Comer: Biden Business Received over $20M from Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan While Joe Biden Was VP
The Biden family business received over $20 million from Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan while President Joe Biden was vice president in the Obama administration, the House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) revealed.
The committee previously unveiled two tranches of Biden business bank records. Those showed the Biden business received at least $10 million from business schemes in Romania and China. In total, nine Biden family members received payments from the family foreign business ventures, including two of Joe Biden’s grandchildren.
Comer predicted in June that the committee’s work would ultimately show the Biden family accepted up to $30 million from its foreign business dealings.
House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) during a House Committee on Oversight and Accountability hearing on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, Feb. 8, 2023. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)
The committee revealed the third tranche Wednesday after subpoenaing six different banks and receiving thousands of records in response. The committee said its subpoenas were tailored to individuals and companies that engaged in business activities with Biden family members and their business associates.
The committee has not yet subpoenaed Biden family members.
“During Joe Biden’s vice presidency, Hunter Biden sold him as ‘the brand’ to reap millions from oligarchs in Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine,” Comer said in a press release. “It appears no real services were provided other than access to the Biden network, including Joe Biden himself.”
Comer said Joe Biden is implicated in the payments due to his personal relationship with the family’s business associates.
“This is made clear by meals at Café Milano where then-Vice President Joe Biden dined with oligarchs from around the world who had sent money to his son,” Comer said. “It’s clear Joe Biden knew about his son’s business dealings and allowed himself to be ‘the brand’ sold to enrich the Biden family while he was Vice President of the United States.”
The committee provided specifics about the bank records:
- Hunter Biden and Devon Archer Used Rosemont Seneca Entities to Bring in Millions from Oligarchs in Europe and Asia: Using accounts nominally tied to Devon Archer (but using the familiar “Rosemont Seneca” branding), Hunter Biden received incremental payments originating from foreign sources, attempting to hide the source and size of the payments.
- In February 2014, a Russian Oligarch Sent $3.5 Million to a Shell Company Associated with Hunter Biden and Devon Archer: Russian billionaire Yelena Baturina transferred $3.5 million to Rosemont Seneca Thornton, a shell company. Approximately $1 million was transferred to Devon Archer, and the remainder was used to initially fund a new company account, Rosemont Seneca Bohai, which Devon Archer and Hunter Biden used to receive other foreign wires.
- In the Spring of 2014, a Ukrainian Oligarch Placed Archer and Biden on the Burisma Board of Directors and Agreed to Pay them $1 Million Each per Year: Burisma Holdings’ (Burisma) corporate secretary, Vadym Pozharsky, worked on behalf of the Ukrainian oligarch and owner of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky. Hunter Biden was initially hired by Burisma to work as counsel for the company, and Pozharsky and Zlochevsky met with Hunter Biden at a conference in Lake Como in Italy where they decided Hunter Biden would work on the board of directors with Devon Archer. Then-Vice President Joe Biden visited Ukraine soon after their first payments. Payments from Burisma for both Devon Archer and Hunter Biden were wired to Rosemont Seneca Bohai. Payments were transmitted in incremental amounts to Hunter Biden’s different bank accounts.
- In April of 2014, a Kazakhstani Oligarch Wired the Exact Price of Biden’s Sportscar to a Bank Account Used by Archer and Biden: In February 2014, Hunter Biden met with Kenes Rakishev at a Washington, DC, hotel. Rakishev worked closely with the prime minister of Kazakhstan, Karim Massimov. In April, Rakishev, a Kazakhstani oligarch, wired $142,300 to Rosemont Seneca Bohai. The next day, a payment was made from Rosemont Seneca Bohai for a sportscar for Hunter Biden in the amount of $142,300. Archer and Biden then arranged for Burisma executives to visit Kazakhstan in June 2014 to evaluate a three-way deal among Burisma, a Chinese state-owned company, and the government of Kazakhstan.
