|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:33:40 GMT
UPDATE: I keep this thread to remind myself how WRONG I was. Joe Biden has PLEASANTLY surprised me so far in his presidency. I have always said the best person to be elected president in order to help the poor and minorities would be an OLD WHITE LIBERAL MAN especially one that knew his way around Congress. So far it is proving to be true. Many times I have said I am NO fan of Joe Biden and his choice as VP was just one of many "issues" that stuck in my craw about Obama. That lack of fandom began when he put the interests of banks above average Americans right before a major economic crash that took many by surprise and left lives in shambles. Be it far from me to want to use questionable right wing sources. One usually needs to separate the wheat from the chaff. I listen to right wing noise quite often to see what's up in CONservative world and what their latest push is. Right now it is Biden. Biden has made a huge mistake in running for the presidency. He should have gone into the sunset when he had the chance. Any legacy he might have had will be destroyed through investigations which frankly should happen regardless.
The Democratic Party will be making a HUGE mistake if Biden is chosen as their nominee. He is almost as bad as Trump and his crime family. While he and his family may not have done anything illegal what they have done stinks to high heaven. Both parties have some major housecleaning to do. We need a BIG change in this country and a president that understands right from wrong, good from evil and when to say yes and when to say no. Joe Biden is NOT that person. The Americans Joe Biden Left Behind on the Bankruptcy BillIn 2005 amendments to the bill, Biden voted against borrowers drowning in medical debt, seniors, servicemembers, union members, and victims of deadbeat dads.
prospect.org/politics/bidens-votes-on-the-bankruptcy-bill-middle-class-joe/
BY ADAM LEVITIN JANUARY 9, 202014 Years Ago, Warren And Biden Battled Over Bankruptcy. Their Fight Still Defines A Party Rift05:12Play dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/traffic.megaphone.fm/BUR9574045953.mp3
May 21, 2019Updated Jun 11, 2019 2:26 PM
Anthony Brooks www.wbur.org/news/2019/05/21/warren-biden-bankruptcy-bill-democrats
As they and others battle for the Democratic presidential nomination, former Vice President Joe Biden and Massachusetts U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren are revisiting an old fight that defines a major rift in their party.
The fight goes back to 2005. Biden was a Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Warren was a Harvard law professor and an expert on the middle class and bankruptcy.
Biden, along with most Republicans, favored the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, a bill to reform bankruptcy laws — essentially to make it more difficult to file for bankruptcy. Warren opposed the legislation because she saw bankruptcy as a crucial protection for working families hit by financial devastation.
|
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:34:41 GMT
THE BIDEN 5Peter Schweizer on ‘the Biden 5’: Deals in China, Costa Rica, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukrainewww.breitbart.com/radio/2020/01/21/peter-schweizer-on-the-biden-5-deals-in-china-costa-rica-iraq-kazakhstan-russia-ukraine/ Joe Biden’s family’s domestic and international and business dealings are linked to the former vice president’s political influence, explained Peter Schweizer, author of Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite, president of the Government accountability Institute, and senior contributor at Breitbart News.
“Everything we do can be replicated,” said Schweizer of the research and findings in his book. “We follow the money. We follow the paper trail. So there’s no anonymous sources, and what we simply show you is who’s getting money, when, how, and in what context are they getting that money.”
LISTEN: soundcloud.com/breitbart/breitbart-news-daily-peter-schweizer-january-21-2020
Schweizer said, “In the case of Joe Biden, for example, we show you how five of his family members cashed in while he was vice president, who was paying them, what they were being paid for, the lack of any skill or background they had in that field, the fact that they were scoring these sweetheart deals, they didn’t get them before he was vice president, they didn’t get them after he was vice president, and the policy positions that Joe Biden took at the time that his family members were getting paid.”
Schweizer continued, “We really use financial records, court documents, [and] in one case, criminal case documents, in this book, from seven different countries. It takes a lot of work. We have a research team of 12. They do a terrific job, and it’s something that very few people are doing these days because of the cost, because of the time and the level of detail that’s involved, but we think it’s absolutely necessary to follow the money and cover these stories that nobody else either has the inclination or the resources to cover.”
Left-wing and partisan Democrat political biases shape many news media outlets’ disinterest in investigating and reporting on Democrats’ business dealings, said Marlow.
“A lot of very well paid, arrogant, elite journalists in a celebrity class, now. [don’t] do a lot that’s productive,” Marlow stated. “They spend tons of time researching things and getting awards for things that end up either being false or sort of irrelevant. … The media is not interested in researching these people.”
Marlow added, “It takes money to get this stuff done. You need to buy these books. You should buy it in hardcover. You should buy it today, and you should buy multiples and give them out.”
The volume of Biden family members — dubbed the “Biden 5” by Schweizer — involved in business dealings linked to Joe Biden’s former role as vice president is surprising, assessed Schweizer.
“Having done this for a long time, having researched and investigated Republicans and Democrats, I have not found a case where you actually have five members of a family who cashed in at the same time,” Schweizer said. “That’s kind of unprecedented.”
Schweizer remarked, “We certainly have new material on Hunter [Biden] in the book, including the fact that he had a joint-venture business setup that got $3 million in our taxpayer money in the form of a grant.”
Schweizer went on, “In addition to Hunter, we have Joe Biden’s brother James who landed a very lucrative job in the construction business. Essentially what happened is, a guy named Kevin Justice — a longtime Biden family friend — in November of 2010, went and visited the white House and met with Joe Biden’s people in Joe Biden’s office. He started a company called HillStone International, a construction company. Three weeks after that meeting in the White House, he announced that James Biden, Joe Biden’s brother, was going to join as an executive vice president. ”
Schweizer continued, “What stands out in this, of course, is that James Biden has no background in construction, and in a bio the company released on him, all they noted was the fact that he was comfortable in the corridors of power and his brother was Vice president of the United States. A few months after he joins the firm, lo and behold, this new company lands a contract to build 100,000 homes in Iraq from the federal government. They get a bunch of other contracts, as well.”
“Frank, [Joe Biden’s] other brother, starts doing deals in Costa Rica,” explained Schweizer. “Joe Biden, as vice president, visits Costa Rica in the spring of 2009 and suddenly Frank — who was has no background in energy [and] no background in major real estate development projects — starts getting all these deals, meetings, photos, letters, [and] support from the Costa Rican government for these projects.”
