Five Facts That Compel the Biden Impeachment Inquiry

Below is my column in The Messenger on the reason why an impeachment inquiry is warranted.  I do not believe that a case for impeachment has been made, but there is clearly a need for an investigation into a growing array of allegations facing the President in this corruption scandal.

I also reject the notion that, because a conviction is unlikely in the Democratic-controlled Senate, the House should not go down this road. I rejected the same argument made by some Republicans during the Trump impeachment. The House has a separate constitutional duty in the investigation of potential impeachable offenses and to pass articles of impeachment if those allegations are found to be valid. My objection to the Trump impeachments were first and foremost the failure to fully investigate the underlying allegations and to create a full record to support the articles of impeachment. The Senate has its own constitutional function under the Constitution that it can either choose to fulfill or to ignore.  A House impeachment holds both constitutional and historical significance separate from any conviction. That does not mean that grounds for impeachment will be found in this inquiry.  While the President deserves a presumption of innocence in this process, the public deserves answers to these questions.

Here is the column:

With the commencement of an impeachment inquiry this week, the House of Representatives is moving the Biden corruption scandal into the highest level of constitutional inquiry. After stonewalling by the Bidens and federal agencies investigating various allegations, the move for a House inquiry was expected if not inevitable.

An impeachment inquiry does not mean that an impeachment itself is inevitable. But it dramatically increases the chances of finally forcing answers to troubling questions of influence-peddling and corruption.

As expected, many House Democrats — who impeached Donald Trump after only one hearing in the House Judiciary Committee, based on his phone call to Ukraine’s president — oppose any such inquiry into President Biden. House Republicans could have chosen to forego any hearings and use what I called a “snap impeachment,” as then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) did with the second Trump impeachment in January 2021.

Instead, they have methodically investigated the corruption scandal for months and only now are moving to a heightened inquiry. The House has established a labyrinth of dozens of shell companies and accounts allegedly used to transfer millions of dollars to Biden family members. There is now undeniable evidence to support influence-peddling by Hunter Biden and some of his associates — with Joe Biden, to quote Hunter’s business partner Devon Archer, being “the brand” they were selling.

The suggestion that this evidence does not meet the standard for an inquiry into impeachable offenses is an example of willful blindness. It also is starkly different from the standard applied by congressional Democrats during the Trump and Nixon impeachment efforts.

The Nixon impeachment began on Oct. 30, 1973, just after President Nixon fired Archibald Cox, the special prosecutor looking into the Watergate allegations. The vote in the judiciary committee was along party lines. The House was correct to start that impeachment inquiry, although House leaders stressed that they were not prejudging the existence of impeachable offenses. The inquiry started roughly eight months before any indictments of defendants linked to the Watergate break-in. It was many months before clear evidence established connections to Nixon, who denied any wrongdoing or involvement.

Every impeachment inquiry is different, of course. In this case, there is a considerable amount of evidence gathered over months of methodical investigations by three different committees.

Consider just five established facts:

First, there appears to be evidence that Joe Biden lied to the public for years in denying knowledge of his son’s business dealings. Hunter Biden’s ex-business associate, Tony Bobulinski, has said repeatedly that he discussed some dealings directly with Joe Biden. Devon Archer, Hunter’s close friend and partner, described the president’s denials of knowledge as “categorically false.”

Moreover, Hunter’s laptop has communications from his father discussing the dealings, including audio messages from the president. The president allegedly spoke with his son on speakerphone during meetings with his associates on at least 20 occasions, according to Archer, attended dinners with some clients, and took photographs with others.

Second, we know that more than $20 million was paid to the Bidens (and Biden associates) by foreign sources, including figures in China, Ukraine, Russia and Romania. There is no apparent reason for the multilayers of accounts and companies other than to hide these transfers. Some of these foreign figures have allegedly told others they were buying influence with Joe Biden, and Hunter himself repeatedly invoked his father’s name — including a text exchange with a Chinese businessman in which he said his father was sitting next to him as Hunter demanded millions in payment. While some Democrats now admit that Hunter was selling the “illusion” of influence and access to his father, these figures clearly believed they were getting more than an illusion. That includes one Ukrainian businessman who reportedly described Hunter as dumber than his dog.

Third, specific demands were made on Hunter, including dealing with the threat of a Ukrainian prosecutor to the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, where Hunter was given a lucrative board position. Five days later, Joe Biden forced the Ukrainians to fire the prosecutor, even though State Department and intelligence reports suggested that progress was being made on corruption. Likewise, despite warnings from State Department officials that Hunter was undermining anti-corruption efforts in Ukraine, he continued to receive high-level meetings with then-Secretary of State John Kerry and other State Department officials.

Fourth, Hunter repeatedly stated in emails that he paid his father as much as half of what he earned. There also are references to deals that included free office space and other perks for Joe Biden and his wife; other emails reference how Joe and Hunter Biden would use the same accounts and credit cards. Beyond those alleged direct benefits, Joe Biden clearly benefited from money going to his extended family.

