The media is reporting that the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden is at a “critical stage” with the grand jury considering an array of charges including various tax violations and possible foreign lobbying violations. I previously testified in Congress on possible criminal exposure for Hunter under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). There seems ample evidence for such charges but there remain some glaring questions in how the Biden Administration has handled the investigation of the Biden family.
What is also striking is the initial response of pundits on cable channels like MSNBC that has long ignored or downplayed the allegations.
The most glaring question raised the report is, again, the refusal of Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a Special Counsel despite overwhelming justification for such an appointment. For over a year, I have been writing on the obvious need for a special counsel in an investigation that not only is embarrassing for the Biden family but implicates not just Hunter but his uncle and his father.
Given this mounting evidence, the position of Attorney General Garland has gone from dubious to ridiculous in evading the issue of a special counsel appointment. He continues to refuse to acknowledge these conflicts with the President.
Federal regulations allow the appointment of a special counsel when it is in the public interest and an “investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney’s Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances.”
It is hard to imagine a stronger case for the appointment of a special counsel. Attorney General Garland has failed in his duty to protect the Justice Department from such conflicts or the appearance of such conflicts.
There will be lingering questions over the independence of the investigation. For example, if you are investigating lobbying violations tied to Hunter’s open influence peddling, why would you not ask to question the man referred to as the “big guy” who was purportedly cut in for a ten percent share of one of the most dubious deals? He is also the same man who reportedly received money from shared accounts and was referenced by Hunter to foreign clients as part of the inducement for giving him money. He is the object of the influence peddling. He is also now the President of the United States.
Without speaking with such figures, the Justice Department could be accused of engaging in willful blindness to possible conspiracy violations involving not just Hunter but his family. If Hunter is then given a plea deal on limited charges, it will magnify those questions. That would particularly be the case if the case is closed before Republicans take the House and start their own investigation into the matter. That danger of an appearance of a conflict could have been avoided with simply appointing a special counsel over a year ago.
What is also striking is the response in the media, which long called the Hunter Biden laptop “Russian disinformation” or fake news. On MSNBC, Paul Begala dismissed the importance of any criminal charges of the President’s son in a multimillion dollar influence peddling scheme:
“No. No. I wish the guy well. He struggled with addiction, and, you know, nobody has charged him with anything. But this has been a Republican fixation to no avail. They have got no political gain out of this. I looked up Ron Johnson, the senator from Wisconsin, a couple of months ago, was asked about mass shootings … He said, ‘Before we pass anything new on guns, let’s enforce the law we already have. Let’s start with Hunter Biden.’ What the heck? So it’s a challenge for Hunter Biden. I wish him well, but it’s not going to be a political issue.”
The response of Kasie Hunt was even more interesting:
“It seems like, if anything, it probably energizes Democrats because it makes them think it’s political and that Republicans are just going after him for that reason.”
This would be an indictment under the Biden Administration but Hunt is already portraying the expected criticism as “Republicans are just going after him.” There remains no expression of concern over emails detailing millions of dollars going to Hunter as he raises access and meetings with his father. The same pundits who dismissed or downplayed the basis for the investigation are now dismissing the possible finding of probable cause of federal crimes.
As discussed earlier, it remains astonishing how successful the Biden family was making the scandal vanish before that 2020 election with the help of most of the media. It was analogized to Houdini making his 10,000-pound elephant Jennie disappear in his act. The Biden trick however occurred live before an audience of millions. The media has made the story disappear except for a couple of the usual outlets.
The start of the spin shows that even criminal charges might not force the media to see the whole elephant. The key to the trick was involving the media in the original trick is that it invests reporters in the illusion. It is like calling audience members to the stage to assist in the performance. Reporters have to insist that there was nothing to see or they have to admit to being part of the original deception. The media cannot see the elephant without the public seeing something about the media in its past efforts to conceal it.