The Bidens: When Can We Start Calling It What It Is, Namely Bribery?

ExpressLane said:
They have uncovered a 250K wire transfer from China to Biden's Wilmington address.
Click to expand...

Do you think this thread is about right wing Biden lies? Try and get on track. This is about more Trump financial crimes and corruption. Why did you not respond with Teapot Dome or Vicuna coats?
 
Lionfish said:
QPeee presents more of his TDS,

...
Click to expand...

Your TDS is showing when you ignore Trump CELEBRATING Menendez, after his DoJ drops all charges against him and then try to shade Biden with him.


Your TDS is fully triggered...

3byvp3.jpg
 
Nutberg said:
Do you think this thread is about right wing Biden lies? Try and get on track. This is about more Trump financial crimes and corruption. Why did you not respond with Teapot Dome or Vicuna coats?
Click to expand...
NOPE. Because it is true that a ~ 250K wire transfer from China was sent to Joke Bribem's Wilmington address.



Hunter Biden's Chinese business partners sent $250,000 to Joe Biden's Delaware HOME in 2019, bank records show as Republicans reveal latest impeachment bombshell


BUT TRUMP!!!
 
Last edited:
ExpressLane said:
NOPE. Because it is true that a ~ 250K wire transfer from China was sent to Joke Bribem's Wilmington address.



Hunter Biden's Chinese business partners sent $250,000 to Joe Biden's Delaware HOME in 2019, bank records show as Republicans reveal latest impeachment bombshell


BUT TRUMP!!!
Click to expand...

Because you believe that? The reds have been investigating Hunter and Joe for years. Don't you think they would have charged them with SOMETHING by now ,if they had it? They charged Hunter with tax evasion and bad paperwork for buying a gun. Whoopdidoo.How can Joe survive such a scandal? Oh wait, it was not about him at all. Now the Reds are investigating them anew. This time will be different. Why? They will have floor time to tell lies on a committee. Jirdan can take of his jacket ab[nd scream about. Joe. that will do the trick.
 
QP! said:
Your TDS is showing when you ignore Trump CELEBRATING Menendez, after his DoJ drops all charges against him and then try to shade Biden with him.


Your TDS is fully triggered...
Click to expand...
QPeee/Mr. Tiny Penis, what are you afraid of?
 
Lionfish said:
QPeee/Mr. Tiny Penis, what are you afraid of?
Click to expand...

You like to pretend people correcting your idiocy and TDS has something to do with fear. It does not.

If you are going to make shit up such as Biden and Putin are too chummy, then expect someone to correct you and show you Trumps relationship, even if that triggers your TDS.

If you are going to try and use the Menendez situation as a slight against Biden, then expect someone to correct you and show you how Trump and his DoJ not only gave him a pass after the Dem DoJ tried to prosecute him the last time, but also how Trump was celebrating him getting off those crimes.

Trump does luv him some criminals. Sorry if that triggers your TDS.
 
serendipity said:
Francis Menton cuts through the crap yet again, God love him.

The Biden family corruption scandal gets deeper with every passing day. Speaker Kevin McCarthy finally opened an impeachment investigation in the House last week, and now the first hearing in that investigation has been scheduled for September 28 before the House Oversight Committee.

So what is the potential impeachable offense? You will undoubtedly recall, in the context of the two Trump impeachments, the endless semantic contortions that took place trying to shoehorn Trump’s conduct into the vague constitutional catchall of “high crimes and misdemeanors” that might support an impeachment.

Now, with Biden, the conduct at issue goes by various euphemisms like “the family business,” “business dealings with foreign nationals,” “influence peddling,” “selling access,” or maybe just “corruption.” Are these impeachable offenses?

Well, how about “bribery”? In Biden’s case, there is no need for creative legal argumentation. Biden’s crime is right there in the list set out in Constitution Article II, Section 4:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

And yet for some reason participants in the public discussion of the Bidens’ conduct seem remarkably reluctant to call a spade a spade. The reluctance spans both sides of the political divide, and even extends to the websites of the House of Representatives that discuss the ongoing investigations. Here are a few recent examples (out of hundreds):

From NBC News, May 10: “The Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee mounted more attacks Wednesday against President Joe Biden and his family, alleging that relatives of the president engaged in business with foreign nationals. . . .”

From ABC News, September 14: “[O]n Capitol Hill, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy this week said he would initiate an impeachment inquiry against President Biden over his alleged role in his son's influence-peddling. . . .”

From the New York Post, August 14: “The evidence that President Joe Biden benefited directly from son Hunter’s influence-peddling operation just keeps mounting.”