Fifth, there is evidence of alleged criminal conduct by Hunter that could be linked to covering up these payments, from the failure to pay taxes to the failure to register as a foreign lobbyist. What is not established is the assumption by many that Joe Biden was fully aware of both the business dealings and any efforts to conceal them.

The White House is reportedly involved in marshaling the media to swat down any further investigation. In a letter drafted by the White House Counsel’s office, according to a CNN report media executives were told they need to “ramp up their scrutiny” of House Republicans “for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies.” It is a dangerous erosion of separation between the White House and the president’s personal legal team. Yet, many in the media have previously followed such directions from the Biden team — from emphasizing the story that the laptop might be “Russian disinformation” to an unquestioning acceptance of the president’s denial of any knowledge of his son’s dealings.

Notably, despite the vast majority of media echoing different defenses for the Bidens for years, the American public is not buying it. Polls show that most Americans view the Justice Department as compromised and Hunter Biden as getting special treatment for his alleged criminal conduct. According to a recent CNN poll, 61% of Americans believe Joe Biden was involved in his family’s business deals with China and Ukraine; only 1% say he was involved but did nothing wrong.

The American public should not harbor such doubts over corruption at the highest levels of our government. Thus, the House impeachment inquiry will allow Congress to use the very apex of its powers to force disclosures of key evidence and resolve some of these troubling questions. It may not result in an impeachment, but it will result in greater clarity. Indeed, it is that very clarity that many in Washington may fear the most from this inquiry.

Jonathan Turley, an attorney, constitutional law scholar and legal analyst, is the Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law at The George Washington University Law School.

467 thoughts on “Five Facts That Compel the Biden Impeachment Inquiry”

  1. This just in….BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!

    It was Captain Kangaroo that was called by Hunter and Zlovchevsky from Dubai!!

    Anonymous called it and Gigi agrees. Bug boy chimed in with something creepy and indistiguishable. Dennis says it was Beetlejuice, but he hasn’t had his meds today.

    So now, the second part of the question. Why did they call Captain Kangaroo?

    Same offer, $100 to the charity of your choice, libbies.

    1. Thats what I thought.

      You know, when something smells like manure, but its covered up with canvas, some people reason that its manure under there. Some people lift the canvas to verify. Then you have others, like Dennis and Sammy, who need to touch it to be sure. Just looking at it is not evidence, cuz you need proof. Then you have the rest, like ATS, bug boy, Wally, Gigi, and Fishwings, who, needing “incontravertible proof”, gotta taste it first.

  2. – “Big Fanny” Willis indicted Real President Donald J. Trump and 18 assistants on “fake” political charges.

    – “Big Fanny” Willis identified 30 unindicted Trump co-conspirators today.

    – “Big Fanny” Willis is prepared to indict the entire republican party before the 2024 election.

    – “Big Fanny” Willis reveals her overriding compulsion to indict George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Adams, John Jay, George Mason et al. for providing Americans freedom per self-reliance, the freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, the right to private property, free enterprise in free markets, the right to keep and bear arms, et al., for which she will recommend the posthumous death sentence due to the egregious nature of their promotion of success through liberty and merit, their establishment of a severely limited and restricted government sans welfare and public assistance, oh, and affirmative action and forced busing, and their “truth” crimes.

    You go, girl!

    Go BIG!

    1. What did “Dennis the Menace” say?

      JFK, Monster By Timothy Noah

      “I knew that John F. Kennedy was a compulsive, even pathological adulterer, given to taking outlandish risks after he entered the White House. I knew he treated women like whores. And I knew he had more than a few issues with his father about toughness and manliness and all that. But before I read in the newspaper that Mimi Alford’s just-released memoir, Once Upon A Secret: My Affair With President John F. Kennedy And Its Aftermath, described giving Dave Powers a blow job at JFK’s request and in his presence, I didn’t know that Kennedy had an appetite for subjecting those close to him to extreme humiliation.”

      “Clinton pays Paula Jones $850,000”
      Associated Press
      Wed 13 Jan 1999 13.15 EST

      “WASHINGTON (AP) – Paula Jones is awaiting the arrival of an $850,000 cheque from President Clinton, bringing an official end to the four-year saga spurred by her allegations of sexual harassment.”

      “FDR and His Women”
      “… she was deeply wounded to discover that Franklin had been having an affair with her secretary, Lucy Mercer.”

