Hunter Biden's Ukraine gig was corrupt, just not in the way Republican conspiracists claim it was

One reporting simplification that makes things sound so much worse:

And then there’s Ukraine. In February 2014, Hunter Biden, less than a year after enlisting in the Navy, was discharged for testing positive for cocaine.

What’s left out is that this was the Navy Reserve he joined in his 40s – sounds so much more suspicious to imagine this consulting gig straight out of a cocaine-fueled youthful enlistment, but sounds about right when the full context is supplied.


Needs more “Mom’s basement conspiracy web string.”


Did they find that out from his tax returns?

1 Like

Honestly, I don’t think anyone’s going to care about Hunter Biden after they hear the names, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman.

Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman! What great movie names!


Assumed. The media loves the horse race. The horse race needs a favorite and an underdog, and a villain. Especially if that favorite can fail, falter, or pull a heel turn. If Ukraine wasn’t dominating the news right now they’d be ecstatic that one of the underdogs has caught him. And a lot of his dominance in the news despite that, is currently connected to Ukraine. And whether he’ll do the heel turn, is he corrupt? Could it be true? Will it impact is electability?

Almost every Democrat or Democrat adjacent person I know over the age of 50 is on Biden. As are a bunch of my peers in the 30ish block. And quite a lot of them like Biden a lot (if not like him as a nominee). But there is almost no discussion of his policies, positions, history. And very little actual enthusiasm about the guy. It seems 100% driven by fond Obama feels and the expectation that he he will play better to some one else. Often framed as everyone else being “too progressive” even conservatives and people more conservative than Biden.

He was never as dominating a front runner as the pundits said, he peaked at around half of where Clinton was polling before the first primaries. He’s here because of hand wringing, fear, and received wisdom from decades past. The idea that a thoroughly middle of the road candidate that can appeal to the right is the only safe past. That worked in the 80’s and 90’s. But it presumes that the generation that drove that is still representative of the entire nation. Its boomer shit.


Igor Fruman? The Sausage King of Chicago?


Well, it does look like they knew how the sausage got made.

1 Like

Instead, he’s HB; neither hard nor soft. His monogrammed pencils turn up all over the place.


It’s almost as if the BB readers trended significantly to the left of the average Democrat, let alone the average American voter, and that BBers’ interests, expectations and demands weren’t representative at all… :wink:


Well a big portion of Bernie supporters have Biden as their number 2 choice. Kind of my point is that Biden’s support level seems to be disconnected from political views.

For what its worth the griping about Biden is often based on the same misapprehensions about “average voters”. There’s a really miniscule amount of people who are truly ideologically in the middle, true independents, or actually undecided. To the point that an average voter practically doesn’t exist.

Think about it this way. If I have 5 black cats, and you have 5 white cats. Then the “average” cat is grey, but there are no grey cats. We tend to assume that means there are mostly gray cats.


I like your metaphor, but it’s even worse; the “real” average cat is a calico.


I get what your saying but my point is that they aren’t. Its all black and white cats. You got a Biden and he in theory appeals to the gray cats. So he’s electable. Some black and some white cats will like Biden because “hey all these grey cats will want to cuddle with him”. And that’ll work if are mostly grey cats, but the reality is there aren’t any gray cats.

Pretty sure that’s why Biden is struggling. As people become familiar with other candidates, and Warren has caught up. The sheen of electability has started to wear off, and with so few gray cats around…

1 Like

Thus, calico. Most informed voters agree most with Candidate A on one issue, Candidate B on another, and Candidate C on yet a third issue. So rather than a bunch of gray cats, you’ve got calicos with different patterns.


Ah, I see. So he’s like the milquetoast of power people. Me? I prefer a good 6B any day.

1 Like

Right you are! Thanks!

If Billy hadn’t ruined the beer endorsement gig maybe Hunter would’ve been able to find some cash stateside.

1 Like

Hey, it turns out your meme was basic bullshit.


So, what are the odds?

Did you check the Politifact link? Because the answer is 0 out of 0.


I mean, the odds of choosing four Americans and it turning out all of them have children who worked on the board of Ukrainian energy companies are very low. If N is the number of Americans who have worked on the board of a Ukrainian energy company, and we are choosing Americans over 50 (so they have a chance of having children old enough to have done so) and they all had an average of 2 children (birth rates were higher 30 years ago) then the odd would be:


Which, if N is, say 10, comes out to about three times ten to the negative 29. If one of the Americans you chose is known to have a child who did work on such a board the odds go up dramatically, but they are still so insanely unlikely that one would never believe the people were in fact chosen at random.

Of course the odds that someone could put together a panel of people who didn’t have children working for Ukranian energy companies and imply that they did are 100%.