Read on Twitter
The Hunter Biden Criminal Probe Bolsters a Chinese Scholar's Claim About Beijing's Influence With the Biden Administration https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-hunter-biden-criminal-probe-bolsters
“Professor Di Dongsheng says China's close ties to Wall Street and its dealings with Hunter enable it to exert more power now than under Trump: ‘Now we're seeing Biden was elected, the traditional elite, the political elite, the establishment, they're very close to Wall Street.”
“We should and could have learned about these transactions prior to the election had the bulk of the media not corruptly decided to ignore any incriminating reporting on Biden, but learning about them now is a case of better late than never.” https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-hunter-biden-criminal-probe-bolsters
As is true of so many countries, the US talks much about China but rarely airs the views of the Chinese. Di’s speech - on the problems they had with Trump & why it will improve now - is fascinating and revealing, especially given today’s news about the criminal probe into Hunter.
Just by the way: there was a lot of information on the laptop about Hunter Biden's exploitation of his father's name to pursue dealings with this company which the probe is targeting, but Silicon Valley censored it & many were barred from reporting it: https://twitter.com/ShimonPro/status/1336787096485421059
From the @nytimes article tonight about the Hunter Biden criminal probe:
“The Biden team has rejected some of the claims made in the NY Post articles, but *has not disputed the authenticity of the [laptop] files upon which they were based.*” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/09/us/politics/hunter-biden-tax-investigation.html
“The Biden team has rejected some of the claims made in the NY Post articles, but *has not disputed the authenticity of the [laptop] files upon which they were based.*” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/09/us/politics/hunter-biden-tax-investigation.html
Media outlets, to justify their refusal to report on the Hunter Biden/China documents before the election, disseminated two primary claims:
1) This was Russian disinformation and 2) the documents’ authenticity is in doubt.
Both of those claims were false. Anyway, moving on.
1) This was Russian disinformation and 2) the documents’ authenticity is in doubt.
Both of those claims were false. Anyway, moving on.