- Hunter Biden received millions of dollars in payments from Yelena Baturina, Burisma, and Kenes Rakishev. Vice President Biden had dinner with them in the spring of 2014 and 2015 in Washington, DC.
President Joe Biden attends his granddaughter Maisy Biden’s commencement ceremony with first lady Jill Biden and children Hunter Biden and Ashley Biden at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, Monday, May 15, 2023. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky, File)
Comer said in July the Biden family business caused six banks to flag more than 170 “large” amounts of money in Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) to the treasury for review, 20 more than previously known. SARs “often contain evidence of potential criminal activities, such as money laundering and fraud,” according to a 2020 Senate report.
Comer believes the Biden family opened more than 20 shell companies to hide payments and launder money. “When you set up a bunch of shell companies for the sole purpose to launder money, that is called racketeering,” he said.
Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter @WendellHusebø. He is the author of Politics of Slave Morality.
The Biden doctrine: “As long as it takes,” or “No matter how many die”
The Biden doctrine: “As long as it takes,” or “No matter how many die”
The Biden doctrine: “As long as it takes,” or “No matter how many die”
On Wednesday, US President Joe Biden addressed a raucous mob of xenophobic Lithuanian nationalists in Vilnius following the conclusion of a NATO summit that pledged to massively expand military spending in preparation for global war.
Biden’s diatribe addressed the same themes as a speech he delivered last year in Warsaw, Poland, in which he pledged to “fight” for “years and decades to come.” Back in 2022, his unscripted rant compelled White House officials to publicly walk back the president’s remarks. But now his advisers no longer see the need to reinterpret and modify Biden’s bellicose statements. What he says about US war aims are not dementia-induced errors but actual declarations of the policies of his administration.
Speaking in Vilnius, Biden declared, “Our commitment to Ukraine will not weaken. We will stand for liberty and freedom today, tomorrow, and for as long as it takes.”
The length of a war is invariably related to the toll in human life. The longer a war continues, the greater the number of casualties and deaths, of both soldiers and civilians.
Therefore, when Biden proclaims once again that his administration and NATO will supply money and arms “as long as it takes” to bring about the defeat of Russia, what he is really saying is that the war will continue regardless of the cost in human lives.
This is the barbaric essence of what can be called the Biden Doctrine: “No matter how long it takes or how many die.”
Biden’s speech, in both its delivery and content, was typical of the man: Thoughtless, ill-informed, full of malapropisms and mangled grammar. It was pitched to the lowest intellectual level and basest instincts.
Biden delivered lie after lie, absurdity after absurdity, claiming the United States, which has continuously destabilized, bombed and invaded other countries since the end of the Second World War, was a force for democracy and peace.
None other than Henry Kissinger, the oldest living American war criminal, once summed up with his characteristic cynicism the real attitude of US imperialism to moral principles. “The illegal we do immediately,” he said. “The unconstitutional takes a bit longer.”
Biden, whose own fingerprints are to be found on the scene of every crime committed by US imperialism over the last half-century, invoked “the United Nations Charter that we all signed up to: sovereignty, territorial integrity. These are two pillars of peaceful relations among nations. One country cannot be allowed to seize its neighbor’s territory by force.”
What contemptible hypocrisy! There is no single country that has violated the UN charter’s prohibition on the “use of force” as flagrantly and repeatedly as the United States, whose former Secretary of State Colin Powell once declared that it was his goal to turn the United States into “the biggest bully on the block.”
During his time in the Senate and then as vice president, Biden was a leading advocate and supporter of the United States’ invasion of Iraq in 1991, followed by the bombing of Yugoslavia eight years later in 1999. He backed the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, and another invasion of Iraq in 2003. Biden advocated the American bombing campaigns and efforts to instigate regime-change in Libya and Syria.
These actions were carried out in open and flagrant defiance of the United Nations and of international law. In 2002, the United States withdrew from the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court, and does not recognize the legitimacy of any international body to try US officials for the war crimes they regularly perpetrate.
