House GOP claims Biden corruption in new report, critics don't see it
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Josh MeyerUSA TODAY
Republicans on the House Oversight Committee issued another report Wednesday criticizing President Joe Biden and his family for allegedly corrupt international business dealings, but critics - including the White House - said the report is a political hatchet job that offers no proof that Biden was involved.
The committee, led by Chairman James Comer, said in the report that it plans to continue to investigate Biden to find evidence of corruption, even as it acknowledged that it had no evidence that he financially benefited from the myriad foreign business dealings of his son Hunter.
"During Joe Biden's vice presidency, Hunter Biden sold him as 'the brand' to reap millions from oligarchs in Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine," Comer said in a statement accompanying the release of committee report. "It appears no real services were provided other than access to the Biden network, including Joe Biden himself. And Hunter Biden seems to have delivered."
The 19-page report was titled, "Third Bank Records Memorandum from the Oversight Committee's Investigationinto the Biden Family's Influence Peddling and Business Schemes."
Critics said the report, and Comer's statement, marked a clear shift in strategy by the committee from one claiming it had the goods implicating Biden in corrupt schemes while he was vice president to one in which it says the lack of any such evidence must mean that he was involved.
"This stunt from Comer is just more of the same - no evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden, no new information to tie him to Hunter Biden's business, and another desperate attempt to keep this bogus investigation alive" said Kyle Herrig, executive director of the non-partisan Congressional Integrity Project. "Comer's fishing expedition continues to reel in nothing in a desperate attempt to distract from Trump."
The White House said the new Comer committee report is part of a continuing effort by Republicans to smear Joe Biden without any evidence or even information suggesting wrongdoing.
"Today House Republicans on the Oversight Committee released another memo full of years-old 'news,' innuendo, and misdirection - but notably missing, yet again, is any connection to President Biden," said Ian Sams, White House spokesperson for Oversight and Investigations. "Perhaps that is because - as recently as last week - the House Republicans' own self-proclaimed "hero" witness who was "going to be able to come under oath and tell us exactly what role Joe Biden played" testified that President Biden never discussed these business dealings and was not involved."
The 19-page memo released by House Oversight Republicans is based on bank records highlighting millions of dollars that Hunter Biden and his business associates received from a wide array of business arrangements overseas while his father was serving as vice president to President Barack Obama.
Few of the details appear to be new. But the memo details what it describes as new and damaging information, including "payments from Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan" that occurred during Biden's vice presidency. "The Committee has now identified over $20 million in payments from foreign sources to the Biden family and their business associates," the report said.
The report also rehashes prior claims of corrupt dealings related to how Hunter Biden and former business partner Devon Archer allegedly used the business development and policy advisory firm "Rosemont Seneca Entities to bring in millions from oligarchs in Europe and Asia."
And it mentions other business relationships between Hunter Biden and Archer that it claims were suspicious or corrupt, including payments by a Ukrainian oligarch while they were on the board of directors of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma Holdings LLC.
More:5 takeaways from Devon Archer's testimony on Joe and Hunter Biden: 'There was no business conversation'
The new report is full of references to Archer, and says his recent congressional testimony "supports the Committee's findings," which have repeatedly alleged that Joe Biden himself was personally involved in - and benefitted from - Archer's and Hunter Biden's overseas business dealings.
But after months of describing him as a smoking gun who would prove deep corruption within what Republicans described as the "Biden Crime Family," Archer's testimony July 31, if anything, appears to exonerate Joe Biden.
For instance, Archer testified that Hunter Biden put his father on the phone with clients before his father was elected president, but that they did not discuss business. He also told lawmakers the vice president was not involved in their financial dealings, despite the contacts, and that he had no knowledge of wrongdoing by Joe Biden.
And while Joe Biden at times has said he had no involvement with his son's business dealings at all, Archer testified that he did reach out and call his son -- but only to check up on him, especially when he was grappling with drug addiction and other problems.
"But, you know, Hunter spoke to his dad every day, right? And so in certain circumstances, when you're in -- you know, if his dad calls him at dinner and he picks up the phone, then there's a conversation," Archer testified. "And the, you know, the conversation is generally about the weather and, you know, what it's like in Norway or Paris or wherever he may be. But that was -- yeah, that happened."
More:'How's the fishing?' Devon Archer testifies Joe Biden never talked business when put on phone
In their new report, the House Oversight Committee didn't mention those kinds of details from Archer's testimony. Instead, it said, "No one in the Biden Administration or in the (House Democratic) Minority has explained what services, if any, the Bidens and their associates provided in exchange for the over $20 million in foreign payments."
