Brief Roundup: Mostly Political, Zhou Criminality, Tucker, A Bit Of Ukraine
Today’s a day for yardwork, but I’m taking a lunch break and I’ll try to point to some good links to important stories.
The big story, of course, is what CTH refers to as
CTH’s roundup is pretty good and includes the readily comprehensible graphics from the committee’s memorandum. The actual committee memorandum can be found here in PDF form—36 pages:
The reference to “Influence Peddling and Business Schemes” captures the essence of the report. It takes no imagination whatsoever to look at the money flow to figure out what’s going on. The setup is a transparent attempt to conceal where the money is actually going—the Zhou family’s pockets. This is plenty enough evidence to launch a criminal investigation under a variety of charges, but the main idea is, indeed, “Influence Peddling”. Most of the monies in question were transferred to the Zhou family while Zhou was deeply involved in foreign policy as VP.
Perhaps the most accessible account of all this is at Zerohedge:
Biden Family Tried To Hide Over $10 Million In Foreign Payments: House GOP
Again, just a quick glance through the information assembled by the committee is enough to confirm that the setup of the money transfers was intended to “Hide Over $10 Million In Foreign Payments.” There’s simply no doubt of that. Naturally the Zhou family can claim that these payments were for legitimate services, but any real investigation will expose that flimflam beyond a reasonable doubt—there’s no reason to try to hide the payments if it was all on the up and up.
Zerohedge summarizes the report in a nice bullet point list, followed by two paragraphs from the committee’s report, before shifting to the graphics:
Summary: House Republicans laid out evidence of a vast network of Biden family dealings which reek of corruption - including;
The Biden family received, and tried to hide, over $10 million in payments from foreign nationals
A previously undisclosed $1 million in Romanian-linked payments
Ties to Romanian 'influence peddling'
A 'web' of 20 LLCs created while Joe Biden was Vice President with a 'complicated corporate structure'
'At least 15' of the LLCs were formed after Biden became VP in 2009 - several of which were owned or co-owned by Hunter
These LLCs accepted payments ranging from $5,000 to $3 million
The committee wants to know what legitimate business the Biden family was in
"Biden family members and business associates created a web of over 20 companies—most were limited liability companies formed during Joe Biden’s vice presidency," reads a memorandum. "Bank records show the Biden family, their business associates, and their companies received over $10 million from foreign nationals’ companies. The Committee has identified payments to Biden family members from foreign companies while Joe Biden served as Vice President and after he left public office.
"These complicated financial transactions appear to conceal the source of the funds and reduce the conspicuousness of the total amounts made into the Biden bank accounts. Chinese nationals and companies with significant ties to Chinese intelligence and the Chinese Communist Party hid the source of the funds by layering domestic limited liability companies," Comer continued.
A minor point. While the Romanian payments were, indeed, “previously undisclosed,” their discovery was not unexpected. Further digging may reveal similar schemes involving Kazakhstan and other countries. This has all been previously reported—we’re just now seeing the documentary evidence.
The committee report is, well, conservative in its conclusions. Jonathan Turley—who has been all over the FARA angle the DoJ’s refusal to look at FARA corruption—has a good article up already that shows that we already know that the evidence goes well beyond mere hints of criminality on the part of Hunter:
The laptop is, of course, now recognized as genuine even by some of the early deniers. Hunter remains under criminal investigation for possible tax and money laundering violations. But the greatest “reveal” is the person referred to as “the Big Guy” and “Celtic” in these emails: President Biden.
Recently released emails reference payments to President Biden from his son’s accounts and indicate the possible commingling of funds. Even more embarrassing, the shared account may have been used to pay a Russian prostitute named “Yanna.” In one text, a former secret service agent warns Hunter (who was holed up with a prostitute in an expensive hotel) “Come on H this is linked to Celtic’s account.”
The question is whether prosecutors will continue to act like they do not see the elephant. Consider these established facts:
…
On his Twitter feed Turley launches a series of “tear-him-a-new-one” tweets in a lengthy live-tweet coverage. Scathing, but wasted—I suppose—on the shameless whores in the MSM. A small sample:
Comer is calling on the Bidens to produce receipts and bills to show what legitimate business was being performed by all of these family members received money transfers.
