What Happened in Congressional Hearing Today?

The House Oversight and Accountability Committee held a public hearing today that included fact witnesses – people who engaged in Biden family business ventures. Fred Lucas at The Daily Signal reported that the chairmen of the Ways and Means Committee and the Judiciary Committee participated in the hearing. 

Two former business associates of Biden family members testified today in an impeachment inquiry into influence peddling by Joe Biden and his close relatives. Tony Bobulinski, a former business partner to Hunter Biden, testified in Congress, while Jason Galanis, another former Biden business partner, testified remotely from federal prison. According to Lucas, Navy veteran Bobulinski accused Hunter Biden of lying under oath about his father’s involvement in his business.

Joe Biden was more than a participant and a beneficiary of his family’s business…. He was an active, aware enabler who met with business associates such as myself to further the business despite being buffered by a complex scheme to maintain plausible deniability.

            … I ask this big question: If there’s no evidence of corruption here today, if Joe’s                     conduct and the conduct of his family are fully legal and proper, then why are they so dishonest about it?

Galanis described Joe Biden’s role in helping secure family business in China and Russia. Lucas wrote that today’s “public hearing was significant since it was among the first to include fact witnesses who participated in Biden family business ventures. Hunter Biden was supposed to be in the hearing, but his seat remained empty. Lucas listed six takeaways from the hearing.

1. ‘Perjury’ and ‘Blatant Lies’

Bobulinski accused the president’s son, Hunter, and the president’s brother, Jim, of lying during their depositions to House investigators.

Neither Biden has been charged with lying under oath, and Bobulinski was giving his opinion.

“Hunter Biden gave his transcribed interview on Feb. 28 and lied throughout his testimony,” Bobulinski told the committee, before going on to name CEFC China Energy, a major Chinese energy conglomerate.

“Here is just one egregious example of Hunter’s perjury,” Bobulinski added. “He lied to the committee on vital details concerning money demands and threats to CEFC in text messages on July 30 and 31, 2017. He leveraged his father’s presence next to him in that infamous text to strong-arm CEFC [into] paying Hunter immediately….

Bobulinski went on to talk about the president’s younger brother, Jim Biden.

“On page 100 of his transcript, Jim is asked specifically: ‘Do you recall having a meeting with Hunter Biden, Tony Bobulinski, and Joe Biden? Jim’s response, ‘Absolutely no,’” he testified.

“The committee was so shocked by [Jim Biden’s] perjury that they asked him the same question multiple times. Each time, he denied meeting with me and Joe Biden,” Bobulinski said. “After the committee showed him text messages confirming [that] I met with Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and Jim Biden at the Beverly Hilton in May 2017, Jim Biden, with a former U.S. attorney lawyer sitting next to him, still denied that meeting took place.”

“Hunter Biden in his own transcribed interview confirmed that that meeting took place,” he added. “Hunter confirmed his uncle perjured himself.”

Later, Bobulinski talked about what he called “blatant lies” and recalled information about his meeting with Joe Biden….

2. ‘Across the Finish Line’

Galanis, another former business partner of Hunter Biden’s who testified remotely from federal prison, said he anticipated problems with the U.S. Bureau of Prisons because of the testimony he was giving.

“I believe I am putting myself at great risk within the BOP for providing information on these matters concerning the president and his son,” Galanis testified….

3. Raskin, Goldman ‘Continue to Lie’

During the hearing, Bobulinski called out Oversight’s ranking member, Jamie Raskin, D-Md., as well as Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., both unflinching defenders of the president’s conduct.

“They continue to lie to the American people without hesitation and remorse,” Bobulinski said. “Rep. Dan Goldman and Jamie Raskin – both lawyers and Mr. Goldman a former prosecutor with the SDNY – will continue to lie today and then go straight to the media to tell more lies.”

He also accused Hunter Biden’s defense lawyer, Abbe Lowell, of lying….

4. Democrats Blame Russia

Several committee Democrats insisted that negative news stories about the president are the result of a Russian disinformation campaign.

Democrats’ lone witness at the hearing, Parnas, had almost nothing to do with Biden family businesses and was not a fact witness….

5. ‘1,000% Sure’

Hunter Biden’s infamous abandoned laptop included a message from another business partner, James Gilliar, saying that 10% of the CEFC China Energy deal would be “held by H for the big guy.”

During the hearing, Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, asked Bobulinski, “Who’s the big guy?”

Bobulinski replied: “Joe Biden.”

Jordan: “You sure?”

Bobulinski: “I’m 1,000% sure.”

6. ‘It’s All Fake’

Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., challenged Comer and any other committee Republicans to make a motion to impeach Biden.

