In his book, “A Magician Among the Spirits,” Harry Houdini relates the story of the life and career of a sketchy spiritualist named Daniel Dunglas Home. He was “outwardly a lovable character with a magnetic personality” as well as a fondness for jewelry, Houdini wrote. “In his later years, he set up a studio in Italy and gave his attention to sculpture between seances and ‘sold busts at prices quite out of proportion to their artistic merits.’”

Houdini cited a report in an 1864 London newspaper, but you don’t have to be a Fleet Street reporter or a fraud-busting illusionist to see how easy it is to materialize cash in an art gallery.

After all, the value of a painting is whatever someone will pay for it. Why they will pay that much is entirely another question.

”The variety of frauds in the art world is almost infinite and that is facilitated by the fact that the art world operates with a secrecy that no other investor would dream of operating in,” Herbert Lazerow, a professor at the University of San Diego School of Law, told the New York Times back in June.

The Times was reporting on the potential uses of the art market for money laundering. In January, Congress passed legislation that subjects antiquities dealers to the same type of anti-money laundering regulations that are imposed on banks. The law also requires the Treasury Department to study whether these regulations should be expanded to the wider art market. New laws in Europe are already moving in this direction.

In February, the then-president of the Art Dealers Association of America told an industry group that the art world is in the “paranoid-terrified phase of what’s going to come down the pike,” predicting “a whole lot of paperwork and a whole lot of compliance.”

The Times reported that the dealers’ association and auction houses Sotheby’s and Christie’s have spent almost $1 million since 2019 quietly lobbying to prevent new regulations that risk blowing up the secrecy, privacy and tax opacity that are the treasured traditions of the art world.

And then Hunter Biden came along and ruined it for everybody.

In February 2020, the New York Times profiled then-candidate Joe Biden’s son and wrote this about his artwork: “Mr. Biden set out late last year to find gallery representation with the help of Lanette Phillips,” described as a longtime Biden family friend who had recently hosted a star-studded fundraiser for the former VP. “Biden did not sign with a gallery, and Ms. Phillips said this week that she is no longer advising him, but Mr. Biden is still setting his sights on exhibiting his work.”

At that time, Hunter Biden’s dad was in something of a political slide, but the Times reported, “Democrats worry that [Hunter’s] curious overseas dealings could pose a threat to his father’s presidential campaign, should he rally back to front-runner status in the March primaries.”

The “curious overseas dealings” included a big-money role with Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company, and a business venture in China, both at a time when his father was vice president and access to him was a thing of value that could be monetized.

Today, with his father in the Oval Office, Hunter Biden’s artwork is curiously worth a tremendous amount of money. He is now represented by the Georges Bergès Gallery. Two art shows have been scheduled where the newly professional artist will meet with prospective buyers. A private showing will take place in Los Angeles this fall, and then a larger exhibition will be held in New York. The gallery expects the paintings to sell for as much as $500,000.

He might as well have painted a brown paper bag and invited favor-seekers to fill it with unmarked bills in small denominations.

The pathetic White House press team has gamely defended this transparent conduit for influence-peddling as part of “the highest ethical standards of any administration in American history.”

Maybe they don’t remember that when newly elected President Barack Obama was considering Hillary Clinton for the job of Secretary of State, he insisted on a written ethics agreement that put new limits on foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation and gave the White House approval over former president Bill Clinton’s paid speeches.

You don’t need a degree in fine arts to see the value of Hunter Biden’s paintings.

Influence-peddling and the sale of access to powerful public officials is a form of corruption that enriches people in government and their families. An awful lot of it is perfectly legal, and the U.S. Supreme Court has made it more difficult to prosecute bribery and extortion in politics. Before the courts will see any illegality, the cash-for-favors agreement virtually has to be in writing, in a 36-point font.

On July 22, reporters asked if the agreement between the younger Biden and the New York gallerist is in writing and can be shared publicly. “I can check and see if there is more detail,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki responded.

”The universal truth is that everything is connected,” Hunter Biden told a reporter, “and that there’s something that goes far beyond what is our five senses and that connects us all.”

He’s right about one thing. The Biden family has turned connections into an art form.

(Susan Shelley is a columnist for the Orange County Register of Caifornia.)