View Post

Biden campaign says Burisma meeting not on ‘official schedule’

In Standard by NY PostLeave a Comment

This post was originally published on this site

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s campaign said Wednesday in a carefully worded statement there were no meetings on his “official schedules” in 2015 with Burisma board adviser Vadym Pozharskyi.

The response to The Post’s expose Wednesday about how emails about the meeting were found on his son Hunter Biden’s laptop does not mention any personal calendars or dispute that the get-together actually happened.

Biden has not directly responded to the reporting, which appears to debunk his prior claim he had “never spoken” with his son about his “overseas business dealing.”

Biden led the Obama administration’s Ukraine policy while Hunter Biden earned a reported $83,000 per month on Burisma’s board, despite no prior industry experience.

Pozharskyi, an adviser to the board of Burisma, allegedly emailed Hunter Biden on April 17, 2015, about a year after Hunter joined the Burisma board, to thank him for facilitating a meeting.

“Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure,” the alleged email reads.

Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates said in a statement to Politico that the meeting was not on Biden’s “official schedules” and did not take place “as alleged.” The statement does not foreclose a meeting taking place in an unofficial manner.

“[W]e have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place,” Bates said.

The Biden campaign did not respond to five requests for comment from The Post before publication of the initial account. The candidate himself declared an early-morning lid Wednesday, meaning he will have no public events.

“Investigations by the press, during impeachment, and even by two Republican-led Senate committees whose work was decried as ‘not legitimate’ and political by a GOP colleague have all reached the same conclusion: that Joe Biden carried out official U.S. policy toward Ukraine and engaged in no wrongdoing. Trump Administration officials have attested to these facts under oath,” Bates said to Politico.

“The New York Post never asked the Biden campaign about the critical elements of this story. They certainly never raised that Rudy Giuliani — whose discredited conspiracy theories and alliance with figures connected to Russian intelligence have been widely reported — claimed to have such materials.”

However, in addition to repeated requests for comment sent to the Biden campaign, including to Bates himself, before publication, The Post informed a lawyer for Hunter Biden, George R. Mesires, of Giuliani’s role in passing the hard drive’s contents to The Post.

Hunter BidenHunter BidenAstrid Stawiarz/Getty Images for Town & Country

The Post specified in the email that “Rudy Giuliani gave The Post an external hard drive that the owner of a computer-repair shop in Delaware told The Post was copied from a laptop that Hunter Biden brought in for repair but never picked up.”

House Democrats impeached President Trump in December for asking Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden’s employment. Senate Republicans acquitted Trump in February of charges he abused his power and obstructed a congressional investigation.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee is working with the Delaware computer repairman, whose identity was confirmed by The Post, to verify the documents on the hard drive.

View Post

Facebook censors The Post to help Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign

In Standard by NY PostLeave a Comment

This post was originally published on this site

So much for Facebook’s claims to be a neutral platform: One of its top execs just put the social-media giant firmly in the pro-Biden camp.

Andy Stone, the social-media company’s policy communications manager, boasted about burying The Post’s story on proof that Hunter Biden merchandized access to his dad.

Stone’s tweet Wednesday morning: “While I will intentionally not link to the New York Post, I want be clear that this story is eligible to be fact-checked by Facebook’s third-party fact-checking partners. In the meantime, we are reducing its distribution on our platform.”

Censor first, ask questions later: It’s an outrageous attitude for one of the most powerful platforms in the United States to take.

Democratic presidential nominee Joe BidenDemocratic presidential nominee Joe BidenGetty Images

Especially when Stone wears his own bias on his sleeve: The quick biography he posts on Twitter shows his long history of working for Democrats, including lefty then-Sen. Barbara Boxer and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Though he doesn’t specify what “this story” means, it can only be our scoop on Hunter — e-mails that show he introduced an executive of Burisma, the Ukrainian natural-gas firm on whose board he sat, to his dad while Joe was vice president.

Biden Sr. has insisted he had “never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings,” a statement at odds with the massive trove of data recovered from a laptop at a Delaware repair shop.

