Beholding the Beholders: Hunter Biden’s Art Dealer Defies the House Over Business Records

It appears that Hunter Biden’s art dealer believes that his art should be left entirely to the eye of the beholder — and not Congress. Georges Bergès reportedly refused last week to provide the House Oversight Committee with the identities of the buyers of Biden’s high-priced art work. While counsel William Pittard insists that the list of purchasers must remain secret, it is hard to see the viable legal basis to refuse the demand of the House Oversight Committee, if made subject to a congressional subpoena.

The Biden sales have long been a subject of intense debate over whether it is another form of influence peddling or money laundering. Even President Barack Obama’s ethics head has raised objections.

Former Obama-era ethics official Walter Shaub called the art sale a “terrible idea” and noted that “it just is implausible that this art from an unknown artist would be selling at this price if it didn’t have the Biden name attached to it.”

As a new artist, Biden is fetching prices that exceed the prices of some Picassos. The quality of the work will be left to others to debate, but the Oversight Committee has a legitimate interest in looking into whether the art is being used to funnel money to the family of President Joe Biden.

In January, House Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-KY) requested that Bergès testify before Congress. Comer has long alleged that Chinese buyers are behind the sales, though there is no public proof to support that allegation. He has stated that “arrangement with Hunter Biden raises serious ethical concerns and calls into question whether the Biden family is again selling access and influence.”

Pittard wrote that “[i]n light of these considerations, providing the documents and information requested in your letter seemingly would defeat the efforts of Mr. Biden and the White House to avoid the ‘serious ethical concerns’ that you raise.” He added that “Mr. Berges hopes that you and Mr. Biden can resolve that tension.”

The question is what happens if they cannot “resolve that tension.” The Oversight Committee is investigating a host of avenues through which foreign interests were allegedly able to funnel millions into the Biden family coffers. It is hard to see how a court would find that these business records could not be subpoenaed by a congressional committee if they decide to move forward.

Berges could refuse to testify without a subpoena, but he must appear if so served. He could then invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to refuse to testify.

What is interesting is that this is only the latest lawyer to defy Congress on a Hunter Biden inquiry. We previously discussed how Hunter Biden’s personal counsel Abbe Lowell refused a demand for evidence sought by the House.

These moves appear to be channeling the same strategy of Steve Bannon who was ultimately charged with contempt and convicted. At the time, I said that Bannon was asking for a contempt charge and Biden appears to be replicating this same ill-considered strategy.

These may be just the opening salvos to seek to negotiate with Congress, but they can backfire as they did with Bannon. The categorical refusals could expedite matters in pushing these conflicts before a court where Congress would have the advantage.

95 thoughts on “Beholding the Beholders: Hunter Biden’s Art Dealer Defies the House Over Business Records”

  1. Alright, looky here now!! The legal system is 100% corrupted, meaning from top to bottom, one end to the other, and ALL points in between! That means it’s a criminal enterprise, a crime syndicate, and it has ZERO lawful power or authority over any man or woman because criminals have no right to order others around! How could any man or woman have the right to commit crimes, and then get away with doing so?? The legal system DEPENDS upon being able to get away with committing crimes in order for it to function! Look up the definitions of the words Contract and Fraud in any law dictionary, and then apply them to the legal system itself, and you will see that what I say is absolutely true!
    What needs to happen, is everyone demanding to see it in writing, where we are guaranteed that we will actually GET a fair trial! Since there is no such thing as a fair trial, that means the legal system is a gambling house at best, but is actually just an elaborate con game that is set up to rip us off!
    And, since the USSC/SCOTUS showed the entire world last year that it is incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial when it admitted that it got Roe v. Wade wrong in 1973, where is our bona fide obligation to abide by ANY of its rulings?? If the highest court in the land isn’t capable of rendering correct decisions 100% of the time, doesn’t that make it a gamble when we go there, and who can force us to gamble??

