Hunter Biden Email Cover-Up Is Scandalous
By: David Harsanyi (National Review)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
T he Hunter Biden email cover-up may not be the most contemptible example of the modern political media’s corruption, but it is probably the most demonstrable.
Politico reports today that Ben Schreckinger’s new book, The Bidens: Inside the First Family’s Fifty-Year Rise to Power , corroborates much of the New York Post ’s pre-election reporting on Hunter Biden’s emails. Two of them stick out: The first is a 2015 missive from a Ukrainian businessman thanking Hunter for the chance to meet Joe Biden — then, still vice president. The second is a 2017 email in which a proposed equity breakdown of a venture with Chinese energy executives included the line, “10 held by H for the big guy?” A Swedish government agency and two people who corresponded directly with Hunter also confirmed the emails.
Of course, the New York Post story already had more substantiation than the histrionic and fallacious Russia-collusion scoops the nation had been subjected to for four years. The Post had reported, in great detail, how it had physically obtained Hunter’s laptop. They had interviewed the owner of the Delaware computer shop where Hunter had abandoned his computer. They had Hunter’s signature on a receipt. The Post had on-the-record sources with intimate knowledge of Hunter’s interactions. And later, the emails were authenticated by forensic specialists.
Yet virtually the entire censorious journalistic establishment, with the help of tech giants, attempted to limit the story’s exposure by banning it outright, creating the impression that it didn’t meet proper journalistic standards or that it had been planted by Russian spooks. Schreckinger’s own publication ran a piece headlined “ Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo ,” written by one of journalism’s leading Russia-collusion fabulists, Natasha Bertrand. The usual suspects, such as Ken Dilanian , suddenly wrote process stories about how they were hamstrung by Republicans. Vox called the Post ’s story “nonsense” and asked alleged journalism professor Jay Rosen, the kind of partisan shill that’s been destroying the industry, whether he agreed that progress had been made by sinking the piece before the election . The Washington Post and others “ fact-checked ” the story with a degree of professional scrutiny they rarely apply to themselves.
Only a month earlier, Jeffrey Goldberg had published a highly shared Atlantic piece accusing Donald Trump of besmirching the American military in which he failed to offer a single on-the-record source or corroborating evidence — and then refused to respond to the 21 sources, including on-the-record eyewitnesses, who publicly refuted his account.
And a few months later, the media were breathlessly reporting the infamous Russian-bounty story, about Russia paying the Taliban to kill coalition troops including Americans. This, too, turned out to be another in a long line of “fake news” pieces . This had gone on for years. Is it any wonder that trust in the media dropped from 70 precent in 2016 to 35 percent this year?
CNN, where unsubstantiated gang-rape allegations against Brett Kavanaugh were treated as legitimate news, wrote a piece headlined: “The anatomy of the New York Post’s dubious Hunter Biden story.” What was dubious about it? CNN’s chief media correspondent, Brian Stelter, who regularly hosted the raving smear-peddler Michael Avenatti (now in prison for extortion) , said of the New York Post , “We are not talking about fully reliable sources here.” Well, I suppose, the one thing the Post had going for it over CNN in its investigation of a presidential son was the presence of a non-imaginary source .
When Hunter’s former partner and Navy veteran Tony Bobulinski was interviewed on Tucker Carlson, he claimed he’d had a business meeting with Joe Biden in 2017, and that the former vice president had been intimately involved in the family business for years. We now have emails that lend credence to those claims.
We shouldn’t forget, either, that there is still no widespread reporting on evidence showing that the president may have benefited from his son’s shady overseas scams. Perhaps Hunter lied in the emails about the “Big Man” getting paid, but on numerous occasions Joe Biden denied having any knowledge about Hunter’s business deals or his use of family ties to strike deals with Chinese Communists and Ukrainian energy interests. Does anyone believe that Biden didn’t ask his son what he was doing when Hunter tagged along on an Air Force Two trip to China in 2013? When Hunter became a board member of Burisma in 2014, contemporaneous news reports suggested there was a conflict of interest, given his father’s position . Did Biden not read those pieces? Two Obama-administration officials reportedly raised the ethical problems with Hunter’s dealings. But Joe never discussed this with anyone?
It’s a risible claim.
