America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Amazing what people paid for prints of the originals.

In fairness I should not be “what abouting” Trumps kids - I am sure most here know they are as clean has he is……

And I am not defending Hunter Biden.
From what I have seem Hunter has been a bit naughty.

Maybe macs is right, and we should impeach Hunter…….

https://nypost.com/2023/07/25/hunter-biden-lawyer-accused-of-deception-to-seal-damning-evidence/amp/

Oops

You're a tool. And not a tool that's useful in any way, like most tools.

Biden's kid has shady dealings with numerous countries, it's common freakin' knowledge. And his demented father had knowledge of it, set it up, and even benefited from it.

He should have never been elected president, and now that he has been, he needs to be impeached and imprisoned for crimes against the country.

He never will be, though... because of folks like you who continue to be blinded by your hatred for his opponent.

Sounds like an X-files episode…..

More from the smartest guy Pedo Joe knows....





For two years, as Hunter Biden slid deep into substance abuse and prostitutes, he raked in $4 million from a Chinese private equity firm, a Ukrainian energy company, and other sources, according to a proposed plea agreement to federal tax charges, Bloomberg reports.

The agreement, made public Wednesday after US District Judge Maryellen Noreika ordered it unsealed following media requests, would see Hunter Biden plead guilty to misdemeanor charges, serve no jail time, and gave the First Son de facto immunity from prosecution for future crimes outside the scope of the current cases.

An exhibit incorporated into the agreement between Biden and federal prosecutors in Delaware sets out in some detail his earnings in 2017 and 2018, two years for which he failed to pay income tax. Republicans, who have criticized the proposed plea as a sweetheart deal, have seized upon the millions Hunter Biden made to argue that his father must also have benefited. -Bloomberg

In 2017, Hunter pulled in over $2.3 million - with $1 million of that coming from a company he formed with the CEO of a Chinese conglomerate. He also took in $664,000 from a Chinese infrastructure investment firm, $500,000 from a Ukrainian energy company (we assume to be Burisma), $70,000 from a Romanian business, $48,000 from an international law firm, and $666,000 from domestic business interests.

Biden has admitted ties to Chinese energy company CEFC, Ukrainian energy giant Burisma, and the law firm Boies, Schiller & Flexner.

In 2018, Hunter made over $2.1 million according to the plea deal - which came as his drug addiction went critical. According to Biden's memoir, cited by the document, that year saw "a spring and summer of nonstop debauchery."

According to the agreement, Biden was well aware of his tax liabilities from an accountant he hired. The accountant prepared Biden’s returns and sent them to him for review and signature. Despite repeated encouragement by his accountant, Biden never signed or submitted his returns.

According to the agreement, Biden failed to pay his taxes despite having the money to do so. By May 2019, he had spent money he could have used for that purpose “on personal expenses, including large cash withdrawals, payments to or on behalf of his children, credit card balances, and car payments for his Porsche.” -Bloomberg

By October 2021, Biden's tax liabilities for 2017 and 2018 had grown to $955,800 and $956,632 respectively - and were paid for by an unidentified third party. That personal also covered $45,661 and $197,372 to resolve outstanding tax issues from 2016 and 2019.

Earlier this year, the NYT reported that Hollywood entertainment lawyer Kevin 'bong rip' Morris lent over $2 million to Biden to help with his taxes.

Of note, an IRS whistleblower from the agency's criminal investigations unit told the House Ways and Means Committee in June that Hunter Biden illegally deducted tens of thousands of dollars spent on prostitutes and a sex club from his taxes, according to testimony from June 1 which was released by House Republicans.

"So some of the items that he deducted were personal no-show employees. He deducted payments that were made to who he called his West Coast assistant, but she was essentially a prostitute," said the whistleblower, who worked directly on the IRS's investigation into Hunter's tax issues, speaking of the younger Biden's 2018 return.

Another whistleblower, IRS supervisory agent Gary Shapely , told the committee on May 26 that he found several instances of Hunter expensing flights for prostitutes.

"There were multiple examples of prostitutes that were ordered basically, and we have all the communications between that where he would pay for these prostitutes, would book them a flight where even the flight ticket showed their name. And then he expensed those," said Shapely , who noted that they were expensed to Biden's consulting firm, Owasco, PC.

What's more, Hunter expensed a deposit for an elite Los Angeles sex club (which he was kicked out of for 'grabbing women's asses' and 'acting like a spoiled child').

