Thread by @magi_jay

There's been some chatter about whether Hunter Biden writing a book & selling art violates ethics rules/norms. Here are emails between the White House & the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) pertaining to Ivanka Trump's publication of a book while she was a WH employee

The OGE seemed primarily concerned that:
-Ivanka made the deal before employment at the WH
-That she should *not* promote the book as a WH employee & that she should make a public statement saying why
-That she should use a scripted response when asked to avoid promotion

In one case the OGE expressed concern when VOA network promoted the book. They checked with the White House & were reassured when told Ivanka knew nothing about the promotion.

Now I get why the price of Hunter's artwork is raising some eyebrows, but it's not in and of itself unethical. It would be if people tried to use it as influence. And maybe they might! That's why the White House should have safe guards in place.

If everything that *could* produce an influence situation was off the table for the Biden family, then they'd be barred from all kinds of professions (e.g. law; acting in Hollywood, business, banking, etc), as well as getting loans, buying homes, etc.

It's *good* that OGE, Congress, & the WH keep a close eye on any potential influence. But that doesn't mean that any situation where someone could *hypothetically* ask for a favor is unethical or even especially concerning.

The specific issues w/ Jared & Ivanka involved that they both were employed at the White House, stood to specifically profit from *policy*, & also had deep international financial entanglements related to *foreign policy*. That's different than Hunter's overpriced paintings.

Also, re: "overpricing:" it's the market that determines it & there's a market for artwork from famous people & their relatives. One of Picasso's great grandchildren could probably rub their boogers on a grocery receipt & make $100,000. That's how the art market works.