Last week I characterized Hunter Biden’s threatened legal assault on the purveyors of his abandoned laptop as “Battle of the Bulge, Biden style.” Hunter Biden’s new legal team invited the authorities to bring privacy claims and alleged defamation claims against a variety of parties that had the temerity to bring the contents of the laptop to the attention of the public. The news was notable for a number of reasons including those that fall under the heading of Laughter Is the Best Medicine.
Biden supporters including the old man himself had previously asserted that the contents of the laptop constituted Russian disinformation. Last week’s letters on Hunter’s behalf had moved on from the absurd lies of the Deep State 51, President Biden, and their media conduits. “This failed dirty political trick directly resulted in the exposure, exploitation, and manipulation of Mr. Biden’s private and personal information,” said big bucks Biden attorney Abbe Lowell. It was an amazing development.
But wait! No sooner had the letters gone out and been released than Hunter’s lawyers walked right back. The Lowell letters were inoperative in their logic. “These letters do not confirm Mac Isaac’s [the repair shop owner who took custody of it originally] or others’ versions of a so-called laptop. They address their conduct of seeking, manipulating, and disseminating what they allege to be Mr. Biden’s personal data, wherever they claim to have gotten it.”
At NRO, Jim Geraghty, Jeffrey Blehar, and Andrew McCarthy applied the law of non-contradiction to the Biden offensive. That is one law that Hunter Biden’s lawyers will neither observe nor call on the authorities to enforce.
🚨NEW: attorney for Hunter Biden tells me letters requesting investigation into the laptop repair store owner, Rudy Guiliani, and others, are NOT an acknowledgment that the laptop is, in fact, Hunter's: pic.twitter.com/RPbksqNR0v
— Jacqui Heinrich (@JacquiHeinrich) February 2, 2023
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.