Connect with us


Paper Trail Shows Hunter Biden’s Ukraine Job Gave Company Access to Obama’s State Department

Records show that Hunter Biden’s job with a Ukrainian energy company led that company to gaining direct access to the U.S. State Department.



If you want a quid pro quo, newly released records seem to show that Hunter Biden’s job with a Ukrainian energy company led that company to gaining direct access and favorable treatment by Obama’s U.S. State Department.

So, what these records are showing is that Vice President Biden got his son a $3 million job with a Ukraine energy company, and then that company began receiving favorable treatment by the Department of State under Biden’s boss, Barack Obama.

If that isn’t a quid pro quo, what is?

The damning news comes from reporter John Solomon:

Trending: Trump Has Completely Revamped the 9th Circuit Court

Hunter Biden and his Ukrainian gas firm colleagues had multiple contacts with the Obama State Department during the 2016 election cycle, including one just a month before Vice President Joe Biden forced Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating his son’s company for corruption, newly released memos show.

During that February 2016 contact, a U.S. representative for Burisma Holdings sought a meeting with Undersecretary of State Catherine A. Novelli to discuss ending the corruption allegations against the Ukrainian firm where Hunter Biden worked as a board member, according to memos obtained under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. …
Hunter Biden’s name, in fact, was specifically invoked by the Burisma representative as a reason the State Department should help, according to a series of email exchanges among U.S. officials trying to arrange the meeting.

Here is a screenshot of a key email:

Along with other, similar connections reported by Solomon, the evidence seems clear that the Ukrainian company gave a vice president’s son 3 million bucks and then miraculously got access to the U.S. State Department.

Imagine that, huh?

All this is interesting since Hunter Biden had absolutely no knowledge about the energy industry, he did not speak Ukrainian, indeed, he never even visited the country! In fact, there is no evidence that Hunter Biden ever actually did anything FOR Burisma other than lend his name to the company’s list of board members. And yet, he got a 3 million-dollar job with a Ukrainian energy company. And then that company suddenly got favorable treatment from Obama’s government.

If that isn’t corruption… what is?

Amazing, isn’t it?

What is more amazing?

That the media won’t even talk about this.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.



Speaker Pelosi Says She Won’t Force Moderate Democrats to Vote for Impeachment

Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has let her caucus know that she won’t bind all Democrats to vote for impeachment.



Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has let her caucus know that she won’t bind all Democrats to vote for impeachment after rumors spread of perhaps a dozen Democrats who may defect from the party line and vote against impeachment.

Speaker Pelosi (D, CA) said she will not pressure the rank-and-file to vote her way on impeachment.

“I have no message to them. We are not whipping this legislation, nor would we ever with something like this,” Pelosi told reporters in the Capitol according to The Hill. “They’ll make their own decisions. I don’t say anything to them.”

House Democrats are largely for the illicit impeachment gambit, but a growing number of Democrats elected in districts that voted for Donald Trump in 2016 are expressing concern that voting for impeachment would endanger their re-election campaigns.

So far, only two House Democrats have openly defied impeachment, Both Rep. Jeff Van Drew (D-N.J.) and Collin C. Peterson (D-Minn.) voted against the impeachment inquiry rules in September and they are expected to also vote no when the final vote on impeaching Trump is called.

But Reps. Kendra Horn of Oklahoma, Lucy McBath of Georgia, Joe Cunningham of South Carolina, Michigan’s Elissa Slotkin, Ben McAdams of Utah, and maybe a few others, may also vote no when the final vote is called.

Several others may also jump ship at the last second, according to analysts.

Ultimately, Speaker Pelosi could afford to lose 17 Democrats and still win a vote to impeach and analysts don’t see as many as 18 Democrats willing to buck the party.

Indeed, Pelosi is so sure of herself that she has told her team not to whip votes on the issue (Whipping votes is the practice of leadership pressuring rank-and-file members of the House to vote the way leadership wants).

