Turley: 'Hard to Imagine a Stronger Case for a Special Counsel' Than Biden Family's Influence Peddling Scheme
In December 2019, George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley testified at a House Judiciary Committee impeachment hearing. He was called as a witness by the Republicans. This was surprising to some because Turley is a liberal. Asked if he had voted for then-President Donald Trump, he said no.
He was summoned by the Republicans because of his vast knowledge of the Constitution and his ability to objectively interpret the law. In short, although Turley is a lifelong Democrat, he is a highly credible attorney who is trusted by partisans on both sides of the aisle.
In a Saturday editorial published by The Hill, Turley called on Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel to investigate the Biden family’s long and lucrative history of influence peddling. He acknowledges that Washington elites have traded influence for cash forever, but “the Bidens would seem to be standouts in this common practice, engaging in a virtual family business. James Biden has been accused of marketing his connection to his brother. And in the emails discovered on his abandoned laptop, Hunter Biden practically sold timeshares of his father by dangling meetings and dinners for investors.” (Emphasis added.)
At a White House press briefing last week, Communications Director Kate Bedingfield was asked if the White House still stands by a statement made by then-candidate Joe Biden during an October 2020 debate with Trump. The reporter said he’d been asked “if there was anything inappropriate or unethical about his son’s relationships, business dealings in China and/or Ukraine. The President said, ‘Nothing was unethical.’ He went on to say, ‘My son has not made money in terms of this thing about, what you’re talking about, China.'”
“We absolutely stand by the President’s comment,” Bedingfield replied.
The New York Times admitted several weeks ago that the Hunter Biden laptop story is real. Last week, The Washington Post, CNN and other major media outlets followed suit.
Turley points out that the media immediately pivoted to a new narrative. They acknowledged that Hunter may have engaged in foul play but claim that “none of this implicates Biden.” He offers as an example a remark made by CNN’s John Harwood who said, “There is zero evidence that Vice President Biden, or President Biden, has done anything wrong in connection with what Hunter Biden has done.”
Right.
“While many media figures now willingly admit the legitimacy of Hunter Biden’s abandoned-laptop story, they are avoiding what the emails found on that laptop actually contain,” Turley explains. “Hundreds of emails appear to detail a multimillion-dollar influence-peddling enterprise by the Biden family, including Hunter Biden and his uncle James Biden.”
If the laptop is real, then the emails must be real, which Turley argues would make Bedingfield’s statement “appear demonstrably false — and they make the positions of both the media and Attorney General Merrick Garland absolutely untenable.”
Republican Senator investigating the Biden Crime Family RIPS open Hunter’s laptop from HELL live on-air and drops pure fire for 10 straight minutes: “Get ready for impeachment Joe!” ?? pic.twitter.com/Xu7s6tqFTu
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) April 3, 2022
Turley continues: “The key in any influence peddling scheme is to protect the principal. People apparently were told to avoid directly referring to President Biden. In one email, Tony Bobulinski, then a business partner of Hunter’s, was instructed by Biden associate James Gilliar not to speak of the former veep’s connection to any transactions: ‘Don’t mention Joe being involved, it’s only when u [sic] are face to face, I know u [sic] know that but they are paranoid.’”
In addition to the email showing that 10 percent of future profits from a deal with Chinese energy company CEFC would go to “the big guy,” whom Bobulinski confirmed to be Joe Biden, there are others that reference occasions when Joe Biden allegedly met Hunter Biden’s business partners. Joe Biden is also photographed with Hunter Biden and his associates.
Moreover, some emails show Hunter paying his father’s bills, including some for renovations on his Delaware beach house.
According to Turley, at the time he was receiving all of this foreign money, Hunter was, “by his own admission, a hopeless addict. In his 2021 memoir, Hunter Biden admits he was ‘drinking a quart of vodka a day’ and ‘smoking crack around the clock,’ up until his father’s 2020 presidential campaign began. So why would Russian, Chinese and other foreign figures give Hunter Biden all of this money, if not to influence his father?”
“The point is that President Biden really did not have to ask: Hunter Biden had nothing to sell but influence. All President Biden had to do to facilitate such schemes was to be accessible — to allow his family to deliver face-to-face meetings and photo ops.”
“It is hard to imagine a stronger case for a special counsel,” Turley argues. “Any effort to investigate Hunter Biden’s dealings will lead investigators to encounter repeated references to the president and how he may have benefited from those schemes. At the same time, the president is ‘absolutely’ standing by his denial that his son did anything wrong or made any money from China.”
In conclusion, Turley points to Garland’s pledge as a nominee “to protect the Justice Department from such conflicts and to avoid even the appearance of political influence … If Garland declines to appoint a special counsel, he will absolutely fail on his pledge.”
After dismissing an important story they knew would derail candidate Joe Biden’s campaign eighteen months ago, the media has collectively told the world the story is real. They can’t try to tell us that some emails are genuine and others appear to be Russian disinformation. If the laptop is real, the U.S. president has been compromised by foreign governments, including the CCP, and that puts all of us in danger.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
