Poll: Voters Increasingly View Both Biden and Trump As Criminal Actors

We recently discussed a poll showing that 68% of voters believe President Joe Biden acted either criminally or unethically in connection to the foreign dealings of his son, Hunter Biden. Now a Fox poll has found largely that same response — a majority believes that both Biden and former president Donald Trump have committed criminal acts. It is an extraordinary political and legal moment where the two frontrunners for the presidency are believed to be criminal actors by many voters.

The Fox polls show that 52% of voters believe Trump did something illegal in connection to efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his handling of classified documents. Only 23% believe that Trump did not commit criminal acts. Obviously, the results are driven by the overwhelming view of Democrats (86%) but independents (53%) also think Trump did something illegal.

On the Bidens, 52% think Hunter Biden did something illegal in relation to his business dealings in Ukraine and China.  That worsening situation is again driven on one side with Republicans. However, there was an 18% shift in independents that should worry the President. Some 40 percent believe that Joe Biden committed crimes. That is close to the 36 percent who shared that view in the earlier poll.

What is particularly notable is that 69 percent now believe that Joe Biden acted with criminally or unethically — virtually identical to the other poll.

As I wrote earlier, the most striking aspect of these polls is the disconnect with the mainstream media. Despite overwhelmingly protective coverage for the Bidens, the public is simply not buying it. While both the Democrats and the media have been unrelenting in opposing investigations into the Bidens, the public has long supported such efforts.

These consistent polls show that the public is tuning out the media spin on the corruption scandal involving the Bidens. It also shows (with both Trump and Biden) that the same roughly 25% remain constant for both candidates.

NB: The headline and two lines were changed to reflect that the view of Joe Biden as a criminal actor has increased but remains under 50 percent. However, 69% now view the President as acting either criminally or unethically.

194 thoughts on “Poll: Voters Increasingly View Both Biden and Trump As Criminal Actors”

  1. (OT)

    Bomb your own hospital parking lot. Then, for maximum propaganda value, haul a bunch of hospital patients out to that parking lot. Then in your terrorist frenzy, claim: See what those oppressors did.

    Terrorists and their masters (Iran) wouldn’t do that, would they?

    When you are blind to their dictatorial, genocidal ideology, you are blind to their propaganda tactics.

  2. Since the media has been covering for Biden and falsifying information about Trump, how badly has the poll been skewed?

    1. Professors are supposed to be objective. Turley has lost all credibility as a professor. He defends or ignores trumps fraud, bribery, and worst of all, his attempt to undo democracy, yet peddles conspiracy theories about “influence peddling”, as if this is equivalent, and this is from actions of his relatives when Biden was vice president no less. One wonders if turley is being blackmailed into writing these silly articles.

  3. Again: as I’ve already pointed out to you multiple times, many of the records in question are agency records subject to the Federal Records Act, specifically excluded from being presidential records per the text of the PRA: 44 U.S. Code § 2201(2)(B)(i). Agency records are not personal papers.

    And Trump has not asserted in court that any of the records are personal papers.

      1. It’s law, and if Trump wants to challenge that law, he’ll have to do so in court.

        To date, he has not challenged in court that many of the documents are agency records.

        1. It’s law, and if Trump wants to challenge that law, he’ll have to do so in court.

          You finally got something right.
          Personal papers are in possession of the President. The National archives claims the papers are Presidential Records.
          The National Archives can file a CIVIL claim.

          PRA is civil not criminal law.

          You finally stumled into being correct about something

          1. LOL that you pretend the law in question is the PRA, when it’s the FRA. You can’t get anything right.

            1. Which agency demanded the papers back. Which agency went to the DoJ and asked for the papers back!

              I dont care what you want to debate, just pick a topic and stay with it.

              The Federal Records Act.
              All the federal records produced would be under the ultimate control of the President of the United States. IF the President, while still in office decides a copy of a federal record is something he wants to keep, he puts it in box of personal papers, and moves on.
              Tell me with federal agency wants what record returned.

              1. I’m not going to do your homework for you. If you want to know which agencies (plural), read the filings in the case.

        2. It’s law, and if Trump wants to challenge that law, he’ll have to do so in court.

          You have the law backwards. The President has Identified these as Personal. The PRA allows for personal papers.

          It the GOVERNMENT wants to challenge that, they can take the president to CIVIL court.
          Gee, I wonder way the govt refused to seek a civil ruling????

          To date, he has not challenged in court that many of the documents are agency records.

          When exactly is an indicted person allowed to present a defense? Retard.

          1. “The PRA allows for personal papers. ”

            Trump hasn’t claimed in court that any of the records are personal papers. You keep ignoring this straightforward fact. IF Trump wants the court to consider that, THEN he actually has to claim it in court.

            “It the GOVERNMENT wants to challenge that, …”

            Again: Trump has ***not*** claimed in court that any of the records are personal papers. There is nothing for the DOJ to challenge.

            On the contrary, the DOJ ***has*** claimed in court that many of the documents are agency records — per the PRA and FRA — and Trump hasn’t challenged it, not even to claim “no, they’re personal records.”

