That’s according to James E. Campbell, a UB Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the University of Buffalo-SUNY, who wrote at Real Clear Wire that the “evidence” of the influence-peddling operation “is abundant.”

“It includes emails, text messages, bank reports, testimonies, and much more,” he wrote, citing multiple compilations of evidence, evidence from both domestic and offshore banks, thousands of emails, direct testimony and more.

“The principal fact is that during Joe Biden’s two terms as vice president, the influence of his public office was sold to governments and nationals in at least four countries to the tune of at least $20 million,” he said. “The dubious nature of these transactions triggered more than 170 Suspicious Activity Reports from U.S. banks. These funds were deposited in 20 Biden-family shell corporations, then distributed to as many as nine different family members, including some of President Biden’s grandchildren. The scandal is not wild speculation.”

He said, “The corruption appears to be real and extensive.”

So what remains to determine is “whether Biden personally knew of and participated in this enterprise. … Impeachment should turn on this question. Was the influence-peddling scandal conducted without his knowledge and involvement – just the ‘illusion of access’ being sold by Biden family members, or did he knowingly take part in it – turning influence-peddling into bribery solicitation?”

He said the latter warrants impeachment.

Already, he said, Joe Biden “shows up in the evidence quite often – in emails and texts, at dinners and elsewhere with ‘clients’ of the business, on international travel excursions with Hunter, in visits to the White House and VP’s residence … golf outings, and elsewhere, and in the testimonies of whistleblowers, associates, and a big client (the Burisma executive who says he paid Joe Biden $5 million).”

He said the most damning evidence against Joe Biden is his bragging “about his success in getting a prosecutor in Ukraine fired” by threatening the Ukraine government that he would block a billion dollar aid package to the country if they did not fire the prosecutor.

The company, Burisma, was at the time paying Hunter Biden some $1 million a year to be on the board, but testimony has suggested the goal of having Hunter on the payroll was for him to use his influence with his father to get the prosecutor investigating Burisma removed.

Here’s Joe Biden bragging about doing that:

Campbell noted, “Presumably, he had no inkling at the time it would later become known that Burisma desperately wanted the prosecutor fired and paid the Bidens handsomely to that end. Based on the evidence in hand, Burisma put up the bribe ‘quid,’ Vice President Biden delivered the ‘quo,’ and essentially admitted to that in public. President Trump was impeached for merely asking Ukraine’s President Zelensky to look into this.”

He cited other evidence, “Hunter’s ‘laptop from hell’ included an email with the distribution of the take from a deal with an energy company in China.” And other laptop evidence, such as Hunter’s message, “… don’t worry, unlike Pop, I won’t make you give me half your salary.” And the reference to 10% for the “Big Guy.”

And the nine Biden family members who got money from the scheme.

“This would seem to offer at least a partial answer to the president’s mocking question: ‘Where’s the money?’ His family may be getting a bit of their inheritance early. But beyond the distribution itself, it might be enlightening to know how each of these family members reacted to these gifts? Did they understand where it was coming from? Did they ask about it, and what were they told and by whom?”

And whether it’s possible that Biden was in the dark about the operations.

“These facts crowd out reasonable doubt.”

“Can we believe that Joe’s son and brother, Hunter and Jim, two devoted members of the tight-knit Biden family, would have (or could have) both been so reckless as to have undertaken an extensive, long-running, and politically dangerous influence-peddling scheme on their own, without having Joe’s approval? ”

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@wndnewscenter.org.

But their “charitable” contributions since the rollout of the jabs are even more striking than their control over medical propaganda. We knew they had politicians and news organizations in their back pockets, but what about colleges, medical associations, and hospitals? Surely institutions of higher learning and medical professionals tasked with keeping us healthy are immune to Big Pharma bribery, right?

Wrong.

Here’s a thread by attorney Aaron Siri that should open some eyes:

Pfizer donations to universities in 2021, of course, had no influence on those universities’ Covid-19 vaccine guidance.

Pfizer donations to hospitals in 2021, of course, had no influence on those hospitals’ Covid-19 vaccine guidance.

Pfizer donations to professional medical associations in 2021, of course, had no influence on those associations’ Covid-19 vaccine guidance.

Pfizer donations to cancer organizations in 2021, of course, had no influence on those organizations’ Covid-19 vaccine guidance.

Pfizer donations to heart related medical organizations in 2021, of course, had no influence on those organizations’ Covid-19 vaccine guidance.

That’s a pretty big, albeit incomplete list. This also doesn’t show grants or other moneys that were given to individuals to help them with research projects or to pay them for “consultation.” In  other words, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

For Big Pharma to convince people they needed to get injected with an experimental drug that caused more health problems and deaths than the disease it didn’t really help to prevent, they needed the “smart” people onboard. They bought allegiance.