Was Covering Up Biden’s Condition a Quarter Billion Dollar Fraud?

“Last month I co-hosted the single largest fund-raiser supporting any Democratic candidate ever, for President Biden’s re-election,” former ER actor George Clooney revealed in a New York Times op-ed calling for him to drop out. “It’s devastating to say it, but the Joe Biden I was with three weeks ago at the fund-raiser was not the Joe ‘big F-ing deal’ Biden of 2010. He wasn’t even the Joe Biden of 2020. He was the same man we all witnessed at the debate.”

At the fundraiser, George Clooney called Biden a star instead of telling the truth about him.

Did the movie star reveal his misgivings to any of those who contributed $30 million at the fundraiser? Or to those in his circle of acquaintances who would go on to attend other $2,500 a plate fundraisers for Biden in the Los Angeles area? Or did he keep quiet until now?

According to Clooney, who also got Obama to sign off on his attack, “this isn’t only my opinion; this is the opinion of every senator and Congress member and governor who I’ve spoken with in private. Every single one, irrespective of what he or she is saying publicly.”

That’s not just an indictment of Biden, but of Clooney, Obama and every Dem legislator who kept on raising millions for the presidential campaign of a candidate they knew was unfit.

The Clooney fundraiser outraised the previous $26 million fundraiser by Stephen Colbert, whose presence on CBS’ fading late night show is an undisclosed contribution by Paramount to the Democrats. Colbert has now also suggested that Biden might want to step down.

The two fundraisers were part of a much larger haul during which Biden raised $127 million last month with nearly a quarter of a billion dollars being held by his committees.

Those fundraisers were based on what Democrats, including some of those involved in the fundraisers, have now admitted was a lie: that Biden was a viable presidential candidate.

If even the partial haul of $264 million were treated as a fraud, it would be massive in scope.

After Biden’s debate disaster, one Democrat insider after another has come forward to reveal that they knew about his state. Some of those covering up the fraud benefited materially from the Biden campaign while others used their connection to it to obtain status and influence.

Certainly that would potentially apply to Joe Biden, to close Biden family members, allies and staffers as well as to a much larger circle of political operatives, consultants and donors who concealed the truth about his condition while encouraging donations to his political campaign.

The question “what did the president know and when did he know it” may be only so applicable to Joe Biden whom Special Counsel Robert Hur deemed likely to get off in any criminal case on account of presenting himself as an elderly man with a poor memory, but those around him have no such defense. And those who are now coming forward to denounce Biden are also in some cases potentially exposing themselves to criminal liability for their role in the cover-up.

If they had been selling a car, a house or pushing stock in a company that they knew was being fundamentally misrepresented as fit for its intended purpose, there would be a risk of liability.

Viewed as a fraudulent enterprise, the Biden campaign, its associated committees, PACs and the larger Democrat Party is staggering in scope. It might even be the single greatest fraud in American history in which a tremendous number of people were also aware of the fraud.

Former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau, who co-founded Fenway Strategies and served on the board of Let America Vote, claimed that, “It was not surprising to any of us who were at the fundraiser. I was there. Clooney was exactly right, and every single person I talked to at the fundraiser thought the same thing.” And Favreau made the decision to keep quiet about it.

“I remember my wife, Emily, turned to me after the fundraiser and said, ‘What are we going to do?’ And I said, ‘Well, there is a debate in a week. Either he’ll do well in the debate, and we’ll think he was just tired because he flew all the way back from Europe, and that’ll be that, or he’ll be like this at the debate and then the whole country will be talking about it. So, here we are.”

The decision by Democrats was to keep covering it up until it couldn’t be covered up anymore.

Some Dems had invested heavily in Biden already and were treating it as a pyramid scheme that they had to try and keep going at all costs. If we believe the Democrat operatives, media figures and other insiders who keep regaling us with how they knew about Biden’s condition, then much of the party continued to raise money even while hiding information that would have dissuaded donors from continuing to contribute to the Biden presidential campaign.

Since the debate, media reports describe donors refusing to donate or to take calls.

“Disastrous.” NBC News quoted a source in the Biden campaign, reporting that “the money has absolutely shut off.” Sources claimed that donations from large donors were “down by possibly half” or even according to one “much more.”

This establishes that donors would not have handed out the tens of millions that they did over the previous weeks, not to mention the much larger sums taken in during previous months, if they had been made aware of Biden’s true state. Democrat insiders knew of that. It is difficult then to see how hiding that information from donors while asking them to donate wasn’t fraud.

There’s potential civil liability for recruiters, much as there can be in a pyramid scheme in which the recruiters are aware that the larger campaign is fraudulent, but there may also be criminal liability as well should state or federal authorities choose to pursue this question.

Democrats are coming forward to accuse the Biden family of one of the largest frauds in history. But many, if not most of them, were aware of the fraud and chose to keep quiet for political, personal or financial reasons. Complicity in the quarter billion dollar fraud may be widespread.

The question is whether state and federal authorities will impose consequences on those who fundraised, who benefited and who kept on lying as long as the millions kept rolling in.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.

Thank you for reading.