Hunter Biden: The artist

From Wapo

But the arrangement is drawing detractors, including ethics experts as well as art critics who suggest that Hunter Biden’s art would never be priced so high if he had a different last name. Bergès has said that prices for the paintings would range from $75,000 to $500,000.

“The whole thing is a really bad idea,” said Richard Painter, who was chief ethics lawyer to President George W. Bush from 2005 to 2007. “The initial reaction a lot of people are going to have is that he’s capitalizing on being the son of a president and wants people to give him a lot of money. I mean, those are awfully high prices.”


Even the smell of corruption on a politician like Trump would create around-the-clock news, inspire numerous stories citing ‘anonymous sources,’ and lead to liberal pundits bursting blood vessels on MSNBC and CNN.

Donald Trump Jr. even faced scrutiny when he published his book, ‘Triggered,’ in 2019 and critics questioned Republican Party events purchasing thousands of copies. If Trump Jr. had been auctioning off paintings for hundreds of thousands of dollars, you can bet the media would start questioning things.

Not so with Hunter. Just like his seeming free pass on the laptop situation, he is again being coddled and protected by both the political ruling class and the media.

While art can be considered a relatively stable investment, it is difficult to gauge what a market demands of a new painter, with the price of work being entirely subjective. This is not the case with Hunter Biden. He’s asking for half a million right off the bat.

The irony of this nonsense is that the White House is working so hard to make it appear as if Hunter’s foray into art has nothing to do with his father, yet the only thing giving his work any value is his last name. Check out some of his work and ask yourself if it’s the best way to drop $500,000?

The decision to keep buyers private is suspicious, and one that has the opposite effect than the one the White House intends. Numerous critics have piled on to the lack of transparency.

“Is this amateur hour for government ethics?” Walter Schaub, the head of the United States Office of Government Ethics from 2013 to 2017, asked on Twitter. “Good luck dealing with the fallout when a new owner of Hunter’s pricey ‘art’ appears in a magazine spread. In the meantime, the WH has put its stamp of approval on the president’s son profiting off his father’s public service again.”

This is too funny to ignore, first he got a position with Burisma without no help from his dad now this…

Biden should have just hired his whole family and put them in White House jobs that they are unqualified for. What a rube.

This does have a similar stench to some of the other recent deals the Trump’s did.

The first paragraph that secondlife missed

White House officials have helped craft an agreement under which purchases of Hunter Biden’s artwork — which could be listed at prices as high as $500,000 — will be kept confidential from even the artist himself, in an attempt to avoid ethical issues

Compare that too:

Donald Trump Jr. even faced scrutiny when he published his book, ‘Triggered,’ in 2019 and critics questioned Republican Party events [purchasing] thousands of copies.

Yep, if the Democratic National Committee were buying Hunter’s paintings for hundreds of thousands of dollars, that would be an issue.

(The rt article misquotes the source. The books were not bought by “events”, they were purchased by the RNC.)

Yep, I don’t like presidents’ kids profiting off the connection. I don’t know how you stop it entirely. Is Jenna Bush a good enough reporter to earn her job at NBC? Or such a literary critic that people would want to follow her book club?

In Biden’s case, it appears that critics think the stuff is good enough to sell, but the asking prices are awfully high. The solution seems to be to set “reasonable” prices, collect names of willing buyers, then choose one by lot. If that person later resells for a profit the extra margin goes to the lucky buyer, not to Hunter.

I agree with other articles I’ve seen on this that say the whole secretive buyer thing in the art world seems sleazy. The WaPo article links to this:

The rt article complains that the “left-wing” media is ignoring this. But secondlife’s first link is to a WaPo story. It seems that they thought it was news worthy.

The qualm is he listed the price of his paintings too high? You can do better than this…


Weird, I didn’t know this was being suppressed with the number of times I’ve heard about it.

Almost feels like he’s capitalizing on his NIL

I don’t like this. I didn’t like Trump owning a convention center type hotel 4 blocks from the White House. I don’t like nepotism. I don’t want to get in a game of whataboutism because it just turns into justification of “my” people’s immoral behavior because “your” people did something similar. This is immoral and ought to not happen till after Joe leaves office.