A comparison of Trump’s and Biden’s criminal trials (so far)

Last Tuesday, another historic criminal verdict with implications for the November presidential election was delivered. Eleven days after Donald Trump became the first U.S. president to be convicted on felony charges, Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden, became the first son of a sitting president to be convicted of a felony.

Only the previous week, the president went out of his way to tell supporters that a “convicted felon” was running for president. The same term — unquestionably pejorative in context — now applies to his own son.

“No one in this country is above the law. Everyone must be accountable for their actions, even this defendant,” said U.S. Attorney David Weiss on June 11 shortly after a verdict was returned finding the president’s son guilty on all three felony counts related to his purchase and possession of a gun while using illegal drugs.

“However,” he continued, “Hunter Biden should be no more accountable than any other citizen.”

That was an odd remark. Usually, we’re told the opposite — that even in high-profile cases when the convicted has resources and connections to powerful people, the guilty should be no LESS accountable than any other defendant.

But Weiss was crystal clear. “No more accountable.”

It’s inherently true — the younger Biden’s punishment should not exceed what others have faced for crimes of the same nature. Just as the jubilant opposition celebrates Trump’s conviction out of their hatred of him, the staunch opposition to Biden desires to see the president’s screwup son tarred and feathered simply because they dislike the president and his screwup son.

Weiss’ remark is the quiet part stated out loud: the primary interest this case isn’t driven by a desire for justice. It’s driven by politics.

It’s no wonder, then, that Democrats seem more or less pleased to acknowledge that the younger Biden was found guilty of all three felony counts. A guilty verdict against Hunter is a gift to the rocky Biden re-election effort; needed ammunition to discredit claims that Trump’s convictions are a result of partisan lawfare intended to keep him from returning to the White House.

They regret the Biden family’s anguish over the younger’s legal troubles, of course. But to every Democrat not named Biden, Hunter is expendable. Sacrificing him for the sake of his father’s fragile campaign so they can say, “See? The whole process has always been fair!” isn’t only acceptable — it’s necessary.

Nobody in the Democratic campaign machine is going to lose sleep if Hunter is the one thrown under the bus. Hunter probably won’t appreciate it, but the campaign probably doesn’t appreciate all the hookers and crack and alleged tax evasion and the child Hunter fathered with a stripper but hasn’t actually met. (And I think there’s something about a laptop computer, too.)

Drug-fueled shenanigans aren’t a good look for any political campaign, but when the swing state polls look increasingly ominous and the candidate himself isn’t all there upstairs? Oof.

On a gentler note: Hunter Biden is very publicly known to have long struggled with drug and alcohol addiction. Addiction is nothing short of a horrific ordeal. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone, and I hope Hunter can prevail in the daily (sometimes hourly) battle to keep the demons at bay.

At the same time, every addict who’s found success in recovery will tell you that every act they committed while high or desperate was of their own doing — and no else’s.

The cold reality is that Hunter’s actions — those alleged and those already judged — are a contributing factor affecting his father’s chance at re-election. And as pop’s re-election is likely the only way to block Trump from another term, the two new felons and their cases are inextricably linked.

Like I said, this is political.

And because it’s political, the same Democrats who contend that similar guilty verdicts confirm that Trump’s New York proceedings were fair, impartial and correct also contend that the two cases are not the same. They’re correct — for starters, only one of them is running for President of the United States.

But if we’re going to examine the differences, we shouldn’t stop at the surface. Donald Trump and Hunter Biden are indeed two separate men with two very different sets of circumstances. And two major differences stand out in the way their trials proceeded — differences that could lend credence to Team Trump and Republicans’ claims that justice hasn’t exactly been administered equally.

First, the three federal counts on which the younger Biden was convicted were clearly defined from the start: Lying to a gun dealer, lying on a federal gun form, and possessing a gun while addicted to and/or using illegal drugs.

