Democratic corruption

Why it’s wrong to investigate Democratic corruption

By Tom Trinko

One of Adam Schiff’s many rules for his kangaroo court hearings designed to convince the American people that up is down is that testimony related to whether or not the Bidens are a corrupt criminal enterprise is forbidden.

According to Schiff, it doesn’t matter if Joe Biden was bribed through his son to ensure that the investigation into Burisma’s corruption by the Ukraine government was shut down.

Assuming Schiff isn’t doing that simply because it goes against his Big Lie tells us that Schiff believes that it’s wrong to investigate Democratic corruption.

We know that Schiff has no problem with Democrats pressuring Ukraine to investigate people related to Trump even when there is no evidence of wrongdoing.  When three Democratic senators wrote a threatening letter in 2018 demanding that Ukraine reopen investigations into people with political ties to Trump, Schiff uttered not a single word of condemnation.

This is just one more example of how Democrats believe themselves to be above the law.  We see it over and over. Obama, by his own admission, violated the Constitution with his DACA proclamation and now Democrats say that Trump can’t overturn it, as though Obama’s decrees are somehow above those of any other president.

Democrats tell us that Hillary’s gross negligence in handling critical classified information is okay even as a sailor went to the brig for a much less egregious violation of the same law.

If you’re wondering about Trump’s actions, ask yourself this question: if Democrats had clear irrefutable evidence of Trump Jr engaging in corrupt acts in the Ukraine and a Democratic president asked the Ukrainians to investigate would you think that was wrong?

Yet there is clear unambiguous evidence of Joe and Hunter Biden’s corruption in the Ukraine.

  • Hunter Biden received around $3.1 million from a corrupt Ukraine company, Burisma, despite the fact that he never went to Ukraine and knows nothing about the energy business.
  • Hunter Biden has publicly admitted that he only got the job with Burisma because he’s Joe’s son.
  • Hunter got his sweet gig after his dad was made the point man for the US on Ukraine policy
  • Joe Biden is on video saying he used a quid pro quo, denying US aid, to get the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma fired thereby ending the investigation.
  • The only foreign prosecutor that Biden has ever personally ensured was fired just happened to be the one investigating his son.
  • Burisma used the Biden name to try and get special meetings with the State Department

Most commentary about the Biden’s corruption assumes that Joe was protecting Hunter, but any investigation by Ukraine would have been unlikely to directly impact Hunter; the U.S. would never extradite him.  So perhaps what really happened is that Burisma bought Joe Biden by funneling money through Hunter Biden. Then when Burisma was in trouble they had Biden shut down the investigation not to protect Hunter but to protect the corrupt Ukrainians who run Burisma.

In the real world, if some shady character wants to bribe a politician they don’t write a check that would leave a paper trail. Instead they give some relative a fake job and funnel money into the family that way.

Even if Joe Biden himself never saw a cent, Joe benefited because his son got rich.

As you listen to the kangaroo court hearings remember that if you think that a President has the responsibility to look into corruption by his predecessors then even if there was a quid pro quo what Trump did was right.  Few of us want to live in a world where corruption by Democrats can never be investigated.


This entry was posted in Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply