SHOULD JOE BIDEN AND HUNTER BIDEN BE CRIMINALLY INDICTED?
As President Donald Trump’s second term barrels forward in April 2025, a question that simmered through his 2024 campaign has boiled over into a national firestorm: should Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden face criminal indictment? Fueled by years of allegations—foreign deals, laptop scandals, and influence peddling—the debate has erupted anew, with MAGA demanding justice and critics decrying a political witch hunt. With Trump’s tariffs tanking markets—Vietnam’s $40 billion stock crash—and his TikTok tariff deal dominating headlines, the Biden question is a lightning rod, splitting X and testing America’s appetite for accountability in a polarized age. Let’s dive into the case, the stakes, and whether the Bidens should face the gavel.
The saga’s roots stretch back decades, but it’s Hunter’s exploits that light the fuse. In 2014, he joined the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian gas firm, earning $83,000 monthly despite scant energy expertise—coinciding with then-Vice President Joe Biden’s oversight of U.S.-Ukraine policy. A 2020 Senate report flagged it as a “conflict of interest,” while a laptop, allegedly Hunter’s, surfaced with emails hinting at Joe meeting Burisma execs. Fast-forward to 2023: IRS whistleblowers claimed Hunter deducted prostitutes and escorts as business expenses—$1 million over three years—while funneling $4.9 million from foreign entities, including China’s CEFC, to shell companies. “Where’s the indictment?” MAGA roars on X, with #BidenCrimeFamily trending alongside “TrumpWins.”
Joe’s role is murkier but damning to some. A July 2023 House Oversight hearing aired testimony from Devon Archer, Hunter’s ex-partner, alleging Joe joined 20+ calls with foreign clients—small talk, sure, but leverage implied. “10% for the Big Guy,” a 2017 email from the laptop reads, tying Joe to a CEFC deal; Trump’s DOJ, under Merrick Garland, slow-walked probes, per whistleblowers, sparking cries of a cover-up. Post-presidency, Joe’s quiet in Delaware, but Trump’s April 8 TikTok tariff win has MAGA circling back: “If Xi bends, why not Joe?” an X post demands, as 47% in an unscientific poll say “indict them.”
The legal case teeters. Hunter’s indicted twice—December 2023 for tax evasion ($1.4 million) and gun charges (lying about drug use); both await trial, delayed by appeals. Special Counsel David Weiss found “no direct evidence” tying Joe to crimes, but a 2024 House GOP report insists he “knew and benefited”—$27 million in family cash from Ukraine, China, Russia over a decade. Obstruction looms too—Garland’s DOJ allegedly stalled, and Joe’s 2022 pardon talk (never acted on) fuels “guilty conscience” claims. “Lock them up!” chants echo from 2024 rallies, as Vance’s “hillbilly” base—hit by $4.20 gas—sees Biden privilege mocking their struggle.
Critics scream politics. “This is Trump’s revenge—pure and simple,” an X detractor blasts, noting no convictions tie Joe to Hunter’s sins. Weiss’s probe, spanning years, yielded tax and gun counts—not Ukraine bombshells—while the laptop’s chain of custody (Rudy Giuliani to FBI) raises tampering doubts. Democrats cry double standards: Trump’s hush money case dodged jail, and his kids’ Trump Org roles skirted scrutiny. “Hunter’s a mess, but Joe’s clean—stop the circus,” Slate’s Mark Stern argues, as 51% disapprove of Trump (Gallup, March), hinting at backlash. X splits: “No evidence—just MAGA tears!” versus “They’re guilty—DOJ’s corrupt!”
The stakes are massive. Indicting a former president—unprecedented—risks a constitutional crisis; Hunter’s trials alone could drag into 2026, overlapping Trump’s tariff wars (China’s $1 trillion threat, Vietnam’s crash). A GOP House, bolstered by 2024 gains, pushes referrals—Speaker Mike Johnson vows “accountability”—but Attorney General Lisa Monaco, a holdover, resists. “Justice isn’t vengeance,” an X lawyer warns, as Ted Cruz’s “bloodbath” fear looms if probes tank midterms. Trump’s 47% approval rides this—Vance’s “peasants” jab at China pairs with “Biden crime” rants, yet Leavitt’s CNN ban and Barrett’s Trump snub muddy his grip.
Public thirst’s palpable. X roars with “Indict them—clean the swamp!”—47% say yes, 53% no (unscientific)—as Kim Soo Hyun’s $5 million fire gift and Musk’s $70 million suit fade. MAGA sees Biden’s $27 million as theft; libs see a family hustle, not a cartel. “Hunter’s dirty, Joe’s complicit—prove it,” a centrist tweets, capturing the crux: evidence lags outrage. Weiss’s “no direct link” haunts, but Archer’s calls and laptop emails nag—enough for a grand jury?
Should they be indicted? Legally, Hunter’s cooked—tax and gun charges stick; Joe’s a stretch sans smoking gun. Politically, it’s Trump’s ace—47% back him, and “lock them up” sings to the base. Ethically, it’s murky: Biden’s privilege rankles when Vietnam bleeds $40 billion, but revenge isn’t justice. X’s split mirrors America—half crave cuffs, half cry foul. In 2025’s chaos—tariffs, TikTok, Barrett’s turn—indicting the Bidens is a powder keg. Yes or no, Trump’s pushing it, and the nation’s watching, divided as ever.