No one is disputing the veracity of The Post’s story — not even Hunter Biden. His lawyer George R. Mesires wouldn’t deign to comment on the reporting, simply attacking the messenger. The Biden campaign did the same, dismissing it all as “discredited,” while saying that no meeting showed up on Joe Biden’s official schedule on those dates (well if it wasn’t “official,” guess it didn’t happen).

Wednesday's cover of the New York PostNew York Post

Yet Facebook is deliberately trying to keep its users from reading and deciding for themselves what it means.

This, when it did nothing to restrict access to the recent New York Times story on President Trump’s tax returns. And the Times didn’t say a word about how it obtained that confidential personal data.

An executive of one of the most powerful media platforms in the country, who brags about his years working as a partisan Democratic operative, publicly boasting of his attempt to keep Americans from learning something embarrassing about the Democratic presidential candidate. Facebook isn’t a media platform. It’s a propaganda machine.

Glenn Greenwald Explains Why He Was ‘Totally, Formally Banned’ From MSNBC

In Standard by Red StateLeave a Comment

This post was originally published on this site

Lawyer and journalist Glenn Greenwald speaks with members of the media Tuesday, April 7, 2015, in Salt Lake City. Greenwald, the man who used top-secret documents leaked by Edward Snowden to write about global surveillance programs for a British newspaper, will speak with students at the University of Utah Tuesday evening. (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer)

The progressive left is so allergic to opposing views that they will even avoid having to engage with people on their side who don’t quite follow the prevailing narratives of the day. Their propensity for avoiding dissent is evident in the case of Glenn Greenwald, who stated that far-left news media outlet MSNBC has prohibited him from appearing on its network.

In a conversation on former Fox News Anchor Megyn Kelly’s podcast on Monday, he stated that he is no longer allowed to appear on MSBNC. The two journalists spoke on various issues, but when the discussion turned to the news network, Greenwald mentioned his appearances on the network with hosts Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes.

He recounted his time on the network with the two hosts. “I used to be really good friends with Rachel Maddow,” he said. “Before she got her MSNBC show and was on Air America, I used to go on all the time, and we used to bash Democrats from the left as a fraudulent political party.”

He continued, “She’s very, very smart. Same with [MSNBC host Chris Hayes], who’s been a longtime friend of mine. I used to go on both of their shows all the time to kind of feed the audience whatever they felt like they wanted them to be fed.”

Greenwald then recalled how things changed when Greenwald became critical of the Russia collusion narrative. “And then once I became a critic of Russiagate, I basically got banned from the network because I became a critic of their coverage of it,” he claimed.

When Kelly asked Greenwald to confirm that it was an official ban, he stated that “tons of friends” from MSNBC told him that he was “totally, formally banned.” He said, “I have producers who tried to book me, and they get told, ‘No, he’s on the no-book list.”

MSNBC denied Greenwald’s claims in a statement that the network released to The Hill. A spokesperson working for the network stated that there is no ban on the journalist, explaining that none of MSNBC’s shows has asked for him since 2016.

However, when The Hill reached out to Greenwald, he told a different story. “I was told this in 2017 and early 2018 by two separate producers with two separate shows that they were told never to book me,” he said. “I should also add that it’s not just me but several liberal-left journalists — including Matt Taibbi and Jeremy Scahill — who used to regularly appear there and stopped once they expressed criticism of MSNBC’s Russiagate coverage and skepticism generally about the narrative.”

Taibbi recently had a conversation with The Hill in which he asserted that “woke” politics has infested the world of journalism and is systematically destroying the Fourth Estate from within. Essentially the problem is if you say a certain thing, and an employee accuses you of racism, either your career is over or your reputation is ruined,” he said.

Even more recently, former MSNBC producer Anna Pekary resigned from the network because she grew weary of its constant focus on politically-charged reportage. “The problem is the job itself. It forces skilled journalists to make bad decisions on a daily basis,” she wrote in a blog post explaining the reason for her departure.

