You're right. Obviously Burisma gave Hunter the money because he has nice hair plugs, expecting nothing in return.
Do you say the same thing about Clarence Thomas? I mean, you don't have any evidence that Thomas receiving millions in gifts from a right wing billionaire while ruling in his favor has any connection!
CT violated the law by not disclosing his wife’s income. It was obvious to the world while she was working for the Heritage Foundation and he wrote “none” on his disclosure forms re: spouses income. Eventually the clamor was too embarrassing to SCOTUS. He amended about 11 yrs of disclosures. Then he slew of other not publicly known violations of the disclosure law. His benefactor refuses to disclose his gifts to Congress which has the authority of oversight.
To say 2 things are the same is another fallacy: false equivalency.
The slew of other not publicly known violations of of the disclosure law are the gifts which include lavish vacations.
Crowe refuses to respond to give over a list of his gifts which would need to include lavish vacations & other things.
To say being on a board and overcompensated according to Hunter Biden’s qualifications = CT’s violations of the law and his benefactors refusal to submit to Congressional oversight is a false equivalence. At a minimum, we have already seen evidence that CT violated the law.
You're right. Obviously Burisma gave Hunter the money because he has nice hair plugs, expecting nothing in return.
Do you say the same thing about Clarence Thomas? I mean, you don't have any evidence that Thomas receiving millions in gifts from a right wing billionaire while ruling in his favor has any connection!
CT violated the law by not disclosing his wife’s income. It was obvious to the world while she was working for the Heritage Foundation and he wrote “none” on his disclosure forms re: spouses income. Eventually the clamor was too embarrassing to SCOTUS. He amended about 11 yrs of disclosures. Then he slew of other not publicly known violations of the disclosure law. His benefactor refuses to disclose his gifts to Congress which has the authority of oversight.
To say 2 things are the same is another fallacy: false equivalency.
I see you avoid discussing what I actually said, which were the lavish vacations and other gifts slathered on Thomas by Crow.
But I guess it's easier to argue against something I didn't say
CT = Clarence Thomas. Crowe = his benefactor.
The slew of other not publicly known violations of of the disclosure law are the gifts which include lavish vacations.
Crowe refuses to respond to give over a list of his gifts which would need to include lavish vacations & other things.
To say being on a board and overcompensated according to Hunter Biden’s qualifications = CT’s violations of the law and his benefactors refusal to submit to Congressional oversight is a false equivalence. At a minimum, we have already seen evidence that CT violated the law.