After the legacy media finally decided, five weeks after the election, to acknowledge that Joe Biden’s son is under federal investigation for crimes that may implicate the former vice president, the Biden transition team put out a statement reading:
President-elect Biden is deeply proud of his son, who has fought through difficult challenges, including the vicious personal attacks of recent months, only to emerge stronger.
There was no mention in the statement of which of Hunter Biden’s past “achievements” the president-elect was most proud of. Was it his son being drummed out of the military for cocaine abuse? Maybe it was his having sired an illegitimate child with a stripper whose g-string he was nightly stuffing with $100 bills.
Whatever the answer might be, Joe Biden is being either hopelessly naïve or dishonest when he declares that Hunter has emerged stronger from “the vicious attacks of recent months.” Until this past Wednesday, the media were complicit in Biden’s denial. Now that the cat is out of the bag, the “attacks” on Hunter — meaning news coverage — are just beginning.
It seems the media have no choice going forward but to hold the elder Biden’s feet to the fire with regard not only to his son’s nefarious dealings and his own involvement but to his past denials of any wrongdoing, including this one made during his debate with Donald Trump.
Among the more intriguing questions suggested by these remarks relates to Biden’s claim, made multiple times, that he never discussed his son’s foreign business dealings with him. The question: If he had no knowledge of his son’s “salary” from Burisma or his “gifts” from China, then how is Biden able to state categorically — as he does in this answer during the debate — that Hunter earned no money from Ukraine or China?
Up until now, Biden’s handlers have shielded him from real questions asked by reporters. With news of the investigations making headlines, it appears the stuff is about to hit the fan.