While it's certainly beginning to look that way, what with the pace and seriousness of the ongoing revelations we still may not have reached peak SHittingTF time yet. For example ...
An e-mail to Hunter Biden's partner from a top Chinese official on July 26, 2017 shows the Chinese energy company CEFC proposed a $5 million "interest-free" loan to the Biden family "based on their trust on [Biden] family[.]"— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) October 22, 2020
"Should CEFC keep lending more to the family?" pic.twitter.com/MGFizPqOdm
Less than two weeks later, on August 8, 2017, $5 million was wired from a CEFC-affiliated investment vehicle to a Delaware LLC, which spent the next year transfering nearly $4.8 million directly to Hunter Biden's firm, according to Senate investigators. https://t.co/Byyo3FNp3T pic.twitter.com/8XHHVTuFml— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) October 22, 2020
Wait til you see how many well-known members of the media were emailing Hunter Biden— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) October 21, 2020
Now you know why they all tried to bury the story so hard
It just seems to keep coming, with no end in sight. At the rate things are going we may need to start a pool on whether SloJoe shows for the debate.
You just beat me to this:ReplyDelete
Another smoking gun:
500 million interest free loan to the "BD" family" from Chinese partner CEFC, as part of a Joint Venture agreement with Hunter and his merry pals.
Note that they are discussing a JV when CEFC states it does not yet have a process for "evaluating proposals."
Cart in front of horse, anyone?
IOW, this suggests the JV is a fraud -- window dressing for laundering interest free loans to the Biden family.
Just speculating: Biden family defaults on loans, and Chinese entity declares bankruptcy, and everyone walks away happy.
Oh, gee; that's right -- CEFC DID GO BANKRUPT!
What an amazing coincidence.
Wait--did you just say 'money laundering'? Where have I heard that before?Delete
YES! There's definitely an echo in this blog!Delete
I wonder if the Frank Luntz email is a veiled shot across the bow for Kristen Welker. I do wonder if she has ever exchanged any interesting emails with Hunter Biden.ReplyDelete
The interest free loan thing is a problem. There's no such thing in corporate finance. The IRS has pretty tight rules on accounting for such things. To the extent that interest is waived or undercharged, the recipient has reportable imputed income. If these loans do not show up on tax returns, add tax fraud to the charges.
So I've been reading--re 'interest free' loans.Delete
I own a business so have been careful to always charge an interest rate between myself and my company that is reasonably viewed as something that would be agreed to by unrelated parties. IRS publishes minimum interest rate tables as a safe harbor rate to charge for loans made to officers or related parties. It has been reported that Biden's taxes show no China related income or business. Slam dunk tax fraud.Delete
The $500 million loan is effectively a gift. Forgivable. No interest.Delete
Is it too much to hope that the IRS will be all over the entire extended Biden Crime Family?
In general, "interest free" loans are also used to avoid income tax- loan proceeds are not taxable, as income is.ReplyDelete
Loan with no collateral and no security docs, would be highly suspicious in most cases as merely a disguised transfer. Due to abuse in this area, IRS added sections to capture income from "loan forgiveness" where the "loan" ends up not being repaid. Where "lender" filed bankruptcy somewhere, it'd be interesting to see if the "debt" was listed as an asset in their pleadings, and if any attempts were made to collect outstanding money to offset its own liabilities.
If a loan is just not going to be repaid, then it'd be interesting to see if any taxpayers declared the income under the loan forgiveness sections, which generally convert the "loan" proceeds to regular income.
Thanks for the input. I actually took two tax courses--including corporate tax. That would've been in about 1975! I wouldn't dream of offering my opinion beyond the broadest generalities.Delete
no worries! to clarify the spectrum a little more, the imputed interest provisions discussed by some above are applicable, but they are mainly designed to pick up some imputed time value of money where a legit loan is made, but the parties don't provide for it. If it's a legit loan, and not repaid, then the debt forgiveness rules apply. If it has the badges of fraud, in that it was really just income paid in the form of a "loan" to avoid income tax, then IRS can argue it was tax fraud and say it was not a loan at all, but regular income right on payment (which is rarely declared with taxes paid on it!) The Al Capone snafu...Delete
Look at the complex copper-cobalt mine purchase. Stephen McIntyre has a good thread on it.ReplyDelete
Bottom line is Chinese partner guaranteed Hunter's firm (BHR) ROI, and agreed to provide the buy-in capital if BHR could come up with the funds on their own for the 24% interest.
No capital investment, with profits guaranteed by Chinese firm.
A bribe by any other name smells just as bad.
Maybe AOC can brief us on how the copper-cobalt mine investment in the Congo dovetails with the Green New Deal! Sorry, couldn’t resist.Delete
On the bright side, maybe the MSM will cover the environmental angle.
Someday I do believe AOC will make a lovely cocktail waitress! 🤣😂😁
I read that Trump is bringing Bobulinski to the debate.ReplyDelete
I truly love Trump's presidency.
