Mainstream media outlets and Washington D.C. reporters are finally turning their attention to scandals involving the Democratic Party, years after conservative voices raised the alarm. This shift in coverage is sparking debate and raising questions about timing and potential bias.
The New York Post’s editorial board criticized The New York Times for its recent coverage of Hunter Biden’s alleged influence-peddling, noting that the article appeared only after the November election, rendering its impact negligible. They highlighted the significant time lag between The Post’s initial reporting on the issue and the Times’ belated coverage, questioning the Times’ motives and suggesting a possible political agenda at play.
The Times article itself revealed that Hunter Biden, son of former President Joe Biden, allegedly sought support from the State Department to benefit his former employer, Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company. This action, along with allegations of influence-peddling by both Hunter and his father, has been a long-standing point of contention for conservatives. President Biden himself denied any involvement in his son’s business dealings, but this claim is increasingly difficult to reconcile with emerging evidence.
Further fueling the controversy is the sweeping 10-year pardon issued by President Biden to his son, protecting Hunter from potential offenses committed between 2014 and 2024. This pardon, coupled with the perceived lack of initial coverage by mainstream media, has led to accusations of a deliberate cover-up and a double standard in media reporting.
Jonathan Turley, a Fox News contributor and law professor, pointed out the significant delay in the mainstream media’s investigation into the Biden family’s alleged influence-peddling, emphasizing that the information had been available for years. He highlights the disparity between the early reporting of alternative media and the delayed mainstream coverage.
This delayed attention isn’t limited to the Biden family. Mainstream media is also revisiting other previously dismissed claims, such as the lab leak theory concerning the origins of COVID-19 and President Biden’s declining mental fitness. The New York Times, for example, recently published a column acknowledging that the scientific community may have misled the public about the lab leak theory, contradicting previous reports and dismissing initial concerns as ‘racist’.
Adding to the narrative, a newly released book by veteran D.C. reporters Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes details President Biden’s alleged mental decline in the run-up to the election, portraying him as a diminished figure. The authors contend that Biden’s inner circle actively concealed his condition, creating a scenario where concerns about his fitness for office were largely ignored by mainstream media until after the election.
Concerns about President Biden’s mental state intensified following a poorly received debate performance in June 2024. While conservatives had raised these concerns earlier, the mainstream media’s attention only significantly increased after Biden’s performance was widely criticized. This pattern of delayed coverage continues to raise concerns about media bias and the potential for political agendas to influence news reporting.
Even CNN anchor Jake Tapper, a known Trump critic, is contributing to the discussion with his forthcoming book, “Original Sin,” which promises to delve into Biden’s decline and the alleged cover-up. The convergence of these events suggests a broader reassessment of events and narratives previously downplayed or ignored by much of the mainstream media. The timing of this renewed interest, however, remains a point of significant contention.