      Bill Clinton as enabled by Hillary Clinton

      1. Eileen Wellstone (1969) Allegation: Sexual assault
      2. Anonymous female student at Yale University (1972) Allegation: Sexual assault
      3. Anonymous female student at the University of Arkansas (1974) Allegation: Sexual assault
      4. Anonymous female lawyer (1977) Allegation: Sexual assault
      5. Juanita Broaddrick (1978) Allegation: Rape
      6. Carolyn Moffet (1979) Allegation: Sexual assault
      7. Elizabeth Ward (1983) Allegation: Unclear
      8. Sally Perdue (1983) Allegation: Unclear
      9. Paula Jones (1991) Allegation: Sexual harassment
      10. Sandra Allen James (1991) Allegation: Sexual assault
      11. Christy Zercher (1992) Allegation: Sexual assault
      12. Kathleen Willey (1993) Allegation: Sexual assault

  3. Jonathan: Did you see what happened to crazy MAGA Republican Lauren Boebert and her companion? She got booted last Sunday night from a Colorado theater performance of “Beetlejuice”. Other patrons in the theater complained to management that Boebert was vaping, singing, recording and “causing a disturbance”. At intermission management warned Boebert but she continued her disruptive behavior. She was then removed from the theater along with her male partner.

    I mention this incident because the MAGA House Republicans are also engaging in “vaping”–pushing out smoke about the Biden family hoping to find fire somewhere. Your “Five Facts” are not facts at all. What Hunter Biden, a private citizen, was doing was “influence peddling”–giving the allusion he had more influence than he really had with his dad. But “influence peddling” is not a “high crime and misdemeanor”. Despite months of investigation Chair Comer has come up with no evidence that Joe Biden was involved in Hunter’s business dealings or that Biden received kickbacks for influencing official government policy. No witnesses, no bank statements, no audio recordings–nothing to back up what you claim.

    But you are apparently on the same wave length with MAGA Rep. Kaitlen Collins. She was on CNN admitting what you say–there no evidence to file articles of impeachment against Biden. But she seemed to think an inquiry would “get more evidence”. Both of you are putting the horse before the cart! Hoping to find fire in the vapor is not a legitimate reason to start an impeachment inquiry.

    So why the charade that looks more like a “fishing expedition”? You don’t start an impeachment inquiry hoping to find the evidence you hope is there. The two DJT impeachment were based on facts and evidence going in–DJT tried to extort the President of Ukraine to dig up dirt on the Biden family. The second impeachment was based on all the evidence that DJT was trying to overturn a legitimate election by violating the law. That is what Jack Smith’s indictment of DJT over Jan. 6 is all about. This indictment would not have been necessary had the Senate Republicans not been cowards.

    But good luck on your little impeachment inquiry anyway. Right now it doesn’t appear McCarthy even has the votes to START an inquiry. He will have to twist the arms of few GOP moderates to get even close to that!

    1. Dennis get out of that echo chamber bro. The inquiry has already begun. There will be no vote.


      Someone give denny his meds.

      1. Anonymous: Tom the Troll doesn’t know anything about how House impeachments work. Under a prior DOJ opinion a House inquiry without a vote is invalid. Period! Stop!

  4. Donald Trump continues to show his mental decline. In an interview with Megyn Kelly, a very confused Trump said he doesn’t know who awarded Dr. Fauci a presidential commendation. Trump’s the one who awarded Fauci the presidential commendation, and Kelly had just said so to Trump before he claimed he didn’t know who did it.

    1. “Trump said he doesn’t know who awarded Dr. Fauci a presidential commendation.”

      There were *52* people on that list, during the hectic last days of his presidency. (Per usual, facts you chose to omit.)

      Wake me when Biden can recall putting his pants on.

      1. Kelly had just said so [that Trump’s the one who awarded Fauci the presidential commendation] to Trump before he claimed he didn’t know who did it.

        Per usual, facts YOU chose to omit.

        If you were awake, you’d know that Biden is more mentally alert than Trump is.

  5. A SUBJECT WAY OFF TOPIC, but yet another repugnant move by morons!

    Another possible failure of the current administration, they through the GSA are offering to sell two lots of 800 million cubic feet of crude Helium from the national reserve in Amarillo, Texas. The US along with Qatar, Algeria and Russia are the only major producers of Helium. Helium is a non-renewable resource used in medical, rockets, MRI machines, physics and much more. Through many layers of government interactions, the administration has muddied the waters by transferring the asset from one government entity to another. This along with the NPR (oil) sales is placing the United States in jeopardy to foreign players.

      1. Upstate hope this helps.

        It’s known as the Cliffside Storage Facility, or the Federal Helium Reserve, or the National Helium Reserve, which holds reserve of helium in the Bush Dome reservoir. Helium is little known by the public other than it fills their balloons and makes your voice crazy, but has so many uses, and a lot of those uses are critical to the welfare of the US. I think this is more nonsense from the administration to cover their out of this world expenditures’.

        As an aside from this issue of storage of He2, there is a desire to obtain He3 which has been found in small samples of natural helium and natural gas, it is supposed from exploration that He3 is found in the moons soil, though very rare on earth. He3 may be the potential heaven sent source to produce electrical power through fusion. There is literature I’m sure that can be found on the net about He3 and other isotopes.