“This is one of those issues where members have to come to their own conclusions; it’s just too consequential,” said Democrat Deputy Whip Rep. Daniel Kildee (D-Mich.). “I think this is one of those votes where people are going to be remembered for a long time for how they voted on it.”

Polls, though, still show that impeachment is not popular with any voting sector except Democrats. Both Republican and independent voters oppose impeaching the president.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading


AOC Compares Raising Children To Dog Breeding In A Bizarre Analogy



Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez compared paid family leave to dog breeding on Twitter and in congressional hearings, claiming that dogs are granted more time with their puppies than parents are given with their newborn babies.

“Uh, eight weeks,” AOC said with an attitude. “So, the market has decided that women and people who give birth deserve less time with their children than a dog and I think that that at its core has shown that the market has failed to treat people with dignity and with basic respect.”

“And so when that happens, I think it’s our job as the public to redefine the rules of society and to peep, and to treat people who give birth with the dignity that they deserve,” AOC concluded.

Here are her Twitter rants:
Twitter weighs in:
Continue Reading


Timeline of How Democrats and Obama’s Corrupt FBI Sabotaged Trump’s 2016 Election

Sharyl Attkisson has an extensive review of the way the Democrats tried to sabotage Trump’s 2016 election that is a must read.



Investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson has an extensive review of the way the Democrats tried to sabotage Trump’s 2016 election that is a must read.

Democrats have denied that any of them coordinated with Ukraine to meddle in the Trump campaign and the U.S. elections, but facts seem to say otherwise.

Attkisson laid out the whole month-by-month timeline and her review sends a disturbing signal of just how corrupt the Democrats really are.

The reporter points out, “the alleged efforts by Democrats and Ukraine to ‘sabotage’ the Trump campaign in 2016 did impact the race, even though Trump won in the end.”

The first bit of evidence comes in the actions of Democrat operative Alexandra Chalupa.

Democrats have repeatedly claimed the reporting on Chalupa, her work for the DNC, her meetings with Ukrainians, and her meetings with reporters in Ukraine and the U.S., is “debunked” and a “conspiracy theory.” In public accounts since the original news articles, Chalupa has claimed her role and intentions have been misrepresented.

A Ukrainian-American, Chalupa reportedly acknowledged in a 2017 interview with Politico that she worked as a consultant for the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 campaign to publicly expose Trump campaign aide Paul Manafort’s links to pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine.

Chalupa has claimed that she was tracking Manafort since 2014, long before there was a Trump campaign. The FBI was also tracking Manafort during that time, again, long before he worked for Trump.

This is where Ukraine came in:

The Ukrainian embassy proceeded to work “directly with reporters researching Trump, Manafort and Russia to point them in the right directions,” according to an embassy official (though other officials later deny engaging in election-related activities.)

Then the DNC got in on the action:

On March 30, 2016, Chalupa reportedly briefed Democratic National Committee (DNC) staff on alleged Russian ties to Manafort and Trump. It was the day after the Trump campaign hired Manafort to manage the July Republican convention.

With the “DNC’s encouragement,” Chalupa reportedly asked the Ukrainian embassy to arrange a meeting with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to discuss Manafort’s lobbying for Ukraine’s former president Viktor Yanukovych. The embassy reportedly declined to arrange the meeting but became “helpful” in trading info and leads, according to Politico’s reporting.

Attkisson went on to note that Ukrainian embassy officials and Chalupa “coordinat[ed] an investigation with the Hillary team” into Manafort, according to a source in Politico. This effort reportedly included working with U.S. media.

Well. The Democrats have been screeching about “collusion” to affect the U.S. election for three years, now.

Turns out Democrats are right… only it was the Democrats who were doing the colluding, not Trump.

If you want the full timeline, check out Attkisson’s timeline. It has much, much more.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading


MARK LEVIN: The Next Democrat President Must be Impeached

“I am of the opinion that the next Democrat president must be impeached. That’s the only way to stop this,” Mark Levin wrote last week.