It is not difficult to see that the corporate press is becoming more and more intent on pushing the progressive agenda. Many journalists, even on the left, have lamented the fact that the media is no longer slightly biased to the left, it has become a full-on propaganda apparatus for the progressive movement.

Establishment media outlets essentially function as a marketing team for the far-left wing of the Democratic Party, and over the past four years, its agenda has been on full display. Given this reality, it is no surprise that they would blacklist people like Greenwald and Taibbi. They can’t have people on their own side calling out their BS, can they?

Let me know what you think in the comments below!

Follow me on Twitter: @JeffOnTheRight

View Post

Democrats Will Want to Memory-Masshole These Yard Signs With the State Name Spelled Incorrectly

In Standard by Red StateLeave a Comment

This post was originally published on this site

AP featured imageThe Massachusetts Democratic Party misspells the state name on its Biden-Harris campaign signs. (Twitter/@hjessy_)

That’s a wicked-awesome effort on the one job you had!

12 words  – TWELVE.

That was all the Democratic Party offices had to contend with when creating the yard signs for the Kamala Harris campaign with her running mate, Joe Biden. Pretty cut and dry task; you slap on the logo, include the website address, and then cut/paste the party designation on the bottom. Performing a spell check on this would take all of 10 seconds, then you can crack open a Sammy and go watch your beloved Pats play, without Tawmmy in the pocket.

This task, however, seemed too much for the party operatives in Bean Town. When one resident, a 19-year-old podcaster in the Andover area, dropped some cash at party offices to get a sign to sink into his lawn he came to discover what Joe Biden’s blood type might be — Type-o Positive.

When Jessy Han, a 19-year-old podcaster from Andover, saw that his local Democratic Town Committee had Biden/Harris lawn signs up for grabs, he was eager to show his support for the campaign. So he happily handed over a $7 donation and picked one up over the weekend.

Before he plunked it in his front yard, though, he spotted something he calls “unfortunate” in the sign’s required funding disclosure at the bottom of its message: The Massachusetts Democratic party had spelled its own name wrong. “Paid For By The Massachsuetts Democratic party,” the text reads, in small but legible type. Massachsuetts.

Will this impact the campaign adversely, and possibly swing the state over to Donald Trump in the November election? Heh heh, no — not a chance. Massachusettes is so blue it is a darker shade than the Redsox baseball hats. But it does make for a nice accompaniment to some of the rambling vocalizations we have been getting from Joe Biden over the past few months.

After you consider all of the gaffes Joe has made, which his wife Jill forbade Jake Tapper from exploring, maybe butchering the name of the state pales slightly — OR becomes the perfect emblem of the entire campaign.

Brad Slager

Covering politics, as well as the business side of Show Business. Expert in fine bourbons, good cigars, competent hockey teams, and horrible movies.

Read at RedState, Twitchy, and HotAir

Heard at Disasters In The Making podcast

Found at @MartiniShark

Read more by Brad Slager
View Post

LEAKED Inside Documents show BLUE PRINT of Radical Left’s Rapid Response Plan to Disrupt SCOTUS Nomination and Vote

In Standard by Gateway PunditLeave a Comment

This post was originally published on this site

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/scotus-action-plan.jpg

Investigative journalist Millie Weaver released the far left blue prints for the far left’s plans for protesting President Trump’s Supreme Court pick.

President Trump is expected to announce his pick on Saturday at 5:00 PM Eastern.

The left has already released its blue print to disrupt and shut down the Senate during the confirmation hearings and vote to confirm.

The Blue Print includes tips on messaging, coordinated social media posts and slogans.

TRENDING: BREAKING REPORT: President Trump to Nominate Amy Coney Barrett to Replace Ginsburg on the Supreme Court

The blue prints even instruct the mob on staging tactics during the demonstrations.

