Report: Hunter Biden Secretly Traveled on Air Force Two to Foreign Countries at Least Eight Times While Joe was V.P.

During Joe Biden’s time as vice president, his son Hunter flew overseas with him at least eight times, Fox News’ Jesse Watters reported Monday night.

The younger Biden avoided scrutiny by taking the back staircase off of Air Force Two and by not accompanying his father outside on the tarmac. However, raw news footage of those trips shows Hunter Biden being shuttled around in the vice presidential motorcade in Germany, Japan, South Korea, and other countries where the Biden clan allegedly had business interests.

Biden has insisted for years that he never talked to his son about business and never met Hunter’s business partners. He also falsely stated that his family never took money from China. But Hunter’s inclusion on so many foreign trips while Biden was vice president appears to be one more piece of evidence that the two were partners in the family’s influence-peddling enterprise.

“We didn’t know about [the trips] because Hunter didn’t walk down the tarmac with his father,” Watters said. “It looks like Hunter snuck out of the jet through the back staircase.” The “Primetime” host explained that because the back staircase is primarily used by the media, “this means the press knew Joe Biden was flying his son overseas and hiding it and they didn’t report it.”

“Most of the time, Hunter would already be in the limo by the time Joe Biden got off the plane. Hunter did his best to slink into the back seat,” Watters added.

The footage is “indisputable evidence that Hunter Biden was using Air Force 2 as business travel,” Watters said. “Taxpayers funded Hunter’s business travel so the Biden family could sneak around the world and get rich.”

Watters aired news footage showing Joe and Jill Biden getting into a limo in Berlin, Germany in February of 2013. Not far behind them was Hunter Biden.

“What was Hunter doing in Germany?” the Fox host asked. “Well, Joe was there for the Munich Security Conference, that’s the same security conference that took the lead role in the Ukraine War, and at this conference, China was a major issue,” Watters explained. “Ironically, it was those two countries that ended up paying Hunter Biden.”

The 2013 Munich Security Conference also held a panel on energy, entitled: THE AMERICAN OIL & GAS BONANZA: THE CHANGING GEOPOLITICS OF ENERGY. The panel included energy experts from Berlin, Brussels, Moscow, and Washington, D.C. A year later, Hunter joined the board of Burisma Holdings, then-Ukraine’s largest private gas producer, earning $83,333 a month for a no-show position.

A few months after the trip to Germany, Hunter Biden accompanied his father on a trip to Asia, stopping first in Japan, according to Watters.

“No sign of Hunter on the tarmac, but somehow, there he is in the back of the limo,” the Fox host said, as the news footage showed Hunter, again, accompanying his dad in the vice presidential motorcade.

“What’s he doing in Japan?” Watters asked. “We don’t know. And the next day, Air Force Two took Joe and Hunter to China—the infamous trip where Joe Biden shook hands with a Chinese client in the lobby of a Beijing hotel. After that handshake, a $20 million deal materialized between China and the Biden clan.”

The then-vice president had flown to Beijing for a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, and Hunter had insisted on joining his father on the trip, according to The New Yorker.

Hunter arranged to have his business partner Jonathan Li, who ran Chinese private-equity fund Bohai Capital, shake Joe’s hand in the lobby of his hotel. Hunter Biden and Li met privately after the photo op.

A day after the China china trip, Hunter was seen in the vice presidential limo with his dad in South Korea. Again, there was no footage of Hunter getting off the plane, just him materializing in the motorcade later. Next Hunter flew to the Philippines under the auspices of...

Morning Mistress

 

The 90 Miles Mystery Video: Nyctophilia Edition #1485

Before You Click On The "Read More" Link, 

Suggestions For Future Videos? 

Email me.

Combine These Three Lines:

Line1:   mikemiles

Line2:   @

Line3:    protonmail.com

Are You Digging The Mystery Vibe?

Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.

If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.  

Please Leave Silently Into The Night......

The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #2182

You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside? 

It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific, 

from the beautiful to the repugnant, 

from the mysterious to the familiar.

If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed, 

you could be inspired, you could be appalled. 

This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended. 

You have been warned.

Hot Pick Of The Late Night

 

Girls With Guns

The UN is Building a “Digital Army” To Fight What it Calls “Deadly Disinformation”

Another global organization trying to police speech.

The UN is tripling down on its role as an important global player in the “fight against online misinformation” and amplification of the narrative of a supposedly serious threat this allegedly new phenomenon brings to humankind.

Thus UN peacekeepers are adding another task to the duties the member-states fund when they approve their missions meant to help people and countries devastated by war and other disasters: they are now also “building a digital army.”

And according to a writeup on the UN website, “misinformation” is viewed by the world organization in exceedingly alarmist terms as, “deadly,” and posing “existential” risk to such core building blocks of modern societies as democratic institutions and fundamental human rights.

