Hey citizen, remember when the White House claimed dey would have NO idea about who bought Hunty's "art"?

The biden regime has lied about so much, and is being shown to have done so at such an increasing rate, that it's impossible to keep track of it all.  Example:

When Hunty biden got in the business of selling his own "art," critics pointed out that this offered a tempting opportunity for people who wanted to bribe Porridgebrain by buying Hunty's childish "art" at the wildly inflated prices he was asking.  

Seemed obvious, so to keep from raising voter suspicion the regime crafted a careful Narrative (i.e. a cover story, i.e. bullshit) that the owner of the gallery that *exclusively* sold Hunty's faaabulous "artworks" wouldn't tell anyone the identity of the buyers.  See?  So with that "safeguard" in place a buyer couldn't wheedle favors from Porridgebrain's vast domain of bureaucratic lackeys since no one could prove he was the buyer, eh?

White House spokesperson (and now MSNBC host) Jennifer Psaki laid out the Narrative:

>>After *careful consideration* a system has been established that allows Hunter to work in his profession within reasonable safeguards…  All interactions regarding the selling of art and the setting of prices will be handled by a professional gallerist, *adhering to the highest industry standards.*
   And any offer out of the normal course would be rejected.>>

<<Wait...the owner of the gallery gets a commission, right?  Yet you bullshit us that if some briber buyer offered a million bucks for one of Hunty's masterpieces, the owner would "reject the offer"?  Wow, you really do think voters are as dumb as...well, Democrats.<<

>>And the gallerist will not share information about buyers or prospective buyers, including their identities, with Hunter or the administration, which provides *quite a level of protection and transparency.”*

Hahahahahahaha!  Utter, brazen horseshit.

And finally the owner of the gallery is called to testify to the House oversight committee, and admits Hunty not only knew who bought his faaaabulous "artworks," he *demanded to know.*  And of course the gallery owner--knowing Hunty could end the owner's lucrative commissions at any time if displeased--dutifully told Hunty who bought his "art."

The gallery owner told the committee *he* had no contact with the White House, but that Hunty knew who'd bought his "art."

The owner also said he was reading Psaki's statements in the news but never objected to her "misrepresentation" (i.e. lies).  He said he read those statements "and was confused."  Nice cover.

A staffer asked the owner, “When you’re seeing in the press that the White House is putting in certain safeguards regarding an ethics agreement, did you ever ask Hunter Biden, ‘Hey, where’s this coming from?’”

Bergès responded: “I might have. I probably did, yeah.” He admitted that he was surprised by the coverage “because I hadn’t had any communication with the White House about an agreement.” That, of course, was never reported. Instead, the media dutifully parroted how this faaaabulous ethical plan was in place to *totally ensure* no possible bribery, eh?

Again, in light of all the other documented payments to Porridgebrain--carefully, falsely labelled "loan repayments" despite no checks showing any loans made--this seems so trivial.

This is how we're conditioned to ignore things--cuz they pale in light of more serious..."ethical lapses."

And so it goes, eh citizens?

Now imagine how the Media would have reacted if one of Trump's sons had done the same thing.

Source.

https://jonathanturley.org/2024/01/16/art-dealer-testifies-that-hunter-expressly-asked-for-buyer-information/