EXCLUSIVE – LEAKED Inside docs show BLUE PRINTS for the radical left’s entire plans for protesting Trump’s SCOTUS nomination 👇

Video Gold: CNN Host Alisyn Camerota’s Face as Voters Explain Why They’re Voting for Trump

In Standard by Red StateLeave a Comment

This post was originally published on this site

AP featured imagePeople walk outside CNN Center, Wednesday, Oct. 24, 2018, in Atlanta. CNN is now screening all people who enter after a suspicious package was delivered to CNN in New York. NYPD’s chief of counterterrorism says the explosive device sent to CNN’s headquarters in New York appeared to be sent by the same person who mailed pipe bombs to George Soros, Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama. (AP Photo/Ron Harris)

I must admit, it’s a lot of fun when CNN gets taken by surprise and they end up having to report real news rather than just their regular 24/7 anti-Trump narrative.

Sometimes a little truth does accidentally slip through on their network, though, as it did today during one of their segments on the election.

CNN’s Alysin Camerota was talking with voters who were talking about the key issues that were driving them to vote.

But as they began to explain why they were voting for Trump, you can look at her face and she appears to be trying to hold it all together and not lose it. I’ve never seen someone blink so many times in such a short period. She looks almost like she’s about to hurl and you can tell she’s thinking something like, ‘Damn, he might actually win. Again!’

Sean Roberts, a Florida voter said, “The president is making every effort to do his best for people of color…the president is bringing us together.”

“He’s doing a phenomenal job and he has my vote. Absolutely,” declared Alexis Frost Cazimero, a California voter.

It’s almost as if they haven’t been listening to the CNN propaganda about Trump but have actually made their own judgments based upon everything he has done.

What segment producer let that go by and will he have a job for doing so? It’s surprising it made it to air.

Better prepare for Election Night, CNN is going to be a basket case when he wins. I can hear them now trying to say, “We have to wait to declare the winner until all the votes are counted (wherever we can find them).”

HT: Twitchy

View Post

Over 1,000 Shot in NYC Since June, Getting Worse by the Month

In Standard by Epoch TimesLeave a Comment

This post was originally published on this site

Violence in New York City is getting worse as NYPD data shows 1,017 people got shot, fatally and otherwise, between June 1 and Sept. 20.

The violence has escalated since late May, coinciding with the riots in response to the death of George Floyd during an arrest in Minneapolis. The data indicates the shooting trend is still accelerating compared to the year before.

  • In April, 64 were shot in the city, down from 67 in April the year prior.
  • In May, 113 were shot, up nearly 55 percent from the same month in 2019.
  • In June, 270 were shot, making for a year-over-year increase of more than 150 percent.
  • In July, 301 were shot, up nearly 160 percent year over year.
  • In August, 310 were shot, up almost 200 percent year over year.
  • In September, so far, 136 were shot, which is up almost 210 percent year over year.
  • Meanwhile, murder is up 60 percent year over year since May.

The city hasn’t seen such levels of violence since the mid-1990s.

The NYPD has blamed the surge in crime on a series of policies that have complicated the department’s work.

Last year’s bail reform banned judges from requiring cash bail for most nonviolent and some lower-level violent crimes, resulting in criminals getting quickly back on the street after arrests.

The city also outlawed officers from pressing their knee against a suspect’s back or chest during an arrest.

Police officers and experts have criticized the law for criminalizing martial arts techniques routinely used by police to safely subdue resisting subjects. They warned it will lead police to use more severe methods, such as tasers, or avoid arrests altogether.

Some NYPD officers told The Epoch Times on the condition of anonymity that officers are hesitant to arrest resisting suspects, unless they pose a present danger to the officers or the public.

Only a small portion of people released due to the reform have been involved in shootings, The New York Post reported. But the officers cited the reform as a demoralizing factor that makes their efforts seem pointless.

Filings for retirement from the NYPD increased over 160 percent between May 25 and Aug. 11, compared to the same period last year.

Mayor Bill de Blasio blamed the violence on the economic impact of lockdowns related to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic after initially blaming the slowdown of the court system. The Office of Court Administration rejected the blame, saying many of the court proceedings have continued virtually, the New York Daily News reported.

On Sept. 24, de Blasio promised “a number of very specific plans” will be introduced over the coming weeks to address the violence.

“The solution is to work with communities, and that’s what neighborhood policing is all about,” he said, PIX11 reported.

