What The Preemptive Pardons Reveal About Biden Family Corruption: An Interview With Peter Schweizer

The following is an edited transcript of an interview between Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief John Bickley and bestselling author Peter Schweizer on a weekend edition of Morning Wire.

* * *

In the final minutes of his presidency, Joe Biden shocked the political world by issuing preemptive pardons for several of his own family members. The move has sparked outrage on both sides of the aisle – and sparked renewed calls for investigations into Biden family corruption. Morning Wire sat down with bestselling author Peter Schweizer to discuss the unprecedented Biden family pardons – and Republicans’ plans to follow the money.

JOHN: Joining us now is Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute and bestselling author of multiple books that address allegations of Biden family corruption. Peter, always great to talk with you, thanks for coming on.

PETER: Of course. Happy to be with you.

JOHN: We witnessed something this week that Joe Biden repeatedly told the American people he would never do – he preemptively pardoned members of his own family. Five of them. This comes after he did something else he swore he wouldn’t do, pardoned his son Hunter. So first, we hear the term “unprecedented” thrown around a lot. Is this unprecedented?

PETER: Yeah, there’s no example in American history of a family member of a sitting president being pardoned – no less five members of the family, or six if you include Hunter. Also, these sort of preemptive pardons are really unprecedented, and they will probably be tested in court.

JOHN: I would assume so. Now we’ve covered the Hunter pardon at length here – in fact, we had you on to talk about it at one point. We now have five more members of the Biden family. And again, like you said, these are preemptive pardons so different in kind. First, who exactly did he grant this blanket immunity to?

PETER: These are essentially his siblings and their spouses, and his son and his daughter. And what’s significant is all six of these people are individuals who are connected to LLCs, these limited liability companies that the family had multiple listings of. These are all entities that received money from foreign entities. It’s also important to point out, John, that each one of these pardons, whether it’s Hunter or the other five family members, the pardon specifically mentions any crimes that occurred beginning after January 1, 2014. That’s significant because all of the foreign deals – those involving China, Ukraine, and Russia – all started happening in early 2014, so they clearly seem to be dated and designed to cover the transfers of those foreign deals.

JOHN: Yeah, pretty revealing. Had the names of these particular members come up in investigations or claims by members of Congress?

PETER: Yes, in fact they had. James Comer (R-KY) mentioned all of them, I think. Comer actually has a new book out, which is quite good by the way, where he mentions all of them. And I think there is a connection there. I think the fact that these are in the sights of congressional investigators is probably one of the things that prompted Joe Biden to issue this action. Keep in mind that this also, in a way, provides some protection of Joe Biden , because if you do believe this was an influence-peddling scheme, Joe Biden was certainly involved. And by pardoning his spouses and his children, it provides a guardrail of protection for him as well. So this is self-serving, not just something beneficial to his family.

JOHN: You’ve been documenting for years the allegations of Biden family corruption. What is some of the more compelling evidence against them?

PETER: Well, I think the most compelling evidence is that they have collected tens of millions of dollars, some $31 million from these foreign entities, and there’s no evidence of them giving anything legitimate in return. In the case of China, for example, we know that they got $5 million from a Chinese businessman named Mr Zhao. There’s no evidence that anything was given to him in return of a business nature – and people generally don’t pass around $5 million without expecting something in return. That has always been the mystery. And the fact that the Bidens have A) denied that there was any money transference, and of course there was. And then B) they denied that Joe Biden was aware of this or involved. We now know that he met with several of these people, which makes it very clear that they were trying to cover something up. What Joe Biden did specifically in return for those funds, we don’t know. But that’s why I think we need to have continued congressional investigations. It’s not about looking in the past and trying to punish a political opponent. It’s about trying to unpack exactly what was done for this money, so we can deter it from happening in the future with other political figures.

JOHN: Right, you bring up investigations. First of all, are Biden’s family members now truly immune from all charges that have any connection to this? And can Congress still investigate them? Does this block actual thorough investigations?

PETER: Those are great questions. Well, it’s going to be challenged in court. A lot of people question whether you can grant pardon for a crime that may or may not have been committed that you haven’t been charged for. That has never been done before, and there are a lot of legal scholars who say this just simply is too broad because you could essentially, under this construct, provide blanket immunity for a murder that was not discovered until later on, and that seems overly broad. As far as congressional investigations are concerned, absolutely they can continue to investigate. Jim Comer (R-KY), I talked to him a couple of days ago, and he told me he has advised the incoming Attorney General, Pam Bondi, that he believes that the Department of Justice needs to investigate this. You can do a criminal investigation, even if you’re not targeting the specific family member. I think Congress needs to investigate it because, again, it’s not just about what the Bidens did. One of the true things about Washington DC is, if people in power figure out a way to make money for their family, and they’re not going to be caught, they’re not going to be held liable, it will be imitated. So this notion of getting foreign entities to enrich your family when you’re a decision maker in a position to help or hurt them could become widespread, and I don’t think anybody wants that.

JOHN: There’s been a lot made of Trump coming in with retribution on his mind, but the argument that we are maybe exposed to national security risks from foreign entities that might have their hands in the pockets of people who have a lot of power – I would think that argument would win the day. You’ve mentioned maybe that these preemptive pardons might just collapse legally. Is there any other way to override or work around a presidential pardon of this nature?

