During a recent closed-door deposition concerning his business activities, Hunter Biden raised a pointed question directed at Republicans, highlighting their apparent focus on conflicts of interest and corruption.
He questioned why they weren’t investigating the post-White House financial dealings of former first son-in-law Jared Kushner, particularly his firm’s receipt of $2 billion from Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund.
Representative Dan Goldman, relaying Biden’s stance to reporters, emphasized the distinction between Biden’s business dealings with independent entities and Kushner’s involvement with foreign governments, which Biden had avoided.
Representative Jamie Raskin echoed this sentiment, noting Biden’s frustration with perceived double standards regarding Kushner’s financial transactions, contrasting them with the scrutiny Biden faced.
This frustration extends beyond Biden himself, as evidenced by Representative Robert Garcia’s recent address on the House floor. Garcia urged Republicans to redirect their investigative efforts from Hunter Biden to Kushner’s business dealings.
Displaying a large photo of Kushner and Ivanka Trump, Garcia criticized the lack of evidence linking Hunter Biden to President Biden and labeled the entire case a political maneuver orchestrated by Donald Trump.
Garcia delved into the specifics of Kushner’s financial engagements, questioning why Saudi Arabia had provided such a substantial sum to Kushner’s investment firm shortly after his departure from the White House.
He highlighted Kushner’s role in securing a significant arms deal for Saudi Arabia during his tenure in the White House, emphasizing the ethical concerns surrounding these transactions. Despite Kushner’s assertion of the legitimacy of his business dealings, Garcia and others continue to call for further investigation into the matter.
The New York Times reported on Kushner’s receipt of $2 billion from the Saudi Public Investment Fund shortly after his exit from the White House. The report also highlighted the disconcerting fact that the fund’s due diligence panel deemed Kushner’s firm “unsatisfactory in all aspects,” recommending against providing any funding.
However, this recommendation was overridden by the fund’s board, which is led by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS). Kushner’s advocacy for MBS within the Trump administration following the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi further raised questions about the propriety of his financial transactions with Saudi Arabia.
Despite these concerns, Kushner has maintained the legitimacy of his business dealings, characterizing the Saudi Crown Prince as a “visionary leader.” In response to Biden’s reference to Kushner during his deposition, Republicans have dismissed any allegations of wrongdoing on Kushner’s part.
House Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan labeled the idea that Kushner acted improperly as “ridiculous,” reflecting the partisan divide on the issue.
The debate over Kushner’s financial dealings underscores broader questions about conflicts of interest and ethical considerations within the realm of political and business relationships. As calls for further investigation persist, the scrutiny surrounding Kushner’s post-White House financial engagements remains a contentious issue.