A reporter just asked why the Trumps are not being investigated.
The inclusion of Biden grandchildren in the list of family Biden members has not been previously disclosed. The spread of transfers to nine family members and the use of a complex array of LLC companies raise obvious concerns over an effort to conceal influence peddling.
Once again, these layers of work for foreign interests raises the question of why FARA violations have reportedly not been the focus of the DOJ.
The expected spin after the House presser would well alter the Earth's axis. The Committee has detailed what at a minimum is an obvious effort to conceal transactions with an absurd array of LLCs
The Committee could produce eight heads in a duffle bag owned by Hunter and the media would still demand a luggage tag referencing the President. The question is what it takes to generate serious media interest in Biden influence peddling
Influence peddling is corruption and the Bidens are in a league to themselves in using influence peddling to enrich themselves.
Now, just a brief link to a Turley article from yesterday, re Blinken’s problems:
Blinken Contest: House Committee Prepares to Hold Secretary of State in Contempt
You have to wonder: Is the country about to slide into political chaos at some point in the not too distant future?
Even among those who wanted to end the war, the withdrawal from Afghanistan was condemned by Democrats and Republicans alike. Given the loss of lives and equipment (as well as the impact on U.S. standing), there could not be more obvious subject matter for congressional inquiry.
The question is whether Blinken and the Administration really want to test this in court. Attorney General Merrick Garland would likely decline to prosecute Blinken for contempt (despite his green lighting such prosecutions against former Trump officials), but the Congress could go to court to compel production.
The Biden Administration has racked up an impressive line of losses in court. It has already succeeded in looking like it wants to hide the document. If it is classified, it can be handled in a classified setting, but it should be produced rather than trigger a new fight over the separation of powers.
Now, Tucker.
Here’s a link to an article that explains
It’s not too long and it’s quite lucid and convincing.
That sound you hear is the establishment media breaking into a million pieces.
Re Ukraine.
Mike Krupa, writing at Larry Johnson’s site, has a lot to say about a pair of Polish generals who appear to have got the wake up call, smelled the coffee, and are sounding some warnings. Just this, however, regarding any Ukrainian “offensive” whatsoever:
“If the Americans say now that they were building 9 armored brigades, these 9 armored brigades are only there to conduct small, shallow operational activities. If one talks about a counteroffensive, that is a term that is practically strategic in nature. For such an attack, for such a counteroffensive, one would need not 9, but rather 19-20 armored brigades” – Skrzypczak observed. The point of the spearhead apparently being prepared by Ukraine for the Spring counteroffensive, according to the general, is to penetrate deeply into Russian lines and that requires that the main attacking force needs its flanks to be protected. But, as stated by Skrzypczak, to achieve a breakthrough “this potential has to be three times larger than the one declared by the Americans.” Skrzypczak then goes on to pour cold water on the vast majority of what he himself has been saying in the past year:
“Ukraine does not have the potential to take back 20% of its territories. If she were to re-take them, she would need a 3-1 advantage over the Russian army along the entire front on the strategic level, she would need around 2 million soldiers to rout them. They have no chance of this because they do not have the equipment. The plants in the West have no such possibilities, such potential. Hence the efforts on the part of the diplomats to end this conflict as it could turn out in a few months that we will not have anything to help Ukraine with.”
Compare the above to Big Serge’s very interesting article about the Germans’ WW2 Case Blue offensive. This passage, about the dangers of going on the offensive with inadequate forces, seems relevant to the current situation in Ukraine. As Big Serge, not only were the German forces seriously depleted, but they were trying to go on the offensive against a foe that greatly outnumbered them in men and materiel:
Death Trap on the Volga: Stalingrad
The History of Battle: Maneuver, Part 13
This was, very plainly, not an army that was in an adequate state to be aiming for objectives a thousand kilometers away. Field Marshal Fedor von Bock (reassigned to command Army Group South, which would be tasked with the crucial Caucasus operation) had a most sober assessment. In February, he reported:
The repair services were created for a certain intake of repairs. They cannot cope with the accumulated mountain of work produced by the campaign in Russia. . . . General overhauls cannot be performed at all. . . . Lack of spare parts, lack of skilled men, and lack of machinery are therefore at such a disproportion to the number of motor vehicles in need of repair, and above all of general overhaul, that the army, despite full use of all capacities, cannot help itself by the means within its power…
As a result of this situation the picture is as follows. The armored divisions with their 9–15 battle-worthy tanks do not at present deserve that name. The motorized artillery can move into new position only in staggered phases. It is therefore operational only in positional warfare. The bridge-building columns are, with one exception, immobile. Supply services are adequate only because the railway operates well forward. Matters are similar in all areas dependent on motor vehicles.