The specifics of the crimes of which Trump was convicted aren’t clear. Trump was charged with 34 counts of Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree. Every other degree of that crime is misdemeanor under New York law. To qualify as a felony, as all 34 of Trump’s counts did, the prosecution had to prove that Trump intended to commit, aid or conceal an additional crime. According to the prosecution, that additional crime was conspiracy to prevent or promote the election of a person by unlawful means.

Judge Juan Merchan allowed the jury to consider three different possibilities for unlawful means: federal election campaign violations, falsification of other business records, or tax violations. City, state or federal tax laws? Any of the above.

The verdict states that on 34 separate counts, the jury found beyond a reasonable doubt each time that Trump intended to commit any one of those three additional crimes.

But which one(s) of the three? We don’t know. The jury form does not say. The jury did not have to unanimously decide which unlawful means Trump intended to use — each juror only had to agree that it was by any one of the three possible means. Nor were jurors required to state which crime(s) they concluded Trump intended to commit.

In short, Donald Trump is the first and only U.S. president to be convicted of felony criminal charges. But we will never know what it was that made them felonies.

Unlike Trump, Hunter almost got to avoid felony charges altogether through a generous plea deal reached with federal prosecutors that was announced in June of 2023. Under the terms of the plea deal, Hunter would get to resolve the yearslong investigation into his failure to pay taxes on millions of dollars he received from his consulting work in 2017 and 2018 for companies like Ukrainian firm Burisma.

The deal would allow Hunter to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges, likely avoiding prison. Additionally, he would enter into a pretrial diversion agreement on a single felony gun possession charge, likely meaning that the charge would be dropped at the end of the agreement if he complied with its terms.

The sweet plea deal fell through at the last minute in late July 2023 when Judge Maryellen Noreika raised concerns about “atypical provisions.” Noreika, a former patent attorney versed in highly technical litigation, declined to sign off on the deal, citing the need for further review. Before the end of the hearing, defense lawyers confirmed that the deal was void. With the deal collapsed, Hunter would be charged in October 2023 with the three felony gun crimes of which he was convicted last week.

With one felony criminal trial each under their belts, more time in the courtroom looms in the future for both the former president and the sitting president’s son. The political question is obvious: whose candidacy stands to suffer more from the legal liabilities dominating news headlines?

Trump is facing a significantly higher number of indictments, divided between more jurisdictions. On charges of mishandling classified documents, the trial is postponed indefinitely. With no start date currently set, it’s quite possible the trial would not start until after the election. The federal election interference case is also TBD as it awaits a ruling on presidential immunity by the Supreme Court.

In Georgia, the state election interference case will likely not start until after the election, now that a state appeals court has halted the case to review whether embattled Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis should remain on the case. Willis faced a disqualification hearing after it was revealed that she had a romantic affair with Nathan Wade, a private attorney hired by Willis for the prosecution’s team despite no experience prosecuting RICO cases.

It's very possible that Trump will not be making news from inside a courtroom before the election. The president’s son, on the other hand, is set to be back on trial for tax crimes in September. Hunter faces nine charges in federal court in California — six misdemeanors and three felonies.

The subjects of the trial could prove unflattering, even outright damaging, should any information learned at the younger’s tax trial suggest that the elder Biden was more involved in his son’s business dealings than he was previously willing to admit, as Republicans have alleged for years.

Whether it seems believable or not, Trump seems to have the advantage. Being found guilty of 34 felonies hasn’t resulted in the blow to his campaign Democrats want. To add to Democrats’ woes, Trump’s fundraising exploded in the wake of the verdict.

But the fallout from Hunter Biden doing Hunter Biden things will likely only worsen the elder Biden’s chances of surviving the November election. If Hunter wants to ease the threat to his dad’s already-strained campaign, the best thing for him to do might be to plead guilty and save dad the drama. Happy Father’s Day.

Comments: 319-398-8266; althea.cole@thegazette.com