Ignoring Corruption Codes and USSC Precedents That Would Jail the Bidens Already

Spread the love

Textbook corruption and bribery is being ignored as it relates to the Bidens. US laws are being ignored as it relates to the Bidens, to change the focus over to irrelevancies in a fog of hundreds of proven instances of bribery to several foreign countries.


United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers of California, the Supreme Court held that a company that gave gifts to the Secretary of Agriculture’s wife and son, who were also his employees, violated Title 18 Section 201 (c), which prohibits gratuities https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-11

Everyone just needs to be patient and let the “inquiries” play out. Even before the inquiries begun, there already was ample proof of influence / bribery / corruption. Was there any influence whatsoever? If the President asks someone 20 times “how is the weather”? and that is not influential? It doesn’t matter if they only discussed Mickey Mouse and no money was sent whatsoever to a US bank, we see dozens of shell companies and now the bank records coming out.

The series of recordings of VP Biden with then Ukrainian President Poroshenko were authenticated as legitimate material to show how Biden leveraged the Ukraine economy to make certain profits. Also had pressured the former president to fire the then prosecutor going after Burisma, who would have interrupted such discussed profits that VP Biden engineered with Poroshenko.

Regardless, Fox News is ignoring several US Laws to focus on the Democrat party narrative regarding Joe Biden’s impeachment inquiry nr 1. The first impeachment inquiry which never asked the important questions, as each interviewer was given only 5 minutes, and asked mainly the same irrelevant questions about such transactions to the Bidens.

However Fox News mainly regurgitates the Democrat party narrative that you have to first show exact transactions to Biden’s account. Although dozens of them have been proven or are in process, as going to his home address, this government shutdown is now right at the days when more will come out. Maybe this is why Biden is promoting the shutdown, dangling Ukraine aide as a reason to shut down the government. (Didn’t Trump get impeached for something like this? although the impeachment was nullified as illegal).

This is not true at all. Why do you think Trump’s children all resigned from their lucrative jobs when he became President? It not only breaks ethical and anti-bribery guidelines, it breaks Federal statutes that those all were set up to enforce.

It is well known that Government officials and any family member of a Government official cannot receive gifts or any benefits without being in violation of the law. They re-word it to things like “influence peddling” soft peddling the law which would charge him with around 20 years in prison per count.

It is clearly illegal for family members to receive benefits or rewards for the office of their family member who is a government employee. There are many state as well as federal laws prohibiting it.

One such was put to the test in United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers of California, the Supreme Court held that a company that gave gifts to the Secretary of Agriculture’s wife and son, who were also his employees, violated Section 201 (c), which prohibits gratuities https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-11. The Court reasoned that the gifts were intended to reward and influence the Secretary’s official actions, and that his wife and son were acting as his agents in receiving the gifts.

That was according to Title 18 U.S.C. Section 201. This is the federal official bribery and gratuity statute, which prohibits giving or receiving anything of value to or from a public official, or a person selected to be a public official, with the intent to influence any official act, or to induce such person to violate their lawful duty https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/201.

So there’s no reason to prove that Biden himself got the payments!

The facts of Joe Biden attending dozens of calls to promote his son (talking about the weather 20 times in the phone with them), is also the a textbook proof of bribery or corruption. There’s already enough bank records to show the family members got secret payments. Whether Biden himself got it doesn’t matter. This volatile energy sector did greatly go through ups and down surges surrounding the Biden’s oversight. The tariffs and taxes placed on the Ukrainian people there enriched the Bidens. This was just one of so many more countries, which is why they are losing focus and trying to change the narrative to focus on irrelevancies. The mere patting his son on the back in front of his bosses on the line (heads of a larger energy company, which is closely tied to ups and downs of public policy, tariffs, subsidies etc), , may have been another violation of ethical standards and obligations of public officials and employees, such as:

• 5 U.S.C. Section 3110: This is the federal anti-nepotism statute, which prohibits a public official from appointing, employing, promoting, or advancing a relative in any agency or department over which they have jurisdiction or control

A relative includes a child, parent, sibling, spouse, or in-law. This law applies to the president and the vice president, as well as any other executive branch official

• 5 C.F.R. Part 2635: This is the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch, which sets forth the basic obligations of public service and provides guidance on avoiding conflicts of interest and misuse of official position https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/politics/trump-organization-business-fraud/index.html. For example, this regulation prohibits employees from accepting gifts from prohibited sources or for prohibited reasons; engaging in outside activities that conflict with their official duties; using nonpublic information for personal gain; or endorsing any product, service, or enterprise https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/politics/trump-organization-business-fraud/index.html.

• 18 U.S.C. Section 208: This is the federal conflict of interest statute, which prohibits an executive branch employee from participating personally and substantially in any particular matter that has a direct and predictable effect on their own financial interest or that of a spouse, minor child, general partner, organization in which they serve as an officer or employee, or any person or entity with whom they are negotiating or have an arrangement for future employment https://people.com/politics/trump-administration-officials-resign-following-riot-capitol/. This law requires employees to recuse themselves from such matters unless they obtain a waiver or an exemptionhttps://people.com/politics/trump-administration-officials-resign-following-riot-capitol/

Insider trading by higher government officials is a higher offense. 

One of the federal laws that would be broken if a senator on a closed council meeting had knowledge of collapse of an industry or rise of another, and went and bought company stock (or sold others) to profit off of this disaster, which they may have helped shape, is 18 U.S.C. Section 1348. This is the federal securities fraud statute, which prohibits any scheme or artifice to defraud, or to obtain money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, in connection with any security of an issuer registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or required to file reports under Section 15 (d) of that Act https://nypost.com/2023/09/19/ex-indiana-rep-stephen-buyer-sentenced-to-22-months-for-insider-trading/. A security includes any stock, bond, note, debenture, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, or any other instrument commonly known as a security https://news.bloomberglaw.com/mergers-and-acquisitions/ex-goldman-associate-charged-with-insider-trading-by-us.

According to this law, it is illegal for a senator or any other person to use or employ any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in contravention of the rules and regulations prescribed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding the purchase or sale of any security https://nypost.com/2023/09/19/ex-indiana-rep-stephen-buyer-sentenced-to-22-months-for-insider-trading/. One of these rules is Rule 10b-5, which prohibits any act or omission resulting in fraud or deceit in connection with the purchase or sale of any security https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-clinton-impeachment-manager-sent-to-prison-for-insider-trading-after-judge-says-evidence-screams-guilty/ar-AA1h0hbR. This rule applies to anyone who trades on material nonpublic information that they have a duty to keep confidential, such as a senator who learns about confidential government actions that may affect the market value of certain securities https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/insider_trading.

Therefore, if a senator on a closed council meeting had knowledge of collapse of an industry or rise of another, and went and bought company stock (or sold others) to profit off of this disaster, which they may have helped shape, they may be violating 18 U.S.C. Section 1348 and Rule 10b-5, as well as other federal laws and regulations related to insider trading. This law carries severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment up to 25 years https://nypost.com/2023/09/19/ex-indiana-rep-stephen-buyer-sentenced-to-22-months-for-insider-trading/.