The Original Reporting About Hunter Biden/Ukraine

Synthaholic

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2010
71,525
51,375
3,605
*
"Impeccable credentials" and "New York Times" aren't in the same galaxy.

Ron-Burgundy-Saying-I-Dont-Believe-You.gif
 
Hunter Biden was the family millstone around Joe Biden’s neck, the kind of chronic problem relative that plagues many political families. George H.W. Bush had his son Neil; Jimmy Carter had his brother Billy.

Still, when Joe Biden went to Ukraine, he was not trying to protect his son — quite the reverse.

The then-vice president issued his demands for greater anti-corruption measures by the Ukrainian government despite the possibility that those demands would actually increase – not lessen — the chances that Hunter Biden and Burisma would face legal trouble in Ukraine.

When it first was published, my 2015 story seemed to have little impact, other than to irritate Joe Biden and his staff. It ran inside the print edition of the Times, not on the front page.
 
But somebody obviously read my piece, as well as others like it, because questions about the Bidens in Ukraine suddenly came roaring back this year. Giuliani, Trump, and their lackeys began spreading the false accusation that Biden had traveled to Ukraine to blackmail the government and force officials to fire the country’s chief prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, to derail an investigation into Burisma.

In May, when this issue began to surface, The Intercept’s Robert Mackey wrote an excellent piece debunking the lies in the new pro-Trump version of the Biden story. In the process, he provided greater detail than I had included in my 2015 story. He wrote that Shokin had been forced from office at Biden’s urging because he had failed to thoroughly investigate corruption and stifled efforts to expose embezzlement and misconduct by public officials. Biden did threaten to withhold $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees unless Shokin was ousted. But that was because Shokin had blocked serious anti-corruption investigations, not because he was investigating Burisma.
 
The truth doesn’t get many replies from the USMB wingnuts. :21:
The real truth is that most non Progs do not have an encyclopedia of ready to print Prog wrongs or reputed wrongs like you do about others. And frankly, they should. Because you outnumber them by a factor of ten.
 
The truth doesn’t get many replies from the USMB wingnuts. :21:
The real truth is that most non Progs do not have an encyclopedia of ready to print Prog wrongs or reputed wrongs like you do about others. And frankly, they should. Because you outnumber them by a factor of ten.
Ready to print? I have to actually read the articles, then cut n paste here. I have to screenshot the tweets, save them, then upload them here.

All wingnuts do is reply “but...her emails’
 
James Risen. Impeccable credentials. No bias. Republicans can’t slime this guy since they've cited his journalism for years. Sorry wingnuts.


I Wrote About the Bidens and Ukraine Years Ago. Then the Right-Wing Spin Machine Turned the Story Upside Down.

I Wrote About the Bidens and Ukraine Years Ago. Then the Right-Wing Spin Machine Turned the Story Upside Down.

Uh-huh, Joe didn’t like his son Hunter, and he wasn’t trying to protect him.

This is literally your argument now?
 
Hunter Biden was the family millstone around Joe Biden’s neck, the kind of chronic problem relative that plagues many political families. George H.W. Bush had his son Neil; Jimmy Carter had his brother Billy.

Still, when Joe Biden went to Ukraine, he was not trying to protect his son — quite the reverse.

The then-vice president issued his demands for greater anti-corruption measures by the Ukrainian government despite the possibility that those demands would actually increase – not lessen — the chances that Hunter Biden and Burisma would face legal trouble in Ukraine.

When it first was published, my 2015 story seemed to have little impact, other than to irritate Joe Biden and his staff. It ran inside the print edition of the Times, not on the front page.

The 2015 piece on Hunter was to warn Joe Biden that the company his son worked for was being investigated. What did old Joe do after that? He bribed them with $1.2 billion of our tax dollars to fire the prosecutor, and the investigation which would expose his son.
 
The truth doesn’t get many replies from the USMB wingnuts. :21:
The real truth is that most non Progs do not have an encyclopedia of ready to print Prog wrongs or reputed wrongs like you do about others. And frankly, they should. Because you outnumber them by a factor of ten.
Ready to print? I have to actually read the articles, then cut n paste here. I have to screenshot the tweets, save them, then upload them here.

All wingnuts do is reply “but...her emails’
When it comes to Hillary back when the Clinton's first came to national prominence in 1991/1992 I liked her. But there were stories behind the scenes then. Then Bill did a 180 on what he talked about during the primaries after the election. Hillary had influence on him. That led to the so called 1994 Repub revolution. Which led to deals made between Bill and the congress. Although they did not do thing that were permanent in nature. I soured on the Clinton's and then began to wonder if Perot ran to get Bill elected. It seems it is a joke when we have over 300 million people and power families rule the land.
 
Since when do we hold so called journalists in such high esteem? 95% of them will say whatever they are paid to say. Almost all political journalism has absolutely nothing to do with reality or truth.
 
Even if the story of Biden getting a Ukrainian prosecutor fired is true or false that doesn't change his son getting $166 thousand dollars a month for nothing and how corrupt and dirty that deal is. And Biden did nothing to stop that.
He's more crooked than a first grader's handwriting.
 
But somebody obviously read my piece, as well as others like it, because questions about the Bidens in Ukraine suddenly came roaring back this year. Giuliani, Trump, and their lackeys began spreading the false accusation that Biden had traveled to Ukraine to blackmail the government and force officials to fire the country’s chief prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, to derail an investigation into Burisma.

In May, when this issue began to surface, The Intercept’s Robert Mackey wrote an excellent piece debunking the lies in the new pro-Trump version of the Biden story. In the process, he provided greater detail than I had included in my 2015 story. He wrote that Shokin had been forced from office at Biden’s urging because he had failed to thoroughly investigate corruption and stifled efforts to expose embezzlement and misconduct by public officials. Biden did threaten to withhold $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees unless Shokin was ousted. But that was because Shokin had blocked serious anti-corruption investigations, not because he was investigating Burisma.

Which is why this administration was looking into the new elected President, because of the past corruption.
 
Which is why this administration was looking into the new elected President, because of the past corruption.
Like Joe Biden's son's deal with Burisma, you mean, speaking of corruption and peddling influence?

Not sure this administration was "looking into" the newly elected president. Trump called him purely as a matter of diplomacy congratulating him on being elected president. Zelensky and Trump agreed the corruption in the Ukraine was bad (something Zelensky campaigned on) and of course Biden and Burisma came up. Did Biden Save This Ukraine Firm Responsible for $1.8B in Missing Aid? His Son is on the Board...

"In the last days of the Obama administration, Vice President Joe Biden took a "swan song" trip to Ukraine, a notoriously corrupt country where he had been the administration's "point person." On the eve of this trip, the country announced it would end a criminal investigation into a company connected to the loss of $1.8 billion in aid funding — a company whose board of directors included Biden's son Hunter."
 

Forum List

Back
Top