You may have noticed that I don’t spill much digital ink writing about Hunter Biden. That’s because, all along, I have understood this for what it is: a politically-driven effort to smear Joe Biden over the checkered history of his troubled son. Even saying something is “politically-driven” these days creates chum in the water. After all, that is the current language and currency of the right, and particularly of Trump as he faces a growing number of indictments. If Democrats accuse Republicans of going after Hunter Biden for political purposes, the GOP can point to that and say to their own base, “See how this works? If
Now if we could only investigate the trump offspring for their obviously criminal behavior, not only while their dad was the president, but they worked in that administration as well. That's the lopsided treatment, right there.
I don’t like that Hunter Biden was given a much more harsh punishment versus Roger Stone, for far less money involved versus what Roger Stone was prosecuted for. That aspect is distasteful.
But yeah, five years, and that’s the most a Republican prosecutor could do to him. So there really was no there there.
I hope he does better, and yeah he’s got a huge burden to carry. He has a good family around him, and it’s hard to ask for more than that.
Agreed on all counts. I can't imagine how it must feel to be Hunter. His losses of mother and sister and then his brother....who is somewhat of a "golden" child. I can't imagine trying to live up to that.
Now THIS is a good spill of digital ink. Thank you for thoughtful analysis/summary and consideration of the main character. Wonder if Weiss would consider staying on and looking into a couple other presidential children....
And let's not forget about McDonnell v. United States, the Supreme Court decision that essentially makes influence peddling legal. The court held a Virginia Governor charging vast sums to meet with him to "discuss" legislation did NOTHING illegal because there needed to be "an official act" in consideration of the payment. Like a vote or executive order. So a lobbyist can pay a Governor $1 million to "meet" with him and urge him to vote a certain way, but unless there is proof the vote, or order, or whatever "official action" was tied to the payment, it's legal. It's like the court was signalling the lobbyists - "hey guys, just don't put it in writing, ya know?"
Don't like it? Neither do I. But who puts up the roadblocks to campaign finance and ethics reform? The GOP, mostly, at the behest of the big corporate lobbyists who rely on the open secret that they are trading money for influence.
I'm sure there are more than a few of us here who have family members who are addicts in one way or another (I am one of those). What Jay said above with such sympathy and empathy are feelings many of us with first-hand experience know so well. Joe Biden has been exceptionally supportive of his son's recovery -- many other families would have disowned him. That fact alone is where the truth of the matter lies. It is SO hard when a family member is overtaken by substance abuse, be it alcohol, opioids, meth, your relationship with them often becomes one of distrust. That his father supported him in positive ways, and now Hunter seems to be clean, is probably to my mind the most important thing. One thing father and son share is the tragedy of their past.
Time for this country and its people to let it go.
The New York Times has just reported that a WhatsApp message has been found in which Hunter said to a Chinese business associate that "his father is right here beside him" suggesting his support in a disagreement with the associate. SO....
The NY times then says: 'Taken at face value, the message would undercut President Biden’s longstanding claims that he had nothing to do with his son’s international business deals."
Sorry, NYT. At "face value" the message shows that Hunter SAID his father was right there with him. (This was in 2017, while Biden was out of office in any event.) This is right in the middle of the his deepest drug problems. There is no evidence that his father was actually anywhere near him when he sent it.
The Times admits this further down in the story. But the damage is done by that paragraph--it will be howled to the sky by the GOP. I'm very disappointed in the Times. The proper way to report it is to say "While this could be interpreted as undermining....in fact it is only a record of what Hunter said. There was no illegality found as to the deal itself, nor evidence that Biden Sr. was in fact there. "
Just a reminder to be skeptical of what you read even in MSM.
Minor point: the investigation into Hunter started BEFORE the infamous laptop was dropped off: investigation in 2018 into business dealings; laptop in 2019.
It's spelled, "you're", dear. So, that's two things you managed to get wrong in the space of a three word sentence. Impressive! Going for a personal worst, are we?
The NYT regularly disappoints. I cannot even list how many times. It is mainstream press and that is why I need other sources of information. It is after all, owned by an Oligarch!
I think it is pathetic that Republicans are willing to ignore the $2 BILLION Jared took from the Saudi butcher despite the fact that he has no experience as an investor. In fact, the one major real estate investment he made, while his daddy was in jail for illegal campaign contributions, tax evasion, and witness tampering, was such a failure he ended up getting bailed out by Qatar to save the family business. I guess they can con themselves into believing that was all coincidence?
And I know it's off topic, but this just in: Jack Smith offering immunity to fake electors in exchange for testimony. Which means these fake electors KNEW that they were in big trouble and WANTED immunity and ARE GOING TO TESTIFY AGAINST TRUMP. (You don't offer immunity HOPING the testimony will be favorable - the prosecutor is told ahead of time what it will be). Indictment is close.