            “I wonder way the govt refused to seek a civil ruling?”

            Because Trump broke criminal laws.

            “When exactly is an indicted person allowed to present a defense?”

            LOL, if he wanted to make that claim, it would be entirely relevant to whether he has to view the papers in a SCIF, which he has not challenged. I bet you haven’t bothered reading a single filing in the suit so far. You should read up. Your ignorance shows daily.

            1. You’re all over the place.
              when I prove you wrong, you change topics.

              To repeat in response to the lie you keep repeating.
              Trump has yet been in position to present a defense…..because like You, the DoJ is working under a dozen different legal statutes, so until the defendant is in a position to respond to a single charge there is no defense.

              , which he has not challenged.

              When. When was Trump as the defendant in a court room where the defense could offer evidence, in his defense against a specific charge.?

              The DoJ is immune from leaking FAKE evidence( the latest shit show about the Aussie getting briefed on classified intel, which the Aussie himself said is a lie) The DoJ is free to influence the jury all it wants. The Judge wont punish the DoJ for spreading evidence it knows to be false,

            2. , it would be entirely relevant to whether he has to view the papers in a SCIF

              Nice try. You are quoting from the FRA. Dont need a SCIF.

              PICK A TOPIC
              Your pedantic response is noted as a white flag of surrender

              1. You absolutely need a SCIF for classified agency records. Jeez, keep proving that you haven’t read any of the filings in the case.

                1. The documents are not classified. Trump by the act of taking the documents with him, declassified the documents.

                  But you keep claiming this has nothing to do with classification.
                  So we are right back to where we were this morning.
                  Documents declassified and categorized as personal papers.

                  The judiciary has zero legal basis to challenge the claim of the president exercising plenary power as enumerated in the constitution.
                  The rules for declassification are written by the President. The last controlling rules(not law, the Judiciary cannot adjudicate internal rules) excluded the President from the rules.

                  If there is a conflict, the National archives can seek relief in CIVIL, not criminal court.

                  The PRA does not define the difference between a presidential record and what is personal. Like all things in the White House, the president has final say.

                  So you end up with personal papers

                  The PRA is unconstitutional, but all Presidents have negotiated with the NA (as Trump was doing and was turning over material) as to what gets archived. Because if they force this in front of a Judge, the only ruling constitutionally viable rulling is separation of powers, forbids congress from managing how the President runs the Executive Branch. and poof, the PRA disappears.

  4. What do we do when the official journal of the governing elite is responsible for the spread of dangerous disinformation?

    Many of us saw yesterday’s shifting headlines in the NYT as it was forced to walk back its ideologically driven, inflammatory reporting. What do we do? Hamas might say that nothing needs to be done. That actors like the NYT should be encouraged.

    The violence and hatred provoked by the headlines is nigh impossible to walk back. A fire, once set, can become a raging inferno that is impossible to extinguish. Setting the initial narrative is a powerful weapon. But maybe that is the point.

    Shouldn’t we expect a higher standard of care from the paper of record? That it pause to make sure of the facts before aiming a blowtorch at the tinderbox? Before aiding and abetting a group dedicated to the destruction of the Israeli people?

    The NYT, along with their ideological counterparts in government and the elite universities, have been steadfast in their support of content moderation and the enforcement of hate speech laws.

    If there was ever a time for those principles to be applied, this is it.

    If not now, when? If not applied to the NYT, against whom?

  5. The 20 fake businesses and the banking take is the evidence.
    If joe biden and his mob of family criminals can’t show productive work for all the shell companies and can’t show the money he, his family, and even underage grandchildren got directly from the 20 shell companies is for valid work then he is guilty.

    I have to say so far it appears exactly as above. None of the bidens or spokespersons have denied any of the shell companies and none have explained what work each has done. So right now it does look like guilty beyond doubt.

    If he’s not guilty why hasn’t one of the hundreds of big shot backers and reporters explained to us how each company did valid work and joey didn’t get a dime and how the granddaughter or the 9 family members earned their keep of the 20-50 million dollars that are otherwise bribes ?

    I’ve got to say the silence is damning. There hasn’t been a single explanation anywhere. It’s all quiet on the bribery front. So the evidence is already stark and completely convincing.
    If the biden family wants me to believe they are innocent they sure are clammed up about it. Joe already lied about not knowing anything about Hunter’s business doings while also proclaiming he never got a dime, not dime one from China, and only Trump got money from China. Joe angrily said that in the debate, and we all know the base emotion is first fear then anger he might be exposed, and he was angry as he lied to everyone on the national debate stage.

    Another poster claimed biden’s guilt is obvious, and of course some demoncrat squealed there is no evidence, but the evidence above alone is damning.

    I can’t find any demoncrat reporter or otherwise explaining even in the simplest of terms what the 20 shell company services were or why the money went between them into the biden family accounts – not one explanation by anyone. One of the deposits went into a bank account Hunter had in Malta, which has been known for money laundering.

