You don't seem to respect that no indication of the slightest corruption around the Biden-Ukraine smear has ever been found, either by the hoards of international investigative media in Ukraine from the Russian invasion in 2014 to present or by the official investigations.

Of course there's no conflict between speaking that truth and Warren's ethical standards. They're the same as Biden's.

You might want to reread the post as an answer to unreasonable demands on Warren as posted by others.

Biden’s candidacy and smear his reputation through soliciting a foreign country to investigate him when it is clear he does so for political reasons.

Other candidates have done so. Biden defended Harris as did her other rivals against Trump’s racist
attacks. It would not have been enough for them to call out Trump’s racism and leave out the fact that Harris was the target of his attack.

There is nothing unreasonable about calling upon Warren to contribute to the show of unity other candidates have been well able to make.

Your post suggests Biden had a corrupt intent in trying to eliminate a corrupt prosecutor the international community and the Obama administration wanted out of the way for his obstruction. It is clear that Biden’s business in this regard had nothing to do with protecting his son.

I am quite sure Warren is aware that Trump has no good reason other than political self-interest to
pursue Biden.

chip on your shoulder.

Read how RW media is framing the Hunter issue to attack Warren. I didn’t invent this, it is in those links I posted.

RW media is trying to get Warren to slip up so they can either accuse her of being a hypocrite re her anti-corruption platform, or grab a juicy sound bite they can twist up to use against Biden and his son.

Stop pretending that these demands on Warren constantly being fronted here at DU are reasonable and genuine when they most certainly are neither.

IMO you and others WANT Warren to slip up so you have something to crow about. That’s the difference between us. I want Biden to do well, no matter what, he has a good chance to be our nominee. I don’t craft post after post demanding he perform to unreasonable desires fueled by personal ego.

we are reading the same OP.

Hunter Biden.” How disingenuous. DUers have focused on defending Joe Biden against a specific baseless claim Trump has made on behalf of which he committed an impeachable offense.

That the OP implies Biden is corrupt comes in this part:

“Those here demanding all candidates adamantly defend everything about the Hunter Biden issue, even the parts they disagree with, are just wrongheaded when it obviously conflicts with the comprehensive anti-corruption platform as submitted by Warren. “

Defending Joe Biden against Trump’s attack on him should not conflict with Warren’s anti-corruption platform. The OP doth defend her to too far an extent. I doubt she would beg off using this excuse.

Chris Heinz. Chris Heinz acted completely ethically when he dissolved his partnership with Hunter, NOT because Hunter was going to do anything illegal or corrupt, but because of the APPEARANCE of not being an ethical arrangement. Chris knew that deal had the potential to be used to smear his stepfather, John Kerry. He TOLD Hunter this straight up, and Hunter ignored his warning.

You are twisting what was posted into the straw man that you want to fight instead of the facts as they are. No one has said Hunter acted corruptly or illegally.

Warren is being deft in the face of these attempts by RW media and mindful of Biden’s innocence of wrongdoing. The specific demands on her are plain old stupid even though some of the folks think they are being clever.

Is it your position that Chris Heinz was wrong to dissolve the partnership with Hunter or that Chris was being too overly cautious in protecting his Sec of State stepfather from even the APPEARANCE of impropriety?

Biden if she feels that the issue of Hunter Biden’s position is just too dicey for a candidate running against government corruption. All the candidates are anti-corruption and have managed to defend Joe Biden against this corrupt president.

However, I will make note of her caution as an anti-corruption crusader.

that don’t allow government officials or family members to participate in deals that connect in any way to the office held, or even the APPEARANCE that it is due in any part to the held office.

The RW picked up on her strict guidelines and that is why they have been pummeling her about Hunter.

and Hunter Biden by not falling for RW attempts to smear them both.

Sad that you are so entrenched in your personal bias against Warren that you can’t even see that she is staying true to her anti-corruption platform AND deftly sidestepping RW attempts to use her platform to ensnarethe Bidens.

No graciousness, no gratitude.

up for Joe. Just your logic, your justification for her not to do so, tickles me in its sincerity and the lengths it goes to.

I can’t speak for Biden.

Maybe he is very grateful.

In any case, you have her back.

including on his calling on a foreign country to help him in 2020. THAT is the right thing.

Getting out multiple messages simultaneously is extremely difficult. Here, to make you happy, would she have to make all the following points:

1) Trump's actions on this are impeachable. (My opinion - She has done this.)
2) Joe Biden and the Obama administration acted to reduce corruption in Ukraine and nothing Biden did was against fighting corruption to help his son. (My opinion - Here - if she believes that she could state that she would work to redouble the Obama administration's effort to fight corruption throughout the world. (John Kerry alone gave prominent speeches on how that corruption was impeding the progress to democracy in many many countries.)
3) Hunter Biden did nothing illegal or wrong --- I think she should avoid this unless acted directly. If asked directly, succinctly say that there is no indication he broke either US or Ukrainian law.