“I am of the opinion that the next Democrat president must be impeached. That’s the only way to stop this,” constitutional expert and talk show host Mark Levin wrote last week.

Levin goes on to lay out his excellent reasoning for impeaching a president who isn’t even known yet…

If the Republicans control the House, they must impeach the next Democrat President to ensure this sort of thing is never repeated.

The next Democrat President must be impeached? What are grounds? It doesn’t matter.

With Trump, they were talking impeachment when he was a candidate. They were talking impeachment the day he got elected. I told you, this is all sham. It’s a scam. It’s a ruse.

The only way to stop them is to turn the political and impeachment guns on them.

The next Democrat president must be impeached.

The Republican Congress can take a page from Nadler, from Waters, from Engel, from Schiff and all the rest.

They should issue scores and scores of subpoenas. Scores of subpoenas, for financial information, for bank records, for tax information; all kinds of communications with, around and about the president; issue subpoenas for the president’s White House Counsel, Chief of Staff, National Security Adviser, and other people who are closest to the president so he ceases to function.

You want to burden this Democrat president as much as possible. You want to undermine him as much as possible.

And you can wave around the Pelosi doctrine, the Schiff doctrine, the Nadler doctrine, and all the rest of them. Use their rules and take him down.

Do the Republicans have the guts to do so? I doubt it, but they must.

It is the only way to fix the Constitutional order when it comes to impeachment, because the Democrats are creating this precedent.

Now let them eat it.

Joe Biden would be the perfect Democrat president to be impeached.

Start subpoenaing all of his records; all of his phone calls with Ukraine, all of his phone calls with Red China.

You bring Hunter Biden in for 30 hours of secret testimony, like they brought Don Jr. in.

You create a special counsel, the way they created a special counsel against President Trump.

You demand Joe Biden testify in person and, when he refuses, you claim he has something to hide.

Imagine using their tools and their rhetoric against their guy. Or gal, it could be Elizabeth Warren, another liar. She’s another one with interesting finances. Well, we want to get to the bottom of it.

The next Democrat president must be impeached.

And Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff and Nadler and the others; CNN, the Washington Post, the New York Times, ABC and the others; they have all laid the foundation.

And the only way to stop this is to destroy their foundation with their guy or their lady.

He is right, as always.

Levin is host of a highly popular radio talk show as well as Internet entrepreneur and Fox News host. He can be found at

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading


Rep Al Green: Impeachment Must Address The Original Sin Of Slavery

You just can’t make this stuff up.



Al Green: Impeachment Must Address The Original Sin Of Slavery

On MSNBC’s “Weekends,” Rep. Al Green (D-TX) said the issues of slavery and racism needed to be addressed in the impeachment of President Donald Trump.

When asked about impeachment articles, Rep. Al Green said: “I believe that the American people understand that this is something that we must do at this point. I don’t speak for all of the American people. About a majority seem to think so. And I think that we’re moving forward in a very cautious and prudent way, which is what is expected. But I also think that if we don’t include some of the things that are important to people of color, then I think that our business won’t be finished. I do believe, ma’am, that we have to deal with the original sin. We have to deal with slavery. Slavery was the thing that put all of what President Trump has done lately into motion.”

Rep. Al Green continued: “The president has played on racism, and he’s used that as a weapon to galvanize a base of support, to mobilize people. We cannot overlook what happened when he came down the escalator and just demeaned people of color — when he talked about the s-hole countries. He has found a way to use ugly words to his benefit and to the detriment of the people who are the object of his words.”

Rep. Al Green added: “So I appreciate whatever we will do, but until we deal with the issue of invidious discrimination as it relates to LGBTQ community, the antisemitism, the racism, the Islamophobia, the transphobia, and also the misogyny that he has exemplified, I don’t think our work is done.”