From PBS, today: “Republicans — led by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy — have contended in recent weeks that Biden’s actions from his time as vice president show a “culture of corruption,” and that his son used the “Biden brand” to advance his business with foreign clients.”

Or even from the House Oversight Committee itself, September 13: “There is mounting evidence that Joe Biden was involved in his family’s influence peddling schemes, including while he served as Vice President.”

“Bribery” is not a complicated crime to understand. It has its own section of the U.S. criminal statutes, 18 U.S.C. Section 201. In case there were any doubt what this is about, the title of the section is “Bribery of public officials and witnesses.” Here are the parts of that section relevant to Biden’s conduct:

(b) Whoever—(2) being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly . . . seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for:

(A) being influenced in the performance of any official act; . . .

shall be fined under this title or not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the thing of value, whichever is greater, or imprisoned for not more than fifteen years, or both, and may be disqualified from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

Read through that, and you find that the crime of bribery of a public official only has three elements: (1) “corruptly seek[ing], receiv[ing] [or] accept[ing] anything of value”; (2) “in return for”; and (3) “being influenced in the performance of any official act.”

Of the various instances of corruption involving Joe Biden, the facts relating to Hunter Biden’s service on the Burisma board of directors most closely track the specific elements of the bribery statute. As to seeking, receiving or accepting anything of value, Hunter was paid at least $3 million over several years for board service that involved minimal work and no visible contribution to the enterprise other than access to his father. The board service began in 2014, when Joe was Vice President, and immediately after Joe was named “point man” for U.S. foreign policy in Ukraine. After a corruption investigation into Burisma in Ukraine began in 2015, Burisma’s number one corporate objective became ending that investigation. On November 2, 2015 Burisma executive Vadym Pozharsky stated to Hunter Biden in an email that Burisma’s “ultimate purpose” was to “close down” “any cases/pursuits against Nikolay [i.e., Burisma chairman Mykola Zlochevsky] in Ukraine.” Then, according to the Congressional testimony of Hunter Biden’s partner and Burisma co-board member Devon Archer, after a Burisma board meeting in Dubai on December 4, 2015, Zlochevsky and Pozharsky stepped out with Hunter to “call Washington.” A few days later Vice President Joe Biden traveled to Kyiv, and, as he himself has admitted on a widely-viewed videotape, threatened to withhold a billion dollars of U.S. aid to the country unless the prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. And the prosecutor was fired.

In other words, the prima facie case of all of the elements of bribery is right there. It is what they call a lay down. Sure Biden has a couple of things he claims as defenses — mainly, that all the money went to his son, and that firing the prosecutor was official U.S. policy coming from people other than him. At this point those defenses look very weak, although maybe Biden can make something out of them.

But the fundamental point is that this is not situation of murky facts that somehow need to be contorted and shoe-horned into some obscure statute in order to make out a possible impeachable offense. This is a case where the prima facie case of a crime, and of a constitutionally enumerated impeachable offense, is right there in front of our eyes. And the crime in question is the main bribery statute.

It’s high time that everybody stopped calling Biden’s alleged wrongdoing by euphemisms like “influence peddling” or “foreign business dealings” — neither of which are terms specifically referencing an impeachable offense, let alone a crime. We should all start using the correct and obviously applicable constitutional and statutory term, which is “bribery.”

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com...we-start-calling-it-what-it-is-namely-bribery
Click to expand...

You people are just a bunch of wishful thinkers and malevolent projectionists.

ANYTIME you Meatslappers that wank off to this kind of stuff, accuse Biden of something, it is a CONFESSION on your part, of something DONALD TRUMP IS ACTUALLY ALREADY GUILTY OF! :laugh:

Thanks for your personal confessions! :palm:
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
You people are just a bunch of wishful thinkers and projectionists.

ANYTIME you Meatslappers that wank off to this kind of stuff, accuse Biden of something it is a CONFESSION on your part of something DONALD TRUMP IS ACTUALLY ALREADY GUILTY OF! :laugh:

Thanks for your personal confessions! :palm:
Click to expand...

Two more whistleblowers testify contradicting Merrick Garland claims on Hunter Biden tax probe
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2023/0...and-claims-on-hunter-biden-tax-probe-1398161/

Two more IRS officials say David Weiss stymied and ‘not the deciding person’ on Hunter Biden tax crimes
https://nypost.com/2023/09/21/two-m...t-deciding-person-on-hunter-biden-tax-crimes/

30 ex-FBI agents stand up to support whistleblower who exposed agency’s political bias
https://nypost.com/2022/09/28/30-ex...tleblower-who-exposed-agencys-political-bias/

This investigation is like watching tar drip. Eventually it will get there, but it's excruciatingly slow in doing so. The Bidenistias with BDS are as bad as the Trumpers and TDS.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
the evidence to support the admissions of Hunter and his partner and the guy who paid Joe will be in the transfers between the LLC accounts.....money laundering is one of the easier RICO crimes to prove......
Click to expand...

