On Friday’s “PBS NewsHour,” New York Times columnist David Brooks stated that Hunter Biden “was clearly trying to peddle influence” but he doesn’t think he succeeded in doing so, but acknowledged, “I have sort of underestimated the Hunter Biden story. I think it’s probably worth a look to see if there was actual influence peddling.”
Brooks said, “Well, it’s certainly a liability. It sort of feeds into the narrative that he’s part of the Washington establishment, everybody’s self-dealing. So, that’s a liability. The gun charge, he was a sick man, frankly, who had some drug issues. And the gun charge, to me, is an ancillary issue. To me, I want to know — he was clearly trying to peddle influence. Did he successfully peddle influence? Was any law changed? Did Joe Biden’s policies change? Did Joe Biden sit in on any of those meetings? I kind of doubt it on all counts. But I do think now I have sort of underestimated the Hunter Biden story. I think it’s probably worth a look to see if there was actual influence peddling. But, for the Republicans to talk about impeachment, you’ve got to have a crime. Like, you’ve got to have some accusation you can make. And they don’t really have anything right now. It’s worth looking into, but they’re way premature in talking about impeachment.”
He added, “[W]hat Donald Trump admits to doing is way worse than what the Bidens deny doing. Nonetheless, he’s the son of the president. He’s got lots of money from the Ukrainians. He got lots of money from the Chinese. There’s a reason he got lots of money, and it’s not because of his skills. It’s because his last name is Biden. And so, when you get a case like that, set aside what needs to be done to Donald Trump, it’s worth looking into. And it’s worth answering the fears that a lot of people have, which is, they’re focusing on the gun issues, which [are] trivial, frankly, so they don’t have to focus on the real issue, which is the influence peddling.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