"He made payments – there’s an $18,000 wire that is made to one of these individuals, and on the wires they say $8,000 in wage and $10,000 in golf – $10k golf club member deposit. And we know that that $10,000 went to pay for a sex club," the anonymous IRS investigator testified.

"He went to a sex club, and we’ve talked to the person that owned that sex club, and they confirmed that he was there. And the guy has to pay $10,000, and the girl – whoever is referring him there doesn’t have to pay anything. So that was deducted on the tax return," he continued.

According to Shapely , on his 2018 return, Hunter paid "one of his girlfriends" and recorded it as a "golf membership."

"We went out and followed that money, it was for a sex club membership in LA," said Shapely.

Whether it's taxes, guns, harsh legal penalties or special favors, Biden has shown the standards that he says apply to everyone don't apply to his own family, which is why yes, Hunter Biden is on the ballot https://t.co/Gzyl9JcsQG https://t.co/zkZeZmUIhr
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) June 23, 2023

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/hunter-raked-millions-over-two-years-amid-nonstop-debauchery


BUT....he's still lying he had no involvement with Hunter's "business".


https://youtu.be/cPOnKeDwlNw

Does anybody believe Lyin' Joe Biden's lies anymore?

REVEALED: Hunter Biden’s Business Partner Visited the White House 36 Times During Obama Years

By Cristina Laila Aug. 8, 2023 11:30 am

The evidence of Biden Crime Family collusion with assorted foreign oligarchs from Kazakhstan, Russia, China, Romania and Ukraine, including crooked politicians and organized crime figures keeps growing. Follow the money flow into Rosemont Seneca founded by Devon Archer, Christopher Heinz, and Hunter Biden and at least 20 shell companies, most of which were LLCs created while Joe Biden was Barack Obama’s vice president and run by Hunter’s business friends, with the money then doled out in smaller amounts to family members.
How deep does this rabbit hole go?

Foreign oligarchs moved millions to Biden-tied firms before meeting Joe Biden, investigators say

House Oversight Committee now has traced more than $20 million in funds from Russians, Chinese, Ukrainians, Kazakhs and Romanians to Biden-tied entities.

Updated: August 9, 2023 - 8:58am

As a "Lefty", I say if evidence is found, charges should be brought.
If found guilty - hang 'em high for all to see. No one should be above the law.

That goes for his Dad too.



Of course for the Right, this only apply to Democrats (or those who would oppose Trump).
Because as we all know - for the Right, any charges of wrongdoing area Witch hunt....

You should go look at the portrait on a five dollar bill.
Because obviously, it's been a long time since you've seen an honest man.

funny use of "proves".

It never surprises me when a self-described LEFTY like Brewha tries to hold up the original Republican POTUS Lincoln as an "honest man". Every real honest historian knows Lincoln was the prototype for the modern left's ideal of a progressive.

I mean is there any Republican POTUS since Lincoln that the LEFT has idolized like they have the mythical Abe?
The JACOBINS themselves brag that Abraham Lincoln Is a Hero of the Left
https://jacobin.com/2023/02/abraham-lincoln-historical-memory-american-left-emancipation-of-labor-racial-justice

Besides the LEFT loving Lincoln, the Neoconservatives and Strausians who identify on the right would have you believe Abraham Lincoln was a conservative. Watch for it with the current crop of GOP candidates for POTUS as they pander to the historical ignorance of their electorate as so do the Democrats.

As historian Brion McClanahan has said many times for years in print and on his podcast to this day, Republicans and anybody that self-styles themselves as being "conservative" needs to lose that Lincoln guy or they are going lose to the left every time.

Which Conservative Heroes?

Nov 2, 2021
by Brion McClanahan
Podcast


There is a relatively new channel I discovered on Rumble and Odyssee called CANCEL LINCOLN by a younger guy named Matt.

He's doing a splendid job using primary sources to tear down the fables and myths told about Lincoln and his ilk.

It's pretty funny, the logo for his channel shows a profile of Lincoln next to Karl Marx.

https://rumble.com/c/c-2230304

Wow D, I make a joke about Lincoln and you go off full tilt.
Crazy, but consistent!

I know - you live a world where no one and nothing can be trusted. Unless it’s Trump, Joe Rogen, or a compelling YouTube video. But watch out for the World Health Organization, cause they are run by the American Left!

- love it!

