans, Alexander Smirnov, was later indicted for allegedly fabricating significant portions of his allegations.

• Disagreements by IRS agents with prosecutorial decisions do not automatically establish corruption. Prosecutorial disagreements occur routinely within the Department of Justice.

• Hunter Biden's foreign business activities may have been unsavory, embarrassing, or opportunistic. None of those things are crimes by Joe Biden.

• Hunter Biden making money because he was the son of a famous politician is not proof that the politician himself participated in wrongdoing.

• The evidence unquestionably shows that Hunter Biden conducted foreign business.

• The evidence unquestionably shows that Hunter Biden traded on his family name.

• The evidence does not establish that Joe Biden sold U.S. policy, accepted bribes, directed Hunter's business dealings, or knowingly participated in a criminal enterprise.

That is the central problem with the entire narrative.

Every major allegation ultimately depends on inference piled upon inference.

Joe Biden was on a phone call, therefore he must have been involved.

Someone mentioned Joe Biden in an email, therefore he must have approved it.

Someone claimed access to Joe Biden, therefore Joe Biden must have been selling influence.

A business associate suspected something, therefore it must be true.

That is not how evidence works.

After years of investigation, the conclusion remains exactly where it began:

The evidence proves Hunter Biden engaged in foreign business dealings.

The evidence proves Hunter Biden leveraged his family name.

The evidence does not prove Joe Biden engaged in corruption.

Not one document.

Not one payment.

Not one email.

Not one text.

Not one recording.

Not one witness corroborated by hard evidence.

Not one smoking gun.

And after all this time, if such evidence existed, we would have seen it.
Your objections to the House report remain unproven.
 
15th post
They are not exonerations they are requests for proof, you have not provided it. Links are not proof. Show us the docs. Put up or shut up.
I fear I may never be able to satisfy the desires of leftists for evidence of democrat wrongdoing as long as the democrat rube refuses to honestly examine facts he does not want to see or accept.
 
One or two things at a time, don't gish gallop me, please. To; your URL, sorry, Solyndra was investigated by Congress, the GAO, and the DOE Inspector General. After years of scrutiny, no criminal charges were filed against any government officials. The findings pointed to bad judgment and political pressure — not corruption or personal enrichment.
In spite of the fact that multiple democrats got in on the Solyndra deal, made money, and then got out before the collapse has nothing to do with my question. If Trump is guilty of some crime for a government investment of tens of millions of dollars in a private business, does that make Obama guilty of some sort of crime for a hundreds of millions of dollars government investment in a private business he recommended?
 
Back
Top Bottom