NY Post has obtained some Hunter Biden emails v3 "slightly less salacious"

[Fox by the Sea]

The people behind the Hunter Biden shit don’t exist. The lead author is a computer generated AI out of Switzerland. Or at least the image for this person.

what stage of grief is this?

 

[andnowweknow]

I'm sorry but you are woefully underinformed on the financial strategies of the wealthy. Billionaires do indeed take out loans backed by personal assets. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that the richer the person is, the MORE LIKELY they are to back a loan with personal assets (due to a number of factors, but a big one being that they typically tend to be comparatively "cash poor".

Take billionaire John Paulson (according to reuters, his net worth $11.4B). "Billionaire investor John Paulson has put up part of his personal fortune as collateral to back a credit line for his $18 billion hedge fund Paulson & Co., a government filing shows."

"It is not unusual for wealthy individuals to pledge part of the their fortune to secure credit lines. In 2014 Goldman Sachs, for example, provided a credit line to billionaire investor Steven A. Cohen, who pledged his massive art collection as collateral."
[SOURCE: https://fr.reuters.com/article/us-hedgefunds-paulson-idUSKCN0V423R]

Heck, Elon Musk has recently been widely reported, as have many other billionaires, to be "cash poor". Typically, these billionaires have huge stock portfolios and thus can use their personally owned stock as collateral (much like Musk, Zuckerberg, Bezos, etc. have all done). There's essentially no difference between putting up stock as collateral as say real estate, artwork, cars, etc. as all are just personal assets. The biggest difference is the liquidity of some assets versus others, but that's a whole other discussion.

It's also very common (and has been for quite awhile) in tech industry investing as there are a lot of "paper wealth" people that are illiquid (like if you own a lot of shares of a private company that's worth billions, but don't want to sell your ownership equity, and there is no stock to be sold because it's pre-IPO).

"Chase says one of the biggest demands among his clients is for the ability to borrow against pre-IPO stock. Sometimes Morgan Stanley is able to structure loans against this stock; other times Chase combs his clients' holdings for other collateral to lend against."
[SOURCE: https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoin...-boom-rich-wealth-management/?sh=67111a866f09 - That's a good article to read to get a basic grasp of just how prevalent "wealth loans" are ($70B in 2017 at just Morgan Stanley alone. Goldman Sachs has gone from $0 to $30B in funded loans to the uber wealthy just over the last 10 years or so)]

Rich people borrow, rather than pay "cash" because it's a good strategy for multiple reasons:
1. When you’re borrowing to finance an investment, the idea is that that same investment will pay back the loan, and leave you with your accumulated wealth untouched. Another reason to borrow is to avoid digging into your savings or avoid having to give up on valuable assets.
2. When you take out a loan, you're not selling your assets — you’re borrowing against them. This basically means that you are putting to good use the value that you own, without losing it.
3. By securing the loan with valuable assets, you typically will get a better rate and/or terms. Even though the person could get the loan without collateral, by securing the loan they can procure better loan terms (which can make a HUGE difference because the size of the loans they take are so large)

TL/DR: It's surprisingly common for the uber rich to get loans that are backed by their personal assets, as then they don't have to sell the asset.

That's great and I appreciate the info...one small problem. The banks forced Trump to personally guarantee the loan...because he's a serial loan default savant.

 

[Strychnine]

The laptop emails have nothing to do with this.

Yeah, let's just ignore that the "investigator" is a fable and that Hunter Biden (who is NOT running for Pres. BTW) is (according to the "investigation) is jet setting from coast to coast to drop off laptops like he was Johnny Appleseed.

I'm SURE that this is all on the up and up!

 

[ElKarlo]

Don't know why it's even being discussed, to be honest. It's not related to this story.

I don't recall anybody posting about it when it came out, so it was obviously only a "thing" within niche circles. Like QAnon or whatever. I'm sure there's a lot of crap like this in CT nutjob circles.

The Hunter Biden laptop story is a separate one, and even the NBC article acknowledges that the allegations remain "unverified" (although some have been verified already).

Seems only the right can have whacky CTs. This dossier and other nonsense is definitely out there and doesn't fit in here at all and it's sad it being reported like it's legitimate and related.

