The ongoing scandals surrounding the laptop and cloud-stored data of Hunter Biden have remained in the media spotlight for over two years now, and those tales vary wildly in their accusations. These seedy dealings include an exhausting list of undeclared foreign lobbying, drugs, prostitution, tax evasion, back taxes, money laundering, Chinese money, Ukrainian money, Russian ties, foreign trade issues, oil companies, energy companies, tied to his father’s personal interests and benefits off them, accusations of disinformation, etc.
Most of the arguments and charges being brought against Hunter are in relation to Joe Biden and his 1994 Crime Bill, as if the best way to get to Joe is through Hunter. The only missing bits from this sensational case are the usual D.C. shady activities of human trafficking, Clinton murder mysteries, and necking with Epstein’s inner circle.
In response to the escalating chaos, some have said it is as though Hunter Biden were in the middle of a holy war and that the future of the country, along with US-international relations, is somehow tied to the information to be found on his laptop and cloud storage. These same people tend to believe that justice is only going to be maintained if Hunter Biden is also held responsible and liable as everyone else would be had they not been the son of a lifelong-politician and/or current President.
It is clear that the issue has been politicized from its inception. Likewise, it is well-understood that there may or may not be a significant conflict of interest by having fraternized, national and international, business dealings as the close relative of a politician or child of a US President. For many of those pressing for the condemnation of Hunter and Joe Biden, they correctly point to the hypocrisy of the political elite while the shadowy figures in politics make money off the backs of US tax payers which is at the expense of citizens.
What we can gain from this is the continued appreciation of limitations on government officials, and the role government plays in general. We should also be learning that if we expect a government to abide by certain rules, we should approach others with that same Golden Rule mentality of treating others the way we wish to be treated. If one’s enemies are treated with contempt, and their rights are so easily infringed upon by government as a weapon, the case can be made that the same be done to them or someone else rather arbitrarily.
It is extremely important to have checks and balances, especially between the government and those it governs. If the institution does not hold those in power accountable in the face of evidence of corruption without a lack of upholding the Constitution, then they lose their legitimacy altogether. So, if Hunter, Joe, or anyone else involved used tax payer money or overcame laws that the layperson would not have been able to, there is a serious concern with how that is to be handled in order to uphold justice with those checks and balances.
On the other hand, if the 4th Amendment is to be upheld, for example, we should not advocate for the invasion of others’ property or persons without a warrant at bare minimum. If we expect the Drug War to end, we should not even push for criminal punishment of a hypocritical politician or their relative because it perpetuates the very war’s premise we despise. If we expect government to tax less if at all, or hold a view that taxation is itself theft and avoiding such theft is important, we should not press for legal financial inquiries as this incentivizes the continued tax battles. If we believe that every individual has autonomy over their bodies, who someone chooses to have consensual adult sexual relations with, paid or unpaid, should not be a case for holding someone legally guilty or socially dragged over the coals. If we hold that privacy is foundational to integrity and liberty, we cannot so casually advocate for invasion of that privacy and the divulging of potentially legally or socially harmful information or images.
Overall, the witch-hunt mentality of desperately searching for guilt is probably one of the reasons there are so many scandals surrounding the laptop and released cloud data. The public appears to be spoon-fed the narrative, images, and information the critics want to be seen while all other data is not to be found. If there is actual guilt, it would be best to pursue it in a legal manner while upholding liberty and justice for all, including the party being flagged as guilty. If government is the reflection of the philosophy of those that lead or control, it is imperative that ours reflects tolerance, liberty, justice, trade, and peace for all.
