As US Attorney David Weiss leads a long line of witnesses before a grand
jury, Washington is preparing for the possibility of an indictment of the
son of President Joe Biden, Hunter. This has led to a nosebleed of a turn
for the media, as major outlets suddenly acknowledge that the story that
they tried to kill in 2020 is in fact legitimate.

Many legal experts have insisted that any prosecution for tax violations
would be uncommon or unwarranted because Hunter Biden belatedly paid taxes
after the start of the investigation. However, not only are tax and
international transactional violations still possible, there is a looming
threat of charges under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

This week, I testified in the House Judiciary Committee on enhancements of
FARA and was asked whether Hunter Biden could be charged under the act.
The answer is clearly yes. Indeed, if the Justice Department applies the
standard used in the Paul Manafort case, it would seem like such a charge
is not just possible, but even probable.

The similarities of the Manafort and Biden cases are striking. On a
personal level, both men had ravenous levels of material consumption.
Where Manafort had his $15,000 ostrich coat, Biden had his high-priced
hookers and $143,000 Fisker sports car. Both burned through money and
found themselves with towering debts.

However, the greatest similarities is how they paid those bills. The
Manafort indictment included charges for lobbying on behalf of the
Ukrainian government and Ukrainian political parties from 2008 to 2014. He
did not register under FARA, which has sweeping terms covering such work.

While FARA was rarely used for criminal investigations and prosecutions,
special counsel Robert Mueller seemed to charge by the gross under the
act. He hit a line of Trump associates with such allegations from Manafort
to Michael Flynn to George Papadopoulos to Rick Gates. More recently, the
Justice Department used FARA to conduct searches on the homes and files of
former Trump counsel Rudy Giuliani, Republican counsel Victoria Toensing
and others.

The recent use of FARA was celebrated by legal experts and media figures.
Now, however, Hunter Biden is the target and the evidence against him on
FARA may actually be worse than Manafort in some respects.

In Biden�s laptop, there are hundreds of e-mails detailing work with
�foreign principals,� which can include not just foreign governments or
foreign agencies, but foreign-based companies, nonprofits and individuals,
including Americans living in foreign countries. That would covers
companies like CEFC, which had close ties to the Chinese government.

Biden does not appear to have done much, if any, conventional legal work
for these foreign sources, despite his high fees. Indeed, there is no
record Hunter did anything to earn the cool $1 million given to him to
�represent� CEFC�s Patrick Ho, who was later convicted and sentenced to
three years in prison.

Instead, the record shows Biden advising and facilitating access for
foreign clients, including meetings with his father. That includes, like
Manafort, dealings with Ukrainian officials and businesses.

There was nothing subtle about the alleged influence-peddling effort of
Hunter Biden or his uncle James. In Washington, influence peddling is a
virtual cottage industry. However, there was a little sophistication in
these e-mails to hide the corruption. The Hunter dealings were more like
influence peddling by eBay in terms of the raw pitches and open
admissions.

On May 1, 2017, Hunter Biden recognized how his work with CEFC at a
minimum could trigger FARA and acknowledged that his uncle was also aware
of the danger:

�No matter what it will need to be a US company at some level in order for
us to make bids on federal and state funded projects. Also We [sic] don�t
want to have to register as foreign agents under the FCPA which is much
more expansive than people who should know choose not to know. James has
very particular opinions about this so I would ask him about the foreign
entity.�

The e-mail is a prosecutor�s dream. FARA violations, like tax violations,
can be viewed as cut-and-dried charges for jurors. In this case, the
potential defendant not only incriminated himself under the law, but his
associates and family, as well.

That is why, if the Justice Department applies the same standard applied
to figures like Manafort, Biden would likely be indicted.

The question is whether the same standard will apply. I have long
criticized the sweeping language of FARA. However, the Justice Department
has shifted from prior administrative enforcement to criminal
prosecutions. The Justice Department in recent years has convicted various
individuals for engaging in public relations and lobbying efforts for
foreign countries, including China and Ukraine.

A sudden shift away from such criminal enforcement would raise questions
of favored treatment � and magnify the concern over Attorney General
Merrick Garland refusing to appoint a special counsel in the scandal.

In The Washington Post, the Manafort and other FARA cases were heralded as
essential to protecting democracy. A columnist concluded, �FARA can be a
powerful tool for detecting those foreign instruments. We should use it.
No matter whom it ensnares.�

It has now ensnared the son of President Biden. The question is whether
the Justice Department and the media still have the same appetite for FARA
prosecutions.

Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington
University Law School.

https://nypost.com/2022/04/08/hunter-biden-should-be-charged-under-dojs-
trump-standards/