  2. I’d like to take this opportunity on this Presidents Day, a holiday especially honouring George Washington & Abraham Lincoln, reminding us of our Freedom, to Thank both Prof. Turley and perhaps The Greatest American University standing to-day, The George Washington University, for promoting and protecting the great American institution of Free Speech.. as seen here through Prof. Turley’s work shared on his ‘Res Ipsa’ website. In a world where the discourse of speech is heavily controlled & censored, ‘Res Ipsa’ stands out as a Beacon of Enlightenment… beginning with the sharing of in-depth professional analysis and wisdom by Prof. Turley, and always delivered with such First-Class Diplomacy.. despite the daily onslaught of vicious, belittling, yet comical trolling, mostly from a group of noisy trolls we have all had to endure… yet this site allows their fabrications, content hijacking and put-downs to exist.. another dimension of ‘Res Ipsa’ to celebrate. All in all, Many Thanks from this appreciative American…

    1. Of one th I I as much as he’s been paying cousin eddy..for his family…that he’s sacrifice his family..? Only blanca knew their locations. Who is she ? Really and any translation for the nd 13 cartel?

  3. Hunter gotta a blister on his little finger
    He gotta blister on his little thumb.
    He rode to China on his daddy’s jet airplane
    To get his dealin done.
    That’s the way he did it
    Got his money for nothin and his fix for free.
    That’s the way he did it
    Got his money for nothin and his fix for free.

    1. Good song. But this is serious. Drug business at root by bidens….where is the dea….where did Hunter get his drugs? The orb want us to believe murdaugh….had a 20k a week drug habit…..when it’s physically impossible to use that much ones self. Hence the bags of pills he was likely peddling. To whome? Hunter? But the prosecution tests their case….without answers. Because no one wants to upset the apple cart. Let’s be clear their th time line is schetchy…..the gmail info bounces. But no one introduces smart meter from the power company? The local lady said she knows when I get up to pee….that’s the detail the power company has.

      1. How ever that works on murdering so be it. But if laundry was run like the state wants to infere….then smart meter can prove it……but where’s the nation of smart meters? Worse where can a person use all those pills in a week themselves? They can’t ..they are dealears…..but how? To the cleaning lady who spoke spanish? To whom. Was he dealing! ? Because it’s physically impossible to consume so much himself! The only other person who knew Paul and Maggie and likely Alex was there was the cartel. Via the translator.

        1. And even she could be hostage herself .And not guuilty. But some one supplies Hunter Biden his drugs. Who? Where is the dea? One hand they dispose of Murdaugh’s bags of pillls. Or do they? Still some how Hunter gets pills. How? I’m just curious because I think the more left is huge…And is probably a entire spy group….way more than drugs. But our boys have their lottery no more investigation follows! So unsophisticated…they lose in the end despite their epidermal hematoma. Kma!

          1. They lie …from my neighbor experience you don’t need to be rich to be addicted. And there is no way without dealinge he used so Much himself. He’s a dealer. This was the cartel killing his. And the only one who knew their presence was blanca. Who translated so the cases and privacy translated it all. But the govt dissent eNt to look shot here because she got citizenship how?

      2. We are suppose to believe he uses 20 k product a week..he’s a dealer! By the states own evidence. Why doesn’t the state go after the dealears. Too much kickback? Let’s see the smart .meter. Alex may or may not have killed paul. But the state has to prove it. But that still doesn’t answer how Hunter got drugs.


    This is money laundering by the Biden Crime Family as proven by the demographics of the “art” customers – no conservatives there, hey?

    Selling Pet Rocks or Bottled Water is simply “amusing” as proven by the demographics of the “comedy” connoisseur patrons who represent the full political spectrum.

    1. Nothing is going to happen to the Biden crime clan. Let’s face it, the people just don’t care.

      1. And nothing will happen to Lincoln regarding his shredding of the Constitution rather than ending slavery through legal means, but something did happen to the totally unconstitutional “right” to abortion, it was abrogated and corrected back to State legislatures, just as the Constitution prescribes. Who’da thunk it? The Supreme Court doing its sworn-oath duty, eschewing corruption and actually supporting and enforcing the literal Constitution.

  5. Anonymous, the devil is always in the details. This is a quote from The Hill concerning the Republicans vote on blocking donor information. “Republicans blocked the Disclose Act earlier this session when Democrats brought it to the floor as part of a broader election reform bill”. They mixed it in with some other things that they knew the Republicans would not agree with and then they use it as proof that Republicans are not interested in transparency. It’s one of the oldest political tricks in the book and you fall for it time after time.

    1. Estovir, we’ll see how well Fox News fares in this suit. But most analysts believe Fox will be paying out. It’s just a question of ‘how much’.

