For an American politician, Joe Biden plays a pretty good Nazi dictator, as he and his campaign staff prove once again that the Democrat Party no longer embraces core constitutional values such as freedom of expression and speech.
The Biden campaign, already stung by a burgeoning scandal involving the former Veep’s corrupt dealings with Ukraine — along with his son, Hunter — sent an angry letter to Dean Baquet, the executive editor of The New York Times, this week complaining about a column in the paper written by investigative author Peter Schweizer.
In it, Schweizer laid out a pattern of multi-year corruption by the Bidens in Ukraine and China, and called on the federal government to investigate and, if needed, indict the former VP if those dealings are found to have violated the law, Breitbart News reports.
The news site adds:
The Biden campaign sent its letter to Baquet Wednesday, expressing outrage for printing “a baseless conspiracy theory” and calling Schweizer, author of the book Secret Empires, a “right wing polemicist.” While half of Schweizer’s op-ed in the Times addressed Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao’s China ties, the Biden campaign did not seem to take issue with that particular coverage.
“In December 2013, Joe and Hunter Biden flew aboard Air Force Two to China; less than two weeks after the trip, Hunter’s firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners, which he founded with two other businessmen in June 2013, finalized a deal to open a fund, BHR Partners, whose largest shareholder is the government-run Bank of China, even though he had scant background in private equity,” Schweizer wrote.
“(Representatives of the fund claim that the timing of the deal and the Bidens’ trip to China was coincidental). Thus far, the firm has invested about $2.1 billion, according to its website,” he added.
The author noted that as Russia invaded and took over the Crimea — then Ukrainian territory — in 2014, then-VP Biden became Obama’s policy point man in Ukraine. And that same year, wouldn’t you know it, Hunter Biden managed to land a lucrative “advisory board” deal with Ukrainian gas company Burisma Holdings to the tune of about $167,000 per month.
Mind you, that figure is far more than what’s been reported thus far — $50,000/month. Investigative reporter John Solomon notes that according to records he has seen, the $167,000 figure is accurate.
In any event, Schweizer notes that Hunter Biden managed to secure his role and his multi-million dollar payout despite the fact that he had no prior work experience involving an energy company.
But again, it’s not just the Bidens.
“President Trump’s transportation secretary, Elaine Chao, and her husband, Senator Mitch McConnell, are being accused of having profited from their commercial ties to Beijing. In 2004, the two had a net worth of about $3.1 million, according to public disclosures. Three years later, the range was $3.1 million to $12.7 million. The next year, their net worth rocketed to $7.3 million to $33.1 million,” wrote Schweizer.
To that point, The National Sentinel reported Thursday that a whistleblower organization has just released a new report detailing corrupt pay-for-play connections between four Democratic and four Republican lawmakers in Congress and federal contractors and other businesses that do business with Uncle Sam in their home districts.
The entire Washington world, in other words, seems corrupt and untouchable. It is this “swamp” that President Trump keeps vowing to drain.
As for the Biden campaign, it responded to Schweizer’s column by calling the Times “blind” or intentionally misleading for the sake of being deceptive.
Here's the letter Biden deputy campaign manager @KBeds sent NYT editor Dean Baquet. "Are you truly blind to what you got wrong in 2016, or are you deliberately continuing policies that distort reality for the sake of controversy and the clicks…?" https://t.co/fCJ8Ii32Ds pic.twitter.com/DoVzSm5MXI
— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) October 10, 2019
The Times pushed back, claiming that it has been ‘fair’ in its coverage of the Bidens. Perhaps — but only when that coverage has occurred.
And certainly the paper can’t say the same thing about its coverage of Trump.