Oh sure, try to backpedal now and claim you were just making a joke. I for one am not buying it Brew. No way babeeee!

probably every Synagogue in America has a similar version, and all mention bestowing wisdom and stuff on the country's leaders. often referred to as "A Prayer for Our Country".

It's considered an honor to be called up to participate in the service, and when a Bar or Bat Mitzvah is also part of the Shabbat (Sabbath) service those honors typically go to family members.

Without looking into this any further, I'd feel confident in assuring you this is more a case of your ignorance (again) of Judaism and relying on a source that likely has an agenda that gives you tingles.

With so much available to attack Hunter and family, you really shouldn't need to get chit on your hands digging into this stuff.

diversion.

you were wrong to post a claim from a source you rely on that was also ignorant of what took place at the service.

you are allowed to have wrong ideas on Judaism, and your feelings about Democracy being for morons, and even for stating that a particular prayer is a waste of time...
but all of which speak to my post more directly than your side stepping like a greased pig.

I'm hardly mad. Your lack of self awareness is astounding.
Your lack of information is less of a surprise, because the real info would have freed you of the poison.

You post tons of stuff expressing hate, whether yours personally or an opinion piece trying to justify yours...and then ask "who am I to judge?" above.

You judge. You spew hatred. There's nothing Christian in any of it.

I'll give you a pass tonight.
Try to make sense tomorrow when you aren't drunk...but this mess below is not helping your case.


rayr wrote:
Oh Frankie, I am totally self-aware of my awareness.
I don't think you are aware that a political forum is greatly about mocking the ungodly ruling class and their devilish plans or "spewing hatred" as you prefer to rudely say. And they give us so much to mock. Is it against your religion to join in? Lots of Christians and Jews do it every day.

noted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVRU5O8cmiE

Media admits Trump was right... can't be too long before the impeachment comes with evidence like this, right? I mean... sheit... they impeached Trump twice with no evidence.

The only plausible reason for Merrick Garland to appoint David Weiss special counsel is to protect the president.

There’s simply no rational or legal explanation for Attorney General Merrick Garland naming David Weiss a special counsel in the Hunter Biden investigation. Other than the most obvious one, of course.

While Garland contends he’s “confident” the Delaware federal prosecutor “will carry out his responsibility in an evenhanded and urgent manner and in accordance with the highest traditions of this department,” evidence strongly suggests something corrupt. For one thing, no one genuinely seeking an “evenhanded” inquiry would hand the job to a prosecutor who’s already attempted to shower the target of the investigation with an extraordinarily favorable immunity deal. It defies credulity.

And not only was Weiss ready to bequeath Hunter with a hall pass on the felony gun and tax charges but also blanket immunity on a slew of serious potential offenses, including failure to register as a foreign agent, evasion, bribery, and corruption — and any other entanglements of the Biden family. That fact alone should be disqualifying.

On more than one occasion during the plea agreement hearing, the incredulous judge, Maryellen Noreika, asked the government if they could provide a single precedent in which immunity was offered for “crimes in a different case.” They could not. One imagines that the prosecutor who signed off an unprecedented sweetheart deal rejected out of hand by a court isn’t in an ideal position to lead a case, much less uphold the “the highest traditions” of justice.

Hunter’s immunity deal, one DOJ lawyer explained at the time, was “crafted to suit the facts and circumstances.” Indeed, those circumstances are “Joe” and “Biden.” Any investigation leads to the president answering awkward queries about his role in influence peddling to disreputable players in corrupt regimes. There is no Hunter Biden case without Joe.

Now we learn that the sweetheart plea deal was actually Weiss getting tough on Hunter.

In emails obtained by The New York Times between the (alleged) prosecutors and the Hunter camp, we learn that Weiss was ” willing to forgo any prosecution of Mr. Biden at all, and his office came close to agreeing to end the investigation without requiring a guilty plea on any charges.” It was only the congressional testimony of Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler that changed his mind. Only then did Weiss demand Hunter plead guilty to two piddling misdemeanor counts. Now, whether Weiss changed course to mitigate the damage to the Bidens or himself, or both, it speaks to a decision-making process tainted by political considerations. Even in the best light, that should be disqualifying.

Then again, what kind of “evenhanded” investigation is led by a prosecutor who’s been credibly accused of dragging his feet on a case and then lying to Congress? Is there no one else in the entire United States better positioned to investigate Hunter?

