What we’ve learned since then is that there’s no easy way to get the real answer to that question.
When Hunter Biden’s career as an artist took off like a rocket as soon as his dad moved into the Oval Office, it was perfectly obvious that his costly artistic creations could be a conduit for influence-peddling. It wasn’t even subtle. An ethics agreement that the White House “helped” to negotiate, but never made public, promised that the newly professional painter would not know who purchased his works or bid on them, and then at the first Biden art show organized by the Georges Bergès Gallery, the president’s son was on hand to chat with all the potential buyers. Hunter Biden is currently under investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice for alleged crimes involving federal taxes and foreign lobbying laws. The charges stem from activities long before he was a rookie professional artist. He also made a lot of money and a lot of deals as a rookie energy executive, a rookie international trade specialist and a rookie money manager. The authenticated emails on the laptop computer that belonged to Hunter Biden appear to implicate his father. U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who is leading the federal investigation, recently asked a witness before the grand jury about the email that said “the big guy” would get 10 percent of a lucrative potential deal and that the share would be held by “H.” The U.S. Department of Justice reports to President Joe Biden. Last weekend White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain stated publicly, “The president’s confident that his son didn’t break the law.” Is that an opinion or an instruction? White House press secretary Jen Psaki insisted this week that the Department of Justice is independent and can conduct an independent investigation of the president’s son, even though the president has declared that his son did nothing illegal. But who’s making the decisions about the scope of any charges and the timing of any indictment? And who has access to that information before it is public? This isn’t the first time there has been a question about a conflict of interest in an executive branch investigation.