Schweizer contrasted politicians who build successful businesses prior to entering politics with those who amass fortunes after being elected to political offices.
“You have people who go into politics, like Trump, for example, or Michael Bloomberg on the Democratic side who have built successful businesses before they went into politics,” Schweizer noted. “what you have in the Bidens is kind of the opposite. They actually start businesses once Joe becomes vice president, businesses that they have no background in. They really have no business in even trying to do deals except for the fact that he’s vice president, and you have that with James, you have that with Frank, [and] you’ve got Joe Biden’s sister Valerie, who was involved in his campaigns, ran his presidential campaigns, and put $2.5 million from those campaigns into her own company.”
Schweizer added, “Then you’ve got another situation involving Joe Biden’s daughter Ashley, who’s married to a guy named Howard Krein, and Howard Krein is involved in this company called StartUp Health, that really had no business plan. They had no website. They were just weeks off the ground, and lo and behold, they’re ushered off into the Oval Office because of Joe Biden. They meet with Barack Obama. They highlight this on their website. They get invited to sort of showcase at these major federal government conferences on healthcare policy. Joe Biden actually goes and briefs the investors and the participants with this company in closed-door briefings while he’s vice president, and the chief medical officer of this company just happens to be married to his daughter, Ashley Biden.”
Schweizer observed the lack of news media coverage of Biden’s family’s business and financial dealings. “It’s just this morass, this huge cloud of money and deals swirling around Joe Biden, and the fact the he was vice president for eight years — and none of this was ever reported — to me, is just shocking, because it’s blatant. The timing is clear, and just the number of instances — five family members — is something I’ve never seen before.”
“We discovered this other company that [Hunter Biden] set up with his business partner Devon Archer called the Burnham Financial Group,” Schweizer remarked. “The Burnham Financial group became embroiled in this scandal whereby Hunter Biden’s business partner was accused and charged with trying to defraud an Indian tribe — the Oglala Sioux Indian tribe, which is the poorest Indian tribe in the United States — and as a result of that court case, all these financial records came out involving Burnham Financial Group [and] involving Hunter Biden, and [what] you find in those documents [are] claims and statements that they have financial deals with Kazakh officials.”
Schweizer added, “We know the Kazakhs transferred money into a bank account that Hunter Biden had access to and drew money from. We also know that, in these corporate records, they say they have a $200 million deal with a Russian oligarch named Yelena Baturina. Yelena Baturina is interesting, because if you spend five minutes on Google, you’ll find that she is widely believed to be tied to Russian organized crime.”
“You have several mysterious Chinese companies that they are dealing with,” Schweizer continued, observing a conflict of interest between Joe Biden in his former capacity as vice president with his son’s business dealings in China. “One of those seems to be tied to Chinese government officials. This is just further evidence that he’s doing major deals with the Chinese while his father was point person on China policy. It’s just a huge massive cloud of money coming from these foreign entities, and really, honestly, again, Hunter Biden has no real legitimate claim that these deals should have happened based on his merits.”
Breitbart News Daily broadcasts live on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern. |
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:35:55 GMT
Eight Things to Know About the Biden Family’s Culture of Corruption DES MOINES, IA - AUGUST 10: Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden speaks on stage during a forum on gun safety at the Iowa Events Center on August 10, 2019 in Des Moines, Iowa. The event was hosted by Everytown for Gun Safety. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty …Stephen Maturen/Getty Images
HARIS ALIC14 Aug 20191
The family of former Vice President Joe Biden has earned millions of dollars since the start of his political career, often from dealings with heavy political overtones.
Biden, the frontrunner among 2020 Democrats, often touts his middle-class bonafides on the campaign trail. Although Biden did not become a multi-millionaire until he left the White House in 2017, the same cannot be said of his family. In fact, several members of the Biden clan became immensely wealthy over the span of the former vice president’s 40-year political career.
Breitbart News is providing an in-depth breakdown of a few instances in which Joe Biden’s political career and his family’s financial interests seemed to intersect.
1. Joe Biden’s younger brother, James Biden, secured generous bank loans.
In the wake of Joe Biden’s upset election to the U.S. Senate in 1972, his younger brother James was able to secure a series of generous bank loans to start a Delaware night club.
Although James Biden had no business experience and a net worth of less than $10,000 at the time, he was able to arrange more than $160,000 in start-up capital for the venture. When the nightclub proved to be unsuccessful, generating more than $500,000 of debt by 1975, James Biden and his business partners were thrown a life-line by a Pennsylvania bank that loaned him a further $300,000.
During the same time period James Biden was receiving the extensive lines of credit, Joe Biden was sitting on the Senate Banking Committee, which had purview over the financial sector. A specific jurisdiction of the committee was the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which provides bailouts to banks if they should become over-leveraged.
2. Joe Biden’s top campaign contributor hired his youngest son Hunter right out of law school.
Shortly after Joe Biden was reelected to the U.S. Senate in 1996, his largest campaign contributor, the credit card issuer MBNA Corp., hired his son for an undisclosed role. The job raised eyebrows from good government groups because MBNA employees had just donated $63,000 to Joe Biden’s reelection campaign in what appeared to be a coordinated manner to sidestep federal campaign finance regulations.
Clouding the picture even further was that, at the time, Hunter Biden was a 26-year-old recent graduate of Yale Law School with no prior banking or business experience. Both father and son defended the job offer, claiming nothing improper had or would result because of the arrangement.
“Unfortunately, no matter where I went to work, some people would make an issue of it,” the younger Biden told the Delaware News Journal in November 1996 when the job was announced.
Despite his role being unknown at the time of his hiring, when Hunter Biden left the company in 1998 to join the Clinton-era Commerce Department it was as a senior vice president.
Throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, Joe Biden was championing bankruptcy reform legislation endorsed by financial interests and credit card companies like MBNA.
3. An MBNA executive purchased Biden’s house for the full asking price in a deal that appeared facilitated by the company.
A senior MBNA executive purchased Biden’s 10,000 square foot colonial mansion in the Wilmington, Delaware, suburbs for the asking price of $1.2 million in February 1996. The sale garnered notice because larger and newer homes in the vicinity sold for less. The issue became a minor campaign problem for Biden’s reelection but was quickly dismissed when the senator provided local media appraisal forms showing his home was worth the value for what it was sold.
