Hunter, Bounty

Wherein we learn more of why the NY Post story about Hunter Biden’s laptop had to be suppressed.

*Cognitive dissonance warning:*
*Those who get their news from Facebook may experience paradigm dysphoria.*

The first 3 links will refresh your memory if needed, but aren’t necessary to peruse. They’re documentation. The last is longish, but documents a Swallwell-type honey trap previously unknown. That was during Hunter’s dalliance with CEFC China Energy (a CCP oil conglomerate), which was later (2018) to collapse when its secretary general Patrick Ho was convicted of bribery in a US federal prosecution. Hunter had described Ho as ‘spy chief of China.’

Hunter’s continuing relationship with BHR Equity Investment Fund Management Company is a separate issue.

2019:
It’s NPR, so Republicans are “reacting” “without evidence” to Hunter Biden’s promise to divest his 10% ownership of BHR, co-owned by the CCP’s Bank of China.
Hunter Biden to step down from Chinese board

2019:
In a weasel-worded whitewash “fact check” Politifact does reveal some of BHR’s dealings:
Fact-checking claims about Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, and China

“Reuters has reported that BHR also invested in China General Nuclear Power Corp, a state-owned company. The company employed a naturalized U.S. citizen and nuclear engineer, Allen Ho, who was indicted in the United States in 2016 for allegedly enlisting U.S.-based nuclear experts to assist in developing and producing special nuclear material in China. “Prosecuting those who unlawfully facilitate the acquisition of sensitive nuclear technology by foreign nations continues to be a top priority of the National Security Division,” the Justice Department said its news release about Ho’s sentencing to 24 months in prison.”

That directly follows this quote from a Boston College political scientist:

“[W]hat was known as the Obama administration pivot toward Asia began in 2010. This predated the creation of BHR. [So?]

“This policy shift aimed to resist Chinese security policy initiatives,” Ross said. “Overall security and economic trends reflected a significant hardening of U.S. policy toward China, as compared to both the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. For instance, U.S. policy developed greater security cooperation with South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines to strengthen the alliances and to better contend with Chinese policy.”

But Ross said that he knows of “no U.S. agreements with China that entailed U.S. security interests, much less that compromised U.S. security.”

He must have a different definition of “U.S. agreements” and/or “security interest” than I do. IAC, the Allen Ho indictment was known before Hunter took a $420,000 (2017) ownership stake in BHR.

As of April 29th, 2021:
100 Days Into Biden’s Presidency, Hunter Still Owns Stake In Chinese Private Equity Firm, Business Records Show

“Joe Biden promised in October 2019 that if elected president, nobody in his family would have any business relationship with any foreign corporation or country.

“No one in my family will have an office in the White House, will sit in on meetings as if they are a cabinet member, will, in fact, have any business relationship with anyone that relates to a foreign corporation or a foreign country,” Joe Biden told reporters in Iowa. “Period. Period. End of story.””

Now, the last BHR business filing is from July 2020; 9 months after the promises. Maybe Hunter is shut of the ChiComs by May of 2021. However, Hunter’s lawyer, the White House, and BHR Equity have all declined to comment. You’d expect they would all be happy to tell us if Hunter did, indeed, divest.

On May 8th, 2021:
This is the new part. The UK Daily Mail again does what our media refuses to do.
EXCLUSIVE: ‘Your doggy chain necklace is waiting for you.’ Flirty messages from Hunter Biden’s Chinese-American secretary, 29, who worked for him when he partnered with the ‘spy chief of China’ are revealed

It’s harder than it seems to extract yourself from CCP “investments” when you leave blackmail material on a laptop you abandon.

Vox culturati

Not even a broken link to Vox. You can look for it yourself, but I’ve tried to save you the anguish. The Vox author is the aptly first-named Fabiola Cineas. Note to her parents: Fabulosa would have been perfect.