"The Committee plans to gather additional bank records in the near future and continue following the money trail," it said.
The White House on Wednesday jumped on that discrepancy, saying it was further evidence that House GOP members are trying to unfairly accuse Biden of wrongdoing, potentially as part of an effort to try and impeach him.
"This has been a pattern: time after time, Comer hypes up self-proclaimed bombshell findings about President Biden, and time after time, he fails to provide any actual evidence," White House spokesman Sams said. "Today's release is yet another flop."
NOTHING! THEY'VE GOT NOTHING!
Are you sure?...
Comer needs to be impeached for his lies.
Add MTG, Gaetz, Jordan, Santos, Hawley, Scott, Abbot, Cruz, DeSantis, etc... to the list.
The whole freedumb caucus needs be voted out as well.
Spoken like an independent centrist.......
She does need to go. So does Mitch. At a certain point age does have an effect.
You WISH they had nothing. Or that Papa Joe had no interest in or involvement with Hunter's business associates. Or that Big Guy 10% simply popped into these "dinners" and just talked about the weather. Or that Daddy-O wasn't sitting next to Hunter during that phone call.
Yet you and the gop have zero evidence Joe Biden received any illicit income or ever profited illegally in any way or any form. So, go on throwing unfounded unproven false allegations. You cannot even articulate a crime to level against President Biden. Joe and Jill Biden's taxes are public going back decades with no hints of personal corruption.
Yes, and they know it. Note the shift in strategy below. The following is from the Oversight committee's August 9, 2023 memo titled "Third Bank Records Memorandum from the Oversight Committee’s Investigation into the Biden Family’s Influence Peddling and Business Schemes".
Since they've been unable to come up with anything linking Joe Biden to Hunter Biden's company, they have removed that as a requirement. Now the fact that Joe's brother and son made money from Hunter's company is good enough. Apparently, if you're the kid of someone important, any money you make is automatically a bribe of your parent. This is really pathetic. Even if this nonsense somehow becomes acceptable, the oversight committee would need to show that Joe did something to benefit Hunter's client where that was the intended reason for the act rather than an incidental result of it.
Hunter Biden has a BA from Georgetown University and a Yale law degree. it really does seem that he can provide legal advice to foreign clients wrt US Law. The fact that he is a Biden only enhances his value.
All of your responses, even if true, mean you guys still have nothing.
The Oversight Committee couldn't show any link to Joe from Hunter's company, so now they say we don't need that. They'll just pretend that any money earned by Devon Archer & Hunter is a Joe bribe. Of course, they still have no action taken by Joe in behalf of Hunter's company either. Here's an excerpt from Devon Archer's testimony before the committee:
Q Did Hunter Biden ever tell you, "I can get my dad to change U.S. policy"? A No.
Q Are you aware of Hunter Biden ever asking his dad to change foreign policy? A No.
Q Are you ever -- were you ever privy to any conversations between Hunter Biden and Joe Biden in which they discussed how Joe Biden would take official actions on behalf of Hunter Biden? A No.
-and another excerpt, a Hunter email-
"The announcement of my guy's [Joe] upcoming travels should be characterized as part of our advice and thinking -- but what he will say and do is out of our hands. In other words, it could be a really good thing or it could end up creating too great an expectation. We need to temper expectations regarding that visit."
Devon Archer's testimony shows the opposite of what Comer claims. How surprising. You guys still have nothing.
Did you miss this?
Imagine arguing otherwise.
That's progressivism, 2023.
Where in your article have these "CRITICS" explained Hunter Biden receiving millions and millions of dollars for doing nothing and routing it through multiple shell companies to avoid being tracked. Where is that I must have missed it?
When Supreme Court Justice's wives, Congressmen's family and even President's kids profit from proximity to powerful relatives it stinks, but it is still legal.
What did JaVonka do to earn Saudi billions?
Whatever, there is zero evidence Joe Biden profited in from Hunter's business. Biden's taxes are public going back for decades...
It doesn't matter because it was legal...
What did Hunter do exactly that he was compensated so much? If it was legal, why all the shell companies to move the money around.
By who......Adam Shift for brains or was it the hookers Hunter was doing the blow off their asses.
They never have and they never will.
Yesterday: Trump colluded with Putin because Trump's company entered into routine negotiations to license the name Trump Tower to Russians!
today: There's nothing even remotely suspicious about Biden's family taking millions from a Russian oligarch in advance of a dinner with the VP, nor in other oligarchs/criminals giving the Bidens millions for no apparent legitimate purpose. !
Suddenly. even need a notarized receipt with Biden's signature and "For corruption" written on it won't be enough to concern them.