Byron York, however, investigated the matter in an exposé for the American Spectator and found that properties appraised around the same value in the vicinity had “sold for a good deal less” than at what they were valued on paper.
“In comparison, it appears [the MBNA executive] simply paid Biden’s full asking price,” York wrote. “And, according to people familiar with the situation, the house needed quite a bit of work; contractors and their trucks descended on the house for months after the purchase.”
As York also noted, it appeared that MBNA may have played a role in facilitating the purchase. Documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission show that “in 1996 MBNA reimbursed [the executive] $330,115 for expenses arising from the move.” Of that total, $210,000 “was to make up for a loss [the executive] suffered on the sale of his Maryland home.”
4. Hunter Biden remained on MBNA’s payroll while Joe Biden was writing bankruptcy reform legislation.
Throughout the early 2000s, Hunter Biden remained on MBNA’s payroll as a consultant while his father was writing and pushing the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. The arrangement, which did not become public until after the law was passed, started in 2001 after Hunter Biden had left his position in the Commerce Dept. MBNA was paid monthly consulting fees, with some claiming they ranged upwards of $100,000, to advise the company on online banking issues.
The 2005 bankruptcy tightened regulations to make it extremely more difficult to declare bankruptcy. It was heavily favored by MBNA and other giants in the banking and finance sectors. Many consumer protection advocates, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), have claimed the bill benefited special interests at the expense of consumers. Some have even suggested the law only served to hasten and aggravate the recession of the late 2000s.
As previously reported by the New York Times, Biden worked against many of his own fellow Democrats in Congress to ensure the final version of the bill was free of provisions opposed by companies like MBNA.
Biden “was one of five Democrats in March 2005 who voted against a proposal to require credit card companies to provide more effective warnings to consumers about the consequences of paying only the minimum amount due each month,” the Times noted.
5. Joe Biden paid his family members with campaign cash.
During his failed 2008 presidential campaign, Joe Biden paid more than $2 million to his family members and their business. According to the Washington Times, the money went to a company that was a long-time employer of Biden’s sister, Valerie Biden Owens. Biden also directed funds to a law firm started by his old campaign treasurer, which at the time also employed his youngest son Hunter.
6. James and Hunter Biden sought to monetize off Joe Biden’s political standing.
In 2006, close to when Joe Biden assumed the chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and launched his second presidential campaign, James and Hunter Biden purchased a hedge fund called Paradigm Global Advisors. Although neither man had a strong background in finance, James and Hunter Biden reportedly believed they could leverage Joe Biden’s political connections to their benefits.
“Don’t worry about investors,” James Biden purportedly told Paradigm’s senior leadership upon taking over the fund, as reported by Politico. “We’ve got people all around the world who want to invest in Joe Biden.”
Paradigm’s executives claim that James and Hunter Biden saw the hedge fund as a way to “take money from rich foreigners who could not legally give money” to Joe Biden’s campaign account.
“We’ve got investors lined up in a line of 747s filled with cash ready to invest in this company,” James Biden allegedly told Paradigm’s staff.
Hunter and James also tried to solicit labor unions to invest their pension funds in Paradigm by relying on Joe Biden’s long record of advocating in favor of collective bargaining.
The efforts proved to unsuccessful, though, with James and Hunter Biden choosing to strip and sell the company off by 2010 after a number of bad decisions, including partnering with a Ponzi scheme.
7. James Biden’s received a $1.5 billion contract to build houses in Iraq while Joe Biden was overseeing the region.
After his foray into the world of high finance ended disastrously, James Biden joined Hillstone International LLC as a vice president in 2010. The company, a subsidiary of Hill International, at the time, was pursuing technology and construction projects around the globe.
Although the company had been losing money for some time, James Biden’s arrival resulted in something of a reversal in fortune. Within six months of James Biden joining the firm, Hillstone was the recipient of $1.5 billion dollar contract to build 100,000 houses in war-torn Iraq. The deal, which was never finalized because outside funding failed to materialize, quickly caught attention as Joe Biden was overseeing the Obama administration’s policy in the region.
Both the Obama White House and Hillstone denied Joe Biden had anything to do with the deal, pointing to the fact the contract was awarded through a South Korean group working to build homes in Iraq. Despite the denials, Irvin Richter, the founder of Hill International, did admit James Biden may have had something to do with the deal.
“Listen, his name helps him get in the door, but it doesn’t help him get business,” Richter told Fox Business in 2012 when discussing James Biden. “People who have important names tend to get in the door easier but it doesn’t mean success. If he had the name Obama he would get in the door easier.”
Complicating matters was the fact James Biden was likely to get rich if the deal went through. Fox Business reported that a group of minority partners, which included James Biden, owned 49 percent of Hillstone. The other 51 percent was owned by the company’s parent group, Hill International. Given Hillstone’s profit breakdown structure, James Biden and the other minority partners would have been eligible to split more than $735 million after the deal was completed
8. Hunter Biden’s firm scored a $1.5 billion deal with the Bank of China only days after Joe Biden and his youngest son visited the country.
Peter Schweizer, a senior contributor at Breitbart News, revealed in his bestselling book Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends that Hunter Biden’s firm signed a multi-billion dollar with a subsidiary of the state-owned Bank of China only ten days after he visited the country with his father aboard Air Force Two.
In a SiriusXM Breitbart News Tonight radio interview from last year, Schweizer explained how the Biden-China deal unfolded:
“In December of 2013, Vice President Joe Biden flies to Asia for a trip, and the centerpiece for that trip is a visit to Beijing, China,” said Schweizer. “To put this into context, in 2013, the Chinese have just exerted air rights over the South Pacific, the South China Sea. They basically have said, ‘If you want to fly in this area, you have to get Chinese approval. We are claiming sovereignty over this territory.’ Highly controversial in Japan, in the Philippines, and in other countries. Joe Biden is supposed to be going there to confront the Chinese. Well, he gets widely criticized on that trip for going soft on China. So basically, no challenging them, and Japan and other countries are quite upset about this.” |
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:36:27 GMT
 Arkansas Judge Orders Hunter Biden to Appear before Court in Paternity CaseTobias Hoonhout,
National Review•January 22, 2020
www.yahoo.com/news/arkansas-judge-orders-hunter-biden-155359844.html
An Arkansas judge presiding over Hunter Biden’s paternity case has ordered the son of former Vice President Joe Biden to appear before the court on January 29 to explain the state of his finances, after missing a deadline to hand over five years of records.