The following day, Governor Andrew Cuomo called the violence “wholly unacceptable,” calling on the city government to “step up and lead.”

“If none of them want to lead it, I will find someone to lead it,” he said.

View Post

Pro-Biden Republican Has Staffers Lobbying For Chinese Military Proxy

In Standard by National PulseLeave a Comment

This post was originally published on this site

Former Republican Congressman Jim Leach, who endorsed Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden, has seen former staffers exit his office to lobby on behalf of Chinese government-linked companies including military proxies.

The “Republican,” who also flip-flopped to support Barack Obama instead of John McCain in the 2008 election, signed a letter declaring himself “concerned about our nation’s security and standing in the world under the leadership of Donald Trump.”

Leach’s letter, which insists President Trump has cozied up to dictators such as Chinese Communist Party leader Xi Jinping and, as a result, “imperiled America’s security,” is hypocritical given that Leach has seen former high-level staffers exit his office to lobby on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party.

Leach joins Never Trump hotbed, Former Republican National Security Officials for Biden.

Michael Borden, who served as a Legislative Assistant to the former Iowa Congressman from 2004 to 2007, leveraged those credentials to join lobbying behemoth and law firm Sidley Austin as a Partner. While at the company, Leach lobbied on behalf of two Chinese Communist Party-linked entities: Alibaba and Hikvision.

Borden’s lobbying contract on behalf of Hikvision began in June of 2018, and has already garnered the firm nearly $3,400,000. Sidley lobbied U.S. Congress, the State Department, the Commerce Department, and the Treasury Department on matters of “prohibitions on certain video surveillance equipment in the National Defense Authorization Act (HR 5515) and other potential legislation.”

Borden’s lobbying registration.

The ban on Hikvision’s usage by federal agencies which was later expanded by the Trump administration that Leach was attempting to reverse, however, came with good reason.

Hikvision is a manufacturer and supplier of video surveillance equipment with deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party given its status as a state-owned company. What’s more, the company identified by the U.S. Department of Defense as a Chinese Communist Party military proxy.

Many fear the data recorded by the company’s surveillance equipment could easily end up in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party.

Despite these fears, Borden had no issue lobbying on behalf of the company in an attempt to reverse the ban and grant the company – and by extension the Chinese Communist Party – a greater ability to spy on the U.S.

The other lucrative contract Borden inked at Sidley Austin was with e-commerce giant Alibaba, beginning in January of 2012 for nearly $300,000.

Borden’s lobbying registration.

In 2015 Forbes reported the “Chinese Government Has A Huge “Stake” In Alibaba” and The New York Times unearthed the company’s “deep political connections of the investment firms, Boyu Capital, Citic Capital Holdings and CDB Capital, the China Development Bank’s private investment arm” in 2014. The Times also noted Alibaba’s “senior executive ranks included sons or grandsons of the most powerful members of the ruling Communist Party.”

Both lobbying registrations are still active.

The Alibaba and Hikvision hires cast former Congressman Leach’s dealings with the Chinese Communist Party while in office in an interesting light: why would the Chinese Communist Party knowingly hire a lobbyist they felt had worked against their interests?

The Leach-endorsed letter, which also proposes President Trump is “dangerously unfit” for a second term and has over 70 signatories, comes from the “Former Republican National Security Officials For Biden,” a project of the “Republicans for the Rule of Law” project.

The group is a hotbed for politicians like Leach – Never Trumpers and establishment-style Republicans – who are keen on selling out America to the Chinese Communist Party in the name of profit.

Just like Hunter Biden.

Time Magazine Partners With ‘National Security Threat’ Huawei To Launch Publication Aimed at Kids

In Standard by National PulseLeave a Comment

Time Magazine has partnered with Huawei – the controversial, Chinese Communist Party-linked telecommunication company labeled a “national security threat” by the Trump administration – to launch a Chinese-language version of its magazine oriented for children.

The partnership led to the creation of a Chinese edition of Time for Kids aimed for use in classrooms across the world.