Just last week, Biden announced that he would send cluster munitions to Ukraine, which are banned by over 100 countries because they kill and maim civilians for decades after conflicts end.
Biden made a garbled reference to Lithuania’s myth-based narrative of struggle against tyranny, and he boasted of the United States’ commitment to its freedom. But what Biden left out of his rambling history lecture was the intense collaboration of Lithuanian nationalists with Nazi Germany and direct participation in the mass murder of virtually the entire Jewish population of the country.
During the three-year Nazi occupation of Lithuania, 95 percent of the country’s Jewish population was exterminated—195,000 men, women and children were systematically killed.
This reality gave an ominous tone to Biden’s declaration that “the bonds between Lithuanian and the American people have never faltered,” praising Lithuanian exiles who traveled to the United States.
What Biden did not mention, however, is that two of the Lithuanian immigrants welcomed by the United States happened to be the individuals most responsible for the Holocaust in that country.
Aleksandras Lileikis, the chief of the Lithuanian Security Police in Vilnius during the Nazi occupation of Lithuania and a perpetrator of the Holocaust, was given safe passage to the United States and was employed by the Central Intelligence Agency. His deputy, Kazys Gimžauskas, also emigrated to the United States, as well as three of his subordinates.
Neither of the two men saw a day of jail time for their participation in the Holocaust.
Even as he denounced Russia for refusing any “diplomatic solution” to the conflict, Biden boasted of his own role in the expansion of NATO. He declared, “I had the great honor as United States senator to champion Lithuania and other Baltic States to join NATO in 2004. Wasn’t I brilliant doing that?”
In voting for the expansion of NATO in 1998, Biden proclaimed “the beginning of another 50 years of peace.” In reality, the United States was deliberately setting the stage for the type of fratricidal war that has erupted in Ukraine, with the aim of drawing Russia into wars on its borders and bleeding it white.
Among the most absurd of Biden’s lies was his attempt to posture as a proponent of a “diplomatic outcome” of the war in Ukraine. “Unfortunately, Russia has shown thus far no interest in the diplomatic outcome,” Biden said.
“Russia could end this war tomorrow by withdrawing its forces from Ukraine, recognize these international borders,” he declared. But he defined this “diplomatic outcome” as the total capitulation by Russia and the achievement of all of NATO’s war aims. Biden’s “diplomatic solution” is military victory.
The president’s provocative statements are intended to preclude any negotiated settlement of the conflict, which US imperialism sees as a critical component of its drive to subjugate Russia and China.
Biden’s “No matter how many die” doctrine means the war will escalate, countless thousands more will die, and the world will be brought to the brink of a nuclear conflagration. Nothing can stop this except the development of an international anti-war movement based on the working class.
Poll: Majority Of Americans Have Reservations About Ukraine Funding
According to a new SSRS/CNN poll released Friday, a majority of Americans do not support sending any more funding to Ukraine in the war against Russia.
According to the results, 55% of respondents say the U.S. Congress should not authorize additional funding to support Ukraine versus 45% who say Congress should authorize such funding.
Furthermore, 51% say that the US has already done enough to help Ukraine while 48% say it should do more.
This number has declined, compared to the 62% who felt the U.S. should have been doing more for Ukraine from February of 2022.
When respondents were asked specifically about the kind of aid Ukraine should receive, much more were supportive of helping indirectly rather than sending troops.
Support for sending U.S. military forces to participate in combat operations was as low as 17%, but providing and sending weapons was at 43%. The support for intelligence gathering was even higher (63%), as well as fairly high support for military training (53%).
Another change among Americans concerns regards the war’s effect on U.S. national security. In the beginning of the war, 72% of Americans expressed being concerned for the effect the war could have on national security, but now the number has dropped to 56%.
There were also startling differences between party identification and support for providing aid to Ukraine.
Far more Democrats were supportive of providing aid (62%) compared to only 29% of Republicans who were in support of providing aid.
Respondents were also polled about their approval of the way Biden has handled the situation in Ukraine, which was 45% of respondents overall. 43% of respondents approve of the way he has handled the U.S. relationship with Russia.
