In a way you have to feel sorry for Joe Biden. In best Politburo fashion, which is the only way the Democrat Party works, he has served in the fields and worked his way to the top of the hierarchy. Like a good soldier, he accepted his orders and stood aside in 2016, despite being a much stronger candidate, for the “historic” candidacy of a corrupt, unlikable and unaccomplished (unless we want to call being married to Bill Clinton an accomplishment) tour director for Fort Marcy Park (just joking, you leftwing goobers, lighten up), Hillary Clinton.
Now, in this last chance to grasp the brass ring of the presidency, QuidProJoe finds himself enveloped in a miasma of outright corruption and very corrupt looking activities which also largely involve his coke-snorting, philandering son, Hunter Biden. Ordinarily, we can expect the leftwing media to run interference for Democrat candidates on just about everything, see, for instance, how the media covered manifest and blatant corruption that characterized the Clinton Foundation. So one can excuse Biden for being butthurt when the New York Times ran this op-ed yesterday: What Hunter Biden Did Was Legal — And That’s the Problem
In December 2013, Joe and Hunter Biden flew aboard Air Force Two to China; less than two weeks after the trip, Hunter’s firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners, which he founded with two other businessmen in June 2013, finalized a deal to open a fund, BHR Partners, whose largest shareholder is the government-run Bank of China, even though he had scant background in private equity. (Representatives of the fund claim that the timing of the deal and the Bidens’ trip to China was coincidental.) Thus far, the firm has invested about $2.1 billion, according to its website.
In trying to disprove a link between the father’s powerful position and the son’s surprising success, Hunter Biden’s lawyers claim he did not take an equity stake in BHR Partners until after Joe Biden left office. Hunter, whose company, according to its financial records, held an equity stake in the fund, took a board seat when it was founded, in December 2013. At the same time, his business partner, Devon Archer, was vice chairman.
With the Russian invasion of Crimea in 2014, Joe Biden became point person in Ukraine as well. That same year, Hunter Biden landed a board position with the Ukrainian energy giant Burisma Holdings. Despite having no background in energy or Ukraine, the vice president’s son was paid as much as $50,000 a month, according to financial records. (He left the board in early 2019.)
To say the Biden campaign went batsh** crazy is to indulge in massive understatement.
Biden campaign blasts NYT in letter to Dean Baquet
In a Wednesday evening letter addressed to Dean Baquet, the Biden campaign excoriated The New York Times for its recent coverage of Joe Biden, his son Hunter Biden, and Ukraine. The letter was written by deputy campaign manager and comms director Kate Bedingfield. She expressed extreme displeasure with how The Times has covered the debunked notion Biden abused his office to benefit his son.
Bedingfield wrote that The Times, which published a widely panned story in May by reporter Ken Vogel and then-freelancer Iuliia Mendel, “had an outsized hand in the spread” of the “baseless conspiracy theory.”
In Bedingfield’s words, “What was especially troubling about the Times’s active participation in this smear campaign is that prior to its reporting on the subject by Ken Vogel, this conspiracy had been relegated to the likes of Breitbart, Russian propaganda, and another conspiracy theorist, regular Hannity guest John Solomon.”
- “widely panned” means truthful but didn’t fit the Democrat narrative.
- “debunked” means they can’t answer the charges so all they can do is claim they don’t exist.
- “conspiracy theorist” is anyone who doesn’t agree with the Democrat narrative…like the people who claimed from the beginning that the Russia Hoax was…well…a hoax.
Biden is pulling the old coaching ploy of screaming at the ref on this play in hopes that he will get a better call on the next one. It won’t work. The corruption of Joe Biden’s influence peddling to assist and protect his son is simply too blatant and too easy to understand. More is going to trickle out and the New York Times will either have to take the lead in breaking those stories or begrudgingly following other outlets as they do. But the story is going to come out. The second reason that it won’t work is that when you have a newspaper that will hire a member of its editorial board who boasted about she hates men and white people, you should be bright enough to figure out that a septuagenarian, melanin-challenged, penis-possessing (making an assumption here, I have no personal or second hand knowledge that this is the case) candidate like Biden is not going to get treated all that well. The New York Times’s reporting staff is firmly in the bag for Elizabeth Warren and any story that hurts Biden helps her.