Biden “continues to act as though he has no respect for this court, its orders, the legal process in this state, or the needs of his child for support,” wrote Clinton Lancaster, the lawyer for Lunden Alexis Roberts, the mother of Biden’s 16-month-old child. Judge Holly Meyer signed an “Order to Appear and Show Cause,” which was filed in court on Tuesday.
Lancaster explained that Biden had failed to reveal addresses, phone numbers, all sources of income, ownership stakes in companies, property deeds, and tax returns. The original “Motion for Contempt and for Order to Show Cause” was filed on December 23, with Lancaster arguing that Biden had already missed deadlines on December 12 and December 19.
Biden’s lawyer Brent Langdon has argued in response that “to the extent possible [Biden] has complied with the court’s orders” and asked for the motion to be dismissed.
Lancaster also told the Arkansas Democrat Gazette that the case had nothing to do with impeachment. Roberts has been seeking $11,000 from Biden to defray cost of her paternity case, after DNA results proved he had fathered her child.
“I don’t believe we have any stake in the impeachment proceedings. We don’t have any stake in it whatsoever. We need his income so we can determine child support,” he said.
Earlier this month, Judge Don McSpadden recused himself without explanation after ordering Biden to hand over all income records over the past five years, in the interest of “Baby Doe.” McSpadden also stipulated that Biden’s financial information would remain under seal.
More from National Review
Judge Recuses Himself from Hunter Biden Paternity Case Without Explanation
Trump Adviser Claims Chinese Gave Him ‘Quite a Bit of Background’ on Hunter Biden
Sanders ‘Absolutely’ Denies That Biden Is Corrupt, Apologizes for Supporter’s ‘Corruption Problem’ Op-Ed |
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:36:54 GMT
                 Not just a Biden thing... Oh my GOD America, can't we do better? |
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:37:59 GMT
A comment from someone who ranted in defense of Trump. Blaming someone else for things Trump has done is a distraction and meaningless. It does however bring up problems with Biden as a candidate: |
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:38:37 GMT
The answer to this question is obvious. The author hits on it in paragraph #3.Why is Joe Biden Running?What exactly does his candidacy have to offer?
Lauren Martinchek
medium.com/@xlauren_Mx/why-is-joe-biden-running-d4b5c8e33b4
Jun 20, 2019 · 4 min read
Photo via Joe Biden on Instagram
Well we’re almost a couple months in to former Vice President Joe Biden’s campaign for the democratic nomination, and it’s been an interesting couple months indeed. Since before he even made the announcement, those of us on the left of the spectrum within the party have been saying that Joe Biden would be his own worst enemy, hurting his chances just by opening his mouth. Of course, he has proven this to be true in the most painstaking fashion, whether it be his ardent defense of the 1994 crime bill, bragging about compromising with segregationists, or when he made sure to tell donors that under his presidency, nothing would fundamentally change. As harsh as it may sound, his self sabotage would be comical if it wasn’t so cringeworthy and disturbing.
But putting all jokes or nostalgia for the Obama days aside, the democratic base needs to start asking some critical questions, the most important and obvious of which would be: why is Joe Biden even running?
Something that corporatist, centrist candidates like Joe Biden or even Hickenlooper and Delaney refuse to acknowledge is that in order to win, you have to give voters something to vote for, not against. 2016 showed us in no uncertain terms that just painting Trump as a boogyman does not cut it. Of course it should go without saying that we don’t need to replace a narcissist with another narcissist. So again, I have to ask why Mr. Biden is even seeking the nomination. Is it really too much to ask that when going through the process of electing a public servant, we get to know what issues really matter to them? The American people deserve to know what sets a candidate apart from the rest, but Joe Biden, with his “campaign of limited exposure” has unfortunately made it blatantly obvious that he does not see it that way.
Putting at least one authentic policy proposal at the center of a campaign is nothing unusual. Rather, it should be expected, and some of our candidates have fortunately treated it that way. Bernie Sanders has made medicare for all the center of his campaign platform. Elizabeth Warren has made taking on the big banks and student debt the center of hers. Tulsi Gabbard has made foreign policy and noninterventionism her campaign strongpoint. Jay Inslee has made tackling climate change the center of his. So where is our frontrunner? If we were to hypothetically elect Joe Biden as the next president of the United States, what can we count on him to focus on? We still have not found out. So if he isn’t prepared to tell us, then-once again-why is he running?
He didn’t have to put himself through this, or subject himself to the microscope he finds himself under. I don’t remember at any point during the Obama years that people were vetting Joe Biden in the way they are now. If he had made the decision not to run, then I have a feeling he could have retained his status as America’s Uncle Joe.
But here we are, with more closets full of skeletons just waiting to be opened. Given the context of his record, it’s almost painfully obvious how out of touch Mr. Biden is with the current political climate. Even his base is having trouble trying to defend his record and past statements, which is no surprise considering I’ve heard some argue that it’s even further to the right in some instances than the Tories in England. Why is he subjecting himself to this, just to run for a position for which if won, he promises no fundamental change?
Mr. Biden has ran for the nomination not once, but twice before over the course of his decades long career in national politics. And that’s fine. Clearly, having the highest office in the land is something that matters to him, and I’m not going to be opposed to someone having political ambition. All I ask is that we understand what’s at the heart of that ambition. We not only deserve, but have the right to know the motives and intentions of someone who wants to be the highest public servant. That isn’t too much to ask.