      2. Sell helium now! And give all proceeds to student loan borrowers and Ukraine in exchange for votes and bribes, respectively.

    1. Clinton sold Top Secret, Classified rocket/satellite technology to the Chinese by placing it/switching it to under the authority of a different government agency without strict standards.

  6. In true Lincolnesque fashion, Biden has abused the power of the executive branch through extreme “executive overreach,” extending Lincoln’s multiple and numerous breaches to quid pro quo, influence peddling, money laundering, graft, corruption, perfidy, et al. The Department of Justice has been egregiously politicized, corrupted, weaponized, and deployed against Biden’s 2024 election opponent as a gross and flagrant act of election fraud and corruption.

    The Supreme Court must vigorously exercise its power of Judicial Review against Biden, as Chief Justice Taney exercised Judicial Review against Lincoln. Lincoln had absolutely no power to suspend habeas corpus, as but one example, and Chief Justice Taney informed him of, and harshly admonished him for, his manifest high criminality.

    To wit,

    “The clause in the Constitution which authorizes the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is in the ninth section of the first article. This article is devoted to the Legislative Department of the United States, and has not the slightest reference to the Executive Department.”

    “I can see no ground whatever for supposing that the President in any emergency or in any state of things can authorize the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or arrest a citizen except in aid of the judicial power.”

    “I have exercised all the power which the Constitution and laws confer on me, but that power has been resisted by a force too strong for me to overcome.”

    – Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, May 28, 1861


      The Supreme Court can strike down any law or other action by the legislative or executive branch that violates the Constitution. This power of judicial review applies to federal, state, and local legislative and executive actions. The Constitution does not specifically provide for the power of judicial review. It arises instead from an 1803 decision known as Marbury v. Madison.

      – Justia


      The legitimacy of judicial review and the judge’s approach to judicial review are discussed.

      The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.

      – Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs

    2. Didn’t Lincoln then have the Congress pass an act suspending Habeas Corpus which he then signed into Law? 19th century precedents on all levels were that such suspensions were legislative and not executive acts.

      1. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus judging by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s passionate, vigorous and constitutionally conclusive response.

        The point is, if you read it, that the Supreme Court requires no case in order to exercise Judicial Review, Taney being the precedent.

        It’s about time, I’d have to say.

        The communists are out to destroy the entire American concept before the next election.

  7. First part of the question. Who was called that day?

    This was Archers REVISED testimony, after his lawyer called a “time-out” to confer with his client.

    From the Congressional Transcript.

    3 Q What did Hunter Biden do after he was given that request?
    14 A Listen, I did not hear this phone call, but he — he called his dad.
    15 Q How do you know that?
    16 A Because he — because I think Vadym told me. But, again, it’s unclear.
    I just know that there was a call that happened there and I was not privy to it.
    18 Q What did Vadym tell you about the call?
    19 A Just that — just that they — “We called D.C.” But he didn’t — you know,
    20 again, it’s not like the — there was not a — there was not, “Oh, we’ve got all our problems 21 solved” kind of, you know, revelation. I was — I was not on that side of the equation and
    22 kind of working on the lobbying side of the business.
    23 Q When Vadym told you this, where were you?
    24 A I was — you know, basically what — then we drove back to the hotel I was

    1. Pardon the all bold. It was supposed to be just the “he called his dad”.

      Archer knows who was called and why. He was trying to avoid implicating himself in Bribery of the VPOTUS, because he had no immunity.

      1. He’s Hunters business partner in this matter. He knows. He’s always known. He knows Hunter is “Icarus”. Twist on bro, twist on.

        I said a week ago that it was gonna be fun watching you people twist in the wind. I underestimated.

    2. “…I did not hear this phone call”….”I THINK Vadym told me, but, again it’s unclear. I just know that there was a call that happened there and I WAS NOT PRIVY TO IT.”
      “I was not on that side of the equation.”

      THIS is what you think is some kind of bombshell “evidence” proving Joe Biden took bribes or something? The foreging would not be admissible in any court of law. In addition to it being hearsay, the witness admits he was not privy to the conversation. He does not have personal knowledge of any facts.

      1. So juvenile its not even worth discussing. But i’m not done with you GIGI the liar. The second part is where u get put to bed. Stay tuned

        1. Why is it that when i read tour texts, its in this really screechy, high pitched voice? Look, if you want to keep acting like you cant piece this all together because your IQ is 80, who am i to say otherwise. Its just a really bad look.

          1. Tom the Troll talks to himself using two of his multiple avatars and owns up to having an IQ of 80 and a screechy voice.

            1. Now the bug face guy that mows lawns is fantasizing about my “avatars”. Creepy.
              No one even knows what you’re talking about, poopy head.

        2. Nope, I showed Archer saying they called joe, then backpedaling. He knows and you know. Unless you’re sticking with “it was Captain Kangaroo”???

