Evidence continues to mount for a basic, incontrovertible finding: Whether criminal or not, Joe Biden was the kingpin in an elaborate, 20-company scheme, brought to life immediately after he became vice president. This is what Treasury documents show. The core question: Could Joe Biden be indicted, even as a sitting president?
Given Democrat control of the Senate, Biden will not be impeached, we know that. As for an indictment, that depends on two other questions. First, are the activities Joe Biden was involved in objectively criminal – that is, would others’ be indicted for them? Second, does the Constitution’s “impeachment clause” bar – or substitute for – the idea of an indictment?
On the first, documents coming to light are damning. As reported, Joe Biden took his son to China and Ukraine, facilitating contacts with foreign governments. After that, his son secured contracts with those tied to corrupt governments, collecting millions either for introductions to or actions taken by his father.
These foreign payments appear over an extended period in accounts managed by the Biden family, and in sums that appear intended to avoid bank filings of “suspicious transaction reports,” CTRs or CMIRs.
A laptop computer owned by the son fell into FBI custody in 2019, a year before the 2020 election. The laptop contained information we now know of likely crimes committed exclusively by the son and of involvement by the father in a money-for-access scheme, benefiting the Biden family.
Unfortunately, for reasons better understood after the Durham Report – condemning the FBI and Justice Department for political involvement favoring Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016, in 2020 these institutions failed to reveal what they knew prior to the election, and were not pressed by media.
We are only now learning what some suspected mid-2020, that Joe Biden appears to have been part of a scheme engineered to benefit himself and his family financially by selling access to his VP’s office. Coming to any other conclusion is counter-intuitive, given all the documents being produced.
Why this happened, if one assumes an absence of integrity by the VP, is not hard to figure out. A lot of money stood to be made by shaking down foreign governments, especially China, Ukraine, and Romania – if they were willing to pay a VP’s son for access to and actions by his father, which now seems likely.
If this is mind blowing to many Americans, pause and think about the likelihood that this happened. Public corruption, the lure of abusing office for self-enrichment is as old as time, and is common around the world, even if we hope and assume better at home.
When the press refuses to investigate, when Justice and FBI are politically captured, when a former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, dodges accountability for seeming sale of her office, and when Biden thought he could take the money and run, not imagining later scrutiny, is it really unlikely? No, it is not.
Reality is that Joe Biden, whether classified documents and national security were involved or not, likely violated federal anti-bribery statues, a fact no one wants to admit. Would the same acts committed by others, a senator, governor, mayor, dogcatcher, or citizen be a crime? Almost certainly, yes.
Question two. If the evidence continues to mount, if a Joe Biden was kingpin in a kickback scheme, his son the intermediary, does an indictment fall to the “impeachment clause,” for a sitting president? Some will say yes, noting crimes were discussed during Nixon, Clinton, and Trump’s tenure, none indicted.
Their argument is the Constitution offers remedies if a president is a criminal, impeachment and non- reelection. The rationale is also separation of powers, to prevent presidents from facing scurrilous indictments, or having to defend an indictment while presumably leading.
Reality is no court has reached that conclusion; it is based on two DOJ memos, one from 1973, the other 2000. Reality is this: If a president is caught committing a felony, such as violation of federal anti-bribery statues by sale of access to his office or actions in office, let alone to a foreign country using his son as a cutout, multiple bank accounts for subterfuge, he could be indicted.
No uncontested legal authority exists to countermand a thoughtful, honest prosecutor – or an attorney general – who steps up, makes the case for removal by impeachment, resignation, or indictment.
While neither impeachment nor resignation saves a president from later indictment, circumstances could compel indictment. If a majority of Americans conclude they do not want a criminal in office – is that is where mounting evidence leads – they might press DOJ for an indictment.
Of course, politics these days seems to be in the driver’s seat, overriding truth, justice, self-respect, integrity, and the “American way” – which holds “no one is above the law.” But it is possible. If people see what is emerging, understand it, get disgusted, who knows? We might get some accountability.
What no one wants to say is just this: The Constitution is silent. It does not foreclose throwing out a crooked president with an indictment, or using the threat of one to compel a resignation. Full stop.
Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, attorney, and naval intelligence officer (USNR). He wrote “Narcotics and Terrorism” (2003), “Eagles and Evergreens” (2018), and is National Spokesman2 for AMAC.