PETER: Well, some people, like professor Alan Dershowitz – a Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard – has said that these pardons actually create problems for the Biden family, because now when you are asked questions by a congressional committee or by Department of Justice lawyers, you cannot plead the Fifth Amendment – because, of course, the Fifth Amendment prevents you from self-incrimination. Now, if you are exempt from being prosecuted for these crimes, you presumably cannot plead the Fifth Amendment. So it may actually make things harder for the family in terms of actually having to answer questions. But the key thing is those questions have to be asked. The Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, who I think is going to be confirmed, and by the Congressional Oversight Committees, need to proceed. This is not about retribution; it’s not about being vindictive. That certainly seems to be what people have accused Trump of doing. But if you look at his first term as president, he certainly did not prosecute Hillary Clinton or anyone else. And there’s no reason to believe that that would be taking place here. It’s simply trying to get clarification and facts of what actually transpired and what these Chinese, Russian, and Ukrainian entities actually got in exchange for sending millions of dollars to Joe Biden’s family.

JOHN: You bring up Pam Bondi. Judging by the Cabinet picks so far from Trump, what is the sense you get about the priority he’s laid out of weeding out government corruption. Do you feel that they’re fully invested in this project?

PETER: I think that’s going to be the central question, John, going forward, because you have these large institutions – the Department of Defense, for example, or the CIA – there’s a reason people call them “the deep state” because they’re deeply embedded within those bureaucracies. So you’re going to have somebody who is confirmed as the SECDEF or as the CIA director who’s going to be having to deal with bureaucracies that are trying to counteract what you’re doing. It’s very hard to fight that kind of trench warfare at the same time you’re carrying out policies to deal with, say, the threat from China, the threat from Russia. So, that is going to be the defining issue. But I think it is the battle that has to be fought because it comes down to the question of: Are we actually governed by the people we elect, that we have chosen to represent us? Or are government decisions being made by unelected bureaucrats? And are those unelected bureaucrats involved at some level in corruption? And I think the history of our country demonstrates that absolutely they are. So, to me, this is the marquee issue, and it’s a reflection of this broader concern that I have of what I call “the globalization of corruption.” When we think of corruption, we think of the guy who’s got a paving business back in some congressional district who wants some federal highway dollars steered his way by the congressman. What we’re talking about now are foreign governments, in some cases those that are hostile to the United States, giving money to our elected officials and getting something in return. So, this is not just rank and file corruption, which is bad enough. This is globalized corruption – and it’s only going to get worse, not better, unless we actually do something about it.

JOHN: I think you’re right. What do you expect to see in the coming weeks and months from the White House and the Republican-led Congress related to Biden family corruption and other sort of government level corruption issues?

PETER: Well, I think on Capitol Hill, the House Oversight Committee’s Jim Comer I think has done an excellent job. He’s fact-based, he’s driven, and he’s prepared to name names, which is the key in the investigation. So I expect a lot of activities in the House of Representatives. And I think in the Department of Justice, in the next several weeks, you’re going to see a series of reviews done by senior attorneys at DOJ under Pam Bondi making decisions about some of the very controversial things that have happened with regard to, say, Tony Fauci, who apparently lied before Congressional committees when he testified. What is the legal standard for lying before Congress? Did he cross that line? And is there a reason to open an investigation and to bring him in to ask him questions about that? So, I think there’s going to be a little bit of quiet before the storm because, again, when you’re dealing with these legal matters, you want to make sure that you are crossing all the T’s and dotting the I’s – because what gets you into trouble is when you don’t do the prep work, and Bondi certainly has a reputation for doing her prep work.

JOHN: Yes, I think there’s no arguing that she’s someone who comes prepared. Final question: What do you expect from the Biden family? Will they withdraw from public life or try to stay politically relevant?

PETER: Well, I think one of the unanswered questions about the Biden family, and again, if you look at the pardons that were issued to Hunter Biden and the family, they run up specifically through December of last year. So any crimes that would have been committed in 2024 would be covered as well. And you wonder, well, what does that mean? Well, that could be the Hunter Biden art deals that were very controversial. But I also think it’s worth looking at this period when Joe Biden had that disastrous debate performance with Donald Trump, and he spent about four or five weeks refusing to get out of the race, and Hunter Biden moved into the White House. I believe – I don’t have evidence to confirm this – I believe that the Biden family negotiated financial deals to secure his exit from that race. Whether that crosses the legal line and is illegal, I don’t know, but I think that is worth looking into as well. It certainly fits their pattern of monetizing things. It certainly makes sense that Hunter Biden was at the center of it – that’s where a lot of this money would flow through. And that would of course raise questions about what they might be doing in the post-presidential years and the money they might be living off of in this case.

JOHN: Intriguing questions – and hopefully we do get some answers and Congress does pursue what I think the American people deserve to know has actually happened here. Peter, thank you so much for joining us.

PETER: It’s always a pleasure. Thanks, John.

JOHN: That was bestselling author and GAI president Peter Schweizer – and this has been a weekend edition of Morning Wire.

***