The digital magazine rollout was “made possible by Huawei and Tan Chong International Limited,” a collaborative effort that Time for Kids editor in chief Andrea Delbanco described herself as being “thrilled” about.

Huawei, however, has extensive links to both the Chinese Communist Party and the People’s Liberation Army, prompting the U.S. State Department to identify it as an “arms of the state – or, more precisely, the Chinese Communist Party.”

Labeled a “national security threat” by the Trump administration and a Chinese military collaborator by the U.S. Department of Defense, Huawei routinely provides the Chinese Communist Party backdoor access to its products, networks and devices.

The U.S. State Department also noted the Chinese Communist Party uses Huawei as an “instrument not only for making money but also for pursuing the Party-State’s agenda and fulfilling its strategic objectives […] deeply enmeshed in Beijing’s system of oppression at home and its increasingly assertive strategic ambitions globally.”

Joy Tan, Senior Vice President of Public Affairs at Huawei Technologies USA, praising the deal “as part of our global inclusion vision that brings digital access to everyone around the world,” is, therefore, cause for concern.

And roughly one month after the establishment, New York-based rag inked a deal with the controversial, the U.S. State Department was imploring the West “to unite against Huawei.”

Time magazine collaborates with a company identified as an existential threat to the West.

The initiative was spurred by COVID-19 and the ensuing shift to online learning, with PR Newswire describing the effort as a “continuation of [Time’s] global initiative to offer digital editions of the school-based publication in multiple languages to support teachers, families and students around the world during this period of school closures due to the coronavirus pandemic.”

In other words, due to a virus caused by the Chinese Communist Party, one of its subsidiaries inked a lucrative contract that allowed it to infiltrate the pages of a widely-circulated and influential American magazine. And beyond ostensibly allowing Huawei the ability to dictate the content of a magazine shared with countless schools, the partnership also calls into question the Chinese Communist Party’s ability to influence the editorial line of Time.

While Time has no shortage of anti-Trump content, notoriously placing the president on a cover alongside a crying child in an effort to criticize President Trump’s border policy and counting columnists such as Ian Bremmer who have attribute fake quotes to President Trump on social media, the Chinese Communist Party is actively seeking a Biden victory per U.S. Intelligence reports.

The other company listed as a partner in the arrangement, Tan Chong International Limited, is a Hong Kong-listed firm headquartered in Singapore that distributes Subaru and Nissan cars across Asia.

View Post

Biden: A Cheapskate Who Prefers to Tax Others Than Give His Own Money

In Standard by American SpectatorLeave a Comment

This post was originally published on this site

If Joe Biden wins the presidency and Democrats take control of the Senate, taxes will rise. Likely a lot. His official plan envisions a $4 trillion hike over the coming decade. But a big victory would empower the Left, which would demand bigger and broader hikes. After all, there will be lots of benefits to increase, programs to create, and, most important, interest groups to pay off.

The only “cut” likely would be restoring the deduction for state and local levies, a windfall for the wealthy that liberals love. Presumably because it acts as a subsidy for big-spending state and local governments. They can keep raising rates, knowing that the federal deduction will lighten the added tax burden.

Despite the latter, however, Democrats will present any plan in terms of compassion and generosity. Compassion once meant to suffer with, that is, to engage, assist, and uplift the poor, to enter into community with them. Now it means making other people write checks. By this definition some of the most compassionate people — forcing the most people to write the biggest checks — themselves give very little money.

Rather like when the Arkansas Clintons wrote used underwear off their taxes, the Bidens made sure they got the tax benefit from their bountiful $120 given to charity in 1999.

A look by Forbes at the charitable giving of presidential candidates last year found that they were “often lagging average Americans in the same tax brackets.” Of Biden, the journalists found that “Joe Biden and his wife donated just $70,000 to charity in the two decades leading up to 2017, per their tax returns. But when their earnings skyrocketed in 2017, so did their giving. That year they handed more than $1 million, or about 9% of their income,” including $250,000 to two family foundations.