Hunter Biden is a liability for Joe Biden. This might be Biden's moment for a "Reverend Wright" moment. He may need to say that he was not happy with Hunter Biden's action, but that it had no bearing on his actions as Obama's VP - fulfilling Obama's agenda with no regards to how it could impact his son. It would be great if he then bought into Warren's anti-corruption agenda.

PS If you think that Warren should say that Hunter Biden's actions were not wrong, ask yourself if you would not have preferred Hunter Biden, like Chris Heinz, NOT taking that position because it could look wrong?

That's not fair. His actions left him wide open to conflict of interest questions. And he should have known that.

But she's not attacking either Biden -- she's putting the focus on Team Trump's crimes, which is where it should be.

of rehab for drugs and alcohol for decades, and he knew that accepting an overly well-paid position on the board of this company would raise questions embarrassing his father.

THAT's not what this is about, though, is it? It about VP Joe Biden. It's ALL about smearing Joe Biden by claiming his son's doesn't-look-good behavior is corruption Warren is above.

An absurd attempt at false equivalency in that last sentence. She had many chances over the years to go to the dark side and instead for decades now has been fighting the corruption of our government by big special interests. Anyone who wants to look at the records of Warren and Biden can clearly see the differences in their approach to powerful corporate interests.

her to slip up on the Hunter Biden issues so she can be quickly labeled a hypocrite by the RW media machine.

She’s being deft in avoiding right wing traps meant to garner a sound bite from Miss Anti-corruption that they can either twist against her or twist against Biden. Her deftness in sidestepping these traps just isn’t enough for some here.

privacy rights of Americans.

She should sit down with Zuckerberg and others who want to change the vulnerable communications and economic positions that both Wall St and Washington's "tricks and traps" keep Americans stuck and suffering with.

Before he makes his own run for president.

Why sit with the devil?

and threaten bad guys while not protecting milions upon millions' privacy. Not good governance.

She's mistaken because she hasn't seen the whole picture. Here's a previous thread about what Zuckerberg is trying to do to help.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212544439

Here's the current state of "blaming the platform" for the worst that humans use it for:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20191002/23130843110/doj-using-fosta-playbook-to-attack-encryption.shtml?fbclid=IwAR0jIWuLsH_Nc5JdnmEyE_Mh9sPQQlhogYkgEZTsOiQvuJgR0mVmufxkESU

She's taught law; she's taken the right moves on financial and economic Big Players, but in this case, she's wrong. She's not tackled law enforcement issues, and needs to learn more.

(Forget the Hunter Biden bullshit. She's got no duty to help Biden when Biden doesn't want or expect it.)

She still should meet with various Silicon Valley heads, learn, get a clearer picture of how to tackle law enforcement. It's really not their job to do the enforcement work of this government, and she can work out a plan for that. Sit downs with Jaron Lanier and Mark Zuckerberg would be a good start.

Yeah, no, not buying it today or any other day.

Zuckerberg isn't interested in trying to help anyone but himself.

my links, or you'd see what Zuckerberg's up against with Barr and the government.

If you're against Z's plan to increase user privacy, then you're not thinking about the benefits to millions of us in the US any more than she is. Warren, herself, hasn't read into this issue, and all I'm saying is that she should be.

The privacy uses of Facebook are more important to millions than is the surveillance Barr and the FBI want to keep using. They have all the old tools of law enforcement at their disposal, and I think they should use those, instead of making Facebook their surveillance tool.

Please read the links I posted. I've never cared for Zuckerberg, but on this privacy issue, he's right.

Warren has NOT attacked Joe Biden on this. Nor has she said that Hunter Biden did anything wrong.

Way before this was an issue, Warren has made government corruption a major issue. This is something at her core. Limiting her comments to what TRUMP HAS DONE WRONG and saying that Joe Biden's action was consistent with Obama's anti corruption effort in Ukraine is exactly where she should be.

Given that her position is that a Warren administration would work to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest - close to the words used by Chris Heinz for his ending his involvement with both Hunter Biden and Devon Archer, she obviously should not be expected to defend Hunter Biden's decision to take that position. I realize that Hunter Biden is an adult (not even a young adult) and that if this was what he wanted to do, there was nothing that Joe Biden could do to prevent, Hunter, an American citizen with no governmental job from taking this job. The optics, unfortunately, are terrible.

At this point, Joe Biden is NOT the nominee. Warren could be the nominee. If Warren is the nominee, it would cloud her strong anti-corruption message against the infinitely more corrupt Donald Trump. (I still think it is possible that the Qatar boycott that ended when they bailed Jared out is far far more damning - as are other Trump family actions.) Warren should NOT give the Republicans a way to claim that she was ok with "swamp behavior" by Democrats.

