Author Aldous Huxley said once“you will know the truth, and the truth will make you mad. »
Such a moment of madness has arrived in Congress as members prepare to vote on formally approving an impeachment inquiry. Hunter Biden’s second indictment shattered long-standing denials and rhetoric repeated by the White House and members of Congress. What remains in its wake is now obvious to the public: corruption.
The vote is not about impeaching President Biden, but about whether members support investigating these growing allegations of corruption by the Biden family. According to a recent poll, nearly 70% of voters (and 40% of Democrats) believe Biden acted illegally or unethically, or both. Yet while nearly half of the Democratic Party considers Biden’s conduct worthy of investigation, it is unclear whether a single Democratic member will vote to look into these allegations.
In September, I testified at the first impeachment inquiry hearing and said the evidence clearly exceeded the threshold for such an inquiry. Although it was not necessary to hold a formal vote to initiate this process (as the Democrats did with Trump), I encouraged members to hold such a vote.
Since that hearing, the evidence against President Biden has only continued to mount. It is now clear that Biden lied when he claimed, as a candidate and then as president, that he had no knowledge of his son’s business dealings with foreign interests. Even Hunter himself contradicted the president on this assertion.
It is now clear that he lied when he denied that his son ever made money in China. The indictment confirms massive transfers from Chinese sources.
It is also clear that Hunter was engaging in crude influence peddling. That included threatening at least one Chinese businessman by telling him his father was sitting next to him and would retaliate against him if he didn’t send millions to the Bidens.
President Biden also lied when he claimed this week that he had no “interactions” with his son’s business associates. There are now emails, audio recordings and testimonies refuting this claim.
Millions of dollars flowed to members of the Biden family through a maze of shell companies and accounts. Hunter Biden sent emails saying up to half of his income went to his father while they used shared accounts and credit cards for spending.
Even Biden associates now admit they were selling “the Biden brand” and their influence with Joe Biden. Proponents simply argue that they were simply selling the “illusion” of influence.
Now is the time to see if a single Democratic member will stand up to corruption and support an investigation into the president’s role and, later, the cover-up of that corruption. This includes using White House staff to spread false statements and attack critics.
I have already discussed four possible articles of impeachment which warrant investigation.
One of the common false narratives is that there is no evidence that the influence wielded by Biden’s son and brothers benefited the president himself. So, the argument goes, even if he was the subject of influence peddling, Joe Biden did not legally or constitutionally benefit from payments constituting bribery or other crimes.
This is completely absurd. Courts have repeatedly ruled that benefits given to family members (much smaller than the millions in this case) can constitute bribery for a politician. This has also been the position of the Department of Justice in previous cases. Whether Hunter or his associates spoke honestly about handing over percentages of these funds to Joe Biden, he practically and legally benefited from the millions going to his family.
Even if members insist that they are not yet convinced, it makes no sense to insist on the absence of direct evidence while opposing efforts to establish such evidence. These members opposed any investigation into the allegations from the start.
Polls suggest that most people believe there was a massive influence peddling operation around Joe Biden and that the president lied about not knowing about these deals. Now is the time to get answers directly from key players, from Hunter Biden to the president himself.
There’s more at stake for members than a Democratic president. The Democratic Party has already embraced censorship and abandoned its long advocacy for free speech. Democrats are now pledging to expand censorship on social media. The question is whether, as a party, it will now vote to protect corruption, even as nearly half of Democratic voters demand answers.
The Democratic Party I grew up in and supported was much more than the party of censorship and corruption. He fought for free speech and good government. There were principles that preceded personalities.
This is why we have reached a point of unavoidable clarity. There is no basis in principle to oppose an investigation into these chilling allegations. Stripped of the false narratives and false constitutional claims, what remains is raw politics and utter insanity.
The only question is: Who will show up on the Democratic side to demand not impeachment but answers?
So, let’s put it to a vote.
Jonathan Turley is the JB and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University Law School.
Copyright 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