Yeah, they just keep repeating the talking point they were emailed. "Say, 'what evidence?' regardless of how much evidence they list." The "no evidence" lie is as pervasive as "Russia" lies. Now, is it convincing evidence? That remains to be seen, but of evidence, there is a bunch.

let-me-get-aeb219377b.jpg
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Two more whistleblowers testify contradicting Merrick Garland claims on Hunter Biden tax probe
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2023/0...and-claims-on-hunter-biden-tax-probe-1398161/

Two more IRS officials say David Weiss stymied and ‘not the deciding person’ on Hunter Biden tax crimes
https://nypost.com/2023/09/21/two-m...t-deciding-person-on-hunter-biden-tax-crimes/

30 ex-FBI agents stand up to support whistleblower who exposed agency’s political bias
https://nypost.com/2022/09/28/30-ex...tleblower-who-exposed-agencys-political-bias/

This investigation is like watching tar drip. Eventually it will get there, but it's excruciatingly slow in doing so. The Bidenistias with BDS are as bad as the Trumpers and TDS.
Click to expand...

Sure if you read propaganda sites.

Meanwhile in the real world, the so called Whistleblowers, have already been discredited. Remember when i posted to you how most of the stuff they were talking about as 'delays' in the Weiss came during the Trump Presidency which they did not want to acknowledge in testimony?


As always you will have more nothing burgers while actual indictments and convictions on Trump pile out, as those deal with prosecutable facts while you derps on the right only have stuff like this...

_vq_Kdu0Y7usIAkl2020-12-02_22-06-41-401-2_gjllxo
 
Damocles said:
Yeah, they just keep repeating the talking point they were emailed. "Say, 'what evidence?' regardless of how much evidence they list." The "no evidence" lie is as pervasive as "Russia" lies. Now, is it convincing evidence? That remains to be seen, but of evidence, there is a bunch....
Click to expand...

And yet neither Comer or McCarthy will say they have evidence when pressed and just that they ' are looking for it', but have 'lots of smoke'.

And yet you have countless House republicans stating they have NOT BEEN SHOWN any evidence and that is why they would not vote to begin an impeachment inquiry. Those republicans are saying they would gladly vote if shown evidence and want to but as of yet there has been nothing but innuendo and leaps not backed by evidence.

So that begs the question why the GOP, wanting to impeach is hiding the evidence from their own members?

Is this more of their big brain strategy?
 
Damocles said:
Yeah, they just keep repeating the talking point they were emailed. "Say, 'what evidence?' regardless of how much evidence they list." The "no evidence" lie is as pervasive as "Russia" lies. Now, is it convincing evidence? That remains to be seen, but of evidence, there is a bunch.

let-me-get-aeb219377b.jpg
Click to expand...

Evidence my ass!

When my Sister was dying of cancer, I talked on the phone with my son a lot, AND I NEVER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH HIS BUSINESS DEALINGS- and he was not giving me money!!

So you meatslappers that wank off to this kind of crap- truly disgusts me!
 
serendipity said:
Francis Menton cuts through the crap yet again, God love him.

The Biden family corruption scandal gets deeper with every passing day. Speaker Kevin McCarthy finally opened an impeachment investigation in the House last week, and now the first hearing in that investigation has been scheduled for September 28 before the House Oversight Committee.

So what is the potential impeachable offense? You will undoubtedly recall, in the context of the two Trump impeachments, the endless semantic contortions that took place trying to shoehorn Trump’s conduct into the vague constitutional catchall of “high crimes and misdemeanors” that might support an impeachment.

Now, with Biden, the conduct at issue goes by various euphemisms like “the family business,” “business dealings with foreign nationals,” “influence peddling,” “selling access,” or maybe just “corruption.” Are these impeachable offenses?

Well, how about “bribery”? In Biden’s case, there is no need for creative legal argumentation. Biden’s crime is right there in the list set out in Constitution Article II, Section 4:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

And yet for some reason participants in the public discussion of the Bidens’ conduct seem remarkably reluctant to call a spade a spade. The reluctance spans both sides of the political divide, and even extends to the websites of the House of Representatives that discuss the ongoing investigations. Here are a few recent examples (out of hundreds):

From NBC News, May 10: “The Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee mounted more attacks Wednesday against President Joe Biden and his family, alleging that relatives of the president engaged in business with foreign nationals. . . .”

