Joe Biden claimed that he was unaware of Hunter’s international business dealings while running for president.
On repeatedly occasion, Biden rejected speaking about his son.
For instance, in 2019, Fox News’s Peter Doocy requested from Biden the business conversations he had with his son.
Replying to the question, Biden said such conversations never occurred.
“How many times have you spoken to your son about his overseas business dealings?” Doocy questioned Biden.
“I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings,” Biden replied. Biden even scolded Doocy for asking such a question.
However, it appears Doocy was asking the right questions all along. Biden just wasn’t giving honest answers.
In fact, it seems that Doocy asked the right questions from the start. Biden was simply not being honest with his answers.
The question is, if Biden did not know about Hunter’s dealings, then how is it that he can now claim, as his White House has been doing, that nothing Hunter did was illegal? Biden’s story seems to be inconsistent.
In light of the recent discovery that Hunter Biden and the president’s brother James were paid $4.8 million by a Chinese energy company, Washington Examiner disclosed.
Furthermore, it was previously reported that Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company, paid Hunter Biden $50,000 a month.
These salaries are extraordinarily high for someone with no legitimate energy background or experience in any field.
“Of course the president’s confident that his son didn’t break the law,” Ron Klain, White House chief of staff, said on “This Week” in an interview.
Klain’s response to questions about Hunter’s high salary was the usual spin and deflection.
“The president is confident that his family did the right thing,” Klain said.
“But again, I want to just be really clear. These are actions by Hunter and his brother. They’re private matters. They don’t involve the president, and they certainly are something that no one at the White House is involved in.”
Nonetheless, the family of the president could be involved if they were exploiting him and his access.
Biden’s inconsistent account of Hunter’s dealings also suggests that he knows more than he says.
Maybe he didn’t want to admit that he was aware of Hunter’s shady dealings more than he was admitting at the moment.
Perhaps his original response is now false. Coming from a politician who vowed to be upfront with the public, it’s quite wearying.