It’s good news, but it doesn’t necessarily unfold in this manner. They can get called before the grand jury, plead the fifth, and then Jack Smith can offer them limited immunity to compel their testimony, for example. But either way, we get the testimony.
I probably should have been more precise in my first sentence. The news article is not that he is OFFERING immunity - it's that he has already granted it. "Special counsel Jack Smith has compelled at least two Republican fake electors to testify to a federal grand jury in Washington in recent weeks by giving them limited immunity." Doesn't that mean they can't plead the fifth (assuming the limited immunity is covering the subject of the testimony)?
Are the walls closing in on Trump now? So many bootlicks are still running around screaming about Russia while wearing the pussy hat. Going on 7 years now. Collectivism=group=group think.
The whole Hunter Biden thing is a clinic on rather banal implementation of law and order, a sleep-inducing PowerPoint on lesser crimes and punishment, a small particulate occupying an overstuffed chair.
Exhausting is the perpetual and perfect descriptor with which to characterize every single act, failure to act, statement, nuance and declassifying thought of today's radical Republicans; we collectively need a break.
Thanks Jay, I hope Hunter can stay clean. I’m often reminded of a line in the N.A. handbook, “most of us realized that in our addiction we were slowly committing suicide.”
You mention that two IRS agents said they wanted to bring harsher charges against Hunter Biden. I suspect that most IRS agents think the book ought to be thrown at any tax delinquent, but prosecutors have to pick their battles. I also remember two lawyers resigning from the Manhattan DA’s office because they thought Alvin Bragg was wrong not to pursue charges against Donald J. Trump who they thought was guilty of several crimes.
The GOP only knows one thing: revenge! Did Hunter break the law. Yes. Did it need to have a bright spot light shined on it? No. But djt is/was in trouble so they (the GOP) tries they best to deflect and get revenge for it all.
Now if we could only investigate the trump offspring for their obviously criminal behavior, not only while their dad was the president, but they worked in that administration as well. That's the lopsided treatment, right there.
I don’t like that Hunter Biden was given a much more harsh punishment versus Roger Stone, for far less money involved versus what Roger Stone was prosecuted for. That aspect is distasteful.
But yeah, five years, and that’s the most a Republican prosecutor could do to him. So there really was no there there.
I hope he does better, and yeah he’s got a huge burden to carry. He has a good family around him, and it’s hard to ask for more than that.
Agreed on all counts. I can't imagine how it must feel to be Hunter. His losses of mother and sister and then his brother....who is somewhat of a "golden" child. I can't imagine trying to live up to that.
I agree.
Now THIS is a good spill of digital ink. Thank you for thoughtful analysis/summary and consideration of the main character. Wonder if Weiss would consider staying on and looking into a couple other presidential children....
Would surely be helpful. I have many questions!
Whenever I analyze claims the Right makes about the Left, I usually run them through a two-step filter:
Step One: is the Right making their claim in good faith?
Step Two: (well, I never seem to get to Step Two.)
Step Two: Recheck Step One.
Lol
And let's not forget about McDonnell v. United States, the Supreme Court decision that essentially makes influence peddling legal. The court held a Virginia Governor charging vast sums to meet with him to "discuss" legislation did NOTHING illegal because there needed to be "an official act" in consideration of the payment. Like a vote or executive order. So a lobbyist can pay a Governor $1 million to "meet" with him and urge him to vote a certain way, but unless there is proof the vote, or order, or whatever "official action" was tied to the payment, it's legal. It's like the court was signalling the lobbyists - "hey guys, just don't put it in writing, ya know?"
Don't like it? Neither do I. But who puts up the roadblocks to campaign finance and ethics reform? The GOP, mostly, at the behest of the big corporate lobbyists who rely on the open secret that they are trading money for influence.
I'm sure there are more than a few of us here who have family members who are addicts in one way or another (I am one of those). What Jay said above with such sympathy and empathy are feelings many of us with first-hand experience know so well. Joe Biden has been exceptionally supportive of his son's recovery -- many other families would have disowned him. That fact alone is where the truth of the matter lies. It is SO hard when a family member is overtaken by substance abuse, be it alcohol, opioids, meth, your relationship with them often becomes one of distrust. That his father supported him in positive ways, and now Hunter seems to be clean, is probably to my mind the most important thing. One thing father and son share is the tragedy of their past.
Time for this country and its people to let it go.
And the other thing they share is a deep love for each other.
The New York Times has just reported that a WhatsApp message has been found in which Hunter said to a Chinese business associate that "his father is right here beside him" suggesting his support in a disagreement with the associate. SO....