Much of the reticence in investigating Hunter Biden was surely a reaction to the fallout over the Hillary Clinton email scandal. A revisionist history has emerged in which Hillary was the victim of an unfair and unnewsworthy story. In reality, because of her reckless and potentially criminal behavior, there was an open FBI investigation into the front-running presidential candidate for the presidency of the United States. If anything, Hillary is lucky that James Comey let her off the hook.
Still, political media weren’t going to have a repeat of 2016 and ruin the Democrats’ chances. We don’t know whether Joe Biden has engaged in any criminal, corrupt, or even fishy behavior — and major outlets seem determined to never find out. And it speaks poorly of the nation’s political media, to say the least, that Americans have a better chance of learning what Biden’s favorite ice-cream flavor is than whether he knew about, or cashed in, on his son’s corrupt adventures.
Tags
Who is online
44 visitors
"Don’t forget the big guy."
The book is:
The Bidens: Inside the First Family’s Fifty-Year Rise to Power
No one sane gives a shit about Hunter Biden
You mean the Bidens are immune from the laws of the United States?
You know something, I think you're right!
So far that's also true of the Trumps is it not?
btw, no one ever voted for Billy Carter, Jared Kushner or Hunter Biden for POTUS
I guess you had no choice but no you ignore the thousands of stories about the Trump kids' business activities and substituted in Jered Kushner to try and make your argument less ridiculous . . Doesn't help.
Let's imagine a world where these are Trump Jr's emails detailing his and his dad's relations with a Russian energy company. In this bizarro world the MSM sites, staffed by Republicans , refuse to cover the story and even go so far as to suggest that emails are Chinese propaganda to justify ignoring them. And social media sites, always the friend of Republicans, ban anyone for sharing the story.
The idea, that you, or anyone else taking this absurd line, would be okay with the media covering up Trump Jr.'s emails is just laughable. Do you expect anyone to buy that? Why bother making such a preposterous point?
First, punctuation is your friend, please use it.
Second, Donald Trump was elected in 2016 in spite of the stories you referenced, right?
Thanks for making my point.
The rest is just the buzzing of Nematocera.
No it is not. It's been the opposite for Donald Trump.
I'm shocked. Sean said the media posted thousands of articles about the Trump children and your
readers still elected him.
Why is that different from the gay bashing of Obama or the conspiracy theories about
Biden's kids?
Do I sense some double standards?
All I remember is the assault on Trump that started the second he announced his candidacy. They fought the results of the election and after he became President they resisted everything he tried to do. Any other narrative is an insult to everyone who lived through it.
You really have trouble following hypotheticals don't you? I can't dumb it down it down any further than I did. Sorry.
rump was elected in 2016 in spite of the stories you referenced, right?
Do you pay attention to yourself? This might be your dumbest arugment yet. Did Trump win in 2020? Or are you claiming that the media stopped running stories on his kids between 2017 and the 2020?
Regardless, using some ex post facto rational to justify whether a story is acceptable is incredibly silly. Running or suppressing stories before an election is justifiable by the result of an election in the future is an insane argument to try.
Judging by that logic, we should never talk about Trump's actions to be declared winner of the 2020 election. Joe Biden was sworn in, right?
Thank you for your exposing your hypocrisy. I knew you would.
Are you looking in the mirror?
What corrupt adventures, Vic? Want to talk Flynn, Manafort? I figured not.
They were prosecuted (fairly or not). We know the Bidens won't be.
What were you saying?
and pardoned by their GodFather.
Laughing all the way with The Teflon Don.
Corruption personified.
You can't have it both ways. People connected to Trump got prosecuted. Deep state operatives do not.
I asked you first. "What corrupt adventures, Vic?"
You know, the one staring you right in the face - INFLUENCE PEDDLING! Are we going to pretend he wasn't???
You mean Manafort, Flynn, Bannon & company?
What a load of horse shit. So all they claim they can prove is that the laptop was Hunters and on it was an email that said "10 held by H for the big guy?". That's the only actual quote from the supposed Hunter laptop, they merely reference instead of actually quote some supposed thanks given to Hunter "for the chance to meet Joe Biden". Are these dipshits serious? Is that the supposed 'damning' evidence they have against Joe Biden? They even have to resort to such tired ridiculous insinuations like "Perhaps Hunter lied in the emails about the “Big Man” getting paid" as if that would ever stand up in any court other than the 'court of mentally impaired morons opinions'.