I try to keep a finger in the ground and an ear to the wind to measure the mutterings of the sinister fringe, and I just found a bit at Vox that tells me they continue to be serious about ginning up the “Ma’Khia called 911” victim-shifting nano-story. It really matters to them.

I took a look at why this hypothetical is quite improbable here, on April 28.

Fabulosa writes:

Even after it was discovered that Bryant was living in foster care, that she was in the middle of a fight with older women when police arrived, and that she was allegedly the one who summoned the police for help, people — some of the same people who called for justice in Floyd’s case — used police talking points to justify the four bullets that Reardon unloaded into Bryant’s chest. She was brandishing a knife, many pointed out, which meant the other Black women needed to be protected.

Crisis response experts noted, however, that deescalation tactics — like commanding Bryant to drop the weapon, physically getting between the women, or simply communicating with her — could have kept everyone alive. In many recorded encounters between the police and white people carrying weapons, for instance, officers didn’t shoot first or even reach for their guns — they successfully managed to peacefully apprehend the suspect.

Even after it was discovered that Bryant was living in foster care
“Even after…” – was the cop supposed to factor this into his decision before preventing a murder? … ‘Oh, maybe she’s a foster child about to knife someone? That’s different!’

“it was discovered”? Someone was trying to hide it? Foster care is an excuse for being murderously out of control? If so, her father’s arrests for nonsupport would be relevant.

she was in the middle of a fight with older women when police arrived
There was no physical fight at the time the police arrived. No danger to Ma’Khia until she charged down the driveway and initiated one. The older women were barely out of their teens, and the one she was shot in the process of stabbing was half Ma’Khia’s size.

she was allegedly the one who summoned the police for help
Did Ma’Khia call 911 because she thought the police would be accomplices in a stabbing?

‘Alleged’ by a couple of twitter loons and Joy Reid, among other deranged fringe journalists. Who made that call is pure speculation. NO INFORMATION has been released, and would probably depend on voice print comparison to resolve. This is just the SJWs quoting each other as sources.

What we do know points entirely against the idea Ma’Khia called the cops just in time watch her attempted murder.

She was brandishing a knife, many pointed out, which meant the other Black women needed to be protected.
You disagree? Black women being attacked by black girls twice their size are not to be protected?

deescalation tactics — like commanding Bryant to drop the weapon
Shouting “Get down! Get down!… Get down! Get down!” wasn’t good enough. He had to say “Drop the knife,” or it doesn’t count.

physically getting between the women
The cop tried to get between the first woman attacked and Ma’Kihia. Ma’Khia instantly went after the second woman. While Ma’Khia’s father was kicking the first.

simply communicating with her
Somehow there is a different, simpler, communication method than shouting “Get down!,” multiple times. A calm, cool thinking solution would be preferred. Yes, but you wouldn’t write such tripe if you had watched the video. Since I’m sure Ms Fabulosa did watch it, I call her screed “racism as a service.”

In many recorded encounters between the police and white people carrying weapons, for instance, officers didn’t shoot first or even reach for their guns
Who can doubt it? It’s also true that “in many recorded encounters” between the police and black people carrying weapons… officers didn’t “shoot first.” Whatever the hell “shoot first” means in this case. In 9 seconds shooting after 5 wouldn’t be “first.”

It’s even true that in encounters between black police and black subjects, at least as many unarmed black subjects are shot as by white police. This link is NPR, and it goes out of its way to make a case that the US is nonetheless a racist country. They report. You decide if that conclusion is reached by reasoning backwards from it. Like the Vox story.

Fabulosa is pretty good at her avocation. Whenever I see her name going forward I will think of Leni Riefenstahl.

And we’re working on the voting thing

China Launches Hotline to Report Online Comments That ‘Distort’ History or ‘Deny’ Its Cultural Excellence

Well, we’ve gone them one better. We’ve privatized this function, setting up entire industries dedicated to trashing our history and punishing those who object. In China, taxpayers fund it. Here, people volunteer.