“I just think we should do it today. I want to help you out,” Moskowitz said. “I’ll make the motion, you can second it; [I] make the motion to impeach President Biden. Go ahead, your turn; you second it.”

No one responded.

Republicans have often said that they do not know if the impeachment hearings will lead to an impeachment. However, they went forward with the inquiry to look at the evidence.

What Difference Does a Formal Impeachment Authorization Make?

Today the U.S. House of Representatives held a vote to formally authorize an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. With a vote of 221-212, many House Republicans say that they anticipate an impeachment article of bribery against Biden.

According to an article by Fred Lucas in The Daily Signal, Rep. Darrell Issa (Rep-Calif.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, believes that bribery could be the basis for a potential article of impeachment. 

“It certainly appears as though the possibility of bribery, a known offense under impeachment, is on the table,” Issa told The Daily Signal Wednesday on Capitol Hill. “Monies did flow to the home of the president, they did flow to accounts of the president when he was vice president, and his actions show that he favored entities that Hunter Biden was representing. Additionally, his repeated false statements about it continue to be an element of the impeachment inquiry.”

As noted by Issa, many of the suspicious actions by Joe Biden took place while he was vice president. This could be a problem in that presidents have previously been impeached for behavior occurring during presidency. Issa said, “One of the challenges we’re facing is that it’s not been tested.”

Democrats have continued to insist that there is no evidence linking President Biden to Hunter Biden’s business. They opposed the impeachment investigation, and they voted against making it a formal impeachment investigation. Republicans offered their own opinions about evidence.

“Some of the people that say they don’t see evidence, I think they are going to come around,” Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., told The Daily Signal. “We are talking very specifically bribery. You can look at Ukraine. That looks obvious. You can look at China. Obvious. You could look at Moscow, funds that changed hands from Russia. Yes, those are all obvious bribery. Those would be an impeachable offense.”

Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyo., first hesitated to get ahead of the inquiry by suggesting potential articles. But she said that “bribery is an obvious one.”

“We need to use the words that are actually in the Constitution and bribery is clearly one of them,” Hageman told The Daily Signal in an interview Wednesday on Capitol Hill.

“Hunter Biden had no skill set to sell. He had no expertise in Ukrainian oil and gas development and operations. He had no expertise on Chinese Communist Party issues. He had one asset and his asset that he could sell was access to his father.”

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says that grounds for impeaching a civil officer are “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

President Biden has repeatedly denied being involved in Hunter’s business deals. Hunter Biden told reporters today that President Biden had “no financial involvement” in his businesses. A White House statement from the POTUS called the inquiry a baseless stunt. POTUS claimed that he is busy doing the work of the American people, while congressional Republicans are attacking him with lies.

However, there is a lot of evidence showing that Republicans are finding evidence that POTUS, as vice president, did deal with his son’s business associates. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) released one piece of evidence in July. He “released an FBI form that showed a confidential informant reported that executives with Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, paid a $5 million bribe to then-Vice President Biden in 2016 to help scuttle a Ukrainian government investigation of the company.”

President Joe Biden told the New York Post about the allegation, “It’s a bunch of malarkey.” However, Joe Biden discusses in a now-famous video that he refused to give billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to Ukraine unless a certain government official was fired within six hours. Then Biden said that the man was fired.

The House Oversight and Accountability Committee has other evidence. The committee “released evidence showing that payments from one of Hunter Biden’s business[es] went directly to Joe Biden. Before that, the House released information showing that the president’s brother James Biden made “loan repayments” of at least $240,000 linked to his brother’s business” with the payments being made prior to Joe Biden becoming president.

Abbe Lowell, Hunter Biden’s attorney, said that the “payments from Hunter Biden were for a truck.” The payments from James Biden were for loans between brothers. How many people have $240,000 to loan to their brother?

Several House Republicans declined to speculate on any specific impeachment articles yet. They want to complete the inquiry before making any statements. However, Rep. Gary Palmer, R-Ala., who sits on the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, suggested that there are several potential offenses to investigate.

“One, I think that it’s very evident from the documents that I’ve seen that this was at a minimum, a money laundering scheme,” Palmer told The Daily Signal. “It’s tax evasion. I think there’s potential that influence peddling was taking place. I think that going into an impeachment inquiry is the next step, the proper step, because I’m a firm believer in due process, and unlike what happened with President [Donald] Trump where it was all political and based on made up evidence, this has been fully documented.”

My opinion is that an investigation should take place. Congress should gather all the information and let the facts where they land. Truth can be covered up for a while, but it is eventually uncovered. Then, and only then, should a decision about impeachment be made.