By Rich Lowry
Monday, December 11, 2023
We didn’t need confirmation that Hunter Biden was
corrupt, but now it’s in black-and-white in a federal indictment.
The charges, of course, have to do with his failure to
pay taxes, not the family’s influence-peddling. The context, though, is the
enormous amount of unearned foreign funds that sluiced through Hunter’s
accounts solely because his name was Biden and his father had power and
influence.
The indictment underlines the wide-ranging campaign of
deception around Hunter Biden’s laptop upon its public discovery in 2020 that
was meant to keep its true import under wraps through Election Day, and — if
Joe Biden and compliant Justice Department officials had had their way — until
this very day.
This was a rank distortion of the political process and a
disservice to the American public — and perhaps the least serious of three
similar episodes of consequential, high-political skullduggery that have
blighted American politics since 2016.
The Russian-collusion hoax, the Hunter Biden cover-up,
and the ongoing, politically timed legal onslaught against Donald Trump are
among the most shameful and tawdry efforts to destroy a political opponent in
memory.
They all have involved the abuse of power by
national-security or law-enforcement officials, with the connivance of a
complicit press.
This is Watergate-break-in-level political subterfuge, or
something drawn from fever dreams about Ronald Reagan’s “October Surprise,”
except it has all happened in plain sight.
I’m not opposed to, or shocked by, political hardball.
Count me out on all the saccharine clichés about how Ronald Reagan and Tip
O’Neill were great friends despite some polite political differences between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m. The stakes in our debate are enormous,
and that debate should be litigated robustly, even harshly.
But that’s different from abusing investigative processes
and leveraging the presumed professionalism and moral authority of current and
former national-security and law-enforcement officials for a political campaign
against one man.
The vapors over Trump saying he’s going to target his
enemies is rich coming from people who have targeted their enemy by any means
necessary for years now.’
It goes without saying that Trump is a provocateur who
freaks out his opponents even when he’s on relatively good behavior. And his
conduct after the 2020 election was genuinely alarming and deeply wrong. Trump
shouldn’t even be saying he’s going to target his enemies, let alone actually
do it if he takes power again.
Yet the coverage of his statements makes it sound as
though we are starting on a fresh playing field, where everything has been
strictly by the book since 2016.
You’d never know that back then, top law-enforcement
officials began a poorly predicated investigation into Trump-campaign
officials, lied to the FISA court, connived to win appointment of a special
counsel, and then, that special counsel — puffed up by the press with “walls
are closing in,” “only Mueller knows” coverage — kept his investigation going
well after he knew there was nothing there.
It’s unmentioned that in 2020, two weeks before Election
Day, former national-security officials, some of whom were highly respected,
put their names to a letter meant to mislead about the Hunter laptop; Biden,
from the debate stage, lied about that laptop and his son’s business dealing;
and Twitter censored the story and much of the rest of the media treated it as
a non-event at best.
And, oh yeah, Biden Justice Department officials and
Democratic prosecutors are currently trying to put the other side’s leading
contender for the White House in jail. As a warm-up act, they are also
attempting to kneecap his business in a trial, or “trial,” in which the verdict
has already been decided.
Almost all these charges are unworthy, dubious, or
imprudent, but that hasn’t stopped Trump’s pursuers, most of whom have wanted
their trials to start, for some reason, in March right after the Republican
nomination will probably be decided.
Trump’s critics would be on firmer ground objecting to
his declared campaign of vengeance if they had been willing to forebear during
any of these episodes; if they had ever insisted on neutrality or fair play; if
they’d been willing to look beyond the man they loathe and make judgments based
on truth and professional standards.
Instead, they’ve lit a fuse while pretending that they’re
opposed to pyrotechnics, with consequences as yet unknown.
No comments:
Post a Comment