Hunter Biden is attempting yet another reinvention. Fresh from securing a $1.7 million punitive damages judgment against former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne, who lost the case by default after failing to appear for trial, the former first son has launched a coordinated publicity campaign involving podcasts, frequent posts on X, a new Substack, live appearances, and an upcoming documentary financed by his Hollywood benefactor Kevin Morris.
As Miranda Devine has reported in the New York Post, this is not an organic redemption story. It is a deliberate effort to rehabilitate Hunter Biden’s image, monetize his notoriety, and recast the history of the laptop that exposed his conduct, financial dealings, and proximity to his father’s political power. Hunter now portrays himself as a misunderstood addict whose every failure should be excused as the product of crack cocaine. His addiction was real and destructive, but it does not explain years of foreign business arrangements, complex corporate structures, unpaid taxes, suspicious financial transfers, or repeated invocation of the Biden name while seeking money and influence.
Addiction may explain chaos. It does not erase evidence. The laptop documented Hunter’s dealings in China, Ukraine, Russia, Romania, and elsewhere. It contained emails, messages, photographs, financial records, and recordings that directly contradicted Joe Biden’s repeated claim that he knew nothing about his son’s business affairs. References to the “Big Guy,” proposed equity splits, meetings with foreign associates, and Hunter’s own complaints about paying his father’s expenses raised serious questions that much of the media refused to examine honestly.
Instead of addressing those questions, Hunter and Kevin Morris have advanced an increasingly elaborate narrative involving Rudy Giuliani, Russian operatives, manipulated databases, fabricated recordings, Hunter’s former psychiatrist Keith Ablow, me, and others. It is an attempt to recast those who exposed the material as participants in a conspiracy against him.
As I have stated emphatically in the past I must now reiterate that I never possessed, nor saw the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop until I read about it in the New York Post. His claim that I was somehow involved with the exposure of his laptop, are the delusions of a crackhead.
The origin of the laptop is not a mystery. A man identifying himself as Hunter Biden brought three damaged MacBook Pro computers to John Paul Mac Isaac’s repair shop in Wilmington, Delaware, in April 2019. Hunter’s signature appears on the repair authorization. He never paid the bill and never retrieved the devices. Mac Isaac later provided the original computer to the FBI, which seized it under federal subpoena in December 2019.
Federal prosecutors later introduced material from the laptop during Hunter’s gun trial. An FBI agent testified that the device was authenticated through its serial number and that investigators found no evidence of tampering or file insertion. The laptop was not just a media story; it became courtroom evidence.
Independent analysts also verified large portions of the data. Some emails were confirmed through cryptographic signatures, others through recipients and contemporaneous records. Hunter has gradually retreated from blanket denials, acknowledging that much of the material is genuine while still suggesting that unspecified portions may have been altered.
This is a familiar pattern. Deny everything until denial becomes impossible, then concede selectively while casting doubt on the remainder.
When the New York Post first reported the laptop in October 2020, the Biden campaign did not disprove the contents. Instead, 51 former intelligence officials issued a letter claiming the story had the “classic earmarks” of Russian disinformation, despite offering no evidence of Russian involvement. That claim provided justification for social media companies and major outlets to suppress the story during a presidential election.
Twitter blocked the Post’s reporting. Facebook limited its distribution. Major news organizations treated authenticated material as suspect while amplifying the unproven Russian narrative. Only after the election did many acknowledge the authenticity of the material they had previously dismissed.
Hunter now argues the laptop proves only drug use and addiction. That claim is false. The device contained a detailed record of income, spending, foreign relationships, tax issues, firearm purchase, and business negotiations. It helped establish conduct that later resulted in multiple federal convictions.
In June 2024, a federal jury convicted Hunter Biden of three felonies related to the purchase and possession of a Colt revolver. The jury found he lied on federal forms about drug use, made false statements required for firearm purchase records, and possessed a firearm while unlawfully using controlled substances. These were not political accusations. They were criminal convictions reached unanimously by a jury.