The more Joe Biden withdraws and sinks in to his “campaign of limited exposure”, the more convinced I am of America’s own undoing. This is really what we have resorted ourselves to. We’ve unfortunately reached a point in which we’re so desensitized to the corruption, that candidates like Joe Biden actually seem appealing. But it doesn’t have to be this way. We have the right to demand better, and the least a candidate could do is give us a real reason why they’re running. |
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:39:14 GMT
 February 27, 2015
How to Be a Narcissist in Three Easy Steps
By Cheryl Magness
www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/02/how_to_be_a_narcissist_in_three_easy_steps.html
By now you’ve no doubt seen the latest episode in the reality show known as Obama’s White House. In this installment, “Uncle Joe” once again demonstrates his apparent belief that women are meant to be touched, preferably by him, and preferably on national television. The vice-president’s penchant for showing physical affection to females of all ages has been extensively documented and analyzed, and the debate about the appropriateness of his serial touching is not likely to end any time soon, as the VP is not known for fastidiousness in either his speech or behavior. What can we expect next from “Hands” Biden? You’ll have to tune back in to find out.
www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/17/joe-biden-needs-a-tranquilizer-dart-stephanie-carter-suffers-the-veep-s-paws.html
thefederalist.com/2015/01/07/holy-hell-would-be-unleashed-on-handsy-joe-biden-if-he-were-conservative/
Yet as I watched the video of Defense Secretary Ashton Carter’s swearing in, the thing that I found most cringe-inducing was not the touching itself. It’s possible (difficult, but possible) to attribute that to social ineptness, stupidity, or both. Vice-President Biden is hardly the first public figure for whom touching has become a touchy subject. No, what I find most disturbing about his behavior is the highly visible nature of it at a time when it was clearly not called for. A man who has just taken an oath of office and is following that oath with some reflections on the occasion is upstaged by the vice-president’s inability -- or refusal -- to stand aside and respectfully observe the proceedings. The behavior strikes me as less lecherous than narcissistic. Lechers and sexual predators don’t tend to go after their prey in full view of the prey’s closest protector, but in the shadows, where the prey makes an easier mark. Narcissists, on the other hand, crave an audience. Here are some hallmarks of narcissistic behavior that in my opinion are strongly reflected in Vice-President Biden’s Six-Year Touching Tour.
www.nytimes.com/2006/07/23/fashion/sundaystyles/23touch.html?_r=0
1. Narcissists operate in public. As previously mentioned, what they desire more than anything is attention. So they desperately seek it out wherever they can find it, and sometimes the easiest place to find it is on someone else’s stage. A narcissist is not content to stand by while the focus is on someone else. Instead, he must insert himself into the picture. The touching, whispering, and kissing that routinely permeate this type of vice-presidential appearance reflect an inability to let someone else have the spotlight. Every touch screams, “Look at me! I’m here, too! You may be the new defense secretary, but I’m the vice-president, dammit, and I’m not gonna let you forget it!”
2. Narcissists thrive on control. So they not only do whatever they can to draw attention from someone else to themselves, they do so in a way that leverages their own power in the situation. You know what I’m talking about. The boss who routinely turns staff meetings into an opportunity for his own aggrandizement; the relative who looks at every family gathering as a stage for her latest personal drama; the friend whose impetuousness and mood swings keep everyone walking on egg shells. Narcissists take advantage of the tolerance and forbearance of others, who often opt to weather the narcissist’s storm rather than rock the boat and risk capsizing it. In the case of the vice president, what better place to get a power high than on the international stage, where to rebuff a vice-presidential advance would stir more political poop than to simply smile and wait for the unpleasantness to be over.
3. Narcissists objectify people. They don’t see other human beings as individuals with their own identities and lives and feelings, but as props for their own machinations. The vice president seems to have little awareness that the spouses and children he insists on cuddling are not always comfortable with the attention. People are mere scenery, after all, and scenery doesn’t have feelings. How refreshing when one of those props refuses to stand still. Leave it to a child to have the guts to stand up to the bully.
Now, whether Joe Biden is truly a narcissist, I don’t know. A clinical diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder would require examination by a mental health professional. But the times in which we live are nothing if not narcissistic, and our politicians are a reflection of the times. And considering that Vice President Biden has had six years of on-the-job training from the Narcissist-in-Chief, it makes sense that he might have learned a thing or two.
By now you’ve no doubt seen the latest episode in the reality show known as Obama’s White House. In this installment, “Uncle Joe” once again demonstrates his apparent belief that women are meant to be touched, preferably by him, and preferably on national television. The vice-president’s penchant for showing physical affection to females of all ages has been extensively documented and analyzed, and the debate about the appropriateness of his serial touching is not likely to end any time soon, as the VP is not known for fastidiousness in either his speech or behavior. What can we expect next from “Hands” Biden? You’ll have to tune back in to find out.
Yet as I watched the video of Defense Secretary Ashton Carter’s swearing in, the thing that I found most cringe-inducing was not the touching itself. It’s possible (difficult, but possible) to attribute that to social ineptness, stupidity, or both. Vice-President Biden is hardly the first public figure for whom touching has become a touchy subject. No, what I find most disturbing about his behavior is the highly visible nature of it at a time when it was clearly not called for. A man who has just taken an oath of office and is following that oath with some reflections on the occasion is upstaged by the vice-president’s inability -- or refusal -- to stand aside and respectfully observe the proceedings. The behavior strikes me as less lecherous than narcissistic. Lechers and sexual predators don’t tend to go after their prey in full view of the prey’s closest protector, but in the shadows, where the prey makes an easier mark. Narcissists, on the other hand, crave an audience. Here are some hallmarks of narcissistic behavior that in my opinion are strongly reflected in Vice-President Biden’s Six-Year Touching Tour.
Narcissists operate in public. As previously mentioned, what they desire more than anything is attention. So they desperately seek it out wherever they can find it, and sometimes the easiest place to find it is on someone else’s stage. A narcissist is not content to stand by while the focus is on someone else. Instead, he must insert himself into the picture. The touching, whispering, and kissing that routinely permeate this type of vice-presidential appearance reflect an inability to let someone else have the spotlight. Every touch screams, “Look at me! I’m here, too! You may be the new defense secretary, but I’m the vice-president, dammit, and I’m not gonna let you forget it!”
Narcissists thrive on control. So they not only do whatever they can to draw attention from someone else to themselves, they do so in a way that leverages their own power in the situation. You know what I’m talking about. The boss who routinely turns staff meetings into an opportunity for his own aggrandizement; the relative who looks at every family gathering as a stage for her latest personal drama; the friend whose impetuousness and mood swings keep everyone walking on egg shells. Narcissists take advantage of the tolerance and forbearance of others, who often opt to weather the narcissist’s storm rather than rock the boat and risk capsizing it. In the case of the vice president, what better place to get a power high than on the international stage, where to rebuff a vice-presidential advance would stir more political poop than to simply smile and wait for the unpleasantness to be over.
