Goldtent TA Paradise

BIDEN’S JULIUS CEASAR MOMENT IS HERE …ET TU BRUTUS

1. Fullgoldcrown says:

   November 6, 2023 - 10:55 am at 10:55 am

   In a breathtaking story much more remarkable for where it was published than what it said, although that was pretty remarkable too, Politico ran a high-profile “Special Report” this weekend headlined, “Fresh revelations contradict Joe Biden’s sweeping denials on Hunter. Uh-oh! Not only that, but Politico’s “Special Report” about Biden’s lies published yesterday, Sunday, November 5th, 2023 — precisely one year to the day before next year’s Presidential election.

   The sub-headline jammed the assassin’s dagger even deeper into Biden’s waning political fortunes: “The president hasn’t been shown to have committed wrongdoing, but a POLITICO review of recent developments casts doubts on several statements.”

   image 2.png
   The story was a big deal for Politico — a rare, ranging, long-form, magazine-style piece including dramatic non-stock photos, infographics, and custom artwork. Politico took its time recapping all the fundamentals of the Biden corruption story, slowly and carefully walking its audience through the unfamiliar details, and even slipping in a few brand-new arguments of its own.

   Politico was not saying Joe Biden is corrupt. It was just saying.

   The story’s first target was one of the best-documented of Joe’s lies, the one about not being involved in Hunter business deals. Politico began with a now-infamous April 2015 dinner meeting between Hunter’s group and some shady Ukrainian oligarchs. House Republicans found an email on Hunter’s laptop from one of the thuggish ‘executives’ who attended the dinner politely thanking Hunter “for introducing me to your father.”

   It’s embarrassing that oligarchical Ukrainian thugs are more polite and use better-formed English than the chief executive’s own children. Hunter usually emails in all-caps and normally forgets to use punctuation. But I digress.

   Anyway, Biden has consistently and vehemently denied attending any of Hunter’s business meetings. He’s protested that point a LOT. But his denials are usually cuddled in complicated locutions, liberally sprinkled with lawyer weasel words and conditional qualifications. So in October 2021, key White House ally Politico emailed its insider source and directly posed the question: was Biden there at the Cafe Milano dinner or not? Even if just informally?

   POLITICO: “Does this rule out any informal encounter with Pozharskyi in April 2015?”

   WHITE HOUSE: “Yes.”

   Politico said it was revealing that now-obvious lie for the first time. Two years later. Shoring up the point, Politico then described Devon Archer’s testimony to Congress, where Devon swore under oath that Joe Biden did in fact chow down personally, himself, in the flesh, with the oligarchs that night at Cafe Milano, and Devon provided plenty of supporting background detail.

   In other words, Politico volunteered its own internal, behind-the-scenes communications to help pile on the narrative that Biden and his whole crooked White House team are liars.

   That seems pretty remarkable.

   Politico’s extended-form article seemed like a solid reply to hapless, low-information democrat voters relying on Biden’s current stupid excuse, yeah, yeah, but they never proved Joe did anything wrong and Hunter’s not running for president.

   Read these four sentences from the story and you’ll see what I mean:

   The explicit White House denial of even an informal encounter, reported here for the first time, was not the only time that statements made by Biden and his camp about Hunter Biden’s dealings have been contradicted by others. Joe Biden and his representatives have repeatedly defended him from criticism related to his relatives, his son in particular, by issuing blanket denials of misconduct and disclaiming contact with their business affairs.
   But, in recent months, as congressional Republicans have opened an impeachment inquiry and controversies related to Hunter Biden continue to be litigated in the courts and in the public square, a steady trickle of revelations have contradicted the president’s denials. A POLITICO review of recent congressional testimony and exhibits, along with court filings and media reports, casts doubt on several statements made by Biden and his representatives.
   That right there is a meticulously-careful way of saying Joe lied about not doing anything wrong. The article briefly receded from this high accusatory point, back down into the “no evidence” briar patch, suggesting nobody’s claimed Joe Biden ever “took official action” to help his relatives’ “businesses.”