Clearly, not from Garland’s perspective. In the past, the Attorney General claimed that Weiss was free to prosecute Hunter in “any way he wanted to” and anywhere in the country. Weiss also told Congress that he had “never been denied the authority to bring charges in any jurisdiction.” If he chose to, he could have finished the job long ago. It’s been five years. The “special counsel” designation is meant to give him a veneer of independence.

Democrats like to point out that Weiss is a Donald Trump appointee and thus unlikely to participate in the Joe Biden protection racket. (A rather stark projection on how they view political power.) First off, so what? That fact doesn’t make him any more competent or any less susceptible to engage in actions that please those in power. Second, there is no way Weiss, who’s been around a long time, gets through any confirmation process without support from the Delaware power brokers — who are Democrats. Biden Democrats.

We don’t need to bore into his soul, however. We only need to look at his actions and his history. Now, the fact that Weiss worked closely with the late Beau Biden doesn’t mean he’s unethical, but it does mean he’s ill-suited to lead an independent inquiry into the Biden family. The fact that, according to the Washington Examiner, seven prosecutors working under Weiss during the Hunter Biden investigation were Democratic donors doesn’t make them corrupt. It makes Weiss a terrible choice to investigate the president’s family.

It’s worth remembering that the special counsel exists to allow government the ability to avoid conflicts of interest that occasionally hamper federal investigations. Weiss, though, is a walking conflict of interest. And the only plausible reason Garland gave him the job is so he would continue protecting the president.

https://thefederalist.com/2023/08/22/hunter-biden-special-counsel-appointment-is-a-blatant-act-of-corruption/


But Trump dog isn't hunting anymore. The whole, he's already a DOJ employee....ooof! Quick....we need a disaster so Joe can claim it happened to him and it was much worse...because...he's a Uniter.

Nowhere to run to baby...nowhere to hide...






Emails show the DOJ repeatedly intervened on behalf of the Delaware U.S. attorney to respond to Hunter Biden-related congressional inquiries.

Emails obtained by the Heritage Foundation following a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit and shared exclusively with The Federalist establish that on multiple occasions, the Department of Justice intervened on behalf of Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss to respond to congressional inquiries related to the Hunter Biden investigation.

This revelation raises more questions about the June 7, 2023, letter dispatched to House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan under Weiss’s signature line, in which the Delaware U.S. attorney claimed he had “ultimate authority” over charging decisions related to Hunter Biden. It also suggests Weiss and the DOJ may have conspired to mislead Congress.

Did the DOJ’s Office of Legislative Affairs respond to Sens. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson’s May 9, 2022, letter seeking information concerning the Hunter Biden investigation? Weiss posed that question to one of his lead assistant U.S. attorneys, Shannon Hanson.

“Not to my knowledge,” Hanson replied, followed soon after with a second email noting that Joe Gaeta, the then-deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legislative Affairs, was working on a response. And although Grassley and Johnson had addressed their May 9, 2022, inquiry solely to Weiss, DOJ’s Office of Legislative Affairs would intercede on his behalf, responding in a letter dated June 9, 2022, that the DOJ would not respond to the questions posed.

The following month, Grassley and Johnson dispatched another letter requesting information related to the Hunter Biden investigation, addressing this letter to Weiss, as well as Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray. Again, the Office of Legal Counsel intervened, telling Weiss’s office in an email reviewed by The Federalist that it would “take the lead on drafting a response” to Grassley and Johnson’s letter.

These never-before-seen emails establish the Department of Justice and U.S. attorney collaborated in responding to congressional inquiries and were among the first batch of documents provided to the Heritage Foundation following a court order last week in Heritage’s FOIA case against the DOJ. That court order required the DOJ to produce, by Aug. 25, 2023, all records collected from Weiss and Assistant U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf that were responsive to the Heritage FOIA lawsuit.

Mike Howell, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project, initiated the FOIA request and then filed suit against the DOJ after the Biden administration attempted to slow-walk the production. Howell told The Federalist the emails show that while Garland was claiming Weiss had the independence to bring whatever charges he wanted, Garland was “simultaneously running communications from Weiss to Grassley through the political controls of Main Justice.” “It is a slap in the face,” Howell said.

Significantly, the emails also call into question the veracity of a series of exchanges between Weiss and Jordan, beginning with Weiss’s June 7 response to the May 25, 2023, letter Jordan sent to Garland. In that May 25 letter, Jordan questioned Garland on the removal of the IRS whistleblowers from the Hunter Biden investigation.

