Jonathan Turley: Far From Being Launched "Without Evidence," the Evidence That Biden Committed the Impeachment-Level Crime of Bribery Is Strong and Demands an Inquiry

Breaking from The Bee:

Jonathan Turley's newest 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.

That's a huge factor -- with the Biden Administration obstructing Congress' normal means of demanding information, Congress is left with no choice but to escalate to an impeachment inquiry, for which judges will have to give Congress great deference when ruling on whether Biden's henchmen may continue hiding and destroying evidence.

Additionally, Congress is expanding the inquiry to also look into the obstruction of justice and cover-up being executed by Biden's co-conspirators.

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.

...

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."

...

Second, we know that more than $20 million was paid to the Bidens 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.

...

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...

Fourth, Hunter repeatedly stated in emails that he paid his father as much as half of what he earned....

Fifth concerns Hunter Biden's efforts to cover up the cash payments and the DOJ's apparent corrupt protection of him.

Read the column for more details.

The latest Quinippiac poll finds a plurality of Americans think that Biden is guilty of running a foreign bribery shakedown operation, as well as believing that Biden is failing in both senses of "executive function."

In a hypothetical 2024 general election matchup between President Biden and former President Trump, 47 percent of registered voters support Biden, while 46 percent support Trump, essentially a dead heat and unchanged from Quinnipiac University's August poll when Biden received 47 percent support and Trump received 46 percent support among registered voters.

When asked who would do a better job responding to a national crisis, 51 percent of registered voters said Trump, while 44 percent said Biden.

...

Voters 68 - 28 percent think that Joe Biden is too old to effectively serve another 4-year term as president, compared to Quinnipiac University's May 24, 2023 poll when voters 65 - 32 percent said that he was too old.

Voters 63 - 34 percent think that Donald Trump is not too old to effectively serve another 4-year term as president, compared to May when voters 59 - 36 percent said that Trump was not too old.

Voters give President Biden a negative 39 - 55 percent job approval rating, unchanged from a negative 39 - 55 percent job approval rating in Quinnipiac University's August poll.

Voters were asked about Biden's handling of...

the response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine: 43 percent approve, while 51 percent disapprove;

prescription drug pricing: 41 percent approve, while 39 percent disapprove;

climate change: 36 percent approve, while 53 percent disapprove;

the economy: 35 percent approve, while 60 percent disapprove.

But otherwise, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

Nearly 7 out of 10 voters (69 percent) say they are following news about the Justice Department's investigations into President Biden's son Hunter Biden either very closely (28 percent) or somewhat closely (41 percent), while 30 percent say they are following it not too closely.

About half of voters (49 percent) say the Justice Department's treatment of Hunter Biden has been not tough enough, while 31 percent say it has been fair, and 6 percent say it has been too tough.

A majority of voters (58 percent) say they are following an investigation by House Republicans into Hunter Biden's business dealings with Ukraine and China when his father was vice president either very closely (25 percent) or somewhat closely (33 percent), while 41 percent say they are following it not too closely.

Forty-four percent of voters believe Hunter Biden did something illegal in his business dealings with Ukraine and China when his father was vice president, while 34 percent believe he did something unethical but nothing illegal, 6 percent believe he did not do anything wrong, and 16 percent did not offer an opinion.

Half of voters (50 percent) think Joe Biden was involved in Hunter Biden's business dealings with Ukraine and China while Joe Biden was vice president, while 40 percent think Joe Biden was not involved.

Thirty-five percent of voters believe Joe Biden was involved and did something illegal in Hunter Biden's business dealings with Ukraine and China while Joe Biden was vice president, while 13 percent believe he was involved and did something unethical but nothing illegal, 1 percent believe he was involved but he did not do anything wrong, 11 percent did not offer an opinion, and 40 percent of voters believe Joe Biden was not involved.

CNN's "Fact" check of the allegations against Biden is ridiculous. Never before have "fact" checkers strained so mightily to call true, verified facts "unproven."

More from Matt Margolis at PJM:

The next allegation CNN attempts to dispute is that an FBI informant said the Bidens received a bribe.

CNN's response:

Facts First: It's true that an informant gave a tip of this nature to the FBI in 2020, and that the bureau had viewed him as a credible informant. But the underlying allegation that the Biden family was given a bribe is totally unproven; the informant was merely reporting something he said he had been told by a Ukrainian businessman.

Missing from the fact check is that the source of this claim is a longtime FBI informant who has a history of providing the FBI with reliable information.

.Addressing the claim that Biden participated in calls and dinners with Hunter Biden's business partners, CNN responds:

Facts First: McCarthy's claim omits key context about what was -- and wasn't -- reportedly discussed in the calls and dinners. A Hunter Biden associate testified that even though Joe Biden was on these calls and at these dinners, he didn't discuss business. And Republicans have not presented any evidence that Joe Biden himself benefited financially from his appearances at the dinners or on the calls.

What this fails to mention is that Devon Archer testified that Joe Biden's participation on the calls was critical to selling "the Biden brand." It also doesn't mention the fact that Joe Biden spent years denying having spoken to or having met Hunter's business associates. In addition to the phone calls and dinners, White House logs show he met with Hunter's business associates multiple times.

CNN is also attempting to claim that because the investigators don't have all the evidence at the beginning of an inquiry, the inquiry must be cancelled for lack of evidence. Thus insuring -- happenstantially I'm sure -- that the evidence remains buried.

CNN then argues that the claim that the financial transactions involving Biden family members were flagged as suspicious doesn't prove they were criminal.

Facts First: The existence of these suspicious activity reports don't prove wrongdoing on their own.

I can't even.

But, there's more.

Yeah, I left a big, juicy one back at the link. The last one.

Ed Morrissey notes that "without evidence" has been redefined to include 200 Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) issued by banks who spotted the huge sums of foreign money flooding the Biden family's bank accounts as likely money laundering or bribery, as well as the Vice President's office signing off on spin proposed by Hunter Biden's "business" partners about his appointment to the Burisma board.

But sure, AP -- "without evidence." "Wipe your chins off," Ed Morrissey says.

Sort of related, you honor. Goes to credibility:

Has the Deep State ordered the media to drive Biden out of office?

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 03:03 PM

| Access Comments