Really? Are we back to “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is”? Because that’s what Democrats spinning the testimony of Biden family associate Devon Archer on Monday are going with, contending that the president may have sat in on some phone calls, but he wasn’t “involved” in his son’s corrupt business dealings.
But Americans are wise to the Biden crime family’s long history of corruption, and Archer’s testimony is far more damaging than the Democrats will admit. As a former federal prosecutor, I know that with Devon Archer’s testimony, the case for the Biden’s “pay-to-play” scheme is made—under any definition of “involvement.”
Biden allies in Congress won’t admit this. Democrat Rep. Dan Goldman, for example, intimated that Archer’s closed-door testimony actually clears President Biden of involvement in his son’s shady business deals. After Goldman acknowledged that Hunter would “often” put his father on the phone during business calls, he claimed that Archer “was very, very consistent that none of those conversations ever had to do with any business dealings or transactions.”
This is miles away from previous claims that President Biden had “no involvement” with his son’s business dealings.
“I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings,” Biden claimed to reporters in 2019. “You should be looking at Trump… he’s using an abuse of power and every element of the presidency to try to smear me.”
That’s an amazing statement to read in 2023, especially following the third (so far) indictment of Trump, all in a transparently obviously attempt to remove him from the 2024 field of candidates.
But Archer’s testimony does, in fact, confirm that President Biden’s positions of power—and Hunter Biden’s access to his father—have been the very basis of Hunter’s business dealings. Why else would a major energy producer like Burisma put someone like Hunter on its board? His Bachelor of Arts degree in history?
Before Archer’s testimony, this was mostly speculation—albeit with a growing body of evidence supporting it. The clip of then-former Vice President Biden boasting about getting a Ukrainian prosecutor fired for investigating Hunter was widely circulated. He threatened Ukrainian officials with cutting off $1 billion in aid.
“I said, you’re not getting the billion,” Biden said in 2018. “I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bi–h. He got fired.”
It wasn’t enough; in the campaign, Biden said that incident wasn’t about Hunter. And of course, the media “fact checkers” jumped right in.
In the same way, the media is all in on the ridiculous “illusion of influence” claim. But it’s no “illusion” when Hunter Biden puts his father—now the most powerful man in the world—on the phone, that’s access in fact—not just in appearance.
As my friend David Harsanyi points out, either Joe Biden has allowed himself “to be used in creating the ‘illusion’ that Burisma and others were obtaining something of great value in return for enriching his family, or he exerted the force of the U.S. government to enact policy that helped enrich his family. Both are corrupt.”
Just as with President Bill Clinton’s testimony about Monica Lewinsky, the American public isn’t fooled. The Biden crime family has a great thing going—and no effort to redefine “involvement” will change this. That’s why Republicans in Congress must continue to pursue this investigation, even as it seems to lead straight to the Oval Office.