A Republican Conspiracy Theory About a Biden-in-Ukraine Scandal Has Gone Mainstream. But Is Not True

It wouldn't have happened if his name was Hunter Smith. With no discernible talents, what exactly was he selling worth the $1.5B contract the Chinese gave him, ten days after traveling to China on Air Force II?

 

His dad was VP.

 

You should put down the crack pipe when you're typing.

 

Clearly. Don’t tell me you wanna make him president now? I know republicans love people who live off of Daddy’s successes.

 

Hunter would be an improvement over most of your party's candidates.

 

Cooked up by "Hannity and friends?"

Are you saying the video of Biden committing a crime is fake?

 

And case in point about the swamp.

Democrats have once again chosen poorly.

 

I am saying that nobody has produced any evidence that what he was doing or saying was a crime. The MSM is reporting the hell out of it. Biden said he was carrying out his mission which was backed by our State Department and all of our Allies in NATO. He says he was engaged in an act of diplomacy in dealing with a new and unstable government. You and Hannity are alleging that his son was involved in criminal activity over there and that Biden was obstructing justice by bribing the new government to kill the investigation into his son’s criminal activity. So far I have seen no evidence of either allegation. So let me ask you this:

1) Exactly what crime did Hunter Biden commit? If so, what evidence has been produced which indicates that he committed that crime?

2) Exactly what evidence is there that what Joe Biden was negotiating with the Ukranian government using loan guarantees in order to cover up his son’s criminal activity?

Now when I see any credible evidence that this is the case, I will be glad to listen to it or read it. If true, I agree that he should be prosecuted and disqualified for president. However so far all I have heard or seen is the same kind of weak innuendo and slander that creeps like Hannity are famous for. Biden is not ducking the questions that the mainstream reporters are bombarding him with and he really does not seem concerned about them. I am sure he will be grilled on the Sunday shows this week. My guess is that it’s just more reflective bullcrap churned out by Trump and his lackeys in the media and the congress. We’ll see...

 

Another crime on video that Barr won’t prosecjte? Lmao

 

How did Billy Carter convince Pabst to put his name on the can? Do you honestly think Jimmy Carter intervened on his behalf?
Family members profit from their more famous relatives all the time. Probably pisses them off more often than not.
The only question here is did Joe protect his son from investigation? The overwhelming evidence is that, as cited in the OP, Joe's actions to push out a prosecutor that wasn't prosecuting any of the big boys and who's own assistant resigned because of corruption in that prosecutor's office tasked with ferreting out corruption, would have made it more likely that an investigation into Jr's employers would occur. That would be like protecting your son from arrest by unlocking the door, inviting the police in and leading them to his room.
The current Ukrainian prosecutor says he has found no evidence of wrong doing by either Biden, that a company can pay it's board what it wants and has offered to turn over all details on Jr's remunerations. It's not illegal to take money, your best bet here is to pull a Manafort on him him and check his taxes and see if he registered as a foreign lobbyist if he did any lobbying for them. In either case that is a job for the US justice department. To invite under coercion a foreign government to come to a different conclusion on an investigation already done against a political opponent is treasonous.

 

Trump needs to start kicking in doors.

Let them hang themselves first though.

 

Right, I don't know who is going to believe that. Biden's Son was sitting on the board as a consultant to a company who's product he knew nothing about. Didn't even know the language and was being paid $83,000 a month? For what? Biden didn't want that investigation to go any farther than it did and gave the government 6 hours to fire the investigator, or he would cut off all the money promised. That's what they did. Biden's not going to get out of this that easy.

 

Yeah, and Obama didn’t bribe Iran; and Clinton didn’t “have sex with that woman. Spare me the tripe, I prefer steak and potatoes

 

Anyone who is informed about Shokin's behaviour would believe it. That is why the EU, UK & US were pushing for his removal - he wasn't prosecuting corruption very enthusiastically. His deputy at the time says he wasn't investigating the company Biden's son was involved with. The UK government at the time complained because they had frozen funds controlled by that company but had to unfreeze them because the Ukrainian prosecutor didn't provide enough assistance with the investigation.

So, what is the evidence that this guy was investigating Hunter Biden? I mean actual evidence, not supposition or assumption or anything else like that. Actual documentary or witness evidence. Over to you.

 

Tucker informs here...

 

I though he was investigating the company that Biden sat on the board for. The investigation may not have gotten to him yet.

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaig...-were-first-to-enlist-ukraine-in-us-elections

As I have reported, the pressure began at least as early as January 2016, when the Obama White House unexpectedly invited Ukraine’s top prosecutors to Washington to discuss fighting corruption in the country.

The meeting, promised as training, turned out to be more of a pretext for the Obama administration to pressure Ukraine’s prosecutors to drop an investigation into the Burisma Holdings gas company that employed Hunter Biden and to look for new evidence in a then-dormant criminal case against eventual Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, a GOP lobbyist....

At the time, Biden was aware that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma, the firm employing Hunter Biden, after a December 2015 New York Times article.

What wasn’t known at the time, Shokin told me recently, was that Ukrainian prosecutors were preparing a request to interview Hunter Biden about his activities and the monies he was receiving from Ukraine. If such an interview became public during the middle of the 2016 election, it could have had enormous negative implications for Democrats.

Come on, forget about Trump for a while. Democrats have broken all sorts of laws and disgraced themselves in the process. You can't have one law for yourselves and another one for Trump.

 

I think the fact he was on the board, didn't know the language or anything about the gas business and getting paid $83,000 a month might just make one wonder why he was hired outside, of being the son of the VP. You don't pay out that kind of money for someone that has nothing to offer you but influence.

 

Your article claims that Biden would have known that his son was being investigated based on an NYT article. This is what the article says:

So, what Biden would have known is that the Ukrainian prosecutor had not only refused to help the UK, leading them to unfreeze $23 million, but that the prosecutor's office has sent letters to Burisma telling them they were not being investigated. If that is correct then Biden, along with the UK, EU & US government, pressured for the removal of a guy who had reassured Hunter Biden's company it wasn't being investigated.

Not exactly a slam dunk there.

Shokin's deputy at the time says he was not pursuing an investigation against Burisma:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...e-probe-casts-doubt-on-giuliani-s-biden-claim

So, Shokin wasn't pursuing a case against Burisma and the push to remove him didn't come from Biden.

....but apart from all of that Biden was definitely pressuring Ukraine to drop an investigation against his son. Like totally.

 

OK, so you don't actually have any evidence that Biden used his influence to shut down an investigation into Hunter Biden. Gotcha.

Whether or not someone hired him hoping to cultivate influence (an assumption on your part) doesn't get to square one of proving that Biden pressured Ukraine not to investigate him. The prosecutor in question claims he was investigating, but documentary evidence, the US ambassador at the time, the UK government at the time & the testimony of his deputy all say otherwise.

So, evidence?

 

He says now that he was, but an awful lot of evidence from the time & after says he wasn't. His deputy at the time is one of those who says he wasn't & that there was no US pressure to shut down investigations in to Burisma. I wouldn't be surprised if Shokin was still unhappy at his removal & was happy to stir up a bit of trouble for some of the people he blames for it.

 

It's a helluva lot more surrounding Trump.

 

Lets find out together.

 

Let's do, I wonder how many documents he will refuse to turn over.

 

That's right, if it's not a bald faced lie from Trump and Co. or weird assed unsubstantiated rumor you're not buying. Who could blame you?