RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://us7.campaign-archive.com/?e=a9fdc67db9&u=9d011a88d8fe324cae8c084c5&id=fefc435a63

About two weeks ago, the New York Times published an article finally conceding that the Hunter Biden laptop and many of the emails on it are authentic. Yesterday (March 30), the Washington Post followed suit. The laptop in question is the one that Hunter left at a Delaware computer repair shop, and whose contents the New York Post revealed in a series of explosive October 2020 articles. Those articles got the NY Post banned from Twitter in the run-up to the 2020 election, while some 51 ex-intelligence officials denounced the laptop as likely “Russian disinformation.” Meanwhile, the Times and the WaPo never breathed a word about the laptop’s existence or its contents for the intervening year and a half.

Both the recent Times and Washington Post articles mention the laptop in the context of reporting on a federal criminal investigation into Hunter Biden’s tax liabilities and business dealings in foreign countries including Ukraine and China. Clearly the newspapers are trying to get out in front of a likely impending indictment of the President’s son. After all, it would be quite embarrassing for them if the President’s son were to get indicted based on events that have long been public but which events have never been mentioned in either of those two papers.

But how about the question of how this investigation, and Hunter’s underlying conduct, relate to President Biden himself? To read the Times and the WaPo, you would think that that whole question is somehow out of line. The Times’s piece doesn’t even discuss Joe’s role or involvement, although it does include this bizarre line:

It is not clear whether the criminal probe is focused solely on Hunter Biden, or if he is among a group of individuals and companies being scrutinized.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18393/business-vs-government

If a corporation builds a better mousetrap than the government, we buy it. And generally, that is a good idea. But it may come with costs, not easily measurable in dollars or speed.
The Constitution itself was not designed for efficiency…. Ours was designed to check and balance power, rather than to expedite results. We pay a price for our desire to prevent too much centralization of authority in any one person or institution. And sometimes we grow impatient at the slow pace of progress.
We want our mail delivered faster and more frequently; we want to know the outcome of elections tonight not next week… we want our disputes resolved without months of pretrial discovery. And so, we turn to the classic American solution: private enterprise, free market competition, capitalism.
The time has come to consider the consider the costs and benefits of this important development.
It is not the object of this article to resolve these issues or to propose specific jurisprudential shifts. It is simply to bring together a number of related changes that have in common the privatization of traditional governmental activities, and to begin a discussion of the legal changes that, especially in the area of social media censorship, seem urgently required.
We must begin a discussion of the legal changes that seem urgently required, especially in the area of media censorship, invasion of privacy and lack of transparency by private companies that appear to be performing functions, possibly at the behest of the government, as a way of bypassing the restrictions placed on the government by the First Amendment.

When I was growing up, the mail was delivered by the post office, money was printed by the treasury, votes were counted by election officials, wars were fought by the army, prisons were run by departments of correction, law enforcement was conducted by the police force, space exploration was done by NASA, legal disputes were resolved by judges and juries.

https://www.nysun.com/article/biden-is-playing-with-fire-in-a-bid-for-hispanic-vote

President Biden is following in President Obama’s footsteps, scrambling to curry favor with disgruntled Hispanics before an upcoming election. Under pressure from immigration activists, Mr. Biden has rescinded Title 42, a policy adopted by President Trump that allowed for the swift expulsion of those entering the United States illegally.

As of May 23, Title 42 will be gone. That will open the doors to what will doubtless be another wave of caravans heading north, the participants convinced that the current White House will allow them to stay. They’ll have every reason to think so. Mr. Biden has long blasted his predecessor for his “inhumane” treatment of people trying to gain asylum here.

Mr. Biden has eagerly undone the policies — including the construction of a border wall and the “Remain in Mexico” approach — that helped slow the stream of migrants during the Trump years. Title 42 used the threat of Covid-19 as an excuse to expel undocumented people; now that the pandemic has receded, activists pressed Mr. Biden to change course.

The Biden-friendly New York Times reported late last year that over the prior twelve months, “encounters” of illegal migrants had soared to 1.7 million persons, a level not seen since “at least” 1960, “capping a year of chaos at the southern border.” The Times noted that under Title 42, one million individuals had been deported, which invites the question: what happened to the other 700,000?

https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/ron-johnsons-unanswered-2020-questions-joe-biden-loom

Back before the 2020 election, when Democrats and their allies in the corporate media were still claiming the Hunter Biden story was a conspiracy theory or Russian disinformation, GOP Sen. Ron Johnson released an open letter to America posing questions to then-candidate Joe Biden.

Like most Biden scandals at the time, it mostly got ignored or ridiculed. But the questions were rooted in facts and evidence gathered over two years by investigators on Johnson’s Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Now nearly two years later, a funny thing has happened. The giants of the corporate media – the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN among them – have abruptly reversed course and acknowledged Hunter Biden’s foreign business pursuits raise legal issues and that content on his laptop left behind in a Delaware repair shop in 2019 was authentic all along.

And now Johnson’s unanswered questions posed in August 2020 loom larger than ever as a federal grand jury in Delaware investigates Hunter Biden for his Ukraine and China business deals, taxes, foreign lobbying and other issues, and some Democrats reportedly brace for a possible indictment.