 

[ElKarlo]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EliTDS8X0AMK558?format=jpg&name=small



I know it's much easier to just look at joes tax returns, than to try and follow all of this

Yeah, these things are complicated and take a while. Goldfish can't understand these things. Thing someone to an LLC via another one is difficult and takes time. Plus under the table deals like this add to the problems

 

[ElKarlo]

The laptop emails have nothing to do with this.

Yep it's a pointless distraction at best.

 

[Ophydian]

what stage of grief is this?

IDK but it’s my interpretation of the video since someone asked for cliffs. Maybe you should watch the video?

 

[jeremyemilio]

Good riddance. Greenwald's both-siderism is cancer to the left.

Some people are more interested in principals and the truth than "sides."

Go figure.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Some people are more interested in principals and the truth than "sides."

Go figure.

You are defending the assertion by Greenwald that four years of Biden will be equally as damaging to the progressive cause as four more years of Trump. Does that make you feel "principled"? Because it should only make you feel stupid.

 

[jeremyemilio]

I think I got cancer reading this post. Is both-siderism leftinese for critical thinker?

Both-siderism demonstrates the absence of critical thinking. Maybe you're thinking of non-partisanship.

Let me try to clear this up (as I understand it, of course).

All people accused of "both-siderism" do, indeed, display non-partisan traits. But not all non-partisans get accused of "both-siderism."

That's because "both-siderism" is a derogatory buzzword used to specifically to describe people with principles.

If I believe in the principle of free speech, regardless of whether I agree with the politics of the speaker, that's now "both-siderism."

If I take a principled stance against violence, regardless of whether I agree with the politics of the person committing the violence, or of the victim of the violence, that's also now "both-siderism."

If I take a principled stance that each person should be judged based on their own merit and actions, rather than as a member of some demographic to which they belong, regardless of what I think of the majority political or social positions of said group, that too is "both-siderism."

If I take a principled stance against corruption, regardless of the politics of the people involved in said corruption, you guessed it... "both-siderism."

Non-partisans may or may not be principled. But it's only the ones who are that get accused of "both-siderism."

 

[jeremyemilio]

You are defending the assertion by Greenwald that four years of Biden will be equally as damaging to the progressive cause as four more years of Trump. Does that make you feel "principled"? Because it should only make you feel stupid.

I am defending his right to express his opinion.

Also defending the truth of his assertion that the media has covered this story completely differently than they would have had the circumstances been different or had the players been reversed.

Also absolutely not going to fake that I'm oblivious to the irony of some "reporters" feeling the story itself didn't have enough corroborating evidence to be newsworthy and then those same reporters being entirely comfortable about reporting the story as a Russian Disinformation campaign, with zero evidence.

That makes me feel principled.

 

[ElKarlo]

Some people are more interested in principals and the truth than "sides."

Go figure.

Some don't care as long as it benefits their side

 

[Low Test With da Best]

Oof, this could be getting worse...

 

[AgonyandIrony]

what stage of grief is this?

Shit, was dude spreading fake news?

 

[Mr Holmes]

Oof, this could be getting worse...

Lol I wonder if he still is using that password.

 

[Low Test With da Best]

Lol I wonder if he still is using that password.

Nah, prob Hunter03

 

[ElKarlo]

Oof, this could be getting worse...

Wow. Bumping this

 

[Clifford_Harris]

Lol I wonder if he still is using that password.

Lol @ hunter spending 21K on Webcam models.

Lol even more @ his card getting declined for a 129$ purchase.

Biden becoming VP seemingly fucked him up. Apparently Hunter was sober for 8 years prior to that. Could just be a coincidence though.

 

[ElKarlo]

Oof, this could be getting worse...

Btw

• Laptop also showed he spent $21,000 on one 'live cam' porn website.

Dude must be a Mayberryer

 

[ElKarlo]

Lol @ hunter spending 21K on Webcam models.

Lol even more @ his card getting declined for a 129$ purchase.

Biden becoming VP seemingly fucked him up. Apparently Hunter was sober for 8 years prior to that. Could just be a coincidence though.

Like a lot of lottery winners, suddenly getting s whole lot of money can mess up a lot of people