(06-14-2022, 10:11 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote:

(06-14-2022, 06:36 PM)mikesez Wrote: The party that said nothing while Jared Kushner became the money manager for middle eastern monarchs doesn't get to feign outrage when Hunter Biden tries to do the same with Chinese captains of industry or wives of Russian politicians. No one's even sure the money got to Hunter at all.
No one's alleging it changed Joe's behavior.  

But sure, yeah, biggest story ever.  No other story worth talking about.  No one should be taken seriously if they're not talking about Hunter Biden.

And of course the media are totally in bed with Dems at election time, like when Hillary's team planted that story about Trump campaign servers communicating with a Russian bank? The media totally ran with that for... oh days wasn't it? Oh right.  It was only hours before they figured out Hillary was lying and took down the story. 

You have a point with regard to Kavanaugh, that is an important story. But that story is probably over, don't you think? Do we need to breathlessly report every revelation on the guy's motives or state of mind?

Mike, if you've ever wondered why no one takes you serious when you claim to be a republican or in general, your zeal for defending the left (and now the media) at every turn and in every thread might have something to do with it.  Just putting it out there.  Some people have no self awareness.  Not saying that's necessarily you.  I'm just at a loss. 

You'd have to be pretty gullible or an agent of the left peddling lies to say/believe no money ever made it to Hunter Biden.  Hello Burisma at the very least and I'd find it hard to believe that's not the tip of the iceberg. Family of political figures should be allowed to pursue their own business interests, even foreign ones.  It should be scrutinized heavily, sure.  Selling your artwork for big bucks (up to $500k per painting) when your father is currently the sitting President and you have no prior history of being able to do so is suspect, no?  Excerpt from thehill.com:

• Ethics concerns arose over the summer about (Hunter) Biden’s artwork and the White House created an agreement with Bergès to keep purchases confidential, according to The Washington Post. The agreement allows Bergès to set prices for the art and withhold all records, including potential bidders and final buyers. 
  

Um, what?  How do ethics concerns over this activity lead to less transparency?  Of all the things Hunter could do to make money, why choose to dally in the realm of peddling your artwork given his father's position?  Also from thehill.com article:

• Last year, the Treasury Department also issued an advisory warning that high-value artworks, “make it attractive to those engaged in illicit financial activity, including sanctions evasion.” 
  

Anyway, Jared at least appears to have a resume that supports his foreign business ventures.  Hunter?  Please feel free to come to his aid further if you wish, but to me it's quite obvious what's going on.  And it's ok if money got to Joe as long as his decisions affecting those who 'donated' weren't changed by the 'donation'?  Disagree.  Just ask yourself how that whole scenario plays out in the media if Jared is Hunter and Hunter is Jared.  This isn't difficult.

Also, I never claimed it was the biggest story ever.  I was drawing parallels of how the media covers things and the Hunter Biden story was relatively recent and egregious in it's one-sidedness.  I'd really rather not continue talking about Hunter Biden beyond this.  The fact that the media ran with Hillary's lie and retracted it is further evidence of one-sidedness because you know good and well those same outlets wouldn't have run something against Hillary without fully and carefully vetting it and then they would have probably sat on the story if true anyway to help carry their gal across the finish line.

The Kavanaugh story doesn't need breathless wall to wall coverage.  It's essentially over unless there are more lunatics of a similar mindset out there and quite frankly with how agitated the left likes their base to be there probably are.  Regardless, the act of assassinating a sitting SC Justice is a far greater threat to the constitution than what happened on January 6th and that attempt was thwarted thankfully.  As long as we're harping on this issue, at least answer the hypothetical I posed.  How would you envision the media coverage of a thwarted attempt on RBG's life 4 years ago?  Or don't and let's just move on agreeing to disagree because this is very likely what it seems to be anyway.

You're making this way too complicated.  Why does anything that Hunter Biden does matter?  If nothing Jared Kushner did mattered, nothing Hunter does matters either.  You keep giving details of the thing, but I already told you it doesn't matter and why it doesn't matter. 

Now, if Chinese money was making it from Hunter to Joe, that would be different.  Neither a President nor a Presidential candidate can legally accept foreign money.  But no one is saying Hunter shares his winnings with his dad.  

I'm completely aware that many of you think I'm a poser or not serious and it doesn't feel great, but I'm more concerned about what it says about us as a country.  Where are we as a country if we think the only serious people are ones whose beliefs and judgements conform to one of two menus of ideology? Is this not encouraging politicians to be even more divisive?

I also think you misunderstand the nature of my defense of leftists and of the media.  I'm only saying that some of the charges against them are overwrought or hypocritical.  I'm not saying they are good.  I'm saying they are necessary.  If there are leftist people in this country, there must be leftist politicians, and they deserve some modicum of respect from all of us.  If we are to have informed voters, there must be an open media space, where it is inevitable that some outlets will make errors and omissions that must be corrected by others.  I'm not saying any of these things are good.  I'm not sure if it was Churchill or Lewis who said, "This system is by no means good, except, it is better than all alternatives." That's where I'm coming from. In your zeal to inflame passions against the system we have and the officials it empowers, what direction are you really pushing things?

---