Simple, Hunter is selling what Joe produces. It's a partnership. Why would Joe continue to risk his political career making these moves for Hunter if Hunter didn't pay him his share of the proceeds?
This seems like a pretty tight knit family. It's completely plausible that Joe directed Hunter to include Jim and others.
Joe is clearly in charge here. At any point he could have informed Hunter's business partners that 0 favors or consideration would be given to anyone giving Hunter money and Hunter would have stopped receiving money. I'm positive that Joe made a decision to maintain at least ambiguity so the money keeps flowing even if Joe isn't getting any personally.
p
Simple, Hunter is selling what Joe produces. It's a partnership. Why would Joe continue to risk his political career making these moves for Hunter if Hunter didn't pay him his share of the proceeds?
This seems like a pretty tight knit family. It's completely plausible that Joe directed Hunter to include Jim and others.
Joe is clearly in charge here. At any point he could have informed Hunter's business partners that 0 favors or consideration would be given to anyone giving Hunter money and Hunter would have stopped receiving money. I'm positive that Joe made a decision to maintain at least ambiguity so the money keeps flowing even if Joe isn't getting any personally.
More options
Context Copy link