Even though the House committee addressed that letter solely to Attorney General Garland, Weiss responded to the inquiry on June 7 in a letter, which opened: “Your May 25th letter to Attorney General Garland was forwarded to me, with a request that I respond on behalf of the Department.” Weiss then claimed that, as Garland had stated, the Delaware U.S. attorney had “been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of the prosecution…”

Two more letters would soon follow, the first being to Weiss from Jordan on June 22. In that letter, Jordan reiterated the Judiciary Committee’s need for substantive responses, before asking Weiss for more details “in light of the unusual nature of your response on behalf of Attorney General Garland…” Specifically, Jordan asked for information concerning the names of individuals who drafted or assisted in drafting the June 7, 2023, letter, as well as details concerning the drafting and dispatching of the letter.

Weiss responded in a June 30 letter that he was not at liberty to provide substantive responses to the questions concerning an ongoing investigation. The Delaware U.S. attorney then sidestepped questions about the DOJ’s role in drafting the June 7 letter, stating only that he “would like to reaffirm the contents of the June 7 letter drafted by my office” — a statement representing that the Delaware office had composed the letter.

Weiss then proceeded to “expand” on what he meant when he said in his June 7 letter that he had ultimate charging authority, writing:

As the U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware, my charging authority is geographically limited to my home district. If venue for a case lies elsewhere, common Departmental practice is to contact the United States Attorney’s Office for the district in question and determine whether it wants to partner on the case. If not, I may request Special Attorney status from the Attorney General pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 515. Here, I have been assured that, if necessary after the above process, I would be granted § 515 Authority in the District of Columbia, the Central District of California, or any other district where charges could be brought in this matter.

Of course, having ultimate authority and being assured that you would be given ultimate authority if need be, are two different things. But the scandal goes beyond Weiss not having the authority to charge Hunter Biden, to what clearly seems to be an attempt by the DOJ and Weiss to mislead Congress.

It’s important to remember that when Weiss sent the June 7 letter to Jordan, the whistleblowers’ transcripts had not yet been released. Thus neither Weiss nor the DOJ knew the specifics of the whistleblowers’ testimony, leading them to represent to Congress that Weiss had ultimate decision-making authority — something Weiss would later have to massage.

Weiss’s questionable statements didn’t end there, however. In the June 30 letter, Weiss represented to Congress that he had drafted the June 7 letter.

But why would Weiss draft the June 7 letter? That letter was not even addressed to Weiss. And the emails obtained by the Heritage Foundation establish that even when congressional oversight letters were addressed directly to the Delaware U.S. attorney, Weiss did not answer them. Instead, the DOJ’s Office of Legislative Affairs intervened and spoke on his behalf.

There is a second reason to suspect Weiss did not draft the June 7 letter: the footnote reference in the correspondence to the Linder letter.

Jason Foster, a former congressional staffer and the founder and chair of Empower Oversight, which represents the IRS whistleblowers, told The Federalist that when he “worked on Capitol Hill (particularly on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which did regular oversight of the Justice Department), the Department’s Office of Legislative Affairs frequently referenced the otherwise-obscure Linder letter in response to congressional oversight.”

“It’s hard to imagine the letter was widely known outside of Justice Department headquarters,” Foster continued, “especially in U.S. attorneys’ offices, which almost never respond directly to congressional correspondence.”

Conversely, it is easy to imagine Main Justice drafting the June 7 letter on behalf of Weiss to provide Garland cover and to seemingly corroborate the attorney general’s Senate testimony that he had given Weiss full authority to make charging decisions in the Hunter Biden investigation.

That cover may soon be blown away, however, thanks to the Heritage Foundation.

“The only reason these documents are starting to trickle out is because we sued for transparency,” Howell told The Federalist. “We’ve faced taxpayer funded resistance at every step of the way and haven’t given up,” he added, noting that “the DOJ is under a judicial order to continue this production.”

The next round of responsive documents is due by Oct. 31, and since none of the documents produced to date include references to Jordan’s May 25, 2023, letter, it seems likely we’ll see those emails in the next batch — unless House Republicans seek access to them first through a subpoena.

https://thefederalist.com/2023/08/28/exclusive-u-s-attorney-weiss-colluded-with-doj-to-thwart-congressional-questioning-emails-show/

Damn if the SCOTUS didn't dodge a major bullet with skipping on Garland. What a POS.

Questions About Biden Are Real Even if Trump Asks Them

The Washington Post engages in weak jiu-jitsu to change the subject from Hunter’s influence racket.



