Inside the Biden family business

The New York Post continues to mine the contents of Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop. Via Miranda Devine’s Twitter feed we are alerted to Jon Levine’s story “Hunter Biden’s laptop had contacts for Google execs, US officials for China policy.” I would have missed it otherwise and want to bring it to the attention of interested readers. It is an excellent story.

What is there to say that hasn’t been said? Most notable is the lack of interest in pursuing the story in precincts other than the Post and the Daily Mail. The deeper we get the more sickening the story becomes.

One of the US-China officials listed in the address book contained in the laptop responded to the Post’s request for comment. All of the others either declined to comment or did not respond to requests for comment.

The address book also contained the names of 10 current and former Google executives. Kenneth Davies is one of them. He worked with the company’s philanthropic and venture capital arms between 2008 and 2012. He told Levine he remembered Hunter Biden coming to the company headquarters in Mountain View to pitch Googlers on investments abroad. He told Levine: “He was pitching some crazy things like some Chinese stuff. … We kind of looked at it and I kinda scoffed at it. He certainly did not know what he was talking about as it relates to energy. It was very much ‘I am Hunter Biden — look at the last name. Rosemont Seneca. We are brokering deals.’ He certainly did not have subject matter expertise about what he was trying to pitch.”

Levine adds this quote from Davies: “My overall impression [was] this guy has clearly just been riding daddy’s coat tails and I have better things to do with my time.”

Google provided Levine a statement that it had never invested cash in any Hunter Biden projects. Other than Davies and one other named Google exec, however, all the current and former Google employees declined or did not respond to request for comment from The Post. Whole thing here.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses