WHOA. Wall Street Journal's news side just released a debunking of WSJ opinion side.
An ex-business partner of Hunter Biden said he consulted his father about a planned venture with a Chinese oil company. Joe Biden denied any involvement in the venture and corporate records reviewed by The Journal show no role for him.
"Text messages and emails related to the venture that were provided to the Journal by Mr. Bobulinski, mainly the spring and summer of 2017, don’t show either Hunter Biden or James Biden discussing a role for Joe Biden in the venture." via
Note this huge point from WSJ news story: It (and Biden campaign) proceed from position these emails are authentic, this happened. Only issue is whether Joe invested (not whether he knew, or son's behavior). Enough with "disinformation" claims. Real.
Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden
Breaking WSJ. Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden in the China business venture.
Trump was right about WSJ piece. There’s a bombshell here: “Text messages and emails related to the venture that were provided to the Journal by Mr. Bobulinski...don’t show either Hunter Biden or James Biden discussing a role for Joe Biden in the venture.”
Trump has built up WSJ reporting on Hunter Biden. WSJ now: "The venture ... never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals, according to people familiar with the matter. Corporate records ... show no role for Joe Biden."
To summarize: In 2017, when he wasn’t in office, Joe Biden didn’t have a meeting about a business venture that would have been perfectly legal but never happened. So many dogs not barking here.
BREAKING: Trump's Claims About Joe Biden and China Debunked By Nation's Preeminent Conservative Newspaper WSJ: "The venture never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals. Corporate records show no role for Joe Biden." See:
The story Trump has been waiting for, and teeing up.... is a brief that says there's no evidence for his central claim
WSJ: Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden
“The venture—set up in 2017 after Mr. Biden left the vice presidency and before his presidential campaign—never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals.... Corporate records reviewed by WSJ show no role for Joe Biden.”
An ex-business partner of Hunter Biden said he consulted his father about a planned venture with a Chinese oil company. Joe Biden denied any involvement in the venture and corporate records reviewed by The Journal show no role for him.
"Text mes­sages and emails re­lated to the ven­ture that were pro­vided to the Jour­nal by Mr. Bob­u­lin­ski, mainly from the spring and sum­mer of 2017, don’t show ei­ther Hunter Biden or James Biden dis­cussing a role for Joe Biden in the ven­ture."
Breaking News: Trump Lied😐 “The venture never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals, according to people familiar with the matter. Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden.”
Hunter Biden's ex-business partner alleged Joe Biden was part of talks around his son’s efforts to form a venture with a Chinese oil company. Biden's campaign denied the former vice president's involvement, and records reviewed by WSJ show no role for him.
"The venture—set up in 2017 after Biden left the vice presidency and before his presidential campaign—never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals...Corporate records reviewed by The WSJ show no role for Joe Biden."
Reporting (the collection of facts) from the news side of WSJ concludes “The venture never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals, according to people familiar with the matter. Corporate records show no role for Joe Biden."
The news (I.e., the sane) side of the Wall Street Journal weighs in on the Hunter Biden affair and has very different findings from the edit page.
The ven­ture—set up in 2017 after Biden left office—never received proposed funds from the Chinese com­pany or com­pleted any deals, people familiar with the matter said. Cor­po­rate records reviewed by ⁦⁩ show no role for Joe Biden.
The 's news section on the opinion section's Hunter Biden column: "The venture... never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals... Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden."
Props to news section for diving into this story, making the timeline clear, corroborating evidence and establishing the facts. This is of course not exactly what either campaign wants--there's no awesome "gotcha" moment--but it's good reporting.
"Among twenty snowy mountains, The only moving thing Was the eye of the blackbird." Two reporters, including a Pulitzer Prize winner, see Anthony Bobulinski's text messages and emails ... differently than true believer
When the Wall Street Journal newsroom debunks the Wall Street Journal opinion pages:
Interesting night at the Wall Street Journal
An ex-business partner of Hunter Biden said he consulted his father about a planned venture with a Chinese oil company. Joe Biden denied any involvement in the venture, and corporate records reviewed by The Journal show no role for him. via
From the newsroom side of Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for via
Shots fired at the WSJ.
This further establishes how sketchy Hunter's business practices were, and that his job was to use family ties to help Chinese regime-connected firms get rich. It also supports Joe Biden's claims that he had no involvement.
If anyone comes at you with some "Hunter Biden's business partner..." blah blah blah note that not even the Wall St Journal is buying this crap.
Can't tell--are they saying that Bobulinski provided independent confirmation of some sort for the "Big Guy" email? Think so but not sure
What kind of "bombshell" gets refuted by the same venue that drops it? lmao Here is The Wall Street Journal's news division reality-checking the report its own opinion side published