Does This Testimony Prove Biden Lied?

Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

In recent congressional testimony, Devon Archer, a former business associate of Hunter Biden, spoke about the connections between the Biden family and Ukrainian energy company Burisma. According to Archer, the influence of the Biden name played a role in preventing Burisma from facing bankruptcy. He also revealed that Joe Biden was present or on the phone at least 20 times during discussions between his son and foreign business associates.

Republicans view Archer’s statements as further evidence of the former Vice President’s involvement in his son’s foreign deals that reportedly earned millions from countries like China and Romania. Democrats, on the other hand, downplay the significance of the phone calls, insisting that they were innocuous and unrelated to business matters.

Representative Dan Goldman (D-NY) confirmed to the House Oversight Committee that Joe Biden was on speakerphone during some of his son’s discussions with business associates. He clarified, however, that these conversations were casual and non-business related.

In contrast, Republican Representative Andy Biggs reported that Hunter Biden’s position on the board of the Ukrainian energy firm was tied to his family’s reputation, and that Joe Biden’s influence may have impacted a Ukrainian prosecutor’s investigation into the company.

Archer also disclosed that Hunter referred to Joe Biden as “my guy,” an assertion that has been highlighted by Oversight Republicans. While Goldman, who was the only Democrat present during the testimony, acknowledged the frequent communication between Hunter and his father, he emphasized that they never discussed business.

He also made note of the fact that Joe Biden’s son, Beau Biden, was ill during this period, and that Hunter and Joe’s phone conversations were often in that context.

Republicans, however, interpreted Archer’s testimony differently. They emphasized that Burisma would have faced difficulties without the influence of the Biden family name.

Archer further testified that he had no knowledge of specific bribery allegations contained in an FBI document. This document detailed claims that Joe and Hunter were paid $5 million each for favorable policy decisions while Joe Biden was Vice President.

The testimony also addressed claims of constant pressure on Hunter in 2015 by Burisma’s CFO and CEO to have his father act against prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who was investigating the company.

In addition, references were made to a 2017 email related to a deal with a Chinese energy conglomerate and a claim by U.S. Navy veteran Tony Bobulinski that “big guy” was a reference to President Biden.

Some Republicans, such as Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, find the testimony to be damning, suggesting that it provides evidence of influence peddling.

Goldman countered these assertions, explaining that sometimes Hunter would take a call from his father during dinner with business partners, with no indication that Joe Biden knew or cared who else was present.

Others claim that Archer’s testimony exposed Hunter Biden’s efforts to sell an “illusion of access” to his father.

Members of both parties reacted to the testimony, with Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan describing it as “very productive,” while Archer’s attorney emphasized his client’s honesty and completeness in answering questions.

The testimony comes amidst ongoing scrutiny of Hunter Biden’s financial dealings, including a recent failed plea deal, and a back-and-forth with the Department of Justice over Archer’s unrelated fraud conviction.

Republicans have accused the DOJ of trying to intimidate Archer, a key witness in their investigation. The DOJ has denied any intent to have Archer imprisoned before his deposition.

Oversight Chairman James Comer sees the DOJ’s actions as an attempt to stifle a witness crucial to uncovering the truth about the president’s son’s business dealings abroad. The situation continues to develop, with various perspectives on the testimony’s implications for both Hunter and Joe Biden.