Here they get special access and present pet policies desired. All the Russian got was dinner -- can you show otherwise?
You understand the difference between legal campaign fundraising from American citizens, regulated by the federal government, and illicit million dollar payments to an unregistered lobbyist through offshore corporations by Russian oligarchs, right?
And why is this important to anyone.
You miss the point. People with money get to spend it. Switfties pay up to $20,000 for special access to Taylor Swift. Mohammed bin Salman 'invested' $2B of the Saudi Wealth Fund with Jared's Equity fund even though the SWF managers said absolutely no for many reasons. See Jared's purchase of 666 Fifth Ave for more detail on his 'ability', but note that Jared's asskissing of MBS paid off.
Declaring payments to Hunters Equity fund to be 'illicit' may make you feel good, but it's impotent. You, meaning conservatives, need to stop with the Chicken Little dancing and produce solid evidence on which a grand jury would return an indictment. A conservative specialty is the 'Indictmentless, never-ending Investigation'. See Benghazi, Her emails, ..., and Hunter/Joe.
Here are some people whose work you should examine: Jack Smith, Robert Mueller, Alvin Bragg, Fani Willis.
Again, That's legal. You understand the fundamental difference between legally buying concert tickets and illicit million dollar payments to an unregistered lobbyist through offshore corporations by Russian oligarchs, right?
That you keep equating illegal lobbying by foreign oligarchs with perfectly legal behavior is getting a little ridiculous.
ents to Hunters Equity fund to be 'illicit' may make you feel good, but it's impotent
Is Hunter Biden a registered foreign agent?
ancing and produce solid evidence on which a grand jury would return an indictment.
You've already admitted the Russian oligarchs paid Hunter for access to Joe Biden. That's illegal.
Although the irony of demanding someone produce solid evidence to produce an indictment before an actual criminal investigation takes place is not lost on me.
meaning conservatives, need to stop with the Chicken Little dancing
The irony here.
ome people whose work you should examin
Why? Your entire argument is laws don't apply to the Bidens, so why would anything they've done matter?
As was MBS's $2B 'investment' in Jared's Affinity Partners. Or all the Trump apartments bought through shell corporations by Russian oligarchs. People can also pay Hunter, which apparently sucks for you. Deal with it.
No illegal lobbying has been shown to occur by or through Hunter. Hunter hired the DC based Blue Star Group, among others, to lobby for Burisma. From the Devon Archer testimony:
Q Is it fair to say that there was a whole D.C. team that handled public affairs on behalf of Burisma?
A Yes.
Q And that D.C. team was firms like Boies Schiller, Blue Star Group, this lobbyist who was brought in to do the DHS issue. Is that fair?
A Fair.
-and-
Mr. Archer. Blue Star was working very hard for their -- so they were -- they were very well engaged with Burisma. They had a lot of problems. There was a lot of work to do...They were brought in and -- and, you know, brought in for other meetings. They were brought in to, you know, have meetings with State Department people. And, you know, they were -- Blue Star was very active with kind of dealing with lower-level, you know, government folks to help advance whatever Burisma was trying to solve for.
I've noted that people paid Hunter who was, in part, selling the "Illusion of Access" (from the Devon Archer testimony) to Joe. Joe can have dinner with people to help his son, that is not illegal. Joe gets to talk to whomever he wants. You choose the word 'access' and apparently select the definition 'control of' - again, this may make you feel good, but it is false. From a Hunter laptop email -
"The announcement of my guy's [Joe] upcoming travels should be characterized as part of our advice and thinking -- but what he will say and do is out of our hands. In other words, it could be a really good thing or it could end up creating too great an expectation. We need to temper expectations regarding that visit."
Hunter admits that he has *NO* control over his father's actions. Deal with it.
My entire argument is that this investigation is like the previous ones in that there's lots of dancing around and pseudo-bombshells, but nothing substantive on which a grand jury would return an indictment. Conservatives know this, but like Benghazi & Her emails, it's a distraction. So completely on brand.
I may as well take this opportunity to point out something that should be obvious by now. Knowing who to talk to in DC and who will reliably represent you requires insider knowledge. Knowledge that someone like Hunter actually has. He is the one who knew which firms in DC Burisma needed and he hired them for Burisma. Yes, Hunter was also selling the Illusion of Access to the VP, but there is absolutely no indication that this bore any fruit whatsoever.
If you've ever tried to get a government contract, you know that it is pretty much impossible unless you know someone or you pay an intro firm to get you in the door. Hunter's firm got in the door because of his name, and conservatives want Hunter to be just Joe's son. Devon Archer's testimony completely blows that up. Surprise, surprise.
For the 1 millionth time, take it to court.