5 ms·

And you think having a relative with shady deals is disqualifying for public office? And what illegal activities was Hunter up to?

yonaguska 4y ago
The issue is less the shady deals and more the fact that the shady deals were brokered in part by the big guy, Joe, himself as vice president.
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  And the laptop proved that?
remarkEon 4y ago
Not necessarily but it’s worth scrutiny, right? Blood is deeper than votes, and if someone who is running for office has a family member with a drug problem - that’s funded by shady deals with a country that’s openly hostile to the country in which that person is running for office - is makes sense to ask questions. The illegal activities are mostly around guns, drugs, hookers, perhaps some bank and tax fraud but I haven’t seen primary sources on the latter.
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  I'm pretty sure every human has a family member with a drug problem. I don't think that justifies rifling through their possessions and data.
  - CapricornNoble 4y ago
    If you or even a family member has a drug problem, financial problems, a sex addiction, etc...all of that stuff is VERY easily exploitable by State-level espionage professionals. Since the potential for damage to the nation is high if certain information were to fall into the wrong hands, the first step in Risk Mitigation is to limit the access of the at-risk persons so they don't have the information in the first place. This is basic Security Clearance 101 stuff. It's strict because real people have lost their lives due to exploited agents: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen
    - hotpotamus 4y ago
      I'm curious - does that also apply to Donald Trump who himself had dealings with those countries as well as several of his children, and removed classified documents to his own house where foreign agents were known to frequent?
      - CapricornNoble 4y ago
        Everyone should be held to the same standard. That means me, that means Reality Winner[1], that means Hillary Clinton, that means Hunter Biden, and yes, that means Donald Trump. But what we are seeing from what SHOULD BE our impartial law enforcement agencies is that small fish get the hammer, and Donald Trump gets his house raided. Why wasn't there a raid on the Clinton residence after the server scandal? Why hasn't Hunter been indicted if the FBI has known for years of how he's been a conduit for foreigners to buy access to his father? [2][3] Why haven't Ivanka and Jared been indicted for their suspicious overseas deals? [4] Why hasn't Obama been indicted for killing an American citizen without due process? [5] Why are we forced to chose between two geriatrics for President, one with dementia, and the other an ignoramus blowhard? What do we have to fix so I can get a coalition government, with say Allen West (R) for President, Tulsi Gabbard (D) for Vice President, and a cross-party mix to flesh out the Department Heads and other executive staff? I feel like we are just observing a shadow war between two factions of barely-competent kleptocrats, who are so busy destabilizing the system that they aren't paying sufficient attention while China, the greatest adversary we've faced since 1945, rises. Xi Jingping is sharpening his dadao [6] and we're still arguing over who is the bigger threat to democracy, the NY real-estate charlatan/buffoon who enables his businesswoman daughter, and who thinks rules don't apply to him, or the cognitively-impaired lifelong politician who protects his "businessman"/crackhead son, who also thinks rules don't apply to him. Cui bono? Either way...probably not the American people in the long run. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Winner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Winner [2] https://nypost.com/2022/06/29/legal-experts-blast-lack-of-progress-in-hunter-biden-probe/ https://nypost.com/2022/06/29/legal-experts-blast-lack-of-pr... [3] https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3616924-who-is-more-likely-to-be-indicted-donald-trump-or-hunter-biden/ https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3616924-who-is-more-li... [4] https://nationalpost.com/news/world/china-approves-13-new-ivanka-trump-trademarks-in-3-months https://nationalpost.com/news/world/china-approves-13-new-iv... [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awla... [6] https://chinesemartialstudies.com/2012/11/26/693/ https://chinesemartialstudies.com/2012/11/26/693/
- jensensbutton 4y ago
  We had already proved with Trump's kids that, no actually, we don't give a shit as a society about leaders having close family members (even when they're actively working in the Whitehouse) involved in shady deals.
briandear 4y ago
If that illegal activity was connected to the person in public office, absolutely. The actions around the US forcing the firing of a prosecutor going after a company with whom Hunter has signifiant financial interests — that’s a pretty big deal. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY
UberFly 4y ago
When you're running for president of the US and your son is in an overall shady bed with China and Russia it should matter. If Joe knew, it should at least be fair news, same if he didn't know.
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  Do we really have to pretend that anyone cares about this any more? Like sorry, but Trump proved that the right wing doesn't give one shit if one of their boys does it. That's why your faux outrage falls on deaf ears now - no one believes that you have any standards.
  - naasking 4y ago
    > Like sorry, but Trump proved that the right wing doesn't give one shit if one of their boys does it And Democrats just proved they don't either. So maybe Democrats should take this opportunity to prove they aren't hypocrites instead of acting just like the other side they're criticizing.
    - hotpotamus 4y ago
      Which party claims to be all about individual responsibility and law and order? Perhaps the conservatives’ embrace of post modernist nihilism has consequences beyond themselves?
      - naasking 4y ago
        I could just as easily ask you which party claims to be about justice, fairness and democracy? Let's not mince words, politicians of all stripes are largely opportunistic and self-serving, and that's what the evidence is suggesting. There is not as much difference between either side on that point.
        hotpotamus 4y ago
        Ok, what would one party have to do to prove they are better than the other?

