On “Hannity,” Sean Hannity poked fun at Joe Biden’s apparent involvement in Hunter Biden’s business dealings and how Hunter’s pitfalls were well known to possible business partners. It’s all coming to light thanks to the ‘Twitter files’ that deepened the obvious cover-up and showed that social media potentially played a key role in burying the truth.
SEAN HANNITY: We begin tonight with the big guy, you know, Joe Biden because that’s how Joe was identified by his son’s business partners in communications found on the Hunter Biden laptop from hell. In fact, Hunter’s partners mentioned a plan to set aside 10% for the big guy.
Now, these emails referenced by The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post and The Washington Post and New York Magazine and almost every other outlet in the country in America reveal a highly unethical get-rich-quick scheme where the Biden family collected millions of dollars from sketchy foreign nationals all over the world using Hunter, who had pretty much zero experience to lead the way. Now, keep in mind, shady foreign nationals, weren’t paying millions of dollars for Hunter’s business expertise.
He was well known to be unstable, also a drug user and addict, and had a lot of serious problems. In fact, emails that were reviewed by Business Insider from 2015, actually show that one potential business partner detailed the pros and cons of paying Hunter Biden $2 million for a project involving the country of Libya. Quote, “Hunter’s negatives are that he’s an alcoholic drug addict, kicked out, kicked out of the US Army for cocaine. Chasing low-class hookers, constantly needs money and many more headaches.
While on the topic of the Hunter Biden laptop coverup; the fifth installment of Elon Musk’s “Twitter Files” Monday revealed that staffers believed that tweets written by former President Donald Trump around the events of Jan. 6, 2021, had not actually violated its policies despite the company saying so at the time.
“For years, Twitter had resisted calls both internal and external to ban Trump on the grounds that blocking a world leader from the platform or removing their controversial tweets would hide important information that people should be able to see and debate,” Bari Weiss of The Free Press wrote toward the beginning of her thread on Monday. “But after January 6, as @mtaibbi and @shellenbergermd have documented, pressure grew, both inside and outside of Twitter, to ban Trump.”
Weiss cited “dissenters” within Twitter that did not want to ban Trump, including one who wrote, “Maybe because I am from China. I deeply understand how censorship can destroy the public conversation.”
“But voices like that one appear to have been a distinct minority within the company. Across Slack channels, many Twitter employees were upset that Trump hadn’t been banned earlier,” Weiss wrote. “After January 6, Twitter employees organized to demand their employer ban Trump. ‘There is a lot of employee advocacy happening,’ said one Twitter employee.”