  6. Headline is wrong. Majority think Joe Biden acted unethically, but only 40% think he committed crimes.

    1. If the left wing news would stop their nonstop lying, that number would be closer to 100% think Biden is a criminal.

  7. But are they, Professor? Until voting behavior changes, this means jack and s***. And I seriously doubt liberal cowards are prepared to change their voting behavior. Sorry for being cynical, but prying fictitious notions of ‘liberalism’ from these folks’ minds is exactly and precisely that difficult. 2024 will likely be about like 2020. Again: ‘liberal’ voters are closed minded cowards who worship their status quo. They ain’t rockin’ that boat.

  8. Trump files Notice of Appeal regarding Judge Chutkan’s prejudicial gag order:

    I suspect Trump will also shortly request expedited hearing while filing the actual Appeal, to get this issue resolved before this Trump-hating democrat judge gets further involved in this case, including by allowing the Special Counsel to continue leaking to the media while preventing Trump from pointing out how biased the Special Counsel, the court, and its various minions are.

    1. I suspect you haven’t read Chutkan’s order, which applies to the Special Counsel as well as to Trump.

      1. I read the Order within minutes of when it was available online. Maybe YOU should try reading it, because there’s NO indication anywhere in the Order that this Obama judge cares about documented leaks by the Special Counsel and/or court employees, and the entire paragraph following the indented Order is directed specifically to Trump. The Order itself, in its entirety, is directed to Trump, and the biased judge only references all parties as a throw-away comment in the Order.

        1. I, too, read it within minutes, and I posted a link to it on this blog hours ago, quoting the heart of the order when I did so:

          “The Order itself, in its entirety, is directed to Trump, and the biased judge only references all parties as a throw-away comment in the Order”

          I don’t agree. People often have different opinions. Yours carries no more weight than mine.

          1. I shall not be criticized !!!!” IT IS HEREBY ORDERED !

            This is literally pathetic. A corrupt piece of crap whose estrogen markers abrogate the rights of Americans and the 1st amendment.
            This is absolutely corrupt on it’s face.
            The more corrupt the judge the courts and the prosecution the more often they need to do crap like this.

      2. For the record, I’m the “Anonymous” that posted the original comment above that begins “Trump files Notice of Appeal regarding Judge Chutkan’s prejudicial gag order,” and I’m the “Anonymous” that filed the first reply that begins “I read the Order within minutes of when it was available online.”

        Those two entries and THIS reply are mine, and I have NOTHING to do with any of the other replies posted by other “Anonymous” commenters following that original comment above.

        I post as Anonymous because this GARBAGE website has a tendency to delete or not post my comments, whether posted under my real name or under my preferred pseudonym.

        It’s a shame that this GARBAGE site refuses to behave legitimtely, forcing multiple people to post comments without using a screen name, which this GARBAGE website then attributes to “Anonymous” without any differentiation, no matter how many different people it applies that place-holder screen name to. It would be an easy problem to fix, but this GARBAGE website clearly prefers confusion.

        1. This is me — the same “Anonymous” that posted the original comment to which these others are replying — adding information about the DC Court of Appeals judges, followed in parenthesis by which president appointed each judge. From this list, it’s easy to forecast how the DC Court of appeals might rule, given that there’s only ONE Trump appointment in the bunch. It’s a remarkably UNbalanced court:

          Chief Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby (George W Bush)

          Associate Judges:

          Loren L. AliKhan (Joe Biden)
          Corinne Beckwith (Barack Obama)
          Joshua Deahl (Donald Trump)
          Catharine Friend Easterly (Barack Obama)
          John P. Howard III (Joe Biden)
          Roy W. McLeese III (Barack Obama)
          Vijay Shanker (Joe Biden)

          Senior Judges:

          John R. Fisher (George W. Bush)
          Stephen H. Glickman (Bill Clinton)
          Vanessa Ruiz (Bill Clinton)
          John M. Steadman (Ronald Reagan)
          Phyllis D. Thompson (George W. Bush)
          Eric T. Washington (Bill Clinton)

    2. Chutkan is a leftist hack. The Federal Circuit Judges to date are reinforcing the perception in the minds of most Americans that the President who nominated the Circuit Judges defines who these hacks are. Obama nominees = marxist hacks

      President Trump knows all of this and will ignore the circuit judge and take it up to the next level courts. Chutkan will go down in infamy like all Progressive DAs, Judges, law school admins, etc

      Biden has lost almost every single Executive Order when appealed. Yet, like a good little Marxist, he persists in his fake presidency with illegal EOs. Thug Jack Smith and Thugette Chutkan are corrupt hacks. The fruits do not fall far from the Hussein tree

      1. Not only that corrupt joe the blabbering fool said he would slam in the executive order and while it takes years for the courts to knock it down he will have already accomplished much toward the goal.

        So this is how the dirty demoncrats rule, by law breaking and breaking the system knowingly.

    3. Chutkan is a leftist judge, so she has no concept of the Constitution.

      “His presidential candidacy does not give him carte blanche to vilify … public servants who are simply doing their job.” Obama-appointed federal District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan

      His Candidancy does not give him carte blanche. The constitution does.
      The judge knows…she just chooses to ignore.

Leave a Reply