Three months later, Hunter pleaded guilty to three felony tax offenses and six misdemeanors. Federal prosecutors alleged he failed to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes, evaded assessments, and filed false returns over a four-year period while spending heavily on drugs, escorts, luxury travel, cars, clothing, and other personal expenses.
He was not a destitute addict. He received millions through foreign business arrangements while ignoring tax obligations. Addiction may explain some behavior, but it does not excuse deliberate tax violations or false filings. The laptop was central to this record. It contained financial data and communications from the same period covered by the tax case, helping establish timelines and corroborate evidence later used in court.
The public also had legitimate questions about why foreign companies and politically connected figures paid large sums to Hunter Biden. He had no background in Ukrainian energy policy when he joined Burisma’s board. He lacked the experience typically required for such compensation. His primary asset was his last name.
Joe Biden was vice president of the United States, and Hunter monetized proximity to him. Burisma appointed Hunter while its owner faced scrutiny in Ukraine, and while U.S. policy toward that country was under the vice president’s influence. Hunter has never provided a convincing explanation for why his role was necessary beyond access and prestige.
A similar pattern emerged in China. Hunter traveled with his father to Beijing aboard Air Force Two in 2013 and introduced him to Chinese businessman Jonathan Li. Hunter later obtained a 10 percent equity interest in Bohai Harvest RST (Shanghai) Equity Investment Fund Management Company Limited, a Chinese private equity firm backed in part by state-connected financial institutions. He held that interest through his wholly owned company, Skaneateles LLC.
Hunter’s lawyer subsequently announced publicly that Hunter had divested himself of his interest in the Chinese firm. What was not disclosed at the time was that the divestment consisted of selling Skaneateles, and therefore its 10 percent interest in Bohai Harvest RST, to his sugar daddy Kevin Morris. Hunter later confirmed the transaction in sworn congressional testimony. Morris separately acknowledged that his purchase of Skaneateles gave him control of Hunter’s Chinese equity interest and that he continued to hold it.
Hunter did not simply relinquish the investment or walk away empty-handed. He sold the company holding the equity to the same wealthy patron who paid his delinquent taxes, purchased his artwork, covered personal expenses, financed his legal defense, and is now bankrolling a documentary intended to rehabilitate him. Morris also assumed responsibility for a loan associated with Hunter’s acquisition of the Chinese equity. The arrangement further entwined Hunter’s foreign business interests with the man who became his lawyer, financier, purchaser, and public relations impresario.
Hunter also pursued a separate series of deals with the Chinese energy conglomerate China Energy Company Limited. One email related to that venture referenced dividing equity among the participants, including “10 held by H for the big guy.” Business partner Tony Bobulinski identified the “big guy” as Joe Biden. Whether or not that particular deal was completed, the language reflected how participants discussed the vice president’s role.
Hunter also sent a message to a Chinese associate stating he was with his father and demanding payment. Shortly afterward, millions of dollars moved into accounts tied to his business network. He now claims this reference to his father was meaningless. That explanation strains credibility.
Congressional investigators traced more than $24 million from foreign sources to Biden family members and associates. The money moved through multiple entities before reaching individuals connected to the family. While not every transaction is criminal, the structure warranted serious scrutiny.
Banks filed more than 150 suspicious activity reports (SARs) involving Hunter Biden and related accounts. Routinely a SAR is always reported to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). These reports are not proof of wrongdoing, but they are indicators that financial activity may require investigation. A politically connected family receiving repeated foreign transfers should not be shielded from scrutiny.
Romania added another example. Funds linked to businessman Gabriel Popoviciu moved through intermediaries before reaching Biden-associated accounts while Popoviciu faced corruption allegations. Hunter was paid despite lacking any official role.
Joe Biden repeatedly denied discussing business with his son. That claim was undermined by testimony and records showing calls, meetings, and shared appearances with foreign associates. Devon Archer testified that Joe Biden was placed on speakerphone during business meetings. Hunter arranged dinners where his father met foreign partners.
Joe Biden’s presence itself was the product being sold. Access, not policy, was the commodity.
