President Trump made headlines Saturday, March 18, when he predicted his arrest would occur the following Tuesday. However, Trump has faced down the prospects of criminal charges and he may still avoid them. President Biden also has, but his continued ability to do so faces severe hurdles with the Republicans now in control of the House of Representatives. The facts support influence peddling charges for Biden, it seems. So, while arresting Trump appears to be the last gasp of an effort to criminalize his presidency, actions against what some conservatives call the Biden crime family have just begun.
Follow the influence peddling Money
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) issued a sweeping subpoena for 14 years’ worth of banking records linked to three people connected to Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings. They include President Biden’s brother, James Biden, and an associate, John R. Walker. According to reports, Walker “received a $3 million wire transfer from Chinese State Energy HK Limited, a firm affiliated with CEFC China Energy, then distributed $1.3 million to accounts associated with Biden family members.”
Reporting indicates the charges against Trump, expected to be filed in New York by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, concern the so-called hush-money payoff of $130,000 to Stormy Daniels. If that seems like relatively weak sauce compared to the nine-figure sums the Bidens allegedly received, that’s because it is. The decision to prosecute is political and exclusively reserved to the executive branch. This is why the special prosecutor laws exist and why the calls for them to be used against Biden are a growth stock with a substantial upside.
The Question That Answers Itself…
Are the subpoenas and testimony to congressional committees more likely to incriminate Biden, his family, and associates – or exonerate them? There’s no smoking gun required here. Illinois had two former governors who were tried and convicted of influence peddling; Republican George Ryan and Democrat Rod Blagojevich. However, they had something in common: the same prosecutor – U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. Regarding the lack of a recorded quid pro quo demand, he said:
“People now know that if you’re part of a corrupt conduct, where one hand is taking care of the other and contracts are going to people, you don’t have to say the word ‘bribe’ out loud, and I think people need to understand we won’t be afraid to take strong circumstantial cases into court.”
After Ryan’s conviction, The New York Times reported that “Jurors said they had found no single ‘smoking gun,’ just layer upon layer of evidence, all of which, one juror said, added up to a painful education about what had happened at the highest levels of Illinois government.” From his deals with Burisma Holdings in Ukraine, and the infamous “10% for the big-guy” talk with business associate Tony Bobulinski, there is, on its face, a case for investigating President Biden for influence peddling. But, unless a special counsel is appointed, any honest reckoning with Biden’s behavior that may be criminal is unlikely to occur.