The increase was dramatic — a six-fold jump in the percentage of income contributed. Perhaps the Bidens had a spiritual awakening about their responsibility to America’s less fortunate. Perhaps they suddenly found themselves with more money than they had any idea how to spend. Perhaps the windfall coincided with consideration of a presidential run. Giving pennies on an income of more than $11 million might not look good to voters.

A look at Biden’s record is instructive. Whatever the reason for the 2017 upturn, his recent change of heart does not eliminate the lack of giving when the former vice president earned an income that most Americans would consider more than ample.

His tax returns from 1998 to 2018 are available. Americans should compare their situations to his. For instance, every one of those 21 years he earned far more than I did. Yet only in his three peak years, 2013, 2017, and 2018, did he give more than I did — on a substantially lower income. That is not to laud my own giving; others with more meager means do much more than I do. But Biden’s levels are frankly embarrassing: two years under 0.1 percent, nine years between 0.1 and 1 percent, seven years between 1 and 2 percent, and only one year near the Biblical tithe.

His tax returns reveal the following (figures are for total income; gifts to charity; charitable percentage of total income):

2018: $4,580,437; $300,796; 6.6%
2017: $11,037,751; $1,010,762; 9.2%
2016: $396,552; $5,889; 1.5%
2015: $392,279; $6,920; 1.8%
2014: $388,844; $7,380; 1.9%
2013: $408,733; $20,523; 5.0%
2012: $385,072; $7,190; 1.9%
2011: $379,035; $5,540; 1.5%
2010: $379,178; $5,350; 1.4%
2009: $333,182; $4,820; 1.4%
2008: $269,256; $1,885; .7%
2007: $319,853; $995; .3%
2006: $248,459; $380; .2%
2005: $321,379; $380; .1%
2004: $234,271; $380; .2%
2003: $231,375; $260; .1%
2002: $227,811; $260; .1%
2001: $220,712; $360; .2%
2000: $219,953; $360; .2%
1999: $210,797; $120; .06%
1998: $215,432: $195; .09%

Of course, someone could be a competent, effective president even if he or she gives little to charity. Similar analyses of past presidents and presidential candidates reveal only occasional examples of notable generosity. Giving tends to be rather low and often to politically correct causes.

Yet those who most loudly demand that government act to care for the poor should demonstrate the sincerity of their convictions by giving generously with their own money before seeking to conscript the earnings of others. It always is easier to give away other people’s money than one’s own. It certainly is no act of generosity, especially given the political reward expected.

That would seem to be especially important for Joe Biden since his four decades in politics have been unremarkable, with little evidence of strong commitment to principle. This campaign, his main appeal to Democrats was the perception that he was moderate enough to win. The widespread suspicion was that he would do anything necessary to get elected. A demonstrated personal commitment to helping those in need would provide some character evidence for his campaign based on restoring decency and goodness to the U.S. government. A personal commitment also would give credibility to Biden’s advocacy on behalf of substantial increases in social spending.

As it is, tax returns for nearly half of his life in public — 21 of 47 years — suggests a very different Joe Biden. At the very least, he saw no personal responsibility to help meet serious social needs, something traditionally considered important for any believing Catholic. Rather like when the Arkansas Clintons wrote used underwear off their taxes, the Bidens made sure they got the tax benefit from their bountiful $120 given to charity in 1999.

Twice when his giving surged (relatively, anyway), in 2009 and 2017, politics plausibly was a if not the cause. Anomalous was 2013, though 2017 also involved a major increase in income. The test will be what happens if he is elected: does he continue to contribute at his new levels, or will he drop back to the pitiful average evident throughout most of his career?

Whenever Joe Biden speaks of compassion during the coming weeks, it is worth remembering how his willingness to make meaningful contributions of his own money to those most in need is newly arrived. For much of his career he treated the poor as someone else’s problem. That does not bode well for the policies he is likely to pursue if elected president.

Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of The Politics of Envy: Statism as Theology and Beyond Good Intentions: A Biblical View of Politics.

The post Biden: A Cheapskate Who Prefers to Tax Others Than Give His Own Money appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.