      And by the way, your Gateway article cannot be verified by any established sources.

      1. Anonymous, you question my source saying that there are problems with voting machines and that Fox News has pointed out such problems without verification. I’m sure that you will be interested in what Elizabeth Warren has to say about voting machines. Verification enough for you. You could have found this information before you made your comment but you just didn’t care to look.

      2. You’re misinformed and probably extremly biased against gateway.
        … you probably never even read the Gateway article where it has the actual Fox News filing the entire court filing is listed in the article so you’re trying to say that it can’t be confirmed it’s only because you can’t read.

    2. TiT – It is certainly ironic that Democrats now assert that no sane person can question the performance of Dominion’s voting machines. Until recently, Democrats were often skeptical voting machines. The 2004 Presidential elections stands out. In 2022, the RNC collected instances of Democratic office holders questioning the operation of the voting machines in Ohio in 2004:
      ” Then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) questioned the “integrity” of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election. . . .
      . . .
      Harkin [Iowa Senator] also accused Republicans of a “concerted effort to suppress the vote” and suggested electronic voting machines could lead to “serious fraud.”
      Then-Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) in 2005 applauded Democrat efforts to contest the 2004 election, called the election “flawed,” and suggested problems may have been the result of “manipulation.”
      Then-Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) alleged “systematic voter disenfranchisement” and faulty voting machines in the 2004 election.
      In September 2008, then-Sen. Barrack Obama (D-IL) joked about the 2004 election, saying it helps that in Ohio “Democrats are in charge of the [voting] machines” in the upcoming election.
      Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) questioned the use and efficacy of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election.
      . . .
      Then-Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO) blamed “inadequate and malfunctioning” electronic voting machines for “numerous irregularities.”
      Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) claimed democracy was once again “thwarted” in 2004 and blamed the use of electronic voting machines for voter suppression.
      Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) said, “the system of voting broke down Nov. 2, 2004” and called for an independent audit of discarded ballots.
      . . .
      Then-Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-CA) in 2005 attacked the efficacy of voting machines saying they “can’t be trusted.”
      . . .
      In November 2004, Nadler said that “we are requesting an investigation into all the allegations, of irregularities with respect to the electronic and other voting machines.”
      . . .
      Then-Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) cast doubt on the security of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election saying he was “worried” that some machines do not have a paper trail. . . ..
      More recently, Marc Elias, the lawyer involved in propagation of the Putin-Trump hoax, et alia, was planning to challenge of an election result in New York State by questioning the performancee of the election machines. As stated in National Review (2/4/21)
      “Now there is just one remaining unresolved House election, involving another Republican woman (Claudia Tenney in upstate New York’s 22d district) whom Elias is trying to bar from the House despite a 122-vote lead over Anthony Brindisi. And guess what Brindisi’s theory in court is? ‘In this case, there is reason to believe that voting tabulation machines misread hundreds if not thousands of valid votes as undervotes, and that these tabulation machine errors disproportionately affected Brindisi.'”

  6. Republicans Insist On Keeping Donors Anonymous

    Senate Republicans voted Thursday to block the consideration of a bill to promptly require organizations that spend money on elections to promptly disclose the identities of donors who give $10,000 or more during an election cycle.

    The body failed to invoke cloture on the measure, in a 49-49 vote. Every Republican present voted against the measure, while every Democrat voted for it.

    Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) brought the bill to the floor to highlight the reliance of Senate Republican candidates on huge cash inflows from GOP dark-money groups, such as the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC linked to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), according to Democratic senators familiar with Schumer’s thinking.

    The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), has been a top Democratic priority since the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United in 2010 that enabled corporations and other outside special interest groups to spend unlimited amounts of money on federal elections.

    The subject here is ‘dark money’. And Republicans are perfectly fine with it; except when Hunter Biden profits.

    1. The only purpose of this legislation is to open up Republican donors to the kind of intimidation and boycotts that the Left directed at donors to Propostiion 8 (defense of traditional marraige) in California in 2008. The issue is not “darkness” of money. Money spends the same from any source. The issue is anonymity, privacy and safety. It is ironic that Mr. Anonymous objects.

    2. Lol… you’re a delusional NPC Democrat aren’t you.
      Totally biased
      Lol…drooling sheep being led around by its nose.
      Wow are you low info.

Leave a Reply