Slavery has existed worldwide for millennia. It has been abolished from America for over 150 years. No one in America has lived under ‘slavery.’ President Donald Trump had nothing to do with it.

Continue Reading


Democrats Say They’ll Impeach Trump All Over Again Even if He’s Re-Elected

Democrats are now saying that even if they impeach President Trump and the Senate does not remove him from office, they will impeach Trump all over again.



Leading Democrats are now saying that even if they impeach President Donald Trump and the Senate does not remove him from office, they will impeach Trump all over again, even if he is re-elected.

You read that right. Democrats say they will impeach Trump all over again even if he wins re-election.

These same ignoramuses are crowing this week that there is legally no limit to the number of times the House of Representatives can impeach the same president (if the Senate does not vote to convict and remove him), so they are vowing to keep impeaching Trump until his second term is up, or until the U.S. Senate finally votes to remove him from office.

(As a reminder, the way impeachment works is that the House of Representatives votes to impeach, but the trial then moves to the U.S. Senate to convict and remove him. In both past impeachments — Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998 — the U.S. Senate failed to convict and remove.)

This really is obscene, but Democrats intend to spend the next five years impeaching Trump. Over. And. Over. Again.

Per the Daily Wire:

Rep. Al Green (D-TX), who has long pushed for impeaching the president, told C-SPAN that there was “no limit” to the number of times that Democrats could impeach the president.

“A president can be impeached more than once,” Green advised. “So, we can do this, we can move forward with what we have on the table currently, we can take this before the Senate and we can still investigate other issues and when the president has committed additional offenses, and my suspicion is that he will, we can take those before the Senate.”

“There is no limit on the number of times the Senate can vote to convict or not a president, no limit to the number of times the House can vote to impeach or not a president,” Green continued. “So, my belief is that the speaker will probably say we’re going to move forward with what we have now, but we’re not going to end investigations and that there may be possible opportunities to do other things at a later time.”

Green’s proclamation was echoed by Neal Katyal, an acting solicitor general under former Democrat President Barack Obama.

Katyal tweeted: “[Important] note on future: If the Senate doesn’t vote to convict Trump, or tries to monkey w his trial, he could of course be retried in the new Senate should he win re-election. Double jeopardy protections do not apply. And Senators voting on impeachment in the next months know this.”

What we have here is proof positive that radical, anti-American, leftist, Democrats are admitting that the will of the people and elections mean nothing to them.

What a surprise.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading


Poll: Half of Sanders and Warren Supporters Reject Free Speech

In a shocking new poll, half of supporters of Senators Warren and Sanders oppose the American right of free speech.



In a shocking new poll, half of supporters of Senators Warren and Sanders oppose the American right of free speech.

One-quarter of upcoming voters say “offensive” speech should be banned in US, 24% said “not sure”

A new poll by The Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports finds voters are split on the issue of fundamental free speech.

When asked, “Should federal or state governments ban speech by individuals that a majority of Americans believes to be offensive, including speech considered to be racist or sexist,” 50% of voters said “no,” 27% said “yes,” and 24% were “not sure.”

It gets worse…

Further, 51% of those who say they have a “very favorable” view of Bernie Sanders said federal or state governments should “ban speech by individuals that a majority of Americans believes to be offensive, including speech considered to be racist or sexist.”

Even more disturbing, many of those who said certain kinds of “offensive” speech should be banned also said offenders should face harsh punishments. When asked if offenders should face jail time, 48% answered “yes,” 35% said “no,” and 17% answered “not sure.”

When asked if those who say offensive things should be barred from public office, 38% said “yes,” 44% said “no,” and 18% said “not sure.”

The poll has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. See the full results of the poll below, including some of the key data from the crosstabs, which you can review in more detail at Rasmussen Reports.

The Heartland Institute is a conservative think tank based in the Chicago, Illinois, suburbs.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider

Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Send this to a friend