It's always a good time.
I sincerely believe there is at least a half million voters out there who will go for Trump literally just to see how the series finale concludes, not caring a wit what the policy is.Delete
never a dull moment
There is no reason to not enjoy yourself while supporting the policy.Delete
Will Bobulinsky be ignored and destroyed by sundown?ReplyDelete
Seeing as he's a navy vet, and gave almost 10K to Dem candidates, it looks to be a rough road for the MSM to do that, seeDelete
Rough for the MSM to conceal the truth and propagate a lie? Increasingly, these leftwing activists posing as journalists just do it, facts be damned. The good news is that there's more and more conservative media exposing the Left's pathological deceit:Delete
At this point Joe Biden is to big to fail for the party and the media. The only hope is a massive rejection of this on November 3rd.ReplyDelete
Trump is going to make it 100% certain that the entire country hears about this topic, even if the media won't cover it.ReplyDelete
That has been the secret to his genius all along. He doesn't care how they talk about it, so long as they are talking about it. He forces them to talk about it in order that they might smear and discredit him and sooner or later their disingenuous prattle shows itself for what it is, they erode their own credibility and more and more people are PERSUADED to Trump's point. "Fake news" is the classic example. Is there any doubt more citizens by a wide margin are convinced the main stream media simply follow a narrative rather than report the news than did when Trump first came down the escalator?ReplyDelete
"...so long as they are talking about it."ReplyDelete
Can't remember where I read it, but remember reading a quote from a famous Ad man once that went something like "bad publicity is better than no publicity".
"I don't care what they write about me as long as they spell my name right."Delete
Apocryphal quote often attributed to P. T. Barnum.
Two interesting developmentsReplyDelete
The first has the smell of fear about it. The second is a -- what's up with that?
Jeffery Epstein did not commit suicide.
Just read something that may be a clue:ReplyDelete
Apparently CEFC went bankrupt after US accused it of .... wait for it.....
... MONEY LAUNDERING!
This fits my hypothesis that there was a money laundering investigation underway at FBI long before Hunter Biden's laptop got into FBI's hands.
And the hits just keep on commin'!ReplyDelete
Looking forward to the 5am FBI SWAT raids a la Roger Stone:ReplyDelete
"Veteran & business partner of Joe & Hunter Biden CONFIRMS ON THE RECORD WITH PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that Biden lied about Chinese business partnerships, took millions from the communists for himself & defrauded his company. The FBI is now in possession of the evidence"
Ok, we got the Biden side of the story during the debate- straight from the horse's mouth- "this is all nothing but Russian disinformation! He never took a single dollar!" and he said it with as straight a face as "I did not have sexual relations with that woman," and "If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."ReplyDelete
MW: you need to see what I just found; does it suggest what I think it suggests?ReplyDelete
"Ho and CEFC China executives attended President Museveni’s inauguration and obtained business meetings in Uganda with Museveni and top Ugandan officials, including with the Department of Energy and Mineral Resources. After the trip, Ho requested that Kutesa and Museveni assist CEFC China in acquiring a Ugandan bank, as an initial step before pursuing additional ventures in Uganda. Ho also offered to “partner” with Kutesa and Museveni and/or their “family businesses,” making clear that both officials would share in CEFC China’s future profits. In exchange for the bribes offered and paid by Ho, Kutesa thereafter steered a bank acquisition opportunity to CEFC China.
The investigation was conducted by the FBI and IRS Criminal Investigation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations and the Department of Justice, Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs provided assistance."
>> https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-head-organization-backed-chinese-energy-conglomerate-sentenced-three-years-prison <<
This African "Joint Venture" scam by CEFC, for which the CEFC guy was convicted, matches up perfectly with the emails about the CEFC deal Hunter and his partners were working on with CEFC, right down to "partnering with the family business" to share in "future profits."
IOW, CEFC was caught doing the same scam with people in Chad/Uganda as it appears they were trying to do with Hunter Biden, his financial partners, and the rest of Biden Crime Family!
"Pattern and practice?"
I don't doubt they've been doing this all over the world.Delete
This prosecution was brought in Spring 2019, by SDNY. Berman was US A at SDNY at that point, IIRC.
The SDNY investigation of CEFC money laundering/FCPA violations would have Hoovered up not only financial transaction by the firm, but also emails, phone calls, text messages, etc. To the extent CEFC activities with the Biden Crime Family overlapped the CEFC crimes in Africa, SDNY would have picked up on those activities as well, very likely including the emails on Hunter's laptop to and from CEFC!
