1. A few thoughts about Tony Bobulinski, Trump's guest at the debate tonight.

According to Trump, Bobulinski has dirt on Biden that's disqualifying.

What's really going on?

Follow along if interested.
2. In a statement released to the NY Post, Bobulinski describes himself as "the CEO of Sinohawk Holdings which was a partnership between the Chinese operating through CEFC/Chairman Ye and the Biden family"

This actually isn't true.
3. In texts and emails released to the WSJ, Bobulinski acknowledges he was planning to do business with Hunter Biden but the entire deal fell through in the Summer of 2017.

Bobulinski never did any business with Hunter Biden.
4. So Bobulinski is claiming that JOE BIDEN somehow profited from a partnership with HUNTER BIDEN that never existed.

It really makes very little sense.

But lets dig in a little deeper.
5. Bobulinski claims that Joe Biden had an ownership stake in the company, Sinohawk Holdings. And his proof is an email in which Joe Biden is referred to as "the big guy."

But wait. Bobulinski is the CEO OF THIS COMPANY. If Joe Biden had an ownership stake, its easy to prove.
6. I think its very safe to assume that Joe Biden did not have an ownership stake. But even if Joe Biden had an ownership stake IT WOULD BE WORTH NOTHING.


Because this deal fell apart.

No business was ever done.

10% of zero is still zero.
7. So what are we left with? The notion that Joe Biden said he didn't discuss business with his son but Bobulinski says Joe Biden did.

How does he know this?

Bobulinski does not claim he ever talked about the potential deal with Joe Biden.
8. Instead, Bobulinski seems to infer that Joe Biden discussed business with his son. In a way that is not explained.

Joe Biden was "he was plainly familiar, at least at a high level" with "the Biden family’s plans with the Chinese," Bobulinski says.

Very strange phrasing.
9. If Bobulinski had talked business with Joe Biden, I assume he would just say so.

Of course, this was all in 2017, when Joe Biden was not VP. There would not have been anything illegal about talking business. But there is no evidence he did and Bobulinski doesn't claim it.
10. So this provides some perspective on why Bobulinski ended up in an opinion column in the NY Post and then an opinion column in the WSJ and not in actual news stories because the whole thing kind of falls apart with any scrutiny.
12. WSJ has a new story about these claims that confirms what I laid out in this thread. No deals completed. No role for Joe Biden.
You can follow @JuddLegum.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: