The walls could be closing in on Hunter Biden, but they are also at risk of clashing with one another, an outcome that could throw into chaos the inchoate investigation into President Biden, one that Republican lawmakers believe is nearly ready for primetime. 

Charges against Hunter Biden, long a bête noire of Republicans for his lurid personal life and sprawling and suspicious business transactions, could prove a Pyrrhic victory for those very same critics if it short-circuits charges against Mr. Biden pere, allegedly referred to as “the Big Guy” in correspondence recovered from the laptop purported to have been Hunter’s.     

At issue is growing momentum among Republican lawmakers to move against not just the younger Biden, but also against the commander in chief, a remit that has not yet been issued to federal prosecutors. Hunter Biden, so long a target of Republican suspicion, could, in an ironic twist, prove to be an obstacle to the charges against the greater prize: the president.  

That flashpoint is coming into focus as two lines of inquiry into the first son’s behavior appear to be converging. At Delaware, United States Attorney David Weiss is reportedly nearing a charging decision for two misdemeanor counts for failure to file taxes, a single felony count of tax evasion, and a felony count related to a gun purchase. 

President Biden has said his son “did nothing wrong.” Mr. Weiss was tasked with that investigation by Attorney General Garland, who has denied meddling and averred that the Delaware prosecutor, an appointee of President Trump, has “full authority” to charge Hunter Biden, even outside of his own jurisdiction. Mr. Garland said as much to Congress, under oath.

It’s unclear if the president’s assertion of his son’s innocence will influence Mr. Weiss or his boss, Mr. Garland. The president was harshly admonished by the Wall Street Journal for this “inappropriate signal” to the Department of Justice.

Representative James Comer, who leads the House Oversight Committee and has emerged as the primary antagonist of Mr. Biden fils on Capitol Hill, is skeptical of the Delaware investigation. He took to television over the weekend to proclaim: “My message to the Department of Justice is very loud and clear. Do not indict Hunter Biden before Wednesday,” when he has his own press conference planned.

Mr. Comer derided Mr. Weiss’s charging ambitions as small fry, opining that “what they’re looking at charging Hunter Biden on is a slap on the wrist. It’s a drop in the bucket.” Previewing that midweek presser, the Kentuckian suggested that this is “not just about the president’s son. This is about the entire Biden family, including the President of the United States.” 

Word from Mr. Comer is that Wednesday’s event will feature “all the information that we’ve received thus far pertaining to bank records” and transactions that were done in “exchange for something that then-Vice President Biden and now President Biden would have done.” In other words, an illegal quid pro quo. 

The substance of that accusation is still submerged, knowingly only from a whistleblower’s claim that the FBI and DOJ are in possession of a document that, in the words of Mr. Comer and Senator Grassley, “includes a precise description of how the alleged criminal scheme was employed as well as its purpose.” The scheme in question involves money for policy decisions. 

Mr. Comer adds that the form, which a subpoena orders be produced by Wednesday, “raises concerns that then-Vice President Biden allegedly engaged in a bribery scheme with a foreign national.” He adds: “This thing is much bigger than anyone would have ever predicted, and it all points towards Joe Biden.”

The fear from Capitol Hill, though, is that any prosecution against Hunter Biden could encroach on this investigatory vein against his father. If and when charges are filed, certain records can become evidence and be lavished with additional protection through discovery and a potential trial. 

Mr. Comer could also fear that federal charges against Mr. Biden fils could preclude, or divert attention and resources, from a sustained legal assault against the president. He would rather focus investigators’ attention on evidence that “would implicate Joe Biden in a pay-for-play scheme, in trying to set up a deal to receive funds to he and his family, in exchange for foreign policy decisions.”