The decision by Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden has set the stage for uncomfortable questions for Democrats during the 2024 presidential campaign. In light of this development, Democrats should carefully consider their words before speaking on the matter. During a television interview in May, President Joe Biden insisted that his son has done nothing wrong. But is that really true? There is now a strong possibility that Hunter Biden has violated U.S. laws and engaged in wrongdoing that goes beyond what is technically illegal.
To understand the disconnect between what most ordinary Americans perceive as corruption and the narrow definition of corruption in professional spheres like politics, law, and big business, some context is needed. The Supreme Court has continuously narrowed the legal definition of corruption through various cases, starting from 1987 up until this year. This has led to a disillusionment among many Americans who have witnessed the Court’s disregard for its own ethical standards. The Court has reduced our right to “honest services” from public servants to only outlawing the exchange of “official acts” for money or gifts as part of government duties. Furthermore, the Court has even narrowed down what qualifies as an “official act.” This has resulted in disqualifying actions like pressuring subordinates or orchestrating politically motivated traffic closures on a major bridge.
What is even more striking is the unanimous agreement among the Court’s liberal justices in these decisions, despite a strong dissent by John Paul Stevens in the initial case of McNally v. United States. The 2010 opinion by Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling case further limited the honest-services law to bribery and kickback schemes, excluding business executives from its jurisdiction. This jurisprudence has made it increasingly difficult to convict criminals, but not necessarily the perpetrators of severe corruption. Rather, it has made it easier for hopelessly incompetent perpetrators to escape conviction.
Thanks to the Court’s rulings, a breeding ground has emerged for actions that may not be illegal but are still considered wrong. Hunter Biden’s professional life appears to have largely taken place in this questionable realm. This conclusion is evident from the recent testimony of his former business associate, Devon Archer, to the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability.
Let’s examine the case of Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company that appointed Archer and Hunter Biden to its board of directors shortly after the overthrow of the corrupt government of Viktor Yanukovych in 2014. Burisma’s owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, was a former minister under Yanukovych and had been under investigation for money laundering and self-dealing at Burisma. However, Ukrainian authorities suspended their investigation after Zlochevsky fled the country. As someone who has studied corruption in oil-rich countries, I have observed the role of energy or natural-resources ministers in similar cases. For example, the petroleum minister in Nigeria was implicated in multiple bribery schemes during my time there.
There were other individuals associated with Burisma and Hunter Biden that should have raised concerns for Joe Biden, who was then the U.S. vice president and tasked with addressing corruption in Ukraine. One such person is Yelena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia, who had business dealings with a company co-founded by Archer and Hunter Biden. Baturina was married to Yuriy Luzhkov, a former mayor of Moscow known for his corrupt practices. The circle also included Karim Massimov, a close friend of Archer’s, who served as intelligence chief and prime minister under the notoriously corrupt dictator Nursultan Nazarbayev in Kazakhstan. Massimov was investigated for suspected bribery involving a Kazakh minerals company and Airbus.
Archer’s descriptions of their activities provide insight into how these networks typically operate. Their corporate structures were complex and difficult to trace, making it challenging to follow the money. They sought out markets outside of Europe, the U.S., and Singapore that were less scrutinized, such as Kazakhstan. This involved hastily arranged drilling projects that yielded lucrative results. Massimov and Baturina were present at dinners where Hunter Biden invited his father or had him on speakerphone. While no substantive discussions took place, the significance lies in the nonverbal signaling and the implied value that Hunter Biden brought as a vice president’s son.
As someone who has spent time in a country where signaling was the primary method of communication in a corrupt ruling elite, I can confidently say that the Bidens’ behavior was problematic, even if it wasn’t illegal. There is no evidence that Joe Biden, as vice president, changed U.S. foreign policy to benefit Burisma or its key figures. However, Hunter Biden’s position on the board of directors undermined the anti-corruption message that his father and the U.S. were promoting in Ukraine. George Kent, the former head of the U.S. embassy’s anti-corruption effort in Kyiv, stated in a classified cable that Hunter’s presence sent conflicting messages to Ukrainian oligarchs, analogous to what Afghan President Hamid Karzai did. To them, it seemed like the U.S. was providing contradictory signals: one for Western audiences and another through nonverbal actions.
The House committee’s questioning and Archer’s testimony revealed the disconnect between attempts to fit the Bidens’ actions into the narrow definition of corruption under U.S. law and the reality of how corruption operates. As Archer explained, nonverbal signaling is a form of currency in corruption networks. This chilling assessment reinforces the conclusion that Hunter Biden’s involvement with Burisma was ethically wrong, even if it did not meet the legal threshold for corruption. It undermined U.S. anti-corruption efforts and provided a conflicting message to Ukrainian oligarchs. In the end, it’s not just about legality but also about integrity and trust.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
