Biden Impeachment Hearing: Abundant Evidence of Corruption
The Media’s Blackout on the House Impeachment Inquiry
The corporate news media all but refused to cover the opening hearing of the House impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden on Thursday, and to the extent they did, it was only to repeat, at the behest of the White House, the exhausted mantra that there’s “no evidence” connecting Biden to his son Hunter’s international bribery scheme.
Avoiding the Truth
- The New York Times ran with a cursory and misleadingly headlined article, “First Impeachment Hearing Yields No New Information on Biden,” that boasted “even their [Republicans’] witnesses said the case for impeachment hadn’t been made.”
But if the media had actually covered it, the American public might have heard more about the mounds of damning evidence now piling up by the day, including the release on Wednesday by the House Ways and Means Committee of reams of text messages and emails between Hunter Biden, his uncle James Biden, and a colorful array of foreign oligarchs, business associates, and bagmen. All told, House Republicans presented more than two dozen pieces of evidence on Thursday linking Joe Biden to his son’s overseas business dealings.
This evidence was the centerpiece of the hearing Thursday, which served to lay the groundwork for the impeachment inquiry. So far, the evidence suggests the Biden family “business” is exactly what it appears to be: an influence-peddling scheme on a scale never before seen in American history. George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, who testified at the hearing, said that even though Washington, D.C., is “awash” in influence-peddling, he’s never seen “anything of this size and complexity,” and that Congress has a “duty to determine if the president is involved in what is a known form of corruption.”
Based on what we already know, it’s hard to see how Joe Biden couldn’t have been involved or couldn’t have benefited from his son’s corrupt dealings. Consider just a few items of evidence mentioned during Thursday’s hearing. In one text exchange with his uncle in June 2017, Hunter refers to his father as his “family’s brand” and “only asset.” That echoes something Devon Archer, Hunter’s former business partner, said in his July testimony to the House Oversight Committee, that the value of adding Hunter to the board of the Ukrainian energy firm Burisma was “the brand” — clearly a reference to then-Vice President Joe Biden. (Hunter had no experience in the energy sector and brought no value to the company other than access to his father.)
Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina brought up an FBI memo released Wednesday by the House Ways and Means Committee about another former business partner of Hunter’s, Tony Bobulinksi. In an FBI interview, Bobulinksi said that in 2015-16 Hunter and Hunter’s uncle James did business with CEFC, a Chinese company with close ties to the Chinese government. But because Biden was still vice president, Hunter and James weren’t paid right away. “There was a concern it would be improper,” Bobulinksi said, because of the company’s affiliation with the Chinese Communist Party.
But Hunter and James wanted to get paid. According to Bobulinksi, “they believed CEFC owed them money for the benefits that accrued to CEFC through its use of the Biden family name to advance their business dealings.” Once Biden left office, Hunter and James were paid more than a million dollars by CEFC. “Now we know why,” said Mace. “Because it was back-pay.”
Later in the hearing, Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida showed organizational charts of Hunter Biden’s businesses created by the IRS team investigating the president’s son, including from 2014, when Joe Biden was vice president, and 2018, when he was a private citizen. The charts show a dizzying array of interrelated companies — none of which involved real estate or any other industry where you would typically see this kind of complex matrix of different business entities and shell companies. Donalds then shared a text message between Hunter and James Biden in which Hunter, discussing a business deal, tells his uncle, “You’ve been drawn into something purely for the purpose of protecting Dad.”
This is just a sample, but you get the idea. Hunter was engaged in a patently corrupt scheme that involved selling access to his father, one of the most powerful politicians on the planet. The question the impeachment inquiry has to answer is whether Joe Biden knew about the scheme, whether he profited from it, whether he intentionally helped Hunter, and whether he changed U.S. policy as part of rendering that help. On every count, there is mounting evidence that the answer is “yes.”