   Later, the article reversed itself, and give several examples of exactly such evidence, although labeled as “uncorroborated” and other words like that, to help the red pills go down easier. Here was Politico’s first example of direct evidence of Biden corruption:

   The (FBI’s) informant claimed that Burisma’s owner said privately that he was pressured by Joe and Hunter Biden into bribing them for help resolving Burisma’s legal issues, including Shokin’s firing. The informant first mentioned Hunter Biden’s role with Burisma in a 2017 conversation with the FBI, according to an agency form recording his allegations, which was obtained by congressional Republicans and made public in July. The bureau re-interviewed the informant, whose identity remains secret, in 2020, after the Trump Justice Department began scrutinizing claims about Shokin’s ouster.
   Next, Politico shockingly but accurately recited the whole disgraceful timeline of drug-addled Hunter’s abandoned Macbook, and the FBI’s and the intelligence community’s subsequent outrageous lies about it being “Russian disinformation.” Then Politico informed its probably-astounded readers that it (Politico), The New York Times, and The Washington Post — the core corporate media team — had each independently verified thousands of Hunter emails from the so-called “fabricated” laptop.

   image 3.png
   Without drawing attention to the fact’s significance, Politico also deliberately referred to Hunter’s lawsuit against the Mac Shop’s owner for “violation of privacy.” The lawsuit itself confirms the laptop’s authenticity. Obviously, Hunter wouldn’t sue over a fake laptop with fake emails on it. Not for “violation of privacy,” anyway.

   Next up was Tony Bobulinski, another long-overlooked former Hunter business partner (overlooked by Establishment Media). In what constitutes even more “evidence” — at least by any legal definition of the word “evidence” — Bobulinski testified under oath and to the FBI that he personally had discussed Hunter’s Chinese business ventures with Joe Biden. For its readers’ benefit, Politico carefully noted that Bobulinski has always made political donations to democrats.

   But that wasn’t the only way Politico shored up Bobolinski’s testimony. It fastidiously pointed out that Bobulinski has never been arrested for lying to the FBI:

   In September, House Republicans released an FBI summary of an interview agents conducted with Bobulinski in the fall of 2020, showing that Bobulinski told investigators the same basic story: that he had discussed the China venture with Joe Biden. The summary gives extra heft to Boublinski’s public claims because lying to the FBI in order to influence an investigation can lead to criminal charges.
   Well my goodness. At this point in the article, democrat readers with any remaining capacity for independent thought must have been wondering, what exactly is the standard for “no evidence”?

   This is just the tip of the story’s corruption iceberg. The story goes on and on. It was a methodical tour de force of Biden family corruption, and completely reversed the normal course, taking the opposite approach from what Establishment Media has always taken to these facts. Normally, Establishment Media assiduously undermined witnesses like Devon Archer, Tony Bobulinski, and the unidentified FBI informants.

   But in this article, Politico painstakingly boosted the anti-Biden witnesses’ credibility.

   Conservative media is mainly designed to provide its readers with information. But liberal media is designed to give its readers permission to think certain thoughts. It’s not so much that the Politico article was informing democrats about certain uncomfortable Biden facts for the first time, although that is certainly true.

   The article was more significant because it signaled to democrats that now acceptable to talk about Biden lying and about his being mixed up with all these sketchy characters.

   If this Politico article wasn’t an outright hit piece aimed squarely at Joe’s key demographic, it was at least a barely-concealed political torpedo jetting directly towards the S.S. Bob Peters’ exposed port side. Friendly fire!

   Do you think it was coincidental this carefully-written article published exactly one year before the election?

   ? It wasn’t just Politico, either. Guess what The New York Times ran yesterday on the one-year election pre-versary? Never mind about guessing, I’ll just tell you. It ran a story headlined, “Trump Leads in 5 Critical States as Voters Blast Biden, Times/Siena Poll Finds.” Yikes.

   That already sounded bad for Biden, but believe me, the New York Times wasn’t even getting warmed up yet. It continued by blowing its ‘racist!’ dog whistle on Biden in the article’s sub-headline: “Voters in battleground states said they trusted Donald J. Trump over President Biden on the economy, foreign policy and immigration, as Mr. Biden’s multiracial base shows signs of fraying.”

   image 4.png
   In other words, diverse people don’t like Biden. The combined Times-Politico attack was a brutal one-two sucker punch. What the Times is really telling its readers was Biden is a loser. And the one thing democrats hate even worse than Republicans is a loser:

   If the results in the poll were the same next November, Mr. Trump would be poised to win more than 300 Electoral College votes, far above the 270 needed to take the White House. Another ominous sign for Democrats is that voters across all income levels felt that Mr. Biden’s policies had hurt them personally, while they credited Mr. Trump’s policies for helping them. The results were mirror opposites: Voters gave Mr. Trump a 17-point advantage for having helped them and Mr. Biden an 18-point disadvantage for having hurt them.
   An overwhelming 71 percent said (Biden) was “too old” to be an effective president — an opinion shared across every demographic and geographic group in the poll, including a remarkable 54 percent of Mr. Biden’s own supporters.
   Haha, I would have loved to be in President Peters’ situation room when his team opened the New York Times yesterday. The Times’ article was not short. It was one damned thing after another: Joe’s age problem, his lack of mental acuity, voters’s lack of trust in Biden on literally ever single issue, and on top of all that, snarky comments like this one:

   The findings come after … the president continues to tour the country to brag about the state of the economy. “Folks, Bidenomics is just another way of saying the American dream!” Mr. Biden declared on Wednesday on a trip to Minnesota.
   Voters clearly disagree. Only 2 percent of voters said the economy was excellent.
   Ouch!