The army, in consequence, is not combat-ready for a war of movement. It cannot make itself combat-ready by the means within its power.
At the end of March, an assessment of unit battle-readiness concluded that only eight divisions in the entire eastern army were rated “Fit for all tasks” - a proxy for being at full capability. The majority were rated either “Fit for limited offensive tasks” or “Fit for defense.” By comparison, Operation Barbarossa had been launched in June of the previous year with 136 “fit for all tasks” divisions.
The German army was fit for defense, but not for a major offensive—only limited operational activities. The Germans paid the price for that.
Finally, on the Culture War front, a fine article from American Thinker:
The author maintains, correctly, that the War on the Family is at the very heart of the Left’s assault on the West. He traces this right back to Karl Marx in convincing fashion:
Liberals are ultimately relativistic hedonists. As Steven Pinker says in his sermonizing myth defending “liberalism,” any religion, or philosophy, or school of thought which elevates a moral good above “human well-being” -- which he means material comfort and pleasure -- is antagonistic to humanism. How interesting. Moral flourishing is antithetical to humanism even though moral virtue is the basis of humanist thought from the Greeks, Romans, and further elaborated upon in the Christian tradition.
Contrary to relativists, human well-being, which is moral flourishing -- … -- is dependent upon actualizing the moral good in one’s life.
Recall—human well-being, moral flourishing, is exactly what the Founding Fathers meant by Life, Liberty, and Happiness.
Liberalism, in its denial of the summum bonum, denies the life of a higher calling and anything that binds individuals to others. Family naturally and necessarily suffers. In the liberal mind, by being tethered to families, communities, and any organization, individuals are harmed. Thus they must be liberated to choose to be whatever they want. The logic is played out today: biology is also repressive and harms individuals unless they choose to liberate themselves from biology.
Marxism also denies the summum bonum and agrees with liberalism that the highest good is material comfort and pleasure.
In fact, as the author shows, Marx identified the family as the origin of slavery.
Now, here’s my criticism. The author talks constantly about Marxists and Liberals, but in fact those represent simply the Left wing of liberalism. The Right wing—Classical Liberalism or Libertarianism—shares the same views, based in its view of human beings as purely autonomous individuals, mere repositories of “rights”. And, to his great credit, the author demonstrates that, as well, but avoids naming the aberrant views that lie behind Libertarianism and which have—by their acceptance as a kind of default civic ideology of post-Constitutional America—enabled the moral and political debacle we find ourselves in:
By destroying the family, Marxism is also destroying nations, since they understand the two are fundamentally interlinked. And since families and nations create inequality, families and nations must be eliminated for a consummated universal order of peace and affluence.
The individualism of liberalism, though, is ironically statist. As the individual grows in power, through “rights,” the state must also grow in power to enforce those rights. As John Locke wrote, the role of government in the commonwealth society is to decide the rights of subjects. And as Rousseau said, we are forced to be free by the coercive “general will.” This is achieved by the full power and weight of the state.
The growth of a purely individualistic individualism requires a war against the family. It also demands a war against the nation, since the nation is the instantiated embodiment of the love that binds people together in duties and responsibilities which liberalism comes to believe as harmful to hedonistic living. If the family is dissolved, the practical reality of the nation is also dissolved.
Read it all. It’s well written and thought provoking. Libertarianism is worse than a dead end. It will lead the nation over the cliff.
Elon Musk announces Twitter will welcome new female CEO in June
Hmmm. Ginny Thomas?
Take a look at this Nov 3, 2020 article on the CEFC scheme described today in (IMO) less detail. https://www.theamericanconservative.com/exclusive-how-the-bidens-made-off-with-millions-in-chinese-cash/