A bombshell report that detailed possibly incriminating emails and degenerate behavior from Hunter Biden’s laptop were released in October 2020. The original report was published by The New York Post. It was expanded upon by The New York Post. However, social media companies censored the entire report and it was branded “Russian disinformation” by mainstream media and by the Biden campaign.
Right-leaning media didn’t hesitate to dig deeper. The revelations included Hunter Biden earning $80,000 per month from a Ukrainian oil firm and receiving a $2million “retainer” for selling influence to the Libyan government. His business dealings with China were extensive, and at best, appeared to be in violation of criminal FARA. Hunter Biden has not yet fully sold his stake in a Chinese-controlled venture investment firm.
All of this has been known for some time now, but the media has chosen to ignore it, while the Biden administration continues to lie about the origins. This was true up to the last few weeks.
The liberal news industry including The New York Times and The Washington Post decided suddenly, for no apparent reason, to “confirm” the reports we knew were true. The Post’s article goes further and details Hunter Biden’s corrupt dealings with the Chinese. This is quite a change.
A Post review of Hunter Biden’s deals with a Chinese energy company confirms key details and offers new documentation https://t.co/bJI401clhJ
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) March 30, 2022
“It seems pretty clear that Hunter Biden was trading on his father’s name to make a lot of money.”
I never thought I would hear this on CNN
pic.twitter.com/JSKx2f2lmM— Benny (@bennyjohnson) March 30, 2022
It’s not surprising that major media outlets showed up late at night to confirm what much more reliable outlets were able to report on. Instead, we should ask ourselves why the Times, Post, etc. just walked in the door with their six-packs and dancing shoes. Nothing, that is harmful to a major Democrat gets printed by accident. There is always an underlying reason why a report gets made at the time it does, especially when we are talking about a story that was previously suppressed.
What’s the deal? It is easy to see a pattern in the history of media reports about damaging revelations regarding Democrat figures. Reports that make multiple admissions and attempt to hide what’s actually happening are usually a sign that forces within the government are leaking information to create a story.
The Times and the Post published reports on Carter Page’s FISA abuse. However, this was only after it became apparent that much more information was being released about the FBI’s abuses of power. The Times and Post reported John Durham’s indictment of Michael Sussmann. However, this was only to suggest that the indictment wasn’t strong enough. It was much worse than what was described when the indictment actually dropped.
Can you see what I’m referring to? There is something very serious about the corruption around Hunter Biden (and perhaps his father). This is why we are receiving these reports right now and why people who are privy to the FBI investigation into Joe Biden’s son are suddenly leaking like mad. They want to create a narrative before it becomes obvious how terrible things really were. This means that you can assume the Post’s latest report is only the tip of an iceberg.
I’m not sure if this is an attempt to give Joe Biden enough dirt to make Kamala Harris happy, or if Hunter Biden is being targeted directly by the media to draw attention to the White House. This isn’t the end, the shit is about to hit the fan.