yonaguska 4y ago

The issue is less the shady deals and more the fact that the shady deals were brokered in part by the big guy, Joe, himself as vice president.

hotpotamus 4y ago
And the laptop proved that?

remarkEon 4y ago

Not necessarily but it’s worth scrutiny, right? Blood is deeper than votes, and if someone who is running for office has a family member with a drug problem - that’s funded by shady deals with a country that’s openly hostile to the country in which that person is running for office - is makes sense to ask questions. The illegal activities are mostly around guns, drugs, hookers, perhaps some bank and tax fraud but I haven’t seen primary sources on the latter.

hotpotamus 4y ago
I'm pretty sure every human has a family member with a drug problem. I don't think that justifies rifling through their possessions and data.
- CapricornNoble 4y ago
  If you or even a family member has a drug problem, financial problems, a sex addiction, etc...all of that stuff is VERY easily exploitable by State-level espionage professionals. Since the potential for damage to the nation is high if certain information were to fall into the wrong hands, the first step in Risk Mitigation is to limit the access of the at-risk persons so they don't have the information in the first place. This is basic Security Clearance 101 stuff. It's strict because real people have lost their lives due to exploited agents: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen
  - hotpotamus 4y ago
    I'm curious - does that also apply to Donald Trump who himself had dealings with those countries as well as several of his children, and removed classified documents to his own house where foreign agents were known to frequent?
    - CapricornNoble 4y ago
      Everyone should be held to the same standard. That means me, that means Reality Winner[1], that means Hillary Clinton, that means Hunter Biden, and yes, that means Donald Trump. But what we are seeing from what SHOULD BE our impartial law enforcement agencies is that small fish get the hammer, and Donald Trump gets his house raided. Why wasn't there a raid on the Clinton residence after the server scandal? Why hasn't Hunter been indicted if the FBI has known for years of how he's been a conduit for foreigners to buy access to his father? [2][3] Why haven't Ivanka and Jared been indicted for their suspicious overseas deals? [4] Why hasn't Obama been indicted for killing an American citizen without due process? [5] Why are we forced to chose between two geriatrics for President, one with dementia, and the other an ignoramus blowhard? What do we have to fix so I can get a coalition government, with say Allen West (R) for President, Tulsi Gabbard (D) for Vice President, and a cross-party mix to flesh out the Department Heads and other executive staff? I feel like we are just observing a shadow war between two factions of barely-competent kleptocrats, who are so busy destabilizing the system that they aren't paying sufficient attention while China, the greatest adversary we've faced since 1945, rises. Xi Jingping is sharpening his dadao [6] and we're still arguing over who is the bigger threat to democracy, the NY real-estate charlatan/buffoon who enables his businesswoman daughter, and who thinks rules don't apply to him, or the cognitively-impaired lifelong politician who protects his "businessman"/crackhead son, who also thinks rules don't apply to him. Cui bono? Either way...probably not the American people in the long run. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Winner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Winner [2] https://nypost.com/2022/06/29/legal-experts-blast-lack-of-progress-in-hunter-biden-probe/ https://nypost.com/2022/06/29/legal-experts-blast-lack-of-pr... [3] https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3616924-who-is-more-likely-to-be-indicted-donald-trump-or-hunter-biden/ https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3616924-who-is-more-li... [4] https://nationalpost.com/news/world/china-approves-13-new-ivanka-trump-trademarks-in-3-months https://nationalpost.com/news/world/china-approves-13-new-iv... [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awla... [6] https://chinesemartialstudies.com/2012/11/26/693/ https://chinesemartialstudies.com/2012/11/26/693/
jensensbutton 4y ago
We had already proved with Trump's kids that, no actually, we don't give a shit as a society about leaders having close family members (even when they're actively working in the Whitehouse) involved in shady deals.

briandear 4y ago

If that illegal activity was connected to the person in public office, absolutely. The actions around the US forcing the firing of a prosecutor going after a company with whom Hunter has signifiant financial interests — that’s a pretty big deal. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY

UberFly 4y ago

When you're running for president of the US and your son is in an overall shady bed with China and Russia it should matter. If Joe knew, it should at least be fair news, same if he didn't know.

hotpotamus 4y ago
Do we really have to pretend that anyone cares about this any more? Like sorry, but Trump proved that the right wing doesn't give one shit if one of their boys does it. That's why your faux outrage falls on deaf ears now - no one believes that you have any standards.
- naasking 4y ago
  > Like sorry, but Trump proved that the right wing doesn't give one shit if one of their boys does it And Democrats just proved they don't either. So maybe Democrats should take this opportunity to prove they aren't hypocrites instead of acting just like the other side they're criticizing.
  - hotpotamus 4y ago
    Which party claims to be all about individual responsibility and law and order? Perhaps the conservatives’ embrace of post modernist nihilism has consequences beyond themselves?
    - naasking 4y ago
      I could just as easily ask you which party claims to be about justice, fairness and democracy? Let's not mince words, politicians of all stripes are largely opportunistic and self-serving, and that's what the evidence is suggesting. There is not as much difference between either side on that point.
      - hotpotamus 4y ago
        Ok, what would one party have to do to prove they are better than the other?