But don’t expect Democrats to take any of this more seriously than the corporate media are. Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, never one to miss an opportunity for self-parody, gravely asked all three Republican witnesses whether they were “presenting any firsthand witness account of crimes committed by the president of the United States,” as if the only evidence that counts is video footage of Joe Biden stuffing cash into a duffel bag marked “$$$ from China.”
Not to be outdone in performative stupidity, Rep. Jasmine Crockett, a Democrat from Texas, went on a bizarre, emotional rant claiming President Biden is only “guilty of loving his child unconditionally,” which is the only evidence Republicans have brought forward. She added, “And honestly, I hope and pray that my parents love me half as much as he loves his child.” Ah yes, Joe Biden loved his son so much that he made him the frontman of an international bribery scheme and money-laundering operation.
So much for the opposition (including the corporate press). They aren’t going to take this seriously, even if the impeachment inquiry turns up audio recordings of Joe Biden saying, “Why yes, I did fire that Ukrainian prosecutor for $5 million from Burisma.” Democrats and the media don’t care about Biden’s corruption and won’t tell the truth about it, no matter what evidence comes to light. After Thursday’s hearing, at least that much is clear.
How has the media’s coverage of the House impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden been concerning, according to the title?
The media’s blackout on the House impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden is deeply concerning. Instead of providing unbiased coverage of the opening hearing, the corporate news media chose to downplay the significance of the proceedings and repeated the old narrative that there is no evidence connecting Biden to his son Hunter’s international bribery scheme. This deliberate avoidance of the truth is a disservice to the American public.
While a cursory and misleadingly-headlined article in The New York Times claimed that the first impeachment hearing yielded no new information on Biden, the reality is that there is mounting evidence that implicates him. The House Ways and Means Committee recently released a substantial amount of text messages and emails between Hunter Biden, his uncle James Biden, and a variety of foreign oligarchs, business associates, and bagmen. In fact, House Republicans presented more than two dozen pieces of evidence linking Joe Biden to his son’s overseas business dealings during the hearing.
This evidence forms the centerpiece of the impeachment inquiry and indicates that the Biden family’s business dealings are nothing more than an influence-peddling scheme on an unprecedented scale. Professor Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University and a witness at the hearing, remarked that he has never seen anything of this size and complexity in Washington, D.C., and that it is Congress’ duty to determine if the president is involved in such corruption.
Considering the evidence that has already been revealed, it is difficult to believe that Joe Biden was not involved or did not benefit from his son’s corrupt activities. For instance, in a text exchange with his uncle, Hunter refers to his father as his family’s brand and only asset. This aligns with what Hunter’s former business partner, Devon Archer, testified before the House Oversight Committee, stating that adding Hunter to the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy firm, was an acknowledgement of the Biden brand. Hunter had no relevant experience in the energy sector, indicating that his father’s influence was the only value he brought to the company.
Additionally, Rep. Nancy Mace highlighted an FBI memo released by the House Ways and Means Committee concerning Tony Bobulinksi, another former business partner of Hunter’s. According to Bobulinksi’s FBI interview, Hunter and James conducted business with CEFC, a Chinese company closely tied to the Chinese government, in 2015-16. However, because Biden was still vice president at the time, they were not paid immediately due to concerns about impropriety. Once Biden left office, they received over a million dollars from CEFC, which Bobulinksi describes as back-pay for using the Biden family name to advance their business dealings.
Further revelations came from Rep. Byron Donalds, who displayed organizational charts of Hunter Biden’s businesses created by the IRS team investigating him. These charts show a complex network of interrelated companies, none of which are in industries typically associated with such intricate business structures. Donalds also shared a text message between Hunter and James Biden in which Hunter states that James was drawn into something purely for the purpose of protecting their father.
These examples only scratch the surface of the damning evidence against Joe Biden. It is crucial for the media to cover the impeachment inquiry objectively and give the American public the opportunity to learn about these critical developments. The media’s blackout on this issue undermines the principles of transparency, accountability, and trust that are essential for a functioning democracy. It is time for the media to prioritize truth and inform the public about the potential misconduct involving the President of the United States.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...