“An interesting name.”
Those three words by Biden family associate Rob Walker could well be the epitaph for Hunter Biden and his uncle James Biden.
Walker was explaining why Hunter was repeatedly pushed forward as the face of their pitches to the Chinese and other countries.
In his interview with House investigators, Walker struggled to protect President Joe Biden while confirming critical aspects of earlier testimony from associates such as Devon Archer that they were selling the “Biden brand.”
That brand included Uncle James Biden, whom Walker described as “a snake.”
Walker and his associates had a letter to the Chinese come from Hunter because that is what he thought the Chinese expected.
He admitted that the Chinese were led to believe that they all worked for Hunter Biden.
After all, he “had an interesting last name that would probably get people in the door.”
That “interesting name” is how a Beltway bandit avoids saying “influence peddler.”
You are peddling the name — an effort that is reinforced when you repeatedly produce Joe Biden on speaker phone or drop by lunches.
It’s also the same name dropped when Hunter wanted to make sure the Chinese paid up, as revealed in the infamous WhatsApp message: “I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”
Yet whenever questions turned to the most incriminating messages, Walker shrugged.
When asked about a reference to “the big guy” receiving 10% of a deal (an apparent reference to Joe Biden), Walker declined to say who the big guy was.
When he was asked about Hunter’s repeated references to his father and calling his father “my chairman,” Walker insisted that “I don’t think that Hunter was healthy at the time.”
Likewise, when Hunter says that his father “vetoed the deal” on a proposed SinoHawk deal structure, Walker again said that Hunter was not well.
So Hunter was a legitimate businessman “with an interesting name” all the way up to the point that he made admissions on alleged influence peddling. He was then interesting but unhealthy.
Walker could not explain why Hunter told him to send money to Biden family members and said that he could not explain why James Biden had to be part of deals.
Walker repeatedly emphasized that Joe Biden was not a direct part of these deals.
While that is a political defense, however, it is not a legal one.
As I have previously written, federal courts have long treated payments to family members as evidence of bribery and corruption.
Indeed, I was lead counsel in the last judicial impeachment trial in the Senate when Democratic senators voted to convict a judge on payments and gifts going to the children of a judge.
Neither Hunter nor James Biden have demonstrated any particular skill beyond an absence of inhibition and an abundance of appetite.
What they have is “an interesting name” and in Washington, that is enough.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
This story originally appeared on NYPost