Narcissists objectify people. They don’t see other human beings as individuals with their own identities and lives and feelings, but as props for their own machinations. The vice president seems to have little awareness that the spouses and children he insists on cuddling are not always comfortable with the attention. People are mere scenery, after all, and scenery doesn’t have feelings. How refreshing when one of those props refuses to stand still. Leave it to a child to have the guts to stand up to the bully.
www.mediaite.com/online/biden-has-seriously-awkward-interaction-with-senators-daughter/
Now, whether Joe Biden is truly a narcissist, I don’t know. A clinical diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder would require examination by a mental health professional. But the times in which we live are nothing if not narcissistic, and our politicians are a reflection of the times. And considering that Vice President Biden has had six years of on-the-job training from the Narcissist-in-Chief, it makes sense that he might have learned a thing or two.
Read more: www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/02/how_to_be_a_narcissist_in_three_easy_steps.html#ixzz6CCjKU3GR
Follow us: @americanthinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook |
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:39:45 GMT
Best of Biden: "You're gonna be frisked" & more from swearing-in
CBS News
2.23M subscribers
"Don't tell Bob Byrd's ghost," "you're gonna be frisked," and more - the most candid moments from Vice President Joe Biden today as he swore in senators to the 113th Congress. |
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:40:20 GMT
We can count on this however Biden or any president has a template thanks to Trump on how to get away with their crimes. President Biden could just exercise Executive Privilege. All wealthy criminals should run for president if they want immunity forever. Nice job conservatives.Joe Biden Could Be Impeached by GOP Over Ukraine if He Wins, Iowa Senator SaysJennifer Epstein
BloombergFebruary 2, 2020, 5:05 PM MST
www.yahoo.com/news/joe-biden-could-impeached-gop-200240479.html Joe Biden Could Be Impeached by GOP Over Ukraine if He Wins, Iowa Senator Says
(Bloomberg) -- Iowa Senator Joni Ernst warned Sunday that Republicans could immediately push to impeach Joe Biden over his work in Ukraine as vice president if he win the White House.
“I think this door of impeachable whatever has been opened,” Ernst said in an interview with Bloomberg News. “Joe Biden should be very careful what he’s asking for because, you know, we can have a situation where if it should ever be President Biden, that immediately, people, right the day after he would be elected would be saying, ‘Well, we’re going to impeach him.’”
The grounds for impeachment, the first-term Republican said, would be “for being assigned to take on Ukrainian corruption yet turning a blind eye to Burisma because his son was on the board making over a million dollars a year.”
President Barack Obama sent Biden to Ukraine on his behalf to fight corruption, including leading the push from the U.S. and western European powers to remove prosecutor general Viktor Shokin from office. When Shokin was fired in 2016, no congressional Republicans expressed concern about the move. Eventually, though, Shokin began to argue that he was fired because he was investigating Burisma and Biden wanted to protect his son, Hunter, who was on the company’s board. The claim has been debunked.
Biden told a Sinclair news reporter in Iowa that her words reinforced his argument that Trump’s interest in Ukraine was meant to damage his candidacy.
“Doesn’t that make the case I’m making that from the very beginning that this was all about not wanting to run against me?” he said.
Earlier this week, Ernst tied the Senate’s impeachment trial of President Donald Trump to Biden’s chances in Monday’s Iowa Democratic caucus, suggesting that the trial could hurt his case with caucus goers. “I’m really interested to see how this discussion today informs and influences the Iowa caucus voters, those Democratic caucus goers. Will they be supporting Vice President Biden at this point? Not certain at that,” she said.
Biden has been sure to mention Ernst’s comments during every stump speech he’s made this week, drawing applause as he suggests that Ernst had “spilled the beans” about Republicans’ real intention in raising the Burisma issue to damage Biden’s candidacy. “You can ruin Donald Trump’s night by caucusing with me and ruin Joni Ernst’s night as well,” he’s told Iowa crowds this week.
Biden communications director Kate Bedingfield responded to Ernst’s latest comments by again encouraging Iowans to caucus for Biden. “Iowans have the chance tomorrow to say the words that Donald Trump and Joni Ernst fear most: I’m here to caucus for Joe Biden,” she said.
(Disclaimer: Michael Bloomberg is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination. He is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News.)
(Updates with Biden comment in fifth, sixth paragraphs)
To contact the reporter on this story: Jennifer Epstein in Des Moines, Iowa at jepstein32@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Wendy Benjaminson at wbenjaminson@bloomberg.net, Larry Liebert
For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com
Subscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.
©2020 Bloomberg L.P. |
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on May 4, 2020 16:40:52 GMT
This interview has me re-thinking some of my negative opinions about Hunter Biden. The interview was the second part of another subject the author discussed with Terry. As usual, the right wing CONS project their criminal nature onto EVERYONE THAT ISN'T THEM. I am not saying what the Biden's have done, especially Hunter was "clean" but it isn't the sleazy, criminal case the right wing is making it out to be. Too bad the audio is no longer available as you would be able to hear how the author's voice is somewhat sympathetic to the young Biden.
I also have to say the author refutes most of what Peter Schweizer has written called the Biden 5 (second post in this thread). Weiss is also responsible for the phony hit piece on the Clinton's called Clinton Cash. In typical right wing conservative form Schweizer ASSUMES things rather than FACTS.
Killing Of Iranian General Opens Up 'New Frontier' In Assassination, Journalist SaysFebruary 6, 20201:32 PM ET
Heard on Fresh Air
www.npr.org/2020/02/06/803355747/killing-of-iranian-general-opens-up-new-frontier-in-assassination-journalist-say
GROSS: This is FRESH AIR. I'm Terry Gross.
Let's get back to my interview with Adam Entous, who covers intelligence, national security and foreign affairs for The New Yorker. In this part of the interview, we talked about Hunter Biden. Entous profiled Hunter Biden last July, reporting on his business dealings and tumultuous personal life. In December, Entous wrote about the efforts of Rudy Giuliani and Yuriy Lutsenko, Ukraine's former prosecutor general, to smear Joe Biden. Our interview was recorded yesterday, before the Senate acquitted President Trump.
Later, the Republican heads of two Senate committees announced that they're reviewing potential conflicts of interest posed by the business activities of Hunter Biden during the time his father was vice president. The committees have requested travel records to find out whether Hunter used government-sponsored travel to help conduct private business in China and Ukraine.
How did you start writing about Hunter Biden and Ukraine?
