Let’s Talk About Influence Peddling, Hunter Biden

stock here: surely there are bank records? Is the entire system protecting the Biden white trash family?

Hunter Biden is accused of influence peddling, especially in ukraine for big fossil fuel companies, using his fathers name to strong arm people into payments. But is that a crime, and is it a crime that could be prosecuted in the USA for something that mostly happened overseas?ChatGPT

Influence peddling, also known as trading in influence, is indeed a criminal offense in many jurisdictions, including the United States. The specifics of whether Hunter Biden’s alleged actions constitute a crime and whether it can be prosecuted in the USA depend on several factors, including the nature of the actions, the laws in place, and the available evidence.

Influence Peddling and U.S. Law

In the United States, influence peddling can be prosecuted under several statutes, including:

1. Bribery (18 U.S.C. § 201): This statute makes it illegal to offer, give, receive, or solicit anything of value to influence the actions of a public official. However, the person being influenced must be a public official, and the payment must be for a specific action or inaction.
2. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) (15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd-1, et seq.): The FCPA makes it illegal for U.S. persons and businesses to bribe foreign officials to obtain or retain business. This could potentially apply if Hunter Biden were found to have engaged in bribery of foreign officials.
3. Honest Services Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1346): This statute criminalizes schemes to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services, which can apply to cases involving bribery and kickbacks.

Prosecution for Overseas Activities

Criminal activities that occur overseas can be prosecuted in the United States under certain conditions:

1. Jurisdiction: U.S. courts can have jurisdiction over U.S. citizens and entities committing crimes abroad, especially under laws like the FCPA.
2. Evidence and Cooperation: Successful prosecution often depends on the availability of evidence and the cooperation of foreign governments in providing evidence and extraditing suspects if necessary.

Challenges in Prosecution

1. Evidence Collection: Gathering sufficient evidence for prosecution can be challenging, especially when the alleged crimes occurred overseas.
2. Political and Diplomatic Considerations: High-profile cases involving politically connected individuals can be complicated by political and diplomatic factors.
3. Statute of Limitations: There are time limits within which charges must be brought. Delays in investigation can affect the ability to prosecute.

Current Status

As of now, there have been investigations into Hunter Biden’s business dealings, including his work in Ukraine. However, proving influence peddling or other related crimes requires substantial evidence showing that illegal actions were taken. These investigations are complex and ongoing, with legal and political implications.

In summary, while influence peddling is a crime in the United States and can be prosecuted even if the actions occurred overseas, the specifics of Hunter Biden’s case involve a detailed and complex legal analysis, requiring thorough investigation and substantial evidence to support any charges.

You missed the part about “loans” that were never paid back and never meant to be paid back, also he was on the board of directors of Burisma getting $1M a year, is there any evidence that he even attended a single board meeting? What were they getting in return?ChatGPT

The allegations surrounding Hunter Biden’s business dealings, particularly with Burisma Holdings, have raised significant questions about potential influence peddling and financial misconduct. Here are some key points addressing your concerns about loans, board meetings, and what Burisma might have been getting in return:

Loans and Financial Transactions

Allegations of Loans: There have been reports and allegations that Hunter Biden received substantial sums of money, possibly framed as loans that were never intended to be repaid. Such transactions, if proven, could suggest attempts to disguise bribery or improper financial gains.

Burisma Board Membership

Burisma Holdings: Hunter Biden was indeed a board member of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian natural gas company, reportedly earning around $1 million per year for his role.

Board Meeting Attendance: There is limited publicly available evidence regarding Hunter Biden’s attendance at Burisma board meetings. While board members typically attend meetings to fulfill their duties, the extent of Hunter Biden’s involvement and his attendance at meetings have been questioned.

Potential Returns for Burisma

Influence and Connections: The primary benefit Burisma might have sought from Hunter Biden’s involvement could be his connection to his father, Joe Biden, who was Vice President of the United States at the time. This connection could provide Burisma with potential influence, access, or protection, particularly given the ongoing scrutiny and investigations into the company.