          Hilarious. How does that manure taste?

      2. “he was not privy to the conversation. He does not have personal knowledge of any facts.”

        Right, you Liar.

        He said hunter called his dad. Then he started to say that hunter told him. He changed that to “i think it was vadym”. He knows who was called and the phone records will show. Then you’ll come back and say they talked about the weather.

        Keep twisting in the wind. Its fun to watch.

        1. And you know who was called too Gigi. Admit it or go on looking like a fool. Now, tell us why they called Joe, coward. Or, if you think it was captain kangaroo they called, just say so.

      3. So, are you gonna stick with the “they called Captain Kangaroo” defense, Gigi? We all know who they called. Archer was his business partner on this deal. Archer knows. He’s always known.
        Just like he described Hunter as Icarus. The first thing he says is “he called his dad”. Thats all Comer needed to move and subpoena records. You dont like that. Too bad. You can screech, nothing to see here all you want, its not gonna change a thing. Do you want us to believe he just made it up? That vadym lied to him? Then explain why. Stop acting like a petulant 3 year old. You know who he called. We all do. But when comer gets the records, you’ll say its not evidence of anything, wont you?

        But now is the hard part for you, serial liar. Why did they call “DC”?
        Huh? Why? Its in the testimony you’ve never read.

        Or maybe you agree with bug face the lawn boy, that at trial, they will have to adjourn and move the proceedings to Dubai, just to “prove” that there IS a Four Seasons Hotel there.

        1. Maybe you can join bug boy on the Alex Murdaugh and Brian Kohlberger defense teams. I dont think they have thought of the “there’s no proof” defense yet.

    3. Yep, one of those tasters I mentioned.

      Its a new chant “hearsay, hearsay, hearsay”. That incantation isn’t going to work either.

      It was testimony regarding conversations Smeagol, wtf was he supposed to provide? LMAO. It doesn’t have to be proof or even admissable in court to follow up on it. You want us to believe he made it up. Explain why he would??

      Bobulinski provide phones, texts and emails. You don’t care. How does that manure taste, anyway?

      Yea, I’ll grant you Archer is a mealey mouthed slime ball just like Hunter and Joe. But you all want to use his “testimony” when it suits, and discount it when it doesn’t. He said it was Joe. You think it was Captain Kangaroo, and in the face of evidence, your fall back is “who cares?” We know you don’t. The jury is in on that one.

      I told you that he told Comer it was Joe. You said I made it up. I showed you where he did. You said “hearsay”. Archer said it. You can try to take it back, but he can’t. Comer moved on that info. You don’t like it. Waaaaaaaa.

  8. The smartest political move he’s made in his whole time in office is selecting Kamala Harris as VP.

    His handlers will soon likely be talking to Disney imagineers to create a realistic exoskeleton for him as the months and years role on so that he can still be seen in public from time to time and pass the low bar of state media an the few who still believe them.

    1. As Abbe Lowell, HB’s lawyer, previously stated:
      “We believe the signed and filed diversion agreement remains valid and prevents any additional charges from being filed against Mr. Biden, who has been abiding by the conditions of release under that agreement for the last several weeks, including regular visits by the probation office. We expect a fair resolution of the sprawling, five-year investigation into Mr. Biden that was based on the evidence and the law, not outside political pressure, and we’ll do what is necessary on behalf of Mr. Biden to achieve that.”

      Time will tell who’s right.

      1. Hunter Biden does not strike me as the kind of guy who would do a lot of hard time standing on his head. I expect a lot of powerful big wigs will go down with him.

        If Joe Biden falls, forgetaboutit. .. the entire U.S. gov. will collapse with him.

        *that’s not, necessarily, a good thing.

        1. You can expect him to challenge the constitutionality of the law. The Fifth Circuit already ruled against it.

          1. If they are going to grant some kind of retroactive immunity (from the unconstitutional gun laws), Hunter needs to get in line.

            *I know people who have served time for unlawful gun possession. ..

          2. Unless that ruling grants him license to commit perjury, it will only make one of the three felony charges disappear.

      2. Actually, Son of Joetard MIGHT have a case, but I don’t think it’s what you’re talking about, because as a general rule I believe plea deals aren’t effective unless/until approved by the judge or some other authority.

        His best hope looks like the recent ruling in the 5th District about illegal substance users still having a right to own a gun. The problems are (1) that that’s not the jurisdiction in which Hunter was charged, and (2) that won’t necessarily get him off regarding LYING on the application form, and I believe 2 of the 3 charges are for lying while purchasing the gun.

        Anyway, that’s most-likely where his lawyers will begin to focus.

        1. Where are all of the Republcan Second Amendment enthusiasts? Hunter had an unloaded and unused gun in his possession for 11 DAYS total. The weapon was not fired or used in the commission of any crime. I’ve seen multiple interviews with seasoned and experienced former federal prosecutors, and each of them says that they’ve never heard of anyone getting charged with possession under these circumstances unless the weapon was used in the commission of other crimes. The constitutionality of this statute will go to the SCOTUS.

