National Archives just torpedoed Joe Biden's 'I know nothing' defense

[rangerrebew]

National Archives just torpedoed Joe Biden's 'I know nothing' defense
Opinion by Jonathan Turley • Yesterday 3:27 PM
 
For years, President Joe Biden has maintained a Sgt. Schultz defense ("I know nothing, nothing!") to counter allegations that his family has profiteered on influence peddling with foreign countries and companies.

Despite mounting evidence to the contrary, Biden maintains that he "knows nothing, nothing" about Hunter Biden's business deals. He recently doubled down on this defense by even denying that family members received money from foreign sources. He repeated his denial even after the release of financial transfer reports from his own administration showing millions transferred from China.

Now, emails have emerged that show that Biden personally helped draft responses to the controversial deals in 2015 when he was vice president. It also appears that Biden officials like former White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield knew of his role even as the president continued to deny any involvement.

The National Archives has released emails that show that then-Vice President Joe Biden approved an official statement in December 2015 about Hunter Biden’s position on a Ukrainian energy company’s board.

Biden has denied any knowledge or involvement in these business dealings at least seven times as a presidential candidate and as president.

For years, the media has continued to report President Biden’s repeated claim that "I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/national-archives-just-torpedoed-joe-biden-s-i-know-nothing-defense/ar-AA18ZWV5?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=17efea52fc494918c979e8113d0f0162&ei=23

[BellyAche]

More bluffing and lying by the prez. Of course he was up to his eyeballs in working on his son's behalf to block investigations. Sometimes the NA releases interesting tidbits despite it's incompetence with other things.

[christian]

Joes supporters here have vouched for Joes innocence many time here, and they wouldn't lie to us anymore than Joe would.  His one party, joe is god, party must be believed and all others face certain dire consequences, right?
 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Joes supporters here....

Exactly who are they?

[christian]

Those that defend WOKE agendas, their attacks on America, the Constitution and defend those that do such.  If there was none such, what would there be to discuss?  Maj?

[sneakypete]

He DOESN'T know anything.

There is not ONE valid reason for him not having already been removed from office.

Yeah,I know that Camel Toe would be replacing him,but that should be entertaining more than threatening.

She is just stoopid,not senile.

[sneakypete]

Exactly who are they?

@Maj. Bill Martin

Beat me to it.

[sneakypete]

Those that defend WOKE agendas, their attacks on America, the Constitution and defend those that do such.  If there was none such, what would there be to discuss?  Maj?

@christian

You are confusing the "Ah hates rude orange man!" loons with Dims.

The "Rude Orange Man" haters are just "Miss Manners" types that wish everybody would wear red and march in a straight line.

Dims are retards,traitors to America,or actual criminals.

[christian]

sneakypete:
You are confusing the "Ah hates rude orange man!" loons with Dims.

The "Rude Orange Man" haters are just "Miss Manners" types that wish everybody would wear red and march in a straight line.

Dims are retards,traitors to America,or actual criminals.

christian:
As slick willy put it, its all under one big inclusive big tent.  They loathe to divide, they want their opposition divided.  The wicked and evil feel quite comfortable under that big all inclusive big tent, it works for them!

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Those that defend WOKE agendas, their attacks on America, the Constitution and defend those that do such.  If there was none such, what would there be to discuss?  Maj?

You said "here", so how about naming them/us by name?   Otherwise, we're all getting smeared.  So who is it here who defends "woke agendas", "attacks upon American", etc.?

[bigheadfred]

You said "here", so how about naming them/us by name?   Otherwise, we're all getting smeared.  So who is it here who defends "woke agendas", "attacks upon American", etc.?

Shortest witch hunt evah. 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

You said "here", so how about naming them/us by name?   Otherwise, we're all getting smeared.  So who is it here at TBR who defends "woke agendas", "attacks upon American", etc.?