From the WSJ Best of the Web column Tuesday.
Readers have had plenty to say about the issue. In a comment posted under yesterday’s column, William Turner questions why the Ukrainian company would pay Hunter Biden $50,000 per month. “They could have gotten one of the Clintons for $49,000,” opines Mr. Turner.
Another reader, Sandra Greenheck, reasonably notes that Joe Biden’s claim that he manages potential conflicts of interest by avoiding discussion of the business activities of his family members is wholly inadequate. Says Ms. Greenheck:
Joe could claim he has no control over his wayward son. But Joe was in control of his own actions in Ukraine. He could have easily told Barack to get someone else for the anti-corruption work in Ukraine because of the appearance of a conflict of interest. Would have been a no-brainer under normal conflict-of-interest governance rules. But he chose not to go that route.
This raises the question of exactly which rules applied in this case. Former President Bill Clinton has often thrived in parts of the world with legal and governance systems which are very different from those in the U.S. Yesterday’s column noted:
... while the sums collected by Hunter Biden were not fully Clintonian, the former vice president’s son seems to have benefited from doing business outside the United States. Given the different legal systems, Burisma probably had more leeway to hire a Biden than a U.S. company would have if it wanted to hire the son of a high-ranking official in a foreign government.
Readers might reasonably demand a more precise answer than “probably” and so this column contacted attorney Alex Frishberg of the Frishberg & Partners firm in Kiev, Ukraine. He responds via email:
You are right: the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act could prove problematic for a US firm to hire the son of a high-ranking Ukrainian official if there is evidence that such employment amounts to giving a bribe to the parent related to a particular transaction.On the other hand, Ukraine has no restrictions whatsoever (legal or ethical) on Ukrainian company hiring a son of a high-ranking US official. This is perfectly legal due to the absence of any applicable Ukrainian laws.The absence of any applicable laws obviously makes for a nice operating environment for Americans who carry well-known political brand names and show up to do “business” in a foreign locale. The environment seems particularly welcoming if the father of such an American happens to be the sitting Vice President of the United States and has been specifically tasked with leading U.S. policy in the foreign locale.
************
Speaking of cleaner politics here at home—and U.S. governance—shouldn’t Joe Biden have recused himself instead of demanding the firing of a prosecutor investigating his son’s company?
Comments