The NY times then says: 'Taken at face value, the message would undercut President Biden’s longstanding claims that he had nothing to do with his son’s international business deals."
Sorry, NYT. At "face value" the message shows that Hunter SAID his father was right there with him. (This was in 2017, while Biden was out of office in any event.) This is right in the middle of the his deepest drug problems. There is no evidence that his father was actually anywhere near him when he sent it.
The Times admits this further down in the story. But the damage is done by that paragraph--it will be howled to the sky by the GOP. I'm very disappointed in the Times. The proper way to report it is to say "While this could be interpreted as undermining....in fact it is only a record of what Hunter said. There was no illegality found as to the deal itself, nor evidence that Biden Sr. was in fact there. "
Just a reminder to be skeptical of what you read even in MSM.
Minor point: the investigation into Hunter started BEFORE the infamous laptop was dropped off: investigation in 2018 into business dealings; laptop in 2019.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/22/us/politics/hunter-biden-joe-business-deal.html?searchResultPosition=2
"Very" disappointed by the Times? I'm *regularly* disappointed by the Times.
This sort of dishonesty has been their MO for a few decades now. And always - ALWAYS - directed at Democrats.
I’ve found bias in opinion pieces, but in straight news they’ve always seemed to be fairly trustworthy. Or at least not as blatant as this.
Your kidding, right?
It's spelled, "you're", dear. So, that's two things you managed to get wrong in the space of a three word sentence. Impressive! Going for a personal worst, are we?
FU bootlick
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
The NYT regularly disappoints. I cannot even list how many times. It is mainstream press and that is why I need other sources of information. It is after all, owned by an Oligarch!
The Times screwed up. Yep!
Anyone remember Ken Starr and Susan McDougal during the Clinton years?
I think it is pathetic that Republicans are willing to ignore the $2 BILLION Jared took from the Saudi butcher despite the fact that he has no experience as an investor. In fact, the one major real estate investment he made, while his daddy was in jail for illegal campaign contributions, tax evasion, and witness tampering, was such a failure he ended up getting bailed out by Qatar to save the family business. I guess they can con themselves into believing that was all coincidence?
Yes, it’s time for some what-about-isms regarding other presidential relatives
And I know it's off topic, but this just in: Jack Smith offering immunity to fake electors in exchange for testimony. Which means these fake electors KNEW that they were in big trouble and WANTED immunity and ARE GOING TO TESTIFY AGAINST TRUMP. (You don't offer immunity HOPING the testimony will be favorable - the prosecutor is told ahead of time what it will be). Indictment is close.
It’s good news, but it doesn’t necessarily unfold in this manner. They can get called before the grand jury, plead the fifth, and then Jack Smith can offer them limited immunity to compel their testimony, for example. But either way, we get the testimony.
I probably should have been more precise in my first sentence. The news article is not that he is OFFERING immunity - it's that he has already granted it. "Special counsel Jack Smith has compelled at least two Republican fake electors to testify to a federal grand jury in Washington in recent weeks by giving them limited immunity." Doesn't that mean they can't plead the fifth (assuming the limited immunity is covering the subject of the testimony)?
Are the walls closing in on Trump now? So many bootlicks are still running around screaming about Russia while wearing the pussy hat. Going on 7 years now. Collectivism=group=group think.
The whole Hunter Biden thing is a clinic on rather banal implementation of law and order, a sleep-inducing PowerPoint on lesser crimes and punishment, a small particulate occupying an overstuffed chair.
Exhausting is the perpetual and perfect descriptor with which to characterize every single act, failure to act, statement, nuance and declassifying thought of today's radical Republicans; we collectively need a break.
Clear, balanced, and thoughtful.
Thanks Jay, I hope Hunter can stay clean. I’m often reminded of a line in the N.A. handbook, “most of us realized that in our addiction we were slowly committing suicide.”
You mention that two IRS agents said they wanted to bring harsher charges against Hunter Biden. I suspect that most IRS agents think the book ought to be thrown at any tax delinquent, but prosecutors have to pick their battles. I also remember two lawyers resigning from the Manhattan DA’s office because they thought Alvin Bragg was wrong not to pursue charges against Donald J. Trump who they thought was guilty of several crimes.
There's also a VERY good chance that the two IRS agents are MAGATs that have fallen for/fully supported the GQP lies.
The GOP only knows one thing: revenge! Did Hunter break the law. Yes. Did it need to have a bright spot light shined on it? No. But djt is/was in trouble so they (the GOP) tries they best to deflect and get revenge for it all.
Thank you Jay for breaking it down for us!
Burisma is the new Benghazi.