The National Archives will release a series of records about Hunter Biden and other Biden family members on November 6, following the presidential election.
A delay in releasing documents linked to the Biden family has sparked discussions amidst legal and political realms, New York Post reported.
In September 2022, America First Legal (AFL) initiated a lawsuit targeting the National Archives and Records Administration demanding access to correspondence and records tied to Joe Biden when he served as Vice President, as well as his brother James, and son Hunter. This set off a chain of procedural and legal activities centered around these potentially revealing documents.
Originally, these records were scheduled to be made public on September 23, 2024. However, following a request from President Biden's legal team, the Department of Justice confirmed an extension pushing the release date to November 6, just after the election.
The Presidential Records Act of 1978 is critical in this context as it mandates that all documentary materials related to the presidential office be preserved. This act has ensured that the records involving the Biden family, encapsulating various forms of correspondence and financial documents, are maintained securely by the National Archives.
Among the delayed batch are records including material about James Biden's interactions, details from a defunct firm co-founded by Hunter Biden named Rosemont Seneca, and documents associated with Hunter Biden’s financial activities. These materials are significant due to their implications and the insights they may provide into the dealings of the Biden family during Joe Biden’s vice presidency.
Moreover, the records include photographs from a White House event that James Biden attended, along with tax form preparations for the year 2015. The year 2015 is particularly notable since Hunter Biden engaged in financial transactions with Burisma Holdings in Ukraine and received loans connected to Romanian businessman Gabriel Popoviciu.
The push to extend the document release date came under scrutiny by AFL, especially considering the timing post-election. AFL's Vice President, Dan Epstein, criticized the delay, stating that the National Archives "arbitrarily deferred to former President Obama and current President Biden’s requests to delay disclosure of likely embarrassing records until after the election."
In response to these claims, a representative from the National Archives clarified their role saying, “NARA does not grant or approve the extension and cannot deny it.” This stance by NARA underscores their procedural obligation and the limitations within which they operate, disavowing responsibility for the timing of the release.
AFL's investigations have also uncovered that Joe Biden used multiple pseudonyms in email communications during his tenure as Vice President. These discoveries have broadened the scope of the information they seek, which includes over a thousand emails between Biden’s office and Rosemont Seneca, the firm co-founded by Hunter Biden.
These revelations emerge while Hunter Biden faces legal challenges of his own. He recently pleaded guilty to charges of tax evasion and received a guilty verdict in separate felony gun charges. Amidst these controversies, President Biden has explicitly stated that he will not pardon his son.
The intertwining of legal, political, and personal elements in this story highlights the broader implications of the document release delay. The documents' ultimate revelations could significantly impact public perceptions and the Biden administration’s historical record.
As the date approaches for the eventual release of these records, everyone will focus on how this information might influence public opinion and shape the historical understanding of the Biden administration's inner workings. The aftermath of this delayed release is yet to unfold, but it surely stands as a significant episode in contemporary political history.
While AFL's relentless pursuit and the ensuing legal skirmishes reflect the contentious nature of presidential record handling, the broader democratic implications of transparency and historical accuracy remain central themes in this ongoing saga.