WSJ Opinion
A decade ago the Washington Post ended the practice of employing an ombudsman, who in the name of honest reporting would police the paper’s own pages. That decision by then-editor Marty Baron saved the asterisk key from wear and tear in response to Friday’s front-page story about Donald Trump’s typically unconstrained, free-association approach to exploiting the Hunter Biden scandal.

A reader didn’t have to progress far to discover that President Biden “has denied any involvement in his son’s affairs, and no evidence has emerged proving otherwise.”

The only word in this sentence not needing an asterisk is “and.” The first asterisk necessarily bridges both clauses, since one piece of evidence against Mr. Biden is precisely that, without explanation, his denials have changed, from the White House denying Mr. Biden discussed Hunter’s business with his son to denying that Mr. Biden was “in business” with his son.

And when the paper speaks of “proving,” does it mean to a journalistic standard, a civil-court standard, or a criminal-case standard? A business partner of Hunter’s, Devon Archer, testified that Joe Biden knowingly was “the brand” that Hunter was selling “access” or the “illusion of access” to.

Another partner, Tony Bobulinski, confirmed for the press the gist of an email showing Hunter sought a 10% stake in one of his proposed deals for his father.

Joe Biden’s campaign lied when it said he never attended a dinner with a representative of his son’s Ukrainian employer, as the Post’s own gullible fact checker was forced to acknowledge in a follow-up piece. Mr. Biden lied to voters, the New York Times further adjudicated, when he claimed in a 2020 presidential debate that his family had received no money from China and Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation.

There are many other suggestive bits you’re probably tired of reading about. An FBI confidential source, apparently credible to the agency, with known ties to Hunter’s Ukrainian employer, reported on multiple occasions that the company’s owner claimed to have paid money to both Hunter and Joe.

Mr. Trump, in typical Trump fashion, levels accusations the evidence doesn’t support or doesn’t yet support. But his assertions at least are consistent with evidence that exists and that he didn’t fabricate, unlike Hillary Clinton’s Russia-collusion narrative.

One Trump criticism, that Mr. Biden is a “dumb SOB,” is a matter of opinion only. In my view, if Mr. Biden allowed himself to be seen dirtying his hands in Hunter’s racket, the epithet fits but I find it hard to believe Mr. Biden would be so dumb.

And yet here we are again. In getting to the bottom of the collusion hoax, the FBI’s strange behavior in the Hillary Clinton email case, and now the various Hunter Biden leads, we’ve had to rely on partisan or nonpartisan government officials, including the Justice Department’s nonpartisan inspector general. The mainstream press would rather belittle and distract from the sidelines than learn a truth that doesn’t fit its desired narrative.

Post reporter Isaac Arnsdorf and his editors could afford to lift their game intellectually, to phrase the matter with non-Trumpian gentility. If the Washington Post can’t understand that Mr. Trump might recklessly exaggerate the evidence in the Hunter Biden matter and yet there can also be evidence, the Post can’t do any job worth doing.

This category of dumbness even has a clinical name—“splitting,” or a psychological reliance on black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking to evade the ambivalences the world forces on us. Example: We may not like Donald Trump but there are also things not to like about his enemies.

What is merely neurotic in the individual, alas, is now a media business model. Once-reputable news outlets have become lifestyle brands, serving up emotional comfort to their target demographic. This is pernicious for our democracy, pushing out real but mundane issues in favor of grand canards of various kinds, such as collusion, “stop the steal,” the white supremacist under every bed, our impending climate doom.

Mr. Trump’s exaggerations of the Hunter Biden scandal may be regrettable but, hearteningly, are less atypical of pre-Trumpian politics than the Post pretends. At least they are exaggerated renditions of real questions that need answers. It’s hard not to see the Post engaged in a kind of jiu-jitsu to make the questions go away by focusing on Mr. Trump’s abuse of them.

Which is the real problem: Both political parties would find their strategy of peddling tall tales impossible—the circle of suggestion would be impossible to close—if mainstream journalism wasn’t so full of cowardly conformists, who ask not what is true but how to advance the desired narrative, and therefore have no credibility with the public.

DMV...I heard all this stuff about nailing Hunter on gun-related charges is just part of a larger right-wing "witch hunt" with the end game of impeaching the Big Kahuna of the crime family.
So, will the next step in this vast right-wing conspiracy be nailing Hunter for failing to pay his heavy progressive Marxist income tax "fair share" on the ill-gotten gains he achieved through Bidenomics?