Seven reasons why Biden impeachment inquiry has merit

Last week, Speaker Kevin McCarthy initiated an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden concerning his knowledge of and involvement in his family’s international influence peddling efforts, and the apparent efforts of the executive branch under his command to cover-up and obstruct inquiries into related crimes, and to refuse to prosecute of them.

Despite laying out a clear rationale for heightening the congressional probes already underway by pointing to evidence of “corruption, obstruction, and abuse of power,” in the Speaker’s words, naturally the Democrats’ communications arm – the corporate media – tried to gaslight us.

Parroting the White House – which sent out a memo directing the media to attack the Republicans’ basis for the inquiry, if not the Republican investigators themselves – media stenographers roared there was “no evidence” to support the inquiry.

So I thought it would be helpful to lay out the basis for this inquiry in seven simple points based on government documents, sworn testimony, banks records, and other credible evidence – some of which the corporate media itself has acknowledged.

Point 1: The Bidens, with son Hunter as the bagman-in-chief, took in millions of dollars from individuals and entities tied to foreign regimes, many adversarial and/or corrupt – think China, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Romania, and beyond – and never rendered any discernible service for the money. As Hunter himself admitted when it came to his board seat on Ukrainian energy concern Burisma, he had no knowledge of that industry.

Point 2: Joe Biden repeatedly spoke and met with Hunter’s foreign business “associates” as vice president and thereafter; in the case of Burisma, he took official action, per government records, seemingly wildly reversing U.S. policy, in a way that directly redounded to the benefit of the company that was paying his son a million bucks a year, by leveraging $1 billion in U.S. aid to get the prosecutor probing Burisma fired. 

Point 3: An allegation from a credible FBI source, known to be at least partially corroborated, exists, indicating that Burisma’s founder bribed Joe and Hunter Biden to the tune of $5 million each to help make the problem of the Ukrainian prosecutor go away. Whether Joe took the bribe or not, family members taking in money “as an indirect way of corruptly influencing a foreign official” can constitute a bribe under law. What’s more, Joe and Hunter’s finances appear to have been commingled per records. Money’s fungible obviously.

The Biden family business posed a gigantic conflict of interest, was facially corrupt, and compromising either way. That “business” looms over almost every major foreign policy issue affecting America today, almost definitionally, when you consider Hunter’s counterparts, and the governments to which they were tied. 

Point 4: Hunter Biden committed crimes in connection with the ill-gotten gains from this business, in part in a seeming bid to cover-up the “work.” The gains flowed through nearly two-dozen shell companies, via apparently surreptitious transactions, down even to the grandchild level of Joe’s family tree. Were the grandkids experts in the oil industry, or private equity deals?

Point 5: None of this “business” would’ve happened had Hunter not had the “Biden brand” — Joe Biden’s office and name — to sell. 

Point 6: Joe Biden lied about his knowledge of all this repeatedly, including to help himself get elected president, and his mouthpieces shifted the goal posts repeatedly about his involvement in Hunter Biden’s affairs.

Point 7: The DOJ and FBI seem to have worked to cover-up, bury, and thwart leads critical to this whole story — most directly through the Hunter Biden “case.” This has been indicated by the accounts of IRS whistleblowers alleging the systematic obstruction and subversion of the Biden investigation; the lack of charges brought particularly around FARA; and inadvertently by the collapse of the plea agreement that the DOJ apparently rushed to come to with Hunter Biden in the wake of the whistleblowers’ disclosures, followed by the elevating of the Delaware U.S. Attorney prosecuting the case to Special Counsel. He wasn’t supposed to need that authority, according to Attorney General Merrick Garland, but Biden-appointed U.S. Attorneys would not partner to bring charges against Hunter Biden. So Biden’s Justice Department was working to shoot down charges brought against Biden’s son. This is also seen by the timeline, with statutes of limitation running out on the tax offenses involving perhaps the most corrupting Biden family behavior – around Burisma in 2014 and 2015.

All of this is not to mention the obvious double standard at play here when you consider Democrats were seeking to impeach Donald Trump from literally the day he entered office – without evidence; that Russiagate was rooted in opposition research documents never corroborated and idle bar talk between a minor Trump advisor and foreign officials – whereas what I went through has been meticulously documented over the years; and that one of Trump’s impeachments was over allegedly leveraging foreign aid for political benefit – to get the dirt on Joe Biden that this impeachment inquiry in large part is about.

Everything will be bad faith coming forward.

But the reality is there is no greater scandal than for a commander in chief to be corrupted and compromised by foreign adversaries.

There is evidence of that in spades with Joe Biden that must be pursued – per the impeachment clause itself which lists as the only specific offenses bribery and treason – exactly what the conduct at play points to.

The evidence is overwhelming. Democrats and their media just don’t want you to see it.