Interestingly, that is even higher than Biden’s overall approval rating, which sits at a historic low of 40%. A president has not had an approval rating so low since President Jimmy Carter received an approval rating as low as 30.7% in 1979.
The poll was conducted by the independent research company SSRS for more than 1,200 respondents throughout the entire month of July.
Report: Biden to Ask for Another Ukraine Aid Package ‘North of $10 Billion’
President Joe Biden will soon ask Congress for a Ukraine aid package that could exceed $10 billion, a report released Tuesday found.
Punchbowl News reported the Ukraine aid battle will resume when Congress returns from recess. The incoming request, which could be “north of $10 billion,” follows as Ukraine continues its slow-moving counteroffensive against Russia, and America and other NATO countries have pledged support for Ukraine.
The Army’s acquisition chief told reporters on Monday that the Department of Defense was working on a funding package for lawmakers to consider. The package would be used to replenish American weapon stockpiles which have been depleted after providing munitions to Ukraine’s protracted conflict with Russia.
The United States has provided more than $110 billion in aid to Ukraine even as voters go sour on the prospect of even more taxpayer dollars being spent to aid the Kyiv regime.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has said that any additional Ukraine funding should have to go through regular order, or the appropriations process, and not a supplemental package.
Seventy House Republicans voted to cut off funding for Ukraine in July, making the expected Ukraine aid battle highly contentious.
In contrast, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has slammed the current defense cap set by the Fiscal Responsibility Act, the debt ceiling deal struck by McCarthy and Biden, and has pushed a robust aid package to Ukraine.
A Ukraine aid package would also require generous floor time as both chambers of Congress needs to pass appropriations bills to avoid a government shutdown by the end of September.
MEETING OF THE MINDS: Zelensky, Greta Meet to Discuss Russia’s “Environmental Crimes”
President of Ukraine via StoryfulA poll released last week found that a majority of Americans oppose sending more aid to Ukraine.
Kelley Vlahos, a senior adviser for the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, contended that the poll does not bode well for Biden.
Sean Moran is a policy reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @SeanMoran3
Gallup Poll: Confidence In Military Plunges Under Biden
According to a recent Gallup poll, Americans’ confidence in the U.S. military has been steadily plummeting over the last two decades.
The survey reported only 60% of people have 'a great deal' or 'quite a lot' of confidence in the U.S. military, the lowest approval rating since 1997.
Generally, Republicans have always held the highest approval ratings for the U.S. military, but even their approval ratings have declined significantly, from 91% to 68% in the last three years.
Independents’ confidence has dropped in a similar fashion, from 68% to 55% between 2020-2023. In contrast, Democrats' confidence in the military increased from 2020-2022 after Biden assumed office, but then dramatically dropped in 2023 by 6 points.
However, among respondents as a whole, confidence has significantly decreased since Biden has taken office. From 2021 to 2023, the rating significantly dropped from 69% to 60%.
This nearly ten point drop can be easily linked to the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan that happened in August of 2021, leaving thirteen Marines dead and many American citizens stranded in a foreign country.
On top of such a poorly executed withdrawal, the U.S. military has been facing major recruitment crises like it has not seen before. MRCTV has reported on the Army recruitment crisis and its potential connections to the increase of woke rhetoric in the military.
Gallup conducted their poll by interviewing a random sample of 1,013 American adults from June 1-22, 2023.
More evidence of Joe Biden’s probable role in Hunter’s business dealings
When it comes to Joe Biden's knowledge of and possible complicity in Hunter Biden's dealings with foreign businesses and businesses connected to foreign governments during his father's vice presidency, the big questions are "Did Joe Biden know what was going on, did he participate in what was going on, did he profit from what was going on, and did he alter American foreign policy based upon that profit?"
The contents of Hunter Biden's laptop indicated that the answer to each question is yes. There's also emerging evidence that proves that the answer to each question is yes. It now turns out that one of Hunter's business associates had dozens of trips to the White House and Joe Biden's office and residence during the Obama presidency.
