You're drawing a false dichotomy between believing things with no evidence (what you dishonestly call "deduction") and simply waiting for the accused to produce evidence.

I know this is mighty convenient framing to justify the conclusion you've already reached, but back here in reality there's actually no shortage of people with access to all sorts of records who are extremely motivated to find and publish such evidence. They haven't yet and they almost certainly never will.

P.S. To deduce that Biden ordered these investigations, you'd have to disprove alternative explanations including "the defendant himself and his own legal team publicly provided ample evidence of his criminality to justify investigation."

You're making shit up, not deducing, lol.