ENTOUS: So my editors were - there were a lot of stories that were circulating, particularly on Breitbart and Fox News that were making some of these allegations about the involvement of Hunter Biden on the board of this Ukrainian gas company called Burisma. You know, I said, hey, let me poke around; let me see if there's any there there.
It kind of morphed into a story that told about his business activities and his very, in some cases, questionable business choices, but also the broader story of his, you know, struggles with alcohol and drugs and how that, frankly, contributed to some of these problems that his father and he are now facing.
GROSS: How did the story get started that Joe Biden, when he was vice president, got a former Ukrainian prosecutor removed from office because the prosecutor was investigating corruption in Burisma, the energy company in which Hunter Biden served on the board of directors? That's the Republican narrative. There is no evidence to back that up. There's no evidence that Biden was trying to cover up for his son and prevent an investigation into Burisma; it's actually the opposite way around, according to your sources.
ENTOUS: Yeah. So it kind of starts in kind of two parts. The original stories, which were covered by the mainstream press - The Wall Street Journal, New York Times - when Hunter Biden was given this very lucrative seat on the board of Burisma. When that takes place in 2014, you know, there are stories that are written at the time, you know, about the questions raised about the decision of Hunter Biden to take the seat on the board because of his father's role in trying to get Ukraine to combat corruption and the perception that that could create a conflict of interest. So that - you know, that's a story that's been bubbling.
Starting in 2014, what happens is, is that a conservative researcher who's very close to Steve Bannon, Peter Schweizer, he writes a book that comes out in 2018, which points at those 2014-2015 articles about the questionable choice of Hunter Biden and, frankly, Joe Biden and his son playing this role. And then what happens is, is that Biden, as part of his efforts, the vice president, in trying to get Ukraine to combat corruption, he is urged by his team to put pressure on the Ukrainian government to remove a prosecutor, Shokin - Viktor Shokin - because he was not investigating corruption and, in particular, was not investigating this company, Burisma.
GROSS: So one of the things that furthered what became the Republican narrative, Joe Biden got a Ukrainian prosecutor fired because the Ukrainian prosecutor was looking into corruption in Burisma, the company on which Hunter Biden served on the board of directors. This book that helped further that narrative was written by Peter Schweizer, who is the co-founder, with Steve Bannon, of the Government Accountability Institute, which is funded in part or perhaps largely funded by Rebekah Mercer, part of the Mercer family, which funds a lot of right-wing causes.
You've read the book, and you've done a lot of investigation. How much of this book is actually based on fact? How much of it do you think is really misleading?
ENTOUS: Well, I think that the chronology is largely accurate. But what I was amazed at was, you know, obviously Peter Schweitzer was not able to really talk to anybody. I don't know how hard he tried to talk to people. But, for example, there's a moment when, just before Hunter joins the board of Burisma, there is a visit to the White House by Hunter's business partner Devon Archer.
And in the book, it's described as a moment when Hunter and Devon Archer, who are going to be on the board of Burisma, he's suggesting, because of the timing of the visit - it was right before the announcement that they were joining the board. He was suggesting, Schweizer was suggesting that the meeting obviously was about talking to Joe Biden about their role that they were going to play at this Ukrainian company.
So as part of my reporting, I spoke to Devon Archer. Archer explained that actually it was that Hunter had heard that his son, his young son, had a school project, and he was designing a model of the White House. And what happened was, is that Hunter, at the last minute, arranged for Archer's son to come to the White House so he could look around the White House and make a better school model for - you know, a cardboard model of the White House.
And so it was interpreted in the most nefarious way, without any evidence or having done any interviews, by Schweizer when, in fact, it was a completely benign - had nothing to do with Burisma. It was purely kind of a nice gesture between friends for Archer's son. And to me, it was sort of the classic example of where you can construct a narrative based on chronology, but unless you really talk to people, you really might be misinterpreting things, which is what happened in this case.
And the book is littered with examples like that, where Schweizer is making the most nefarious interpretations of what, when you actually talk to people, you realize are actually benign moments.
GROSS: So how influential was this book?
ENTOUS: Well, it certainly was influential in right-wing media. I mean, Fox gave it a lot of airtime. Breitbart printed a lot of stories based on parts of the book. As we saw with "Clinton Cash," one of the things that...
GROSS: Another book written by Peter Schweizer.
ENTOUS: Correct. What we saw is, is that the strategy that Bannon and Schweizer have is to take these investigations, if you want to call it that, and find a way to get the narrative to jump from the right-wing press into the mainstream press; in other words, try to get reporters from mainstream news organizations - The New York Times, for example, The Washington Post, you know, mainstream television - get them to run the story.
And that's basically what was happening. There was an attempt to try to do that in the first half of 2019. Giuliani was working that one very hard. I had many conversations with him - Rudy Giuliani, the president's personal lawyer who was investigating this and wanted the mainstream press to write stories about Hunter Biden and his, you know, potential conflicts and, you know, the notion that Joe Biden somehow abused his office, even though there's no evidence to back that up. And so he was basically trying to push the story for the first six months of the year, trying to get it into the mainstream press.
GROSS: So he was trying to sell you on that story?
ENTOUS: He was trying to sell me. He was trying to sell everybody, frankly, on that story to try to get them to write stories about it.
GROSS: But your conclusion is that there's no credible evidence that Biden sought the removal of the Ukrainian prosecutor in order to protect his son.
ENTOUS: Yeah, absolutely. I saw no evidence of that. I think the questions about Hunter Biden's wisdom in taking this board seat, given his father's role in Ukraine, that's a legitimate subject of scrutiny. But the notion that his father, you know, used his office in order to protect his son, I saw evidence that suggests the opposite.
Joe Biden, really, frankly - and this is not necessarily to his credit - took a position that whatever his son did was none of his business and nobody should ask him about it. So he sort of gave his son, you know, the freedom to do whatever he wanted and didn't really want to know anything about it.
And when people at the embassy, at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, were asking him to intervene in this case to try to get Shokin fired, because he was not investing in the company that employed his son, Joe Biden did what the embassy staff asked him to do, which is get this guy fired, which ends up obviously coming back and being twisted by the right-wing to make it look like he was trying to protect his son.