In December 2019, FBI Baltimore FO gets it's hands on the Hunter Biden HD material, and reportedly passes it up the food chain as a FBI HQ "special investigation" because of the high profile Biden family being implicated. If that material was evaluated under the auspices of a different investigation (in FBI HQ) than the one prosecuted by SDNY, they may have become aware of the emails and other incriminating documents, and realized this was the SAME Chinese company that SDNY had investigated and prosecuted. IOW, both FBI HQ and SDNY were looking at the same emails, etc., from Hunter's HD
I assume Barr was notified of the fact that SDNY appeared to have the some of the same incriminating evidence that FBI HQ was finding on Hunter's computer, much of it related to the SAME Chinese energy company SDNY had already prosecuted. When it became clear that SDNY was NOT following up investigation the Biden Crime Family's involvement with CEFC, Barr realized that SDNY was "protecting" the Bidens.
I assume he then attempted to lure Berman away from SDNY, probably to see if he was the road block to investigation the Biden/CEFC corruption. When that failed, he fired him as US A at SDNY in June 2020.
What I'm wondering is if DOJ was already suspecting SDNY was covering Bidens' butts BEFORE FBI got its hands on Hunter's laptop/HD, and had FBI investigating it very quietly.
It's too difficult to say. The problem with this type of speculation is that there are two avenues of reporting--the FBI investigative one and the DoJ prosecutive one coming from local USA offices. Coverups of that sort require an awful lot of people to be on board and not to say a word.Delete
I SDNY was failing to follow out political corruption investigations aggressively it would seem to me that the most likely way Barr might learn about that would be from complaints by the FBI.
In the Russia Hoax we saw on a number of occasions that Strzok and others at FBIHQ had to 'hide the ball' from the field agents and run things themselves without being transparent. Because they didn't really trust anyone outside their small circle. Once things started to unravel the first people to bail were the field people like Pientka.
So, if this was a NY investigation reporting to HQ, I have to believe that Wray and others would be afraid to go along with the SDNY coverup that you posit.
The other side of it is that there's no real NY nexus for Biden or the other domestic contacts--except, of course, Cuomo. I would expect that the NY investigation would therefore refer investigation to WFO or other divisions, rather than trying to keep it to themselves. I don't think the SDNY USAO could have kept this to themselves.
I think the SDNY USAO kept it to themselves because it is corrupt and the FBI/DOJ in DC didn't want to touch the case.Delete
SDNY had the CEFC case because the money to Africa went through a NYC financial institution, hence it was an overt act in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy, and SDNY could thus have jurisdiction. (This is not speculation; it says as much in the cited DOJ press release.)Delete
Once they had jurisdiction, they would have seen all evidence produced via search warrants/subpoenae for CEFC comms/bank transfers, which may well have picked up traffic/payments to/from Hunter Biden and his partners.
"may well have picked up traffic/payments to/from Hunter Biden and his partners."Delete
Why would a case involving Chad and Uganda have picked up evidence regarding Congo? My recollection is that the Bidens were involved with copper mining in Congo.
"This is not speculation"
What's speculation is your speculation about a coverup.
"Why would a case involving Chad and Uganda have picked up evidence regarding Congo?
My recollection is that the Bidens were involved with copper mining in Congo."
The Congo mine deal was one of many Biden/Chinese deals. My point if CEFC is the nexus of the Chad/Uganda bribe case AND many (but not all) of the Biden China deals. CEFC, AFAIK, had no connection to the Congo mine deal the Bidens were involved with.
I'm simply suggesting that if SDNY was investigating/prosecuting CEFC for the Chad/Uganda bribe case, they likey picked up emails, phone calls/bank transfers to/from the Biden crew related to the other deals CEFC was negotiating with them.
" 'This is not speculation'
What's speculation is your speculation about a coverup. "
Yes, the cover-up is speculation, and I so stated.
But the reference to what is "not speculation" is the reason why SDNY had jurisdiction over the CEFC Chad/Uganda bribe case. The DOJ press release specifically states the $400k payment went through some financial entity in NYC, hence, SDNY had jurisdiction to bring a conspiracy case.
That's all that I'm claiming as being "non-speculative."
I apologize if my earlier posts were ambiguous.
My original reference to "speculation" was referring to coverups--I explained why that would be very difficult to pull off in the NY CEFC case.Delete
"CEFC is the nexus of the Chad/Uganda bribe case AND many (but not all) of the Biden China deals."
But that doesn't mean that investigating the Chad/Uganda case will somehow lead to the Bidens. CEFC is a Chinese outfit and I guarantee you that the FBI did not obtain all CEFC's comm and finance records. You have no reason whatsoever to suppose that FBI NY had any knowledge of Biden/CEFC dealings.
Mark Wauck, I recall you telling me that the Federal RICO statutes did not apply to the Bidens corrupt activities.ReplyDelete
Do you still think RICO is not applicable?
"I recall you telling me that the Federal RICO statutes did not apply to the Bidens corrupt activities."Delete
I can't recall ever saying that and believe we still don't know enough about their activities to say that. Show me where I made a definitive judgment on that.
Alternatively, show me how RICO would apply.