The defense offered by the Bidens relied on a narrow definition of corruption: that no specific policy change was directly exchanged for payment. Influence operations rarely work that way. They depend on access, expectation, and implied leverage rather than explicit contracts.
Hunter and his uncle Jim Biden were part of a broader financial network. Money moved through associates and entities before reaching family members. Joe Biden received payments labeled as loan repayments from his brother after business-related transactions. These arrangements demanded scrutiny rather than dismissal.
A House impeachment inquiry concluded that Joe Biden engaged in conduct involving influence peddling that benefited his family. While not a criminal conviction, the findings were based on records, testimony, and financial data that cannot be ignored.
Whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler testified that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) investigation into Hunter Biden was obstructed, delayed, and limited. They alleged investigators were restricted from pursuing leads that could implicate Joe Biden and that key steps were blocked or slowed. They also stated that statute-of-limitations issues were allowed to expire on potential charges and that investigative tools were withheld. Their testimony helped expose irregularities in the handling of the case.
A plea agreement initially offered to Hunter would have resolved charges with minimal consequences. It collapsed in court when a judge questioned its scope and unusual immunity provisions. Only after that collapse, and after whistleblower disclosures, were felony charges pursued.
Joe Biden later issued a sweeping pardon covering federal offenses from 2014 through 2024. That period includes Hunter’s foreign business activity, tax issues, and firearm conviction. The pardon effectively shielded him from further federal prosecution across a decade of conduct. The timing and scope of the pardon raised serious questions about its purpose.
Hunter’s current media campaign depends on selective memory. He wants the public to forget prior denials, prior statements, and prior reporting. He seeks to replace documented history with personal narrative shaped by addiction, recovery, and grievance. But the record remains unchanged.
His judgment against Byrne does not validate his broader claims. The case was decided by default and did not address the laptop’s authenticity or the wider evidence. Addiction does not erase responsibility. Many Americans struggle with substance abuse without engaging in foreign business dealings, tax evasion, firearm violations, or relying on presidential pardons. Hunter Biden is entitled to recovery. He is not entitled to rewrite history.
Kevin Morris can fund documentaries. Media figures can provide platforms. None of it alters emails, financial records, testimony, or court findings.
In a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, Hunter repeated claims that the laptop data was stolen from cloud storage by unknown actors. He offered no evidence. Carlson acknowledged familiarity with some material but did not press sufficiently on the physical device, its chain of custody, or its use in court.
Hunter’s claim remains unsupported speculation. His strategy is consistent. Question the origin of the laptop, concede partial authenticity, and attribute remaining material to manipulation. Deny foreign payments are connected to influence. Reframe legal outcomes as persecution. Present addiction as universal explanation. Each step narrows responsibility while expanding ambiguity. A forthcoming documentary will likely emphasize personal struggle, family hardship, and recovery. These elements may be real, but they also serve to obscure documented financial and legal issues.
Compassion for addiction does not require acceptance of revisionist history. The chronology is clear. Foreign payments flowed to Biden-linked entities. Taxes went unpaid. A firearm was purchased illegally. A laptop containing extensive records was abandoned. Federal convictions followed. A presidential pardon closed the legal consequences. These are facts, not interpretations.
The Biden family’s survival strategy has long relied on denial, delay, and institutional protection. Hunter’s current campaign is a continuation of that pattern, now repackaged for media consumption. The laptop remains. The evidence remains. The record remains. No amount of publicity can change that.
Truly a piece of shit just like his father is. Rubbish.
This is the Biden family operating manual: deny, delay, blame Russia, attack the messenger, invoke addiction, cash the checks, then rewrite the record when the documents survive. Hunter abandoned the laptop. Prosecutors authenticated it. Analysts verified key material. Whistleblowers exposed obstruction. The sweetheart plea collapsed. The convictions followed. Then Joe Biden issued the pardon that covered the entire danger zone. Now Kevin Morris bankrolls the rehabilitation tour. No documentary, podcast, Substack, or Tucker appearance changes the facts. The laptop remains. The money remains. The pardon remains. The influence racket remains.