The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
The House of Representatives Needs to Open An Impeachment Inquiry Into President Joe Biden
Bribery is a High Crime and Misdemeanor
On Dec. 7, 2023, a federal grand jury filed an explosive indictment that charged Hunter Biden with a scheme to evade taxes on millions of dollars in income from foreign businesses. Prior to this, he was charged with violating federal law by lying about his drug usage on a federal form, and he was administratively discharged by the U.S. Navy for failing a drug test on his first day at work—a job which Vice President Joe Biden had helped him to get which he was too old to hold.
Hunter Biden's indictment is a public document, and there is no purpose in reprinting it here. The key takeaways are that: 1) Hunter Biden received more than $7 million in income between 2016 and 2020 much of it from Chinese sources; and 2) that the corrupt Ukrainian Burisma Holdings Corporation paid him an annual salary, for a while, of one million dollars a year.
Count 4 of the Indictment says that Hunter Biden "engaged in a four-year scheme to not pay at least $1.4 million in self-assessed federal taxes he owed ***. In furtherance of that scheme, the Defendant:
a. subverted the payroll and tax withholding process of his own company, Owasco, PC by withdrawing millions from Owasco, PC outside of the payroll and tax withholding process that it was designed to perform;
b. spent millions of dollars on an extravagant lifestyle rather than paying his tax bills;
c. in 2018, stopped paying his outstanding and overdue taxes for tax year 2015;
d. willfully failed to pay his 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 taxes on time, despite having access to funds to pay some or all of these taxes;
e. willfully failed to file his 2017 and 2018 tax returns on time; and
f. when he did finally file his 2018 returns, included false business deductions in order to evade assessment of taxes to reduce the substantial tax liabilities he faces as of February 2020.
Now, it is theoretically possible that Hunter Biden is a financial genius who earned all of these millions of Chinese and Ukrainian dollars legitimately, and it is also theoretically possible that he just has writer's block about filling out his tax returns. These excuses just do not fly here as I will show in recounting Hunter's life story as told by those right-wing infidels the New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN.
Before recounting the sad and frankly pathetic life of Hunter Biden, we need to remember that his father, Joe Biden, is the President of the United States—which is a fact not lost on the Chinese and Ukrainian shady "interest groups" funding Hunter Biden's jet set lifestyle. Unlike King Charles III, Joe Biden is probably the most powerful man on the planet—a status Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping would dearly like to change. Chinese and Ukrainian shady interest groups with government ties would no doubt like to influence President Joe Biden's actions by showering money on Joe's son Hunter.
Also, unlike King Charles III, President Joe Biden is subject to impeachment and removal from office on "Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." The U.S. House of Representatives is the sole custodian of the power and the duty to impeach corrupt officials. No other entity in the country has that power or duty. The U.S. Senate sitting as a Court of Impeachment, presided over by Chief Justice John Roberts, has the sole power and duty to try and, by a two-thirds vote convict, President Joe Biden for being bribed through his family members. After this most recent indictment, it is the sworn duty of the House of Representatives to make sure that Joe Biden isn't getting a cut or a benefit out of bribes paid to his son Hunter and that he was somehow not aware of the fact that his son was being given inordinate amounts of money by Chinese and Ukrainian interests perhaps due to senility.
Hunter Biden is President Joe Biden's second son. He survived a car crash that killed his mother, his sister, and that seriously injured both him and his older brother who died in 2015 of brain cancer. For these reasons, mainstream Republicans have, like his father, given him a pass in life. Unfortunately, his recent, serious, criminal behavior make it impossible to look the other way any longer. He is behaving like someone who expects to be pardoned by his father for any crimes he chooses to commit.
The long sordid saga of Hunter Biden's life began in 1996 to 1998 when he worked for a credit card company. The Clinton Administration's Commerce Secretary, William M. Daley, then swooped in to hire Hunter to work for the Commerce Department from 1998 to 2001. From 2001 to 2008, Hunter worked as a lobbyist probably selling access to his father, a powerful Senator. Records show that Hunter Biden had earned more than $2.8 million in fees during this period of time. This is also the period in Hunter Biden's life when he began heavily drinking.
His clients during this period included an online gambling venture, biotech companies, and colleges seeking earmarks. Hunter quit lobbying during the 2008 presidential election to serve on the Board of Amtrak—a job secured for him by Senator Thomas Carper (D-Del.). His credentials for the post were slim. By the time of his father's election as Vice President, Hunter Biden had resigned from Amtrak, did some investment management business, and was unemployed.