      3. Abbe also said he is going to use the whistleblower testimony in his defense, because Weiss succumbed to “undo pressure” by Congress.

        I hope Abbe is as smart as everyone claims and he didnt seriously give away his entire defense strategy to the prosecution. Do you think he knows thats not part of discovery? LMAO

      4. The judge explained herself, when the SINGLE plea deal evaporated in the stink of corruption.
        She has no judicial opinion on the plea deal…except the deal, made the judge the enforcer of the diversion compliance.

        Also, the agreement was bundled together by the demands of the Defense. The Defense canceled the plea agreement, not the govt.

        1. Taxes are about income; income is about payments; payments is about payors; payors is about Ukraine; Ukraine is about Sleepy, Crooked Joe. Whadya think?

        1. Now the Dimedici’s in power will force the old codger out. He’s trailing in the polls and crooks can’t stand to be out of power.

          1. Mespo,
            The WaPo ran an editorial saying Biden should not run.
            Pelosi recently suggested Biden would drop out of the 2024 race.
            Let him pardon his son, drop out of the race or even resign, stops the impeachment inquiry.

            1. UF, that is an elegant solution, but only if the real powers behind Biden believe that an alternative will emerge who can keep the WH for Democrats in 2024. They likely fear a bloodbath which will produce a candidate less likely to win than Biden. What only matters to them is the probability of winning, and even a decrepit Biden facing possible impeachment and a son convicted of gun charges may be preferable to chaos. So long as Biden is the best means of winning, they could care less if he is comatose and corrupt. And seeing him replaced with Harris if he should die or become incapacitated after election worries them not at all. Just another empty vessel. And the added benefit is that she could be there for another eight years after the end of Biden’s second term. So no lame duck issues.

              The logic of sticking with Biden is overwhelming for Democrats, unless he dies or becomes literally incapacitated before the election or it is proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he altered US policy to benefit his family.

              1. And seeing him replaced with Harris if he should die or become incapacitated after election worries them not at all. Just another empty vessel.

                You really nailed it, so much so it gives me hope

                And the added benefit is that she could be there for another eight years after the end of Biden’s second term.

                Fidel Castro’s death was replaced with his brother, Raul. Raul’s replacement in 2021 was Miguel Mario Díaz-Canel y Bermúdez but he is an empty suit. Raul still rules Cuba, as he did when his brother was alive. Raul was the mastermind of firing squads, abductions, brute force, cruelty upon cruelty. Kamala has neither the intellect nor fortitude to run her car much less the Chief Executive. Those who are capitalizing on Biden’s cognitive impairment are merely warming up for his death and replacement with Harris.

      1. Funny thing is, the witch burning of Hunter will make him stay in and you right wing dotards will have watched something else blow up in your face.

    2. No doubt all of the people who’ve been making claims about the weaponization of the DOJ will continue their complaints. Oh, wait.

      1. Well, duh.
        The corrupt DOJ got caught red handed by the judge for their sweetheart deal.
        The only thing they can do without making the corruption even more obvious is to actually follow the law.
        Their reputation is already in the toilet. Dont be the hand that flushes.
        Now all we have to do is wait and see what dear old dad does and how the DNC Pravda spins it.

        1. The judge didn’t reject it as a “sweetheart deal.” The judge rejected it because it was ambiguous, and the two sides disagreed about what the wording of the deal meant re: possible further charges.

          1. No, the judge rejected it because she believed it was unconstitutional. Because the deal required her to make a judgement in the future if charges should be filed on other crimes, which is not the job of the judicial branch. The govt had NO precedent for that sweetheart deal. Never been done before.

            COURT : Do you have any precedent for that?

            WISE: No, your honor.

            You like just makin sh!t up, dont you? Did you even read the transcript? I can link you to it if you need.

    3. How long do you think before we wake up and discover we’ve been living in the 16th Century Court of the Medici where everything good for the power structure is by definiton “good” and everything else is “bad”?

  9. What was the reasoning for the parties to establish multiple Shell entities, the simple answer may be below?

    The term Shell Company needs definition:

    “A shell company, or shell corporation, is an entity that typically lacks active business operations or employees. Shell companies can have many possible uses, from serving as vehicles to raise funds to facilitating corporate mergers, but they may also be used by individuals and companies to evade taxes, launder money and hide the identities of their owners.

    In general, a shell company is formed when paperwork is filed establishing the company. Shell companies can be established in the U.S. or abroad, the latter of which is popular with those trying to evade taxes.” (From Bankrate)

    SEC defines: Shell Company as a company other than an asset-backed issuer, with no or nominal operations; and either no or nominal assets, assets consisting of cash and or cash equivalents and nominal other assets.