If Biden becomes the nominee, THEN Warren would likely be one of the people who can make the points that Joe Biden did nothing because of his sons position, did not advocate for his son getting that job, and that Hunter's actions were all legal under both US and Ukrainian law. Joe Biden would then do well by taking up Warren's suggestions on ending corruption - even as I doubt there is a legal way to prevent family members, including his,his VPs or his cabinet's from taking these lucrative positions that will be offered by companies thinking it buys access. Realistically, even a strong statement that could be put out whenever there is something like this saying that it does not change administration positions would likely not stop companies - especially in corrupt countries from still believing it does.

Yours would make the far better OP.

Your clarity shines through. I hope you post this so ALL can of us can get on the same clearminded page about this.

Chris Heinz was very clear to Hunter Biden about dissolving their partnership, and did the right thing by contacting State Department aides to alert them that Hunter Biden had sent out a press release about joining the board of Burisma. It was obvious to him that it would be red meat for conservative dogs if did likewise, and that Kerry would have to recuse himself from any involvement in Ukrainian negotiations - particularly on the issue of corruption - to avoid the appearance of a conflict.

If Warren were to contradict her anti-corruption platform and defend Hunter Biden's action, which are clearly tied up to 18 U.S.C. § 208 of US conflict of interest laws, it would make it quite easy for Trump and his flying monkeys to muddy the waters and say everybody in Washington is guilty of corruption.

There was already an article from the RW rag the Washington Examiner (I won't give the scum a link) that delighted in the fact that Warren was flustered by a direct question about Hunter Biden. They would love nothing more than to throw a little mud on the newly emerging frontrunner so they can say, "See? Everybody's got some mud on them!!"

Lays it all out clearly for all of us going FORWARD on this current story and the issue itself. The whole story can be turned against Trump, his kids, and all Republicans if we get a clear grip on it as fairminded Democrats.

I know I don’t have the talent needed to do that.

You're doing a great job!

I have been bowing to karyn’s clearheaded posting for over a decade, and I am not going to stop now.

Seriously, you both made points that most of us haven’t considered. They should be OPs, not lost down here.

Last edited Mon Oct 7, 2019, 08:24 AM - Edit history (1)

Of both Bidens is wrong including great info on Warren's position on this.

but 'poor Elizabeth Warren' is really the victim because some have suggested a:

An attack on one is an attack on all stance from our Democratic candidates.

Somehow, the suggestion our candidates stand together against the Trumpian smear machine represents an attack on Warren's anti-corruption plan.

And then, the PROOF of all this draws from right-wing publications which go out of their way to criticize Warren, have the nerve to write hit pieces on her campaign.

Welcome to the beginnings of the 2020 election in all its ugly, sleazy beauty.

Warren is taking heat because she's nipping at the heels of Joe Biden's frontrunner status. Republicans are stirring the pot because that's what they do. And the biggest gift we can give them is eating our own. Which is why I've said multiple times:

An attack on one is an attack on all.

This is just the opening round. Gird your loins because it's going to get far worse.

She respond the WAY they want her to respond instead of her approach. Warren is answering deftly and some folks here are feeling dissatisfied with her answers.

She has good reasons to stay true to herself AND to not giving right wing smear machine the attack on Biden they want her to make.

Seems some of y’all find offense in her approach. Or WANT to.

Should Biden become the nominee, it will be Warren he turns to represent him on this and other matters, so get your bile against her and her approach to these issues out now here at DU, if it makes you feel happy.

But if you think these attacks are bad coming from Republicans? You're going to be horrified as we close in on the primaries.

No one is suggesting Warren compromise herself on her anti-corruption plans or defend Hunter Biden to the death. The suggestion is to recognize and acknowledge that the attacks, be they against the Biden's or Elizabeth Warren, are being manufactured in Republican fever swamps.

Hello? We are stronger together than fighting amongst ourselves. Which is why I continue to say:

An attack on one is an attack on all

And you're pretty much proving my point because this finger pointing within our own house? It doesn't help anyone.

In the trenches battling GOP before there even were internet sites like this.

Police your side on this, please. This post was a direct response to the constant sniping at Warren for no real purpose.

We're all Democrats, are we not?

And if we're not on the same side, we'll lose in 2020 regardless of who takes the nomination. See 2016 as a reference.

I have posted positively and supportively of other candidates, yet any of my posts defending Warren from the unnecessary attacks on her are met with a wave of further attacks on her.

You may see that as fair, but, I do not.

Someone here would want Warren to revise her views on corruption. The content actually doesn't match the headline. Seems like it's little more than the spreading of right wing propaganda because of that lack of connection.

I posted those links to show how RW machine is trying to use the Hunter Biden story to attack Warren’s positions on anti-corruption as hypocritical. In my view her answers have been deft. Others want to hear what they want to hear and have not been shy about posting their animosity towards her.

Pretty sure if I was a RW troll I would have been outed 99,000 posts ago.