They really do make that connection, verbatim. And they now use the term “war” and “battlefield” to describe (mis)information and other goings on in the media, too.

We’ve heard this before, of course, from the Biden administration regarding the Covid vaccines/pandemic – but the identical wording may or may not be a coincidence.

In order to justify as much as it can this considerable shift in policy and focus from UN’s traditional operations and purpose, the UN article doesn’t talk only about things like undermining epidemic(s)-containing efforts, protecting scientific truths and facts (and, as recent experience has shown, “facts” as well ), and the like.

To prop up the argument, it is claimed that the peacekeeping work itself, and the safety and lives of peacekeepers are also falling victim to “large scale misinformation.”

The UN’s solutions: effectively testing “proactive” approaches to the problem they defined, and doing this in a number of war-torn African countries.

Leading the charge seems to be the UN mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, known as MONUSCO (a French-language acronym).

Then there’s something called the UN Verified initiative, which offers a course free of charge that is supposed to “educate” people in these physically dangerous places on how to keep themselves safe from – online “misinformation.”

This effort expands on several basic topics, including how to recognize “disinformation,” and the UN will also tell you why it is being spread.

Another one is to be able to discern emotional, dramatic, and...

Visage à trois #1638

Three Videos For Your Viewing Pleasure:

Three Additional Bonus Videos:

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #1292

 

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #1290

Visage à trois #1637

Three Videos For Your Viewing Pleasure:

Three Additional Bonus Videos:

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #1291

 

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #1290

Secret Letter to CDC: Top Epidemiologist Suggested Scientific Misrepresentation Used to Support Mask Narrative

“The story of official masking guidance should trouble the American public. Recall that Dr. Fauci at first said there was no need for masks..."

Documents recently obtained from the National Institutes of Health suggest public health officials used inaccurate information and misrepresented medical research to advance their policy objective that masks prevent severe COVID-19 and virus transmission—despite opposing scientific evidence received from experts.

In a recently obtained letter (pdf) sent in November 2021 to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), top epidemiologist Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, and seven colleagues informed the agency it was promoting flawed data and excluding data that did not reinforce their narrative.

The letter warned the agency that misrepresenting data on trusted websites such as the CDC and the COVID-19 Real-Time Learning Network—jointly created by the CDC and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)—would “damage the credibility of science,” endanger public trust by “misrepresenting the evidence,” and give the public “false expectations” masking would protect them from the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.

“We believe the information and recommendations as provided may actually put an individual at increased risk of becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2 and for them to experience a serious or even life-threatening infection,” Mr. Osterhom wrote.

The authors urged the IDSA to remove the suggestion that masking prevents severe disease from its website and asked the CDC to reconsider its statements about the “efficacy of masks and face coverings for preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2.”

Osterholm also noted a pattern of selectively choosing data that supported the desired narrative that masks prevent severe COVID-19 disease and transmission—claims he said are unsupported by the scientific evidence provided by the CDC and IDSA on their websites.

The IDSA “Masks and Face Coverings for the Public” webpage appears to “focus on the strengths of studies that support its conclusions while ignoring their shortcomings of study design,” Mr. Osterholm wrote. “Studies that do not support its perspective are similarly downplayed.”

The COVID-19 Real-Time Learning Network was created in 2020 to share “accurate, timely information about COVID-19.” According to its website, the IDSA’s editorial team of infectious disease and public health experts synthesize clinical guidance, identify emerging scientific consensus and areas of ongoing uncertainty, and tackle “misconceptions and disinformation.”

Although partly funded by the CDC, the IDSA collaborates with numerous medical professional organizations that publish medical journals and make recommendations based on agency guidance, including the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American College of Physicians, the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists.

The letter was sent to CDC officials, the associate medical and associate digital editors of the COVID-19 Real-Time Learning Network, and IDSA board members, which included Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the former director of the CDC during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Experts Ask CDC and IDSA to Address ‘Serious Errors’ on Website

In his letter to the CDC, Mr. Osterholm asked the CDC and IDSA to address the “serious errors” published on its website regarding the efficacy of masks as soon as possible and strongly urged the IDSA to remove the suggestion that masking prevents severe COVID-19 from its website and a podcast where such “irresponsible claims were made.”

Furthermore, Mr. Osterholm recommended the IDSA reconsider statements about the efficacy of masks and coverings for preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, noting the IDSA’s website falsely suggests evidence of mask efficacy has strengthened throughout the pandemic.

“We do not agree that the evidence for their efficacy has strengthened throughout the pandemic, as the website suggests,” Mr. Osterholm said. “In fact, contrary to the conclusion on this website, the November 2020 Cochrane Review cited states this: ‘Compared with wearing no mask, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness (9 studies; 3,507 people); and probably makes no difference in how many people have flu confirmed by...