All this seed, and very likely the book it's trying to sell to gullible conservative dipshits, has is a muddle of accusatory questions without a lick of evidence mixed with disparate irrelevant facts about who Hunter worked for and how much he was paid, a possible laptop he once owned wrapped up in their uninformed suspicion that any company would pay him that kind of money.
These are the same folk who even when walked through the Trump call to Ukraine couldn't see the obvious extortion to get Ukraine to give him some dirt on Joe Biden.
Zelenskyy "We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps. Specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes." Trump "I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike…" "The other thing, here’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great."
Instead they have their panties in a wad over "10 held by H for the big guy?"
10 what? 10 tickets? 10 hotel rooms? And are we really supposed to just assume "big guy" was code word for Joe Biden? Really? No evidence 10 of anything was paid to anyone, no evidence that specifies that "big guy" is actually Joe Biden and not Hunters bookie or bartender, no evidence of any actual wrongdoing but they want to scream and cry that it was the MSM who "covered this up". Covered what up? You have to have evidence of some actual malfeasance to be able to "cover it up" but all they've presented so far is a whole lot of horse shit, no reason to cover it up, you just let it dry out and use it as fertilizer, which is all this seed and the 'hoping for a payday' Ben Schreckinger’s new book. I've no doubt he's going to make a ton of the sad sacks of gullible losers who hate Biden and Democrats with a passion and will believe just about anything, hell half of them no doubt already believe Democrats eat babies and lizard people run the deep state and control our minds with fluoride in the water and airplane contrails.
That the media covered up for the Bidens and lied about it in the middle of a campaign justifies every last bit of skepticism towards their reporting.
Like the censoring of the New York Post story before the election?
I believe it also confirms the email from the Burisma exec thanking Hunter for facilitating a meeting with his father despite President Biden denying ever having anything to do with Hunter's business dealings, doesn't it?
So let me ask you, is Joe Biden some amazing criminal master mind who you think is a bumbling imbecile as POTUS
or might you just think that people around the world want to get their pictures taken with celebrities and politicians to hang
in their restaurants or office to make themselves seem better connected than they really are.
Believe me, at one point I had dozens of pics with sports legends, Mayors, Governors, Senators and a few Presidents.
Starbucks, still wants cash.
Biden is a bumbling moron with a large network of people in the government and media covering for him; and the lemmings on the left that believe every word coming from them.
Yes having a wall full of pictures with celebrities is the same thing; as the VP having a meeting with a foreign company your son works for that is under investigation by the country it resides in. Then ordering the lead prosecutor that is investigating the company to be fired by threatening to withhold promised aid. He even freely admits it; and the Obama administration doesn't deny it.
You are right; the Bidens still want cash.
Not what I said Ronin, but you be you, it is amusing in a way...
No, you said that the meeting was a photo op for the Burisma exec. No one outside of Biden apologists believe that; so why are you peddling it?
I certainly don't think that President Biden is a mastermind of anything at all, bumbling imbecile seems to cover his presidency quite well thus far.
Let me ask you, all those pics you had with famous people, did you or those you were in the pics with ever feel the need to lie about them?
I've been reading Chapter 40 of the book "Peril" just now.
In this chapter it is made quite clear that Donald Trump tried to steal the presidential election. Trump had been told by a crackpot conservative lawyer named John Eastman that Pence could declare Trump the winner of the election on Jan 6. The reasoning behind this would be that Pence would say seven "swing states" were in dispute and the electoral votes would be counted for all the other states but not these states. Leaving the seven states out of the electoral count would make Trump the winner of the election.
Trump was told this directly by Eastman, in the Oval Office, and Trump wanted Mike Pence to talk to Eastman and follow Eastman's instructions.
Why wasnt this the lead story on the national evening news shows tonight? This is a bombshell story. It alleges Trump attempted to steal the 2020 presidential election.
Why is Trump being given kid gloves treatment about this ? -
Trump is fair game on this seed because he is named in the seeded article.
The Bidens are guilty of influence peddling. Both of them. The drug addict and the senile old fool.
You are too kind in describing both of them.
Another Trump conspiracy theory. What are the odds./S
“There are no editorial standards as long as you feed liberals what they want"
Glenn Greenwald. Sums it up about as well anything else.