    Additional answers can be found here; (SEC, November 15, 2010, decision): Sumotext, Inc.

    Other questions I have: who originated/when did it originate/where (country) did the various Shells’ become business entities? What assets did they originate with, how long did they exist or are they still in existence, if they are closed what assets did, they acquire, and how where those assets accounted for and dispersed.

    Maybe the term Shell is appropriate: Shell Game defined by (Wordnik) “A fraud or deception perpetrated by shifting conspicuous things to hide something else.”

    Loosely they could also be called a Blank Check.

    1. George W,
      I look forward to the questions you raise in the inquiry, the evidence presented for the American public to see.

      1. Upstate
        I am doubtful. even if the committees find water in the well that anything will come of the investigations or that the public will know the full discovery of facts. I suspect that a tremendous amount of amount of obfuscation will occur to counter further distrust of the public’s opinion of corrupt governance.

        1. George W,
          I see you point, but I am hoping there will be enough evidence to at least prove what we already know to be facts and true.
          That much alone would prove the Biden Crime Family is a reality and not a myth as the DNC Brown Shirts would have us believe.

  10. Commentators keep talking about Joe’s involvement in bribery, but if he received 50% (or any portion) of the money collected by Hunter, he is also guilty of tax evasion, just as Hunter is. Hunter was obviously just the bag man for the Bidens; the entire scheme would have been impossible without the Big Guy’s involvement. There should be bank records that confirm all of the money transfers – the House just needs to get them. This is arguably the worst corruption scandal in American history.

  11. Impeachment is the understatement of the entire history of the Country.

    The illicit President is guilty of treason from his :

    – Afghanistan murders of Americans and allied personnel
    – Leaving billion$ of equipment to the Taliban enemy
    – Abandoning an air base in Afghanistan which was not threatened by the Taliban
    – Allowing and aiding the following to illegally enter the U.S.: child slaves, sex slaves, indentured illegals to cartels, arms trafficking, drug trafficking, terrorist trafficking, cartel migration from Mexico.
    – Removing free speech rights through social media.
    -Using the power of the federal government to suppress the truth in various media. Truth which contradicted or doubted government propaganda.
    – Investigating, arresting, and jailing political opponents on trumped up charges, if any
    – Having the FBI arrest local citizens at public hearings
    – Influence peddling to give foreign countries precedence over American citizens
    – Mandating experimental gene therapy for ALL constituents
    – Ignoring national disasters until a former President helps victims
    – Waging proxy war so far away that it cannot endanger national security
    – Waging war against a nuclear power without Congressional approval
    – Hiring and appointing federal government personnel without regard to their relative abilities in that capacity
    – Mandating a deadly and disabling experimental medical procedure on his own military personnel
    – Threatening gun confiscation from lawful owners
    -Depleting the national fuel reserve, which is maintained for national security
    -Selling part of the national fuel reserve to Communist Chinese

    1. There’s no need to sugar coat it.

      *the most pressing issue, obviously, is Biden’s insane war in Ukraine .. . he’s quite mad, you know, even in his more lucid moments.

  12. The same $100 charity offer applies to any lefty coward who can reconcile these two.

    1. Goldman—Hunter was selling the “illusion of access”. Parroted by the press ad nauseum.

    2. Archer attended the July 7, 2015, meeting at 8:30am, along with Marc Holtzman, chairman of Kazakhstan’s largest bank, Kazkommertsbank.

    In his congressional testimony, Archer explained that the 45-minute discussion over breakfast was “about who was going to be the next UN Secretary-General” and he was involved “because Mark Holtzman was lobbying for Karim Massimov. But … obviously, that didn’t happen.”

    “It was, like, a U.N.-related conversation,” Archer told congressional investigators about the Naval Observatory breakfast.

    “Who was present?,” he was asked.

    “A gentleman named Marc Holtzman, myself, Hunter, and the Vice President,” he answered.

    But Joe was NEVER involved with his sons overseas business dealings.

      1. You know, when something smells like manure, but its covered up with canvas, some people reason that its manure under there. Some people lift the canvas to verify. Then you have others, like Dennis and Sammy, who need to touch it to be sure. Just looking at it is not evidence, cuz you need proof. Then you have the rest, like ATS, bug boy, Wally, Gigi, and Fishwings, who, needing “incontravertible proof”, gotta taste it first.

        C’mon you guys, lets see you do the twist on this one. Did you even know this was in Archer’s testimony?? I bet not.

  13. Dear Prof Turley,

    One can only hope Congress at the APEX of their impeachment powers will allow them to at least locate and examine The Laptop. Do you know where The Laptop is, or not? Presently, the FBI does not comment about ‘on-going investigations’.

