In a series of recently released, explosive email exchanges with his longtime business partner, Eric Schwerin, and Alexander Mackler, the current Chief Deputy Attorney General of Delaware, Hunter Biden unleashed his real thoughts on the Clinton clan.
The email exchanges, which date between 2015 and 2016, oddly verified what many Americans, above all Trump, have said for a long, long time about the so-called representative government dwelling in Washington, D.C.: It really is a swamp.
For starters, the email exchanges, originally obtained by Fox News Digital, verify that Hunter is hardly impressed by the complete phoniness of Bill Clinton, which was on full display as he basically campaigned for his wife in the 2016 presidential election (how “feminist” of Clinton to let him do so).
Hunter Biden was apparently sent a video clip of Clinton during the 2016 presidential campaign, back during a period when Clinton was apparently still competing with Biden in the presidential primaries.
Mr. Slick Willy apparently thought it would be a good idea to turn everyone against Biden by reminding America that, at one point, Biden did indeed believe in punishing crime, as evidenced by Biden’s alleged contributions to writing the bill in 1994.
In a nutshell, the bill calls for the opposite of “Defund Police,” as reported by NBC News:
“The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, or the 1994 crime bill as it became known, earmarked billions in funding for states to build new prisons, train and hire additional police, expanded the federal death penalty and instituted a federal “three-strikes” life sentence mandate.”
Shame Biden has adopted the opposite approach by the time he was president, above all for the very minorities suffering the most from a “soft on crime” approach.
It’s especially a shame that Democrats actually consider such a bill to be a liability a mere 22 years later, as evidenced by Clinton distancing himself from the legislation.
“Hillary didn’t vote for that bill, because she wasn’t in the Senate. She was spending her time trying to get health care for poor kids – who were they? And their lives matter,” Bill Clinton remarked pompously.
“What an assh—,” Hunter replied angrily.
Strangely enough, despite his numerous entanglements overseas, Hunter’s assessment is dead-on accurate.
After all, the infamous 1994 crime bill is still known as the “Clinton Crime Bill.”
Plus, consider what Slick (or Sick?) Willy said at the time of the bill’s signing, further justifying Hunter’s “a—hole” remark.
“The American people have been looking forward to this day for a long time,” Clinton brayed, “In the last 25 years, half a million Americans have been killed by other Americans. For 25 years, crime has been a hot political issue used too often to divide us while the system makes excuses for not punishing criminals and doing the job.”
Clearly, the Senate agreed, as the bill was passed by a 95-4 vote.
Imagine any bill being passed by a 95-4 vote these days …
Even Bernie Sanders, who was a House representative at the time, voted in favor of the bill. Amazing how easily someone’s values can be bought for a few million bucks a few years later, ironically when Sanders agreed to stand down for Clinton in 2016, just as Biden agreed to stand down.
Only for Sanders to stand down again in 2020 to Biden. Heck, he may stand down in 2024 again … to Kamala.
Regardless, fast forward from 1994 to 2016, and Democrats have decided to take the polar opposite approach of the original intent of the 1994 crime bill that (gasp!) makes criminals so angry, illustrating the extent to which they have zero platform to run on, as they have zero consistent values, aside from a “winner take all” mentality.
The winners, of course, being themselves, which Hunter also shreds in his email exchange.
Eric Schwerin gave just a taste of the degree to which the swamp sinks, referencing Clinton’s constant companion, Huma Abedin, who apparently feels zero qualms about raiding taxpayer money in the public sector while raiding millions in the private sector.
And she’s not even an elected official.
“Huma’s is going to be worse because she was a USG employee at the time. The Library money at the time. The Library money was federally appropriated, but they weren’t government employees. The real question is why did Doug need to ‘supplement’ his salary at Teneo and CGI with federally appropriated dollars?”
Hunter was in total disbelief, clearly unimpressed by Clinton and her associates: “Are you f—ing kidding me. How greedy can you possibly be?”
Further blasting their behavior as “Petty, Greedy, Venal, Low Rent bulls—,” Hunter added, “Why in the world would they even consider taking a dime of taxpayer money as they were cashing in on millions of dollars. I’ve got nothing against making money but just seems so petty.”
Fair point. Seems Hunter Biden’s business deals were “only” with foreign governments, though Clinton and her cronies are simply all over the map, having zero qualms about stealing as many American taxpayer funds as possible.
Heck, the Clintons even set up a foundation in order to do so.
In other words, Hunter has an actual point, and apparently a semblance of actual “values” if he at least appears disgusted by brazen robbery of American taxpayer funds.
Which only underscores how truly scary the Clintons really are … especially since their collusion with Russia appears quite extensive, as evidenced by Special Counsel John Durham’s ongoing investigation.
Author: Jane Jones
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