Legal and Political Protection: It is alleged that Burisma sought to leverage Hunter Biden’s position to secure a favorable political and legal environment. This includes potential influence over investigations and regulatory actions by Ukrainian authorities and fostering a positive image or relationship with U.S. officials.

Legal Implications

Proving Influence Peddling: To prosecute such a case, it would be necessary to demonstrate that payments to Hunter Biden were explicitly intended to influence his father’s actions or policies as Vice President. This requires substantial evidence of a quid pro quo arrangement, showing a direct link between the payments and specific actions taken by Joe Biden in his official capacity.

Loans and Financial Impropriety: If loans were given with no intention of repayment, it could constitute financial fraud or other related crimes. Proving this would require detailed financial records and evidence demonstrating the nature and intent of these transactions.

Current Investigations and Evidence

There have been various investigations into Hunter Biden’s business dealings, including:

1. Senate Report: A 2020 Senate report highlighted concerns about Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma and potential conflicts of interest but did not provide conclusive evidence of criminal wrongdoing.
2. Department of Justice Investigations: The DOJ has ongoing investigations into Hunter Biden’s taxes and foreign business dealings. The outcomes of these investigations will be crucial in determining whether any criminal charges are warranted.
3. Public and Political Scrutiny: Hunter Biden’s activities continue to be a focal point of political debate, and any new evidence could significantly impact public perception and legal actions.

Conclusion

While there are serious allegations regarding Hunter Biden’s business activities, loans, and his role at Burisma, proving criminal conduct requires thorough investigation and concrete evidence. The existing investigations by various authorities will need to uncover and present this evidence to support any potential prosecution.

What about him selling pretty crappy art for $500000 a pop, seems super suspect ChatGPT

The sale of Hunter Biden’s artwork for substantial sums has indeed raised questions and suspicions about potential influence peddling and ethical concerns. Here’s a breakdown of the key issues:

Art Sales and Ethical Concerns

High Prices for Art: Hunter Biden has sold his artwork for prices reaching up to $500,000 per piece. Critics argue that the high prices for his art, given his relatively new status as an artist, are disproportionate and suggest that buyers might be seeking to gain favor or influence through these purchases.

Potential for Influence Peddling: The concern is that individuals or entities might purchase Hunter Biden’s art at inflated prices to gain access to or curry favor with his father, President Joe Biden. This raises ethical questions about the potential for influence peddling through art sales.

Measures to Address Concerns

Anonymous Buyers: To mitigate concerns, the Biden administration has stated that buyers of Hunter Biden’s art would remain anonymous, preventing Hunter Biden and the public from knowing who purchased the art. The idea is to avoid any potential conflicts of interest or influence.

Ethical Guidelines: The White House has outlined ethical guidelines for the sale of Hunter Biden’s art to ensure transparency and prevent any perception of impropriety. These guidelines include keeping the identities of buyers confidential and not involving the President or any administration officials in the sales process.

Criticism and Concerns

Transparency Issues: Critics argue that the measures taken are insufficient to address the core issues. Keeping buyers anonymous does not fully eliminate the risk that someone could still attempt to use the art sales to gain influence.

Market Value and Artistic Merit: Questions about the true market value of Hunter Biden’s art persist, given his lack of an established reputation in the art world. The prices paid for his work far exceed what is typical for emerging artists, leading to suspicions about the motives of the buyers.

Legal and Ethical Implications

Legal Aspects: Selling art at high prices is not inherently illegal. However, if it can be proven that the sales are being used explicitly for influence peddling or as a form of bribery, legal actions could be considered. This would require evidence showing a direct connection between the art sales and specific favors or actions taken by President Joe Biden or his administration.

Ethical Considerations: Even if no laws are broken, the situation raises significant ethical concerns about the appearance of impropriety and the potential for conflicts of interest. Public officials and their families are typically held to high ethical standards to maintain trust in public institutions.

Conclusion

While the sale of Hunter Biden’s art for substantial sums raises valid ethical concerns and suspicions about potential influence peddling, proving criminal activity requires concrete evidence of a quid pro quo arrangement or direct link to specific actions taken by the President or his administration. The measures taken to ensure buyer anonymity aim to address some of these concerns, but questions about transparency and the true market value of the art remain contentious issues.