President Joe Biden has been shameless with his changing narratives about whether or not he was involved in his son Hunter Biden's business dealings as then-vice president, and it's a move the White House blindly backs him up on. The walls may be closing in on the president and the corruption that abounds when it comes to the extended Biden family. The House is under Republican control, and multiple committee chairmen are leading investigations into the manner. Speaker Kevin McCarthy is also once more mentioning the possibility of an impeachment inquiry if the president doesn't hand over documents. It's not just congressional Republicans who are seeing through the White House's narrative, though.
On Wednesday, TheEconomist/YouGov poll from August 19-22 was released, in which both the president and the first son are viewed poorly. Forty-two percent of respondents view Biden favorably, while 55 percent view him unfavorably, giving him a -13 net rating. His job approval is about the same, as 41 percent approve, while 54 percent disapprove of how he's handling the job.
Hunter Biden has among the lowest net approval rating of any of the figures polled. Democrats have long tried to hide behind the talking point that Hunter is a private citizen, but he's nevertheless included in the poll. Just 17 percent view him favorably, while 66 percent view him unfavorably, providing for a -50 net rating.
While Hunter Biden is not on the ballot, as Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) pointed out during his Sunday appearance on "Meet the Press," his father has been and is on the ballot, and there's evidence he was very likely involved in his son's shady business dealings.
Further, Hunter is very much involved with the White House, whether it's behind the scenes or in the forefront. He's spent a considerable amount of time there, including when cocaine was found close to the Situation Room, and just before his ultimately failed plea deal.
As a member of the president's immediate family, Hunter is entitled to Secret Service. The detail provided to him as he rolled up to that plea deal hearing last month wasn't exactly a good look when it comes to him being regarded as that "private citizen."
Then there's the ethics concerns with his art. At first we didn't know who the buyers were. But then it came out last month that Elizabeth Hirsh Naftali, a Democratic donor and Biden-appointed commissioner, was a buyer.
The poll looked more deeply into Hunter Biden, including how the president could be affected. Overall, 72 percent of respondents say that Hunter "personally profited" from his father's "positions in government." This includes majorities of all political persuasions, including 53 percent of Democrats.
The only demographic lacking a majority saying Hunter benefited is black respondents, and a plurality, at 49 percent, still say he profited.
NEW: Do you think that Hunter Biden has personally profited from his father Joe Biden's positions in government?
— YouGov America (@YouGovAmerica) August 23, 2023
% who say yes
U.S. adult citizens: 72%
Democrats: 53%
Independents: 72%
Republicans: 92%https://t.co/U91hSsbDeK pic.twitter.com/1S0uyd3fLH
The next finding is a little hazier, as a plurality of respondents, at 40 percent, say they're unsure if the Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into Hunter has been fair. It's not far behind from the 38 percent who say it has been fair, while 22 percent say it's been unfair.
The only group who is more likely to think that the investigations have been unfair includes a plurality of Republicans, at 37 percent. Independents are most likely to say they're not sure, as nearly a majority, at 49 percent, say as much. Fifty percent of Democrats do think that the investigations are fair, though.
Has the Justice Department investigation into Hunter Biden been fair or unfair?
— YouGov America (@YouGovAmerica) August 23, 2023
% who say fair / unfair
U.S. adult citizens: 39% / 22%
Democrats: 50% / 11%
Independents: 33% / 19%
Republicans: 32% / 37%https://t.co/U91hSsbDeK pic.twitter.com/qUj06CLAdx
When it comes to the investigations into Hunter Biden, it's been hard to keep up. Attorney General Merrick Garland, as well as U.S. Attorney David Weiss – who was granted special counsel status earlier this month – have caused considerable confusion, changing their stories at-length.
It's no wonder that the committee chairmen, which include House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY), House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO), issued warnings at the time the designation was made, with McCarthy also calling out how the stories have changed. Then there's how Hunter Biden's attorneys have engaged in spreading plenty of misinformation.
TODAY: AG Merrick Garland appoints David Weiss as special counsel in Hunter Biden investigation
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) August 11, 2023
JUNE: IRS Whistleblower Shapley testifies that he personally witnessed David Weiss claim that "he was not the deciding person in whether charges were filed" against Hunter Biden pic.twitter.com/gZcaNkPAbS
Jordan referenced a thorough timeline during a committee hearing last month, detailing how he had asked Garland in a letter dated February 28 why it was that a special counsel was not appointed. His letter went ignored.
Jordan sent another letter on May 25, which Garland did not respond to. It was Weiss who did so on June 7 in which he claimed he did have full authority in charging Hunter Biden. This is despite claims from Gary Shapley, an IRS whistleblower, who said Weiss told six people he did not have such authority.
Weiss wrote Jordan again on June 30, in a letter that came as part of a Friday night news dump right before the 4th of July holiday. "Wow, already changing his story 23 days later," Jordan said about that letter in which Weiss then claimed "my charging authority is geographically limited to my home district." Jordan emphasized his concerns with Weiss continuing to change his story.
On July 10, Weiss wrote Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to clarify that he had not requested special counsel designation, but had had conversations with departmental officials.
"Mr. Weiss can't get his story straight," Jordan pointed out in concern. "Three different stories in a five-week timeframe."
As Jordan reminded, however, Shapley and fellow IRS whistleblower, Joseph Ziegler, had not changed their stories.
🚨🚨WATCH🚨🚨
— House Republicans (@HouseGOP) August 11, 2023
House @JudiciaryGOP Chair @Jim_Jordan highlights why David Weiss CANNOT be trusted to conduct a thorough investigation into Hunter Biden. pic.twitter.com/fHiCFPIssy
There are plenty of opportunities here for the committee chairmen leading investigations, including setting the record straight about the confusion the DOJ has caused. Also, a plurality of respondents, at 48 percent, said they've heard only "a little" about the investigations into Hunter Biden. That's better than the 16 percent who said they've heard "nothing at all," but it would be nice if the amount of respondents who said they've heard "a lot" was higher than the 37 percent it's currently at.
It will be an uphill battle, given that, as NewsBusters has covered at length, there's all too often a media blackout on anything to do with Hunter Biden, usually in favor of covering former and potentially future President Donald Trump. That doesn't make it any less worthwhile, though.
A majority of Democrats, white people, and young people have said they've heard only "a little." For many other demographics, it's still a pretty high plurality. As the number of people who say they've heard "a lot" increases, perhaps so too will the majorities of respondents across various demographics who say that Hunter Biden benefited from his father's position.
If House Republicans really want to get to the bottom of what's going on, perhaps such poll findings will throw some much needed encouragement and motivation their way, and act act as a teaching mode to better inform the American people about how shadiness abounds not just with Hunter Biden, but how the politicized DOJ is handling any crimes he may have been involved in.