This time, the associate isn't Devon Archer or Tony Bobulinski, neither of whom claims to have met with Joe Biden very often. Instead, it's Eric Schwerin, who, along with Hunter Biden, founded the now defunct Rosemont Seneca Partners and also served as its managing partner. It was in that capacity that then-president Obama appointed (and, later reappointed) Schwerin to the Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad.
Image: Eric Schwerin. Facebook.
Just as a reminder, It was Rosemont Seneca Partners that was the vehicle through which Hunter conducted most of his deals with foreign corporations, especially those related to China's government. It's no coincidence that Wikipedia deleted Rosemont Seneca Partners. The partnership made it impossible to ignore the probable connection between Joe Biden and those same deals.
It's now emerged that Eric Schwerin, Hunter's business partner, made literally dozens of visits to the White House and to Joe Biden's residence during Obama's presidency, which is about 30% more than previously reported:
Hunter Biden's former friend and longtime business partner visited the Obama White House and then-Vice President Joe Biden's residence dozens of times between 2009 and 2016, likely to make him the next target of the House Oversight Committee's investigation into Hunter Biden's foreign business dealings.
[snip]
The number of Schwerin's White House visits could be much higher than 36 if any of his meetings fell under the White House voluntary disclosure policy exception of "purely personal guests," due to his handling of the Biden family's personal finances.
[snip]
One of Schwerin's visits - in November 2010 - was a sit-down with Joe Biden in the West Wing. Schwerin also visited Joe Biden's residence at least 15 times for various holiday receptions, including the Dec. 12 holiday reception in 2015 that came a couple of days after then-Vice President Biden's infamous trip to Ukraine, where he threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid if the country's leaders did not fire their top prosecutor.
The same article details all sorts of other visits Schwerin had to the White House and the vice president's office, including visits with Anne Marie Person, who started at Rosemont Seneca before joining Biden's staff.
Biden's spokespeople will say, of course, that Schwerin was at the White House because of the Commission, but I wonder if anyone believes that either Obama or Joe cared greatly about a Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad. They'll also say he was there because of Biden's personal finances, which is certainly a colorable argument.
But why would that see Schwerin meeting in 2016 "with Steve Ricchetti, who was Biden's chief of staff" on at least two occasions? Or attending receptions with other Rosemont Seneca partners? Or why he had at least three visits with staffers from Biden's office?
The net is closing. In answer to those four questions I posed above, the evidence is mounting that Joe Biden knew exactly what Hunter was doing, that he made sure that the foreign corporations and governments knew that he was on board, that he profited from these deals, and that he altered American policy in exchange for those profits.
The perfect speech for Joe Biden to plagiarize
In October 2020, during the heat of the presidential election, the mainstream media were defending and denying there was any wrongdoing by then–vice president Biden. USA Today published a column titled "Fact check: Biden leveraged $1B in aid to Ukraine to oust corrupt prosecutor, not to help his son."
The problem with this defense is that, while it claims there is no connection between Joe Biden and his son Hunter, that is a moot point where Joe Biden's guilt or innocence is concerned.
Congressman Daniel Goldman (D-N.Y.), representing Manhattan and Brooklyn, now claims that what Joe Biden did with his son's business partners was talk about the weather — all twenty times. This was reported in The New York Post.
Daniel Goldman was the lead prosecutor in the impeachment of President Trump. He even announced his candidacy for Congress during the impeachment. His claim that President Trump had committed an impeachable offense for looking into the corruption of Joe Biden's involvement in Ukraine is ironic and hypocritical — especially since there is a well known video of Joe Biden bragging that he got a foreign official to fire a prosecutor by leveraging one billion in taxpayer dollars.
Jonathan Turley calls Dan Goldman's account of Devon Archers testimony describing the relationship among Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, and Hunter Biden's business dealings an insult to the intelligence of voters. Goldman's description of what Joe Biden did, getting the prosecutor in Ukraine fired, is convoluted. His excuse for Joe Biden is not legitimate.