   You’re not going to believe this — I had to read it several times to make sure — the very first personal interest interview in the article was of a never-Trump democrat (“you can’t be worse than Trump”) who now says … he’s planning to vote for Donald J. Trump:

   “I actually had high hopes for Biden,” said Jahmerry Henry, a 25-year-old who packages liquor in Albany, Ga. “You can’t be worse than Trump. But then as the years go by, things happen with inflation, the war going on in Ukraine, recently Israel and I guess our borders are not secure at all.”
   Now Mr. Henry plans to back Mr. Trump.
   Mr. Henry was wrong that nobody could be worse than Trump, but he’s back on track now. The lifelong democrat learned that in fact, someone can be worse than Trump. And that someone is Joseph Robinette Biden. Mr. Henry even had the issues listed right.

   Henry wasn’t the only example in the story. Travis Waterman, 33, was quoted saying that other world leaders “don’t respect” Biden. The article also quoted Spencer Weiss, democrat, 53, who now, reluctantly plans to cast his vote for Trump.

   “The world is falling apart under Biden,” said Spencer Weiss, a 53-year-old electrical substation specialist in Bloomsburg, Pa., who supported Mr. Biden in 2020 but is now backing Mr. Trump, albeit with some reservations. “I would much rather see somebody that I feel can be a positive role-model leader for the country. But at least I think Trump has his wits about him.”
   Biden is making the world fall apart! They unironically printed that in the New York Times. Even worse for Biden, the Grey Lady surgically dissected any polling figures showing any promise for Joe. For example, Biden is ahead in at least one swing state, but the Times’ editors slyly attributed that to racism — tying it back to the same odious hint from the story’s sub-headline:

   In a remarkable sign of a gradual racial realignment between the two parties, the more diverse the swing state, the farther Mr. Biden was behind, and he led only in the whitest of the six.
   In other words, only white people like the old white guy. You might think I’m stretching by assuming the Times intentionally injected race into their analysis, but you must remember that democrats are highly-attuned to racial talk. The slightest suggestion of a white preference puts them on red alert.

   Last week, Time Magazine and NBC both launched stories resembling SCUD missiles right into the heart of Biden’s Ukraine Proxy War. Then a few days later, and exactly one year before the elections, both Politico and The New York Times launched deeply-cutting political assassination drones against Biden.

   With Biden’s campaign blimp going down in flames, oh! the humanity, what do you think will happen next? Here’s a hint: last week Gavin Newsom went to China and — surprise! — met with President Xi. An October 26th Associated Press headline:

   image 5.png
   What other surprises might be right around the corner as we head straight into primary season?

   ? Um. It wasn’t just Politico and The New York Times, either. Pretty much the entire Establishment Media leaped on the dump-Biden pig pile. Here’s yesterday’s headline from The Hill:

   And so, it begins. Here was CBS’s headline:

   IF TRUMP WINS MOST VOTERS SEE BETTER FINANCES AND STAYING OUT OF WARS…CBS

   I guess democrats should only vote for Trump if they want to stay out of war and have better finances. Thanks, CBS!

2. Chartsmaster says:

   November 6, 2023 - 12:06 pm at 12:06 pm

   You have correctly documented the concrete steps that the DEMs and the media have been slowly dripping out over the last few months and much more aggressively in the last few weeks and days. This is no surprise to many here, especially yours truly, who has been posting pieces for months saying Biden wouldn’t be the candidate in 2024 and that he will be forced to resign(for health reasons, of course) around the Holidays or shortly after. In line with this I said DEM governors and others would be lining up to run for their nomination inspite of what some said wouldn’t happen because challenging Kamala would be deemed to be racist. I am sure some of her few supporters will again say that, but it isn’t going to stop Newsome and Murphy and others from getting into the race. One of those two is likely to be the nominee.(I have said and stick with it being Murphy.)

3. Chartsmaster says:

   November 6, 2023 - 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm

   PS: That is why all these polls regarding Biden, Trump and with Kennedy are useless. When the Dems pick Newsome or more likely, Murphy and he has a chance to move to the right of some of Biden’s policies, Trump may still have a small lead but it isn’t going to be the slam dunk it was with Biden. That doesn’t even consider the ballot harvesting and fraud we saw last time which is why they have to drop Biden. You can only get away with the fraud, now that everyone expects it, if the race is at least within the margin of error.