    In fact, FBI Dir Wrey during his recent testimony before congress refused to answer questions approximately 27% of the time (at the risk of exposing sources, methods and, as always, vital national security information etc., etc.). Will the enumerated Apex powers of Congress allow them, e.g., to overcome the blatant obstinance of FBI Dir Wray’s silver-tongue malefactions? And demand answers? Surely, you jest.

    The trouble with impeaching Joe Biden is, almost by direct extension, they’re going to have to impeach [the integrity of] at least 51 top intelligence officials, including the past five (5) CIA directors, as well. And a whole bunch more. That’s just the tip of the ice berg. .. even the NYT will have to print a retraction, and disclaim its Pulitzer Prize, American journalism’s most esteemed and valued (sic) award.

    It’s a sticky wicket.

    *otoh, “I have heard That guilty creatures sitting at a play Have by the very cunning of the scene Been struck so to the soul that presently They have proclaim’d their malefactions; For murder, though it have no tongue, will speak With most miraculous organ.”

  14. Impeaching Donald Trump was wrong. Even though I believe that the Biden klan are a bunch of grifters, I still think impeaching The Big Guy is not a good idea. Two wrongs don’t make a right. The dims have been persecuting Donald Trump for almost 8 years, as of last week he and Biden were at 46% each. The republicans impeach Biden in the house, then it goes to the senate, controlled by the Democrats. There it stops.And the MSM will make it look like the republicans are persecuting a feeble old man. The republicans are mean people, first they threw gramma off of a cliff, now they are going after granpa. Nikki Haley was 7 percentage points ahead of Biden last week. Just let the Biden administration crash and burn and go on to win in 2024.

    1. Another view: Team Red is only doing what Team Blue has set as the new example to be followed with the ‘hope’ the Blue’s will eventually consider the consequences of future actions before they proceed to kick over the next apple cart. Sometimes it takes a bully to teach an existing bully to stop bullying others for fear of endless reprisals – the only real fear bullies ever have.

  15. Consideration of impeaching President Biden is inconsequential compared to assuring that history is accurately recorded via an impeachment inquiry.

    1. Robert Blum,
      I agree.
      We need to see all the evidence presented to the American people for them to judge.
      We also need to see to what degree various agencies go to what lengths to obstruct, stonewall and other means of the inquiry.
      Same goes for the media.

  16. “The House has established a labyrinth of dozens of shell companies and acc……” Please identify at least oneof these shell companies..’established by The House.’ TIA

      1. “If Shell companies are illegal then we need to add about 500 counts to the Trump indictments.”

        I’d like to nominate this for “dumbest comment ever”

          1. Wow. An actual factual comment from Sammy.
            How shocking.
            It is not the question of shell companies but what they were used for.
            Which we may see how they were used in the Biden Impeachment inquiry.
            After all, if Biden was using them for legit reasons then he has nothing to hide and in the name of transparency should provide all documentation to the inquiry.

          2. You don’t get to ask me how so, Sammy, until you answer my question.

            Who did Hunter and Zlovshevsky call from Dubai in December 2015, and why?

            Parachute in….unicorn out

      1. “How so? Shell companies are very common and legal. Trump has many.”

        Sammy just couldn’t let someone else have the award. Sorry Sammy, you said the same thing he did. too late.

    1. Rosemont Seneca Partners, LLC
      Rosemont Seneca Thornton, LLC

      “In April 2014, a Kazakhstani Oligarch Wired the Exact Price of Biden’s Sportscar to a
      Bank Account Used by Biden. The next day, a payment was made from Rosemont Seneca
      Bohai for a sportscar for Hunter Biden in the amount of $142,300.

  17. Turley’s hypocrisy on impeachment is well established. Funny how he can find five “facts” on impeachment inquiry on Biden, but anything Trump did, and in Turley’s own words… “just didn’t rise to the level” of impeachments. Again and again Turley writes, oh they got him now, like Barr will get to the bottom of it all and Durham has the goods, and Gowdy was a sure thing. So sure, I’ll wait for the truth to come out, and I will accept the reality, unlike the Trump cult who do not accept reality no matter of what the facts are.

      1. “It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance” Thomas Sowell

        1. You call that drivel analysis??

          Oh wait….now I see it…pulled from your a$$….ANALysis

          But as usual, coward won’t answer the question.

            1. Fair enough, pot.

              My question to you is a reasoned attempt to arrive at a logical conclusion. Your responses are, heck I don’t even know what to call them other than uselss drivel.

              “Self awareness: not a strength of the left”—Tom

                1. Now the bug face lawn mowing pervert is fantasizing about my b hole!

                  Thanks for the compliment, creep, but you’re not my type.

            2. FishStick,
              Would that be the same people who think there are more than two sexes?
              How does one reason with that load of crap?

    1. At least it is an impeachment inquiry. They will go through the process to determine if impeachment is warranted unlike the last two times.

    2. Fish You need to just take a swim. You are too damned biased apparently. You don’t know facts when they slap you up side your head.

Leave a Reply