GROSS: OK. If you're just joining us, my guest is Adam Entous. He writes for The New Yorker covering intelligence, national security and foreign policy. His latest piece is titled "Qassem Suleimani And How Nations Decide To Kill: A New Frontier In Assassination." We'll be right back. This is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF SLOWBERN'S "WHEN WAR WAS KING")
GROSS: This is FRESH AIR. And if you're just joining us, my guest is New Yorker reporter Adam Entous.
So you did a long profile of Hunter Biden, and the profile reveals that he's had a lot of problems in his life. He's been in and out of rehab for alcohol addiction, and he's had, like, problematic business dealings. Beyond serving on the Burisma board, he's - he was in one business dealing that lost a lot of money. He bought a $1.5 million home, didn't have the money for a down payment, so paid 110% mortgage. I never even heard of such a thing.
But all those troubles - and there's more, I mean, including a paternity suit that he denied being the father, and a DNA test revealed that he is the father. So you've got all these troubles in his life, but that doesn't mean that Joe Biden did something corrupt.
ENTOUS: No. I mean, I think in many ways, if you kind of look at the history of the family, you know, Hunter was a breadwinner in the family. He was the one that was supposed to make money. Beau, his older brother, you know, who dies of a brain tumor, you know, he is - goes kind of in the - follows his father into politics.
And, you know, his father was famously - you know, didn't have a lot of money, and neither did Beau. And Hunter, you know, steps in and pays, for example, for Beau's law school debts. You know, he's basically making money in order to, you know, help the overall family. And he's struggling with addiction, with alcohol and later with a crack addiction.
And so he's making some of these decisions on business under pressure - right? - to get money and also, you know, impaired, I think, by these addictions. And, you know, he doesn't talk to his father about any of these things because the rule in the family was you don't mix - you know, his business decisions are his, and it doesn't involve his dad. So they had a system that they wouldn't discuss these matters. And so he was making his decisions largely on his own and obviously made some poor decisions along the way.
GROSS: What was the reaction of Biden's staff to Hunter Biden serving on Burisma?
ENTOUS: Generally speaking, they were displeased. Some of them were quite concerned. The issue was, is they didn't want to raise the matter with Joe Biden. You know, they knew that anything involving the family was sort of - they understood it to be sort of off limits. Joe Biden had made it clear to his staff over the years that things that involved their son - his sons were not things that he - that they should discuss with him. And so they rarely raised it, and that's what happened in this case. So even though there was considerable concern, both on Biden's staff but also at the White House and at the State Department, about some of the business activities of Hunter, they didn't feel that they could raise it.
And there is only one example that I know of where it was raised. And when it was raised with Joe Biden, the official who did raise it didn't say to Joe, you know, you should tell your son to get off the board; he just wanted to, you know, let Joe Biden know that during an upcoming visit to Ukraine, he might be asked embarrassing questions about his son's role at the company. It was more of a heads-up rather than a recommendation that Hunter be removed from that - agree to step down from the board.
So, you know, there was a self-censorship that was going on within the circle around Joe Biden that I think in the end did not serve him or Hunter Biden particularly well.
GROSS: I'm wondering how you thought about this when you were writing your piece, your long profile of Hunter Biden. Talking about Hunter Biden and talking about the problems he had, in a way it amplifies the Republican strategy of putting the spotlight on Hunter Biden and his problems and connecting Joe Biden to that. So what was your approach to writing about Hunter Biden while at the same time trying to not play into the Republican narrative of smearing Joe Biden through his son Hunter?
ENTOUS: Yeah. Frankly, that was a really difficult balancing act. You know, I wanted No. 1. I just wanted to be fair and accurate in telling the story, you know. I wanted to be able to shoot down the conspiracy theories that I thought were false.
But at the same time, I wanted to tell the story that I thought was true, which was that you had a person here who was really struggling - who was struggling in his personal life, was struggling with things that I think a lot of people can relate to and made a lot of decisions that maybe weren't thought through. And I could explain what's real and what's not and do it in a way that hopefully made you understand who this person was and that he was a real human being, you know, rather than a caricature.
But it was, you know, very difficult. You know, I didn't want to give him a pass for his mistakes. You know, and so - I wanted to come across as, you know, very evenhanded and tough at times, but at the same time, you know, not buying into the conspiracies that were being pushed and to make clear that those - when those were false, that I could call those to be false.
GROSS: Do you find that people tell you that they don't know what's true anymore, that they hear both sides and like who knows what's right? And, like, at The New Yorker, like, everything you write, everything the New Yorker publishes is so fact-checked. But still, are people reading and saying, well, that's what you reported, but I don't know what's true because I've heard the other side, too?
ENTOUS: Yeah. No, I'm - you know, again, maybe I'm naive, but the - you know, I have friends who are Trump supporters. And when I was working on this Hunter Biden story, you know, occasionally, I get a call from one of them. And they would ask me what I thought.
And, you know, I would say exactly what I told you, which is, you know, that, you know, clearly there were some strange, you know, maybe not good decisions that were being made in terms of, you know, the business activities that he was involved in, but that I don't think that there's any evidence - in fact, the evidence is the contrary, that Joe Biden tried to protect his son.
And they just wouldn't - you know, these friends wouldn't believe me. And, you know, they were more trusting of what Devin Nunez, the House Intelligence Committee - Republican ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee is saying. And he's repeating these allegations. And they're hearing it repeated on Fox.
And I think, you know, people aren't sure - aren't sure what to believe. Like you said, I mean, we do - you know, we do aggressive fact-checking on these stories to make sure that they're true. And this is an incredibly complicated story. And so that makes it so much easier to sell conspiracy theories.
And so, you know, what's - again, what - the thing that just really bothers me is, you know, senators who know and members of Congress who know that what they're saying is false, they're repeating the false allegation because they don't care. They just want to score political points. And so they're continuing to do this.
And to me, it just - you know, we're becoming so polarized, you know. You - you know, the people who, you know, either only believe what they hear on Fox or they, you know, take an opposite view. And it's scary to think of how, you know, people just assume that there are no facts anymore when there are facts.
GROSS: Well, Adam Entous, thank you for your reporting. And thank you for coming on our show.
ENTOUS: It was a pleasure. Thank you.
GROSS: Adam Entous' profile of Hunter Biden was published in The New Yorker last July. His article in the current issue is titled "Qassem Suleimani And How Nations Decide to Kill." After we take a short break, David Bianculli will review the new crime drama "Tommy" starring Edie Falco. It premieres tonight on CBS. This is FRESH AIR. |
|
