Recent discussions about Joe and Hunter Biden’s business dealings have been fueled by the release of the transcript of Devon Archer’s closed-door testimony. Archer, a former business partner of Hunter Biden, provided insights into their professional relationship and interactions with Joe Biden. However, some claims made by Republicans and Democrats based on the testimony are misleading or inaccurate. Let’s examine the key points of Archer’s testimony and the misconceptions surrounding them.
Claim: Joe Biden lied about his involvement in Hunter’s business dealings.
According to Rep. James Comer, R-Ky, the transcript confirmed that Joe Biden was aware of his son’s business dealings and was the “brand” used to signal power and influence. However, the transcript does not support this claim. Archer testified that while Hunter Biden used his family name to impress potential business partners, he was not aware of any wrongdoing by Joe Biden, and he did not witness any discussions between the Bidens about Hunter’s business.
Claim: Devon Archer testified about bribery involving the Bidens.
Republicans have suggested that Archer’s testimony supports bribery allegations against the Bidens, pointing to Joe Biden’s interactions with his son’s business associates. However, Archer explicitly rejected such claims in his testimony. He stated that he was not aware of any $5 million payments to the Bidens and that he first heard of the allegations from an FBI document. Archer did not believe that Joe Biden was bribed by Burisma.
Claim: Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to remove the prosecutor investigating Burisma.
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, claimed that Joe Biden traveled to Ukraine five days after a phone call related to Burisma and initiated a pressure campaign against the Ukrainian prosecutor. However, the transcript provides a different context. Joe Biden’s visit to Ukraine was publicly announced before the phone call, and his stance on the prosecutor’s removal was based on concerns about corruption, a widely held view at the time. Archer testified that he had no reason to believe that Shokin’s removal was due to anything other than the U.S. government’s anti-corruption policy.
Claim: Hunter Biden provided access to his father’s influence.
Democrats suggested that Hunter Biden sold the “illusion” of access to his father but did not actually provide access. Archer agreed with this characterization, stating that while there were some contact points between the Bidens and business associates, no material business discussions occurred during those interactions.
Claim: Joe Biden participated in Hunter’s business deals.
Claims by Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., that Joe Biden participated in more than 20 of Hunter’s business deals are unfounded. Archer’s testimony does not support this assertion. He stated that Joe Biden’s interactions during phone calls with Hunter and business associates were casual and not related to specific business deals or financial matters.
Conclusion
The release of Devon Archer’s testimony did not provide evidence to support key claims made by some politicians regarding Joe and Hunter Biden’s business dealings. The transcript confirmed that Hunter Biden used the family name to impress potential partners, but there is no indication of wrongdoing by Joe Biden. Claims of bribery and direct involvement in business deals are contradicted by Archer’s testimony. As political narratives continue to evolve, it is essential to rely on accurate information and avoid misleading interpretations of the available evidence.
