Joe Biden has referred to his youngest son as "the smartest guy I know." This doesn't say much for the company that Joe Biden keeps, and it also comes across as particularly amusing in light of a curious detail Hunter Biden spoke about when he gave a press conference on Capitol Hill on Wednesday when he defied a House Oversight Committee subpoena.
"For six years, I have been the target of the unrelenting Trump attack machine, shouting, 'Where’s Hunter?'" he said. "Well, here’s my answer. I am here. Let me state as clearly as I can: my father was not financially involved in my business, not as a practicing lawyer, not as a board member of Burisma, not in my partnership with a Chinese private businessman, not in my investments at home nor abroad, and certainly not as an artist."
Related: Hunter Biden Holds Simpering Press Conference
Hunter Biden then tried to make it about his struggles with drug addiction. "During my battle with addiction, my parents were there for me. They literally saved my life. They helped me in ways that I will never be able to repay, and of course, they would never expect me to. And in the depths of my addiction, I was extremely irresponsible with my finances," he said. "But to suggest that this grounds for an impeachment inquiry is beyond the absurd; it’s shameless. There is no evidence to support the allegations that my father was financially involved in my business because it did not happen."
Did you catch that turn of phrase? He twice said that his father was not "financially involved" in his business dealings.
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) picked up on this new language.
"I've had a chance to review what Hunter Biden said in his press conference, and I think he made an interesting statement. He said his father was not 'financially involved' in the business. And I think that qualifier, the word 'financially,' is important because once again it shows another change in the story," Jordan explained during a press conference on Capitol Hill on Wednesday. "First it was 'no involvement,' then it was 'no, I never talked to anyone,' and then we found out about the dinners, the meetings, the phone calls, and everything else. Now it's 'he wasn't involved in the business financially.' I think that it is important. It's one of the reasons we want to talk to Hunter Biden."
JIM JORDAN:
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) December 13, 2023
"We think [Hunter Biden] should come in, and if he doesn't, we're gonna move forward with contempt proceedings." pic.twitter.com/knQ9f14ciU
It certainly is an interesting change in narrative. Once again, the goalposts have been moved. Is this Hunter Biden's way of conceding what the House Oversight Committee's evidence has already proven? We know Joe Biden spoke with Hunter and business associates about the business. What exactly did Hunter mean by "financial involvement?"
We already know that the Biden Crime Family had more than 20 shell companies that were used to launder foreign payments and bribes, and no one claims that Hunter Biden had a legitimate business that Joe Biden had some partial ownership of.
From where I sit, "financial involvement" is an ambiguous phrase that could be implied to mean anything. But what he did not say definitively was that Joe Biden didn't "financially benefit" from his business ventures. Why didn't he say that? Is it because we already have evidence that one of the Biden Crime Family shell companies, Owasco PC, was sending monthly payments to Joe Biden?
Jim Jordan clearly believes this new goalposts move is important, and it will be interesting to see what Hunter will say when he finally speaks under oath.
