He bought this home for $185,000 in the 70s and then sold it for $1.2 million in 1996 wsj.com/articles/in-hi…
The “Biden is corrupt” argument (that centered on him somehow getting massive payments for... something?) doesn’t make sense. He made his taxes available, his primary source of income between age 29 and 73 was the federal government, etc.
After he left office in 2017, he started raking in cash because turns out former VPs are highly sought after speakers/authors/etc. The money he made during that time has been really well documented, too. This is why presidential nominees who aren’t corrupt release their taxes.
Here’s a story from January 2016 where Biden talked about how when his son Beau got sick he was worried he’d have to sell his house and Obama offered to help him. He wasn’t exactly rolling in cash, obviously. reuters.com/article/us-usa…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Parker Molloy

Parker Molloy Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ParkerMolloy

19 Oct
It's really amazing how many people on the right think they can do this little sleight of hand with why people know that story is BS.

Substitute actual reason (NYP is framing a story as a scandal when the emails they're showing don't actually show a scandal) with "emails exist"
This is literally the same shit dumbass pizzagate people say to defend their conspiracy theory. "OH, SO YOU'RE SAYING THOSE AREN'T PODESTA'S EMAILS!?!?" No, we're saying they don't say what you're claiming they do.

So congrats for taking the pizzagate approach, I guess.
Anyway, I'm sure the "I'm here to dump on the Dems and I'm from the left! I'm here to dump on the Dems and I'm from the right!" show at The Hill that was created the guy who peddled bogus Biden/Ukraine stories last year are going to act like this is legit.
Read 8 tweets
19 Oct
I genuinely wonder if people like this are *actually* this naive and don't realize that it's not a matter of whether there's actual wrongdoing, but the *appearance* of wrongdoing as presented through the right-wing media filter.
"Oh wHaT wOuLd tHeY FiNd? An EmAiL sAyiNg PeOpLe ShOuLd HaVe HeALtHcArE?"

What's just amazing about these takes is that there's an assumption that people on the right are working from a place of intellectual honesty and not just revving up a smear campaign.
John Podesta's emails about catering were the basis of what became a worldwide conspiracy cult that runs around accusing Democrats and random celebrities of eating babies. It's not about there being a "there" there or not.
Read 7 tweets
19 Oct
The *biggest* issue with the Post's stories on this, and I'm willing to bet Sohrab is well aware of this, is that what's being presented by the paper as damning/criminal/"a smoking gun"/evidence is not actually damning/criminal/"a smoking gun"/evidence.
It's the same thing that was used to defend a lot of the reporting on many of the 2016 Wikileaks emails.

WL would tweet something like "DNC spox says [something]!" and then if you looked at it and followed the email thread back, it would be that person *quoting someone else*.
Then, if you'd question it, people would go, "Nuh uh! The emails are real!" which is a dodge because what you were criticizing was the conclusion derived from the emails and not the emails themselves.

Same playbook here, but much flimsier content.
Read 8 tweets
18 Oct
There are some really great pieces about the Bidens/Ukraine/Burisma that Greenwald should check out from an outlet called... one sec... ah, The Intercept.

1. theintercept.com/2019/05/10/rum…

2. theintercept.com/2019/09/22/rep…

3. theintercept.com/2019/09/25/i-w…
Another piece at The Intercept: “By reporting on a conspiracy theory promoted by the president as a political story, with two sides, journalists are helping to weaponize disinformation.”

theintercept.com/2019/09/22/rep… ImageImageImage
Read 4 tweets
18 Oct
... ... ... they can’t even really believe this, can they? Image
Normal human being, especially one who has ever worked in a bar or a restaurant: oh yeah, they’re saying get him out of office/cut him off/vote him out/impeach him

MAGAbrains: sHe iS tHrEaTeNiNg tO mUrDeR HiM

Also, this bad faith play isn’t new:
vice.com/en/article/d3b…
They’re going to get her killed. This is all a game to them.
Read 6 tweets
18 Oct
This guy highlights the issue with all this Hunter Biden stuff.

“It is not going to go away and it will not look like nothing.” Then if you follow his thread, his issue is that a company hiring someone who has a famous family member, and he tries to define that as “corruption.”
Unless you ban family members of famous people from working ... at all ... you can’t stop companies from hiring people because they’re adjacent to power.

What makes it corruption is if the person in power does something or changes policy in order to *get* their relative a job. Image
Was John McCain guilty of corruption because Meghan McCain was hired to work in media (Daily Beast, Fox News, and then most recently ABC)?

No. Because that’s not how corruption works. It’s a backwards understanding of corruption.
Read 13 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!