Subject: Devon Archer on FARA
Some someone here has mentioned (without providing any evidence, of course) that Hunter Biden was guilty of violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Devon Archer specifically addressed FARA in his testimony:

QUESTION: I want to point you now to point 20 in this email --

ANSWER: Uh-huh.

QUESTION: -- where it says, "To that end, they" -- and I believe "they" is a reference to Burisma here -- "need to know in no uncertain terms that we will not and cannot intervene directly with domestic policymakers, and that we need to abide by FARA and any other U.S. laws in the strictest sense across the board." Do you see that sentence?

ANSWER: I do.

QUESTION: And do you understand FARA to be a reference to the Foreign Agents Registration Act?

ANSWER: I do.

Mr. Schwartz: You're asking him his current understanding.

Mr. Archer: Yes, current understanding, yes. At the time I don't think I was familiar with FARA. But, yes, I am very aware of it.

QUESTION: Is it your understanding that Hunter Biden felt that it was important that his role -- in his role in Burisma he comply with U.S. laws?

ANSWER: Did he -- did I --

QUESTION: Yes.

ANSWER: I could speculate that he would think that, yes.

QUESTION: Based on your interactions with him.

ANSWER: Based on interactions, and I don't think he was looking to break any laws.

Mr. Goldman: Well, on this, does this refresh your recollection, this email, as to whether or not you heard him say that to you either in writing or verbally as you look at this document?

Mr. Archer: Yeah. He -- yes, he was -- he was very -- he was cognizant of his name and his brand and would talk about it, yeah.

Mr. Goldman: This doesn't talk about the name and the brand. This just talks about his -- making sure that Burisma understands --

Mr. Archer: Yes.

Mr. Goldman: -- the scope of what he can and cannot do and that he cannot intervene directly with domestic policymakers and need to abide by FARA and any other U.S. laws in the strictest sense across the board. Was that your understanding of both his approach and Burisma's understanding, as well?

Mr. Archer: I would say -- I would say yes to the first part of the question. The first part of the statement, yes, I think Burisma was constantly looking for more. And it kind of speaks a little bit to that other email that we used as an exhibit earlier where it's, like, we're going to use my dad's thing and take credit for it. There was an element that he was always trying to avoid that but at the same time trying to prove value. So it was this element of, like, signals.

REDACTED: Well, we'll return to that --

Mr. Schwartz: Your reference to the name and the brand, what you mean is he had to be scrupulous about not violating

Mr. Archer: Right. That's why I refer to the brand.

Mr. Schwartz: -- reflect on the name and the brand.

Mr. Goldman: All right. So when you were talking about the name and the brand, that because of that --

Mr. Archer: Because of that --

Mr. Goldman: -- it was your understanding that he was even more fastidious about following the law --

Mr. Archer: Right.


So Hunter Biden was keenly aware of not violating FARA or other U.S. laws with respect to his activity with foreign countries and he used his father's name to "take credit" for anything that put a nickel in his pocket.

Quite the son.

But for some reason president Biden refuses to criticize Hunter Biden. Perhaps he fears Hunter's relapse, perhaps he feels as a father he has let Hunter down or paid more attention to Beau when he was dying or perhaps Joe is just a better man than most of us, who knows? But it would be better for all concerned if the president would just say it: Hunter, a drug addict, used my name to make money to fuel his drug habit. Anyone who has a family member or friend with a drug habit (and that's a whole lot of Americans) would understand.