The Decision to Open an Impeachment Inquiry into President Biden: Unveiling the Truth
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s recent decision to initiate an impeachment inquiry into President Biden has sparked intense criticism from Democrats and the media aligned with them. Even some Republican representatives, who are clearly lacking courage, are expressing their concerns as if appeasing the opposition would protect their positions. They need to detach themselves from the herd mentality.
The reality is that if McCarthy had chosen not to proceed with the inquiry, he would be failing at his job, and the Republican Party would not deserve to maintain the majority in the House. The opposition’s role is to resist and challenge the administration in power, particularly when it is plagued with corruption. It is high time for Republicans to play hardball because that is the only way Democrats will understand.
As McCarthy rightly stated, launching an impeachment inquiry is the logical next step in an investigation that involves both politics and the law. It is the only path to obtaining the complete truth about President Biden’s involvement in his family’s corrupt activities.
What Will the Biden Family Business Scandal Impeachment Inquiry Entail?
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has initiated an impeachment inquiry into President Biden, boosting congressional authority to obtain documents and testimonies related to Biden’s foreign business dealings while he served as vice president. House Republicans have already issued a series of demands to executive branch agencies regarding Joe Biden’s associations with his son Hunter Biden and his brother James Biden’s overseas undertakings. These demands, backed by September deadlines, might potentially escalate into legal battles.
Key Questions the Inquiry Aims to Answer:
- What is contained in Joe Biden’s vice presidential emails? During his tenure as vice president, Joe Biden used the aliases “Robert L. Peters” and “Robin Ware” to communicate with staff, generating an extensive paper trail of around 5,400 written records. The House Oversight Committee requested these communications from the National Archives by August 31, but according to sources, the agency did not comply.
- What do Hunter Biden’s bank records reveal? Congressional Republicans are preparing to issue subpoenas to banks for the account information of both Hunter and James Biden, having previously subpoenaed bank statements of some of their associates. These records could shed light on whether money from foreign sources was transferred to Joe Biden and possibly covered a significant portion of his expenses. It is also possible that the House will later seek the president’s bank records.
The notion that Biden never directly communicated his desires to Attorney General Merrick Garland is simply a fig leaf. Instead, he made his intentions known privately to The New York Times, and the consequences were evident. Not long after, two separate federal indictments were issued, with a trial scheduled for Trump during the campaign. Well done, Merrick. That’s what playing hardball looks like.
Meanwhile, the same Department of Justice has been caught concealing Hunter Biden’s crimes, and it took the emergence of two brave IRS whistleblowers from the GOP House to prevent him from evading charges. Additionally, a federal judge exposed a hidden immunity agreement in a sweetheart deal between Hunter and the DOJ, which many experienced prosecutors considered unprecedented. According to a reliable source, top FBI officials were completely unaware of the plea agreement prior to its submission to the court, a departure from standard practice. The source claims that FBI leaders would have objected to the deal due to its excessively lenient terms.
However, Justice officials remain uninterested in thoroughly investigating the substantial evidence suggesting that Joe Biden, in his capacity as vice president, engaged in schemes that yielded his family up to $20 million in illicit gains from foreign entities. For instance, an informant alleged as early as 2017 that both Bidens received a $5 million bribe from the owner of Burisma, a corrupt Ukrainian energy company that appointed Hunter to its board for a yearly sum of $1 million. No inquiry was conducted, and the same informant reasserted the claim in 2020, yet still, there was no indication of an investigation. Strangely, the Delaware prosecutor who chose to ignore the bribery allegations and let Hunter Biden off the hook is still handling the case, but with an elevated title. Thanks to Garland, David Weiss is now a special counsel, a transparent promotion for his dubious efforts to shield the president’s son from prosecution and turn a blind eye to the president’s involvement. This designation ostensibly allows Weiss to file charges against Hunter Biden nationwide. Conveniently for the White House, the special counsel status will also enable Weiss to avoid testifying before Congress about the case until after the next election. That is hardball, indeed.
If we contrast this situation with how these agencies persistently pursued implausible rumors about Donald Trump colluding with Russia and eagerly leaked them to the media, we can clearly see the double standard at play within the Department of Justice. However, thanks to the revelations unearthed by congressional investigations, the public is gradually awakening to the Biden family’s corruption. A recent CNN poll indicated that a majority of Americans believe the president inappropriately participated in his son’s business affairs.
Yet, Representative James Comer of Kentucky, who leads the House Oversight panel, and other Republican leaders acknowledge that there is still work to be done before they can proceed with an actual impeachment case. Their recent call for the State Department to release all information regarding the US government’s stance on a Ukrainian prosecutor touches on a crucial mystery. Based on Joe Biden’s subsequent public boasting, we are aware that, as vice president, he successfully pressured Ukraine to dismiss a prosecutor responsible for fighting corruption as a condition for receiving $1 billion in aid from the US. Viktor Shokin, the targeted prosecutor, had Burisma, an energy company notorious for its unscrupulous practices, among his primary focuses. Comer’s letter demands full transparency regarding the “sudden foreign policy decisions” that led to Shokin’s firing. In light of reports from reliable sources such as The Post, which indicated that the US and Europe were satisfied with Shokin’s performance, Comer seeks to determine whether the firing resulted from a legitimate policy decision by the Obama administration or if Joe Biden was engaged in a corrupt scheme to shield Burisma.
As the White House continues to dismiss every hearing as a publicity stunt and belittle every new piece of evidence as a mere political talking point, the pressure is mounting. One clear sign is that the president was forced to abandon his longtime lie of never discussing his son’s foreign business dealings. He persisted in this falsehood, even as Hunter’s laptop unveiled numerous pictures featuring the father alongside his son’s business partners and benefactors. However, when former Hunter Biden associate Devon Archer testified before Congress that Joe Biden, then vice president, was connected to business meetings with Hunter and his benefactors through phone calls, the White House had to retreat. Suddenly, their defense shifted to claiming that the president “was never in business with his son.” It is a curious fallback position, as if they are asserting that there was never a formal agreement or partnership between the father and son.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