From ABC News, September 14: “[O]n Capitol Hill, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy this week said he would initiate an impeachment inquiry against President Biden over his alleged role in his son's influence-peddling. . . .”

From the New York Post, August 14: “The evidence that President Joe Biden benefited directly from son Hunter’s influence-peddling operation just keeps mounting.”

From PBS, today: “Republicans — led by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy — have contended in recent weeks that Biden’s actions from his time as vice president show a “culture of corruption,” and that his son used the “Biden brand” to advance his business with foreign clients.”

Or even from the House Oversight Committee itself, September 13: “There is mounting evidence that Joe Biden was involved in his family’s influence peddling schemes, including while he served as Vice President.”

“Bribery” is not a complicated crime to understand. It has its own section of the U.S. criminal statutes, 18 U.S.C. Section 201. In case there were any doubt what this is about, the title of the section is “Bribery of public officials and witnesses.” Here are the parts of that section relevant to Biden’s conduct:

(b) Whoever—(2) being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly . . . seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for:

(A) being influenced in the performance of any official act; . . .

shall be fined under this title or not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the thing of value, whichever is greater, or imprisoned for not more than fifteen years, or both, and may be disqualified from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

Read through that, and you find that the crime of bribery of a public official only has three elements: (1) “corruptly seek[ing], receiv[ing] [or] accept[ing] anything of value”; (2) “in return for”; and (3) “being influenced in the performance of any official act.”

Of the various instances of corruption involving Joe Biden, the facts relating to Hunter Biden’s service on the Burisma board of directors most closely track the specific elements of the bribery statute. As to seeking, receiving or accepting anything of value, Hunter was paid at least $3 million over several years for board service that involved minimal work and no visible contribution to the enterprise other than access to his father. The board service began in 2014, when Joe was Vice President, and immediately after Joe was named “point man” for U.S. foreign policy in Ukraine. After a corruption investigation into Burisma in Ukraine began in 2015, Burisma’s number one corporate objective became ending that investigation. On November 2, 2015 Burisma executive Vadym Pozharsky stated to Hunter Biden in an email that Burisma’s “ultimate purpose” was to “close down” “any cases/pursuits against Nikolay [i.e., Burisma chairman Mykola Zlochevsky] in Ukraine.” Then, according to the Congressional testimony of Hunter Biden’s partner and Burisma co-board member Devon Archer, after a Burisma board meeting in Dubai on December 4, 2015, Zlochevsky and Pozharsky stepped out with Hunter to “call Washington.” A few days later Vice President Joe Biden traveled to Kyiv, and, as he himself has admitted on a widely-viewed videotape, threatened to withhold a billion dollars of U.S. aid to the country unless the prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. And the prosecutor was fired.

In other words, the prima facie case of all of the elements of bribery is right there. It is what they call a lay down. Sure Biden has a couple of things he claims as defenses — mainly, that all the money went to his son, and that firing the prosecutor was official U.S. policy coming from people other than him. At this point those defenses look very weak, although maybe Biden can make something out of them.

But the fundamental point is that this is not situation of murky facts that somehow need to be contorted and shoe-horned into some obscure statute in order to make out a possible impeachable offense. This is a case where the prima facie case of a crime, and of a constitutionally enumerated impeachable offense, is right there in front of our eyes. And the crime in question is the main bribery statute.

It’s high time that everybody stopped calling Biden’s alleged wrongdoing by euphemisms like “influence peddling” or “foreign business dealings” — neither of which are terms specifically referencing an impeachable offense, let alone a crime. We should all start using the correct and obviously applicable constitutional and statutory term, which is “bribery.”

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com...we-start-calling-it-what-it-is-namely-bribery
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
QP! said:
i know you claim to only be a slum lord lawyer, and that is why when it comes to criminal law and the Constitution i am schooling you constantly, but this area at least is within Real Estate law so it is that much more embarrassing i am again schooling you.
Click to expand...

lol....you'll actually need to learn some law before you can school anyone......
 
QP! said:
And yet neither Comer or McCarthy will say they have evidence when pressed and just that they ' are looking for it', but have 'lots of smoke'.

And yet you have countless House republicans stating they have NOT BEEN SHOWN any evidence and that is why they would not vote to begin an impeachment inquiry. Those republicans are saying they would gladly vote if shown evidence and want to but as of yet there has been nothing but innuendo and leaps not backed by evidence.

So that begs the question why the GOP, wanting to impeach is hiding the evidence from their own members?

Is this more of their big brain strategy?
Click to expand...

more evidence was posted here today......did you read it?.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top