There’s nothing liberal about it

This is a follow-up to my post on the desecration of the word “liberal,” starting with excerpts from the papers of a President who served only one term. A national calamity laid him low: Like Cassandra, some people get punishment they don’t deserve.

I could have emphasized a lot of it, but I’m pretty sure you will do that in your head:

“…Bureaucracy does not tolerate the spirit of independence; it spreads the spirit of submission into our daily life and penetrates the temper of our people not with the habit of powerful resistance to wrong but with the habit of timid acceptance of irresistible might.

Bureaucracy is ever desirous of spreading its influence and its power. You cannot extend the mastery of the government over the daily working life of a people without at the same time making it the master of the people’s souls and thoughts. Every expansion of government in business means that government in order to protect itself from the political consequences of its errors and wrongs is driven irresistibly without peace to greater and greater control of the nations’ press and platform. Free speech does not live many hours after free industry and free commerce die.

It is a false liberalism that interprets itself into the Government operation of commercial business. Every step of bureaucratizing of the business of our country poisons the very roots of liberalism – that is, political equality, free speech, free assembly, free press, and equality of opportunity. It is the road not to more liberty, but to less liberty. Liberalism should be found not striving to spread bureaucracy but striving to set bounds to it. True liberalism seeks all legitimate freedom first in the confident belief that without such freedom the pursuit of all other blessings and benefits is vain. That belief is the foundation of all American progress, political as well as economic.

Liberalism is a force truly of the spirit, a force proceeding from the deep realization that economic freedom cannot be sacrificed if political freedom is to be preserved. Even if governmental conduct of business could give us more efficiency instead of less efficiency, the fundamental objection to it would remain unaltered and unabated. It would destroy political equality. It would increase rather than decrease abuse and corruption. It would stifle initiative and invention. It would undermine the development of leadership. It would cramp and cripple the mental and spiritual energies of our people. It would extinguish equality and opportunity. It would dry up the spirit of liberty and progress…

The American people from bitter experience have a rightful fear that great business units might be used to dominate our industrial life and by illegal and unethical practices destroy equality of opportunity…

One of the great problems of government is to determine to what extent the Government shall regulate and control commerce and industry and how much it shall leave it alone. No system is perfect. We have had many abuses in the private conduct of business. That every good citizen resents. It is just as important that business keep out of government as that government keep out of business.”

The President was Herbert Hoover.

He was successor to Presidents Harding and Coolidge, and continued their defense of liberalism (he didn’t have to say “classical liberalism” to be understood circa 1928) against Al Smith and Franklin Roosevelt – advocates of Benito Mussolini’s approach to public policy.

The 1929 calamity was compounded immediately, as Hoover predicted, when Roosevelt’s statism deepened and prolonged the Great Depression. Worse, WWII cemented national industrial policy and government intervention in individual lives as “liberal.” American voters accepted this false definition, leading to many of our present discontents.

So. Today, rich and powerful social media companies -information barons- maneuver a willing government into undoing the 1st Amendment through ‘approved’ regulation of speech. Facebook and Twitter, et. al., seek government sanction for their private censorship.

Free enterprise capitalism is being overwhelmed by creeping corporatism: The merger of woke government with the rent-seekers. This is most obvious in the greenspace of pipeline cancellation, anti-fracking, plastic straw bans, anti-nuclear power cognitive dissonance, etc., by corporations who thrive on government subsidies.

The predations of bureaucracy are ubiquitous, but nowhere are these sanctions on liberty more obvious than in the enlistment of public health poobahs to bludgeon American citizens. Our teacher’s union owned public educational cartel is a close second, but to that we’re inured.

Freedom of conscience is targeted by the petty fascisti in academia, government, media, and the viciously tribal special-victims groups they empower. This is possible because equality of opportunity is now called racist and sexist.

Equal opportunity is replaced with demands for equality of outcome (“equity”). I seriously doubt FDR’s good intentions contemplated that outcome. Or the world that these totalitarian wannabes desire.

All because we don’t know what “liberal” means.