Hunter Biden came out of hiding for a long ABC News interview Tuesday morning to try to lay to rest the questions about his foreign profiteering. He failed.

The main controversy centers on his $50,000-a-month position on the board of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian natural gas company that’s been under investigation for corruption for a decade, on and off.

Why did it bring on a 44-year-old lawyer who had no experience with Ukraine or natural gas — but happened to be the son of the US vice president who was serving as administration point man on Ukraine?

“I think I had as much experience as anybody else on the board … if not more,” Hunter told ABC News.

But — asked outright: “If your name was not Biden, do you think you would have been asked to be on the board of Burisma?” — he didn’t dare deny the obvious: “Probably not,” he replied.

Indeed, “There’s a lot of things in my life that wouldn’t have happened if my name wasn’t Biden.” That would plainly include his even more lucrative luck in doing business in China — another country for which father Joe had point. Heck, Hunter’s first big job was with MBNA America, a Delaware bank holding company that was one of Joe’s top campaign donors.

Hunter insists he never sold access to his father — as if the name alone weren’t a promise of influence.

But the only “poor judgment” Hunter admits to was that he “didn’t take into account” the chance “that there would be a Rudy Giuliani or a president of the United States who would be listening to this ridiculous conspiracy idea” — namely, suspicions about Joe’s publicly admitted role in the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor who was probing Burisma.

He never figured anyone would look into it. How many other influence peddlers could make the same pathetic excuse?