Goldman's claim that there is no evidence that links Joe Biden to Hunter's business dealings is an incomplete statement. I will complete the statement for Mr. Goldman — "that I, Dan Goldman, am capable of comprehending." Perhaps he is that incompetent as an attorney. Why should we question that?
He also points a finger at Donald Trump, claiming that President Trump used the government for his own personal gain. Jonathan Turley disputes all of Goldman's points in an interview on Fox News. He correctly states that what we are looking at, where President Biden and his family are concerned, is one of the most significant corruption scandals in our nation's history.
If Joe Biden, whether as the vice president or simply a United States citizen, had used his own billion dollars to bribe the foreign official, it would be a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The reason or motive is not required when violating of the FCPA. For him to have used federal dollars adds to the charges.
Here is the definition of the FCPA, as explained in its first paragraph:
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd-1, et seq. ("FCPA"), was enacted for the purpose of making it unlawful for certain classes of persons and entities to make payments to foreign government officials to assist in obtaining or retaining business. Specifically, the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA prohibit the willful use of the mails or any means of instrumentality of interstate commerce corruptly in furtherance of any offer, payment, promise to pay, or authorization of the payment of money or anything of value to any person, while knowing that all or a portion of such money or thing of value will be offered, given or promised, directly or indirectly, to a foreign official to influence the foreign official in his or her official capacity, induce the foreign official to do or omit to do an act in violation of his or her lawful duty, or to secure any improper advantage in order to assist in obtaining or retaining business for or with, or directing business to, any person.
The fact is, President Trump had the right, even an obligation, to look into any corruption in Ukraine, even if it was by Joe Biden, who admitted to it in a video. He even bragged about it, and indirectly may have even implicated President Obama. He clearly says that President Obama would withhold "the billion dollars." President Trump, before he was going to authorize any more money to Ukraine, had reason to look into whether or not the money was going to be used for its intended purpose and not misappropriated.
As far as what we keep hearing, that there is no evidence that Biden's shakedown of the Ukraine president to fire the prosecutor, as he himself bragged about doing, is related in any way to Hunter Biden, that makes no difference. Bribing the official is by itself a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Using federal funds makes it even more egregious. Why Biden did it makes no difference.
To give a legal analogy, saying they need a reason or motive, even if it was to get a corrupt prosecutor fired, which is the other defense pundits offer for Biden, is equivalent to saying, "The suspect committed murder, but we don't know the motive, so we aren't going to charge him with a crime."
I can understand that a prosecutor would want to tie the act to Hunter Biden, but it's not necessary to do that to indict President Biden. While they keep saying you can't indict a sitting president, these same people impeached a citizen who was a former president. They impeached a president for investigating what we now see is a crime committed by a former vice president and U.S. senator. We also see what the Biden Justice Department is doing to his leading political opponent.
We have always claimed the United States is a country of laws, but we are becoming a country of politicians who make up their own rules and laws. What do we call that kind of country? We need to make sure our elected officials remember that we are a republic and remind them of what that means.
President Biden, you've been accused of stealing speeches, plagiarizing, and lying. Let's hear you steal this from Richard Nixon: "The people need to know if their president is a crook. Well, I'm not a crook."
Come on, man!
David Ennocenti is a retired accountant and graduate of the State University of N.Y. at Buffalo, School of Management with a degree in accounting and finance. He passed the CPA Examination in 1983. His writing has appeared in The American Thinker, USA Today, The New York Times, and several other publications. His screenplay, Sniper Queen, was an official selection of The Artemis Women in Action Films Festival. He is a past winner of the Writer's Digest Annual Competition. His essay "1984 Arrived: Now What? How Progressive Policies Decimated a Once Vibrant Community" and his political TV pilot screenplay "Blood on the Hill" are available on Amazon.
Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.
No comments:
Post a Comment