What needs to happen for Hunter Biden to become a mainstream political issue?

The observation that Democrats face daunting midterm election prospects has become somewhat of conventional wisdom at this point. Democrats are defending razor-thin majorities in Congress at a time when voters are pessimistic about the state of the country, frustrated by inflation and feel that the party is out of touch.  

At the same time, President Biden’s inability to strengthen his political position — even amid a strong jobs report, low unemployment, leading the international response to a war and a historic Supreme Court confirmation — bodes poorly for Democrats’ election chances in 2022 and 2024. 

To be sure, Americans generally vote for whichever party they feel can improve their own personal circumstances — in 2022, for instance, Americans will back the party that they feel can remedy rising prices, lower crime and address other major issues — rather than based on a candidate’s personal liabilities. There is no better example of this in modern history than the election of Donald Trump.

That being said, an issue within the Biden family is rapidly developing — the investigation into Hunter Biden and his business ventures — and this familial matter now threatens to spill over into becoming a mainstream election issue. 

The investigations into Hunter Biden, which are currently underway in Delaware and in the Justice Department are — for now — confined to Hunter Biden and President Biden’s brother, James. However, as more information comes to light, the risk of this becoming a problem for the president is increasing.

So, what needs to happen for the saga surrounding Hunter Biden’s business ventures to turn into a mainstream election issue? 

If, as chief of Staff Ron Klain stated on ABC last week, this remains a private family matter — and if the investigations find that Hunter Biden and the Biden family did not in fact do anything illegal — then most voters will not hold the president accountable politically. 

This was the case with Billy Carter, the brother of President Jimmy Carter, whose connection to Libya was investigated in the early 1980s but ultimately did not become a major political liability for President Carter.  

However, there are distinct developments that are unique to the Hunter Biden case, which could reasonably lead to Hunter’s actions becoming a damning mainstream political problem for the president and his party.

Notably, there there are lingering questions over revelations in Hunter Biden’s emails that outlined profit-sharing agreements in a joint venture between his company and CEFC China Energy Company, a Chinese state-owned energy firm.

In the email, Hunter’s business partner asked, “10 (%) held by H for the big guy?” Tony Bobulinski — a whistleblower, and the former business partner of Hunter Biden — has stated that President Biden is “the big guy” referred to.

Further, Bobulinski has released text messages which seem to corroborate allegations of then-citizen Joe Biden’s involvement in Hunter’s murky deals with Chinese companies.

One such text between Bobulinski and another associate of Hunter Biden’s from 2017 reads: “Don’t mention Joe being involved, it’s only when u [sic] are face to face, I know u [sic] know that but they are paranoid.” 

To that end, there are also questions that have been raised as to why Hunter Biden was on Air Force 2 when he flew to China to launch his most lucrative business deal there.

If it is proven that President Biden was not only involved in but profited from Hunter’s business deals with Chinese state-owned firms, it would be a politically calamitous development for the president.

If this was the case — and I caution against leaping to conclusions without all of the facts — it is easy to see how the Hunter Biden saga will move from a private family matter to a much larger political issue that calls President Biden’s integrity into question. 

Indeed, if there is evidence that President Biden was actively facilitating the business interests of Hunter for the collective benefit of the Biden family, there will be real political damage.

As with the questions over the “10%” being held, we do not yet have concrete evidence that Joe Biden — either as vice president or president — actively assisted his son’s business ventures. However, there is some circumstantial evidence that this occurred.

An executive from Bursima — the Ukrainian energy company Hunter was on the board of — emailed Hunter in 2015, during the Biden-Obama administration: “Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure.” 

One day before that email was sent, then-vice president Biden dined with Hunter and his business associates from Ukraine, Russia, and Kazakhstan at a dinner in Washington, D.C.

To be sure, I do not mean to imply that these developments point to a larger, more nefarious story than the one the administration has repeatedly offered, which is that President Biden was not involved in, did not facilitate, and did not speak to his son about his business dealings.  

However, if concrete evidence emerges — either that President Biden profited from his son’s business ventures or used his position as vice president or president to benefit himself or his family — voters will not take kindly to this revelation, and the president and his party will face real, tangible political consequences.

Ultimately, if complicity is shown — and that is still a very big if — what is now likely a red wave election could turn into a massive blowout that is more substantial than anything seen in recent history.

Douglas E. Schoen is a political consultant who served as an adviser to former President Clinton and to the 2020 presidential campaign of Michael Bloomberg. He is the author of “The End of Democracy? Russia and China on the Rise and America in Retreat.”