Roughly 43% of U.S. adults identify themselves as politically independent. However, according to Gallup polling, only 7-12% of Americans are considered “truly” independent, meaning they do not lean toward either the Democratic or Republican Party.
This small group of genuine independent voters is most likely the ones who see issues from both sides, such as the Hunter Biden-Ukraine business dealings versus the Trump family business conflict situation.
Let’s explore the selective outrage and partisan hypocrisy that have been going on since 2014 and the ensuing partisan divide.
Hunter Biden and Ukraine
Hunter Biden joined the board of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma in 2014 while his father, Joe Biden, was vice president. Hunter was deeply involved in Ukraine policymaking, which created the appearance of a conflict.
Republicans built a narrative that Hunter’s role represented deep corruption and influence peddling by the Biden family. However, America’s policy toward Ukraine never changed.
A GOP-led Senate investigation concluded only that Hunter’s position was problematic and awkward for U.S. anti-corruption efforts.
Trump family business conflicts
During Donald Trump’s 2017-2021 presidency, he retained ownership of his global business empire, which allowed numerous conflicts of interest to arise among eight Trump-branded hotels/resorts, 15 golf courses, and around 30 licensing deals (CIO Times). That business ownership still prevails in Trump 2.0.
Ethics watchdogs tracked government and lobbyists' spending at Trump properties during his first presidency, foreign trademarks granted to Trump companies, and ongoing or renewed business ventures in the Middle East, raising serious questions about foreign leverage over U.S. policy.
A lawsuit filed by 29 Senators and 186 House Democrats alleged Mr. Trump violated the Constitution’s emoluments clause.
Key differences at a glance
Hunter Biden held no American government office and served on a private board at one foreign company. Formal GOP-led investigations found the situation was only problematic, and the GOP’s intensity of criticism included impeachment rhetoric against his father.
Donald Trump was president, and his children were senior advisers and had ongoing control over global branding, real estate, and licensing. Ethics groups warned of pervasive, structural conflicts that touched on many policy areas. Republicans have not criticized Mr. Trump about violating the emoluments clause during either Trump 1.0 or 2.0 presidencies.
The truly independent registered voters can easily see that Hunter Biden’s case dealt with criminal charges, while Mr. Trump and his family business issues centered on ethics and constitutional questions and concerns.
Hunter Biden’s criminal case
Hunter Biden was convicted in federal court on three felony gun charges for lying about his drug use on a 2018 firearm purchase form. He also pleaded guilty to nine federal tax charges in September 2024. However, Hunter received a full presidential pardon from his father, President Joe Biden, which spared Hunter from sentencing and potential prison time.
President Biden’s pardon of his son was highly controversial and one of 80 full clemency pardons issued during his 2021-2025 term of office. Mr. Trump issued 144 full clemency pardons during his 2017-2021 presidency, and over 1,500 pardons have occurred since Jan. 20 (Al Jazeera).
Hunter’s case deals with straightforward criminal statutes of a personal nature rather than an alleged abuse of public office.
Donald Trump and the Trump family's constitutional and ethics issues
Donald Trump’s situation is legally distinct, with lawsuits and watchdog reports focusing on whether he violated the emoluments clause by continuing to own businesses that received $160 million from foreign and domestic government clients. At the same time, he was president (CREW). On Jan. 25, 2021, the Supreme Court identified the emolument lawsuits as moot because Trump was no longer president.
Trump’s children and in-laws held formal government roles in Trump 1.0 and in Trump’s 2.0 administration, all the while maintaining or pursuing foreign business interests. This has prompted legal and ethics complaints about conflicts and potential violations of anti-nepotism norms. Mr. Trump has argued that conflict-of-interest rules do not apply to him as president.
Americans may not know that 577 legal challenges to Trump administration actions have already been filed in the 330 days of Trump 2.0. With 1,131 days of Trump 2.0 to go, stay tuned as violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clause may again see the light of day.
Core legal differences
In summary, Hunter Biden has concrete criminal convictions. Mr. Trump faces ongoing civil, constitutional, and ethics challenges over his business dealings and foreign payments, with watchdogs alleging serious illegality but, to date, no equivalent criminal verdicts against him.
The tale of selective outrage is well understood by the 7-12% of truly independent registered voters. They realize the Hunter Biden case was a personal matter that’s closed, whereas there’s a lot of time – and possible actions – left before Trump 2.0 comes to a close.
It’s a sad commentary that the remaining 88-93% of voters can’t see issues from both sides; partisan hypocrisy prevails in America.
Steve Corbin is a professor emeritus of marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.