If the name Devon Archer means nothing to you, then congratulations: You’ve escaped the deepest depths of the GOP’s obsession with Hunter Biden. Archer, Hunter Biden’s former business partner, gave testimony to the House Oversight Committee on Monday and to hear the Republicans on the committee tell it, he gave them all the evidence they need to prove that President Joe Biden was corruptly profiting from his son’s deals.
Except they’ve provided no evidence that’s the case. The three-hour hearing was held behind closed doors, and Republicans haven’t released a transcript, despite Democrats pushing for it to come out sooner rather than later. The framing that Archer presented evidence that implicates the president comes courtesy of committee Chair Rep. James Comer, R-Ky. He’s been grasping at straws for months now in what’s so far been a failed attempt to prove that his probes into the Biden family are worthwhile. Monday’s hearing with Archer has prompted yet another round of House Republicans trying to sell what is, at most, half a scandal in hopes that the public will see it as something bigger than it is.
House Republicans are trying to sell what is, at most, half a scandal in hopes that the public will see it as something bigger than it is.
At its core, the claim from the GOP is that while Biden was vice president, Hunter Biden was busy conducting business that led to his father benefiting monetarily. Biden has said that he had “never discussed” the details of his son’s work and didn’t get involved with his dealings. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre recently shifted that language to say that the president “was never in business with his son,” But there’s precious little evidence that anything corrupt was occurring. Archer didn’t bolster the GOP’s claims of corruption, according to Democrats on the committee, while still giving Republicans further fuel for the fire they’ve been trying to stoke. The transcript of Archer’s testimony, released Thursday, showed that he had “no knowledge of any wrongdoing by Joe Biden as it related to his son’s business dealings,” according to NBC News.
For example, Archer reportedly told the panel that there were around 20 times over the course of a decade that Hunter Biden put his father on speakerphone while he was meeting with potential business associates. That does sound bad, given Biden’s decades in the halls of power. Comer said in a statement that Hunter Biden did so to sell “the brand.” Basically, because they share the same name, Comer is arguing, they both have access to the same degree of power and influence.
But according to Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., who sits on the oversight committee, the content of those calls was anodyne with Biden often unaware of what his son was doing at the time of his calls. Bear in mind that the time when Hunter Biden and Archer were in business together, Hunter Biden was doing, well, not great. His brother, Beau Biden, had died of cancer in 2015, leaving him even more adrift. Biden was constantly checking in on his surviving son, who was struggling with addiction and other self-destructive behaviors. We heard that concern last year in a leaked voicemail from 2018, where Biden urged his son to “get some help.”
Goldman, who wrote on X that he was the only member to stay in the room for the entirety of the hearing, said afterward that Hunter Biden was selling the “illusion of access” to his father. As my colleague Zeeshan Aleem recently wrote, Hunter Biden’s entanglements are definitely a drag on his father. But there’s been no evidence uncovered that the firewall Biden has insisted was there between his official duties and his son’s businesses was ever breached.
Which leads us to the current GOP talking point that has Republicans stressing that Biden called his son often. Things fall apart though when they’re asked to take it to the next step: What actually came after those calls? Did Biden profit in a way that he managed to hide on his tax returns, which — unlike those of his predecessor — have been provided willingly? The leaked emails that Republicans point to about “the big guy” getting a cut of Hunter Biden’s profits don’t prove that’s the case. And according to NBC News, the transcript of Archer’s testimony shows that “the brief conversations focused on pleasantries like the weather or fishing, not official business.” The pattern repeats in the GOP’s claims that Hunter Biden leaned on his father to get a Ukrainian prosecutor fired for looking into the energy company that hired Archer and Hunter Biden to join its board. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, last month released a redacted FBI document that alleges that the chair of Burisma was hoping to use Hunter Biden to that effect. Archer also testified that the chair once urged Hunter Biden to “call D.C.” about the prosecutor’s ongoing investigation. Yes, it’s always been pretty clear that Hunter Biden, who had no experience in the energy field, was being paid solely because of who his dad is. But the idea that the prosecutor was removed to advance Biden’s personal interests was debunked during former President Donald Trump’s first impeachment. The European Union was right there with the U.S. in calling for the prosecutor to be removed for being corrupt, and there’s been nothing conclusive that’s been brought forward to the contrary. Beyond that, the company’s investment in Hunter Biden apparently got it the right to throw around his name, but nothing truly substantive, let alone access to Biden himself. Unfortunately, the ongoing inability to pin something on Biden won’t deter the Republicans from continuing to act as if they’ve got some fully fleshed out indictment against him. That’s especially the case given how badly they want to distract from the many, many legal troubles that Trump faces. What’s much more likely is that it’ll be a repeat of Republicans’ attempts to tar former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after the Benghazi attacks in 2012. Whenever Biden leaves office, expect Republicans to announce that their investigations have also coincidentally ended as well.
Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He focuses on politics and policymaking at the federal level, including Congress and the White House. 