Hunter Biden was then commissioned as an ensign in the U.S. Navy Reserve in 2013 due to Vice President Biden's influence, which was improper to say the least. The Navy had to waive a rule that Biden was too old for him to serve in the job he was appointed to for Hunter to be commissioned. On his very first day at the naval base, Hunter Biden was fired and administratively discharged when a drug test showed that he was using cocaine.
Within months, Hunter Biden was invited to join the Board of Directors of Burisma, a very shady Ukrainian energy company that was under investigation for corruption. At the very same time Hunter's father Vice President Joe Biden was overseeing White House policy for President Obama toward Ukraine. Hunter Biden made more than $800,000 from Burisma in 2013 and more than $1.2million in 2014—not bad for a forty-four year old who had just been discharged from the Navy for using cocaine.
Hunter had met his first wife, Kathleen Buhle in 1993; they were married from 1996 until 2017; and they have three children together. Hunter plunged into alcoholism and drug abuse. following the death of his brother Beau in 2015. Ms. Buhle accused Hunter of "spending extravagantly on his own interests (including drugs, alcohol, prostitutes, strip clubs, and gifts for women with whom he has sexual relations) while leaving the family with no funds to pay legitimate bills".
Hunter is the biological and legal father of a child born to an exotic dancer from Arkansas who Hunter has no recollection of every having met much less having had sexual relations with her. Hunter Biden was also in a years-long custody battle to force him to pay child support for his illegitimate child.
Hunter then entered into a relationship with his brother's widow, Hallie Biden. A month after he left his brother's widow, Hunter married South African native, Melissa Cohen, in May 2019. They have a son, Beau Biden Jr., who is named after Hunter's brother. Hunter Biden thus has five children by three different wives.
On October 12, 2018, Hunter Biden bought a .38 caliber handgun, and he lied on a U.S. government form that he was not using drugs when he was in fact using drugs at the time. The standard penalty for lying on government forms, if you are not a Biden, is five years in prison. First time offenders would not get the maximum penalty.
In April 2019, Hunter Biden left a damaged laptop with "alarming" and "embarrassing" content at a computer repair shop. The owner of the shop copied the contents and sent them to the FBI. In the run-up to the 2020 presidential election, Joe Biden falsely denied that Hunter Biden had made money doing business in China.
Hunter Biden's biography is not the biography of a brilliant investment manager, hedge fund executive, or financial genius. When China drops $7 million on Hunter Biden or Ukraine hires him for a salary of $1 million a year—right after he was discharged from the U.S. Navy for cocaine use—they are not buy brilliance, they are buying influence on great power—Joe Biden's power. It is now the job of the U.S. House of Representatives to determine whether a possibly senile President Biden has noticed that he is being bribed through his son.
To get the Volokh Conspiracy Daily e-mail, please sign up here.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Sounds worthy of investigation.
However, I see one slight problem.
He served as Vice President from 2009-2017. Then he went into private left. Then in 2021 he became President.
Now we’re looking, in large part, into his 2009-2017 behavior, even though there was a four-year interval (2017-2021) between the corruption of his Vice-Presidential years and his taking of another federal job.
So can the House and Senate consider his Vice-Presidential years, or are they confined to what he’s done since 2021?
How far back can an impeachment inquiry into a federal official go? Into all previous federal jobs? Even if he’s held those jobs non-continuously?
Yes, worthy of investigation.
Regardless of past timeframes, obviously there’s a current continuation, for the events carry over into current decisions. Payments in the past can and do influence today. Moreover, the election of 2020 is still in dispute as bits and pieces point to fraudulent actions around the country. However, this money angle is more solid and is being displayed honestly, even-though slowly so.
A degeneracy, of this administration, of the Obama administration, and of actions by others, to the Republic must not be glossed over, but rather trials of some sort are imperative to fully expose current issues of concern from the People.
I don’t see any statue of limitations on impeachment.
If you want a reference, I remember investigations into Justice Kavanaugh’s actions from…well before he was a judge…during the Congressional hearings. I imagine looking back 10 years or so to when Biden was still in federal office is entirely reasonable.
Your usual idiotic fucking analogy.
Kavanaugh was not being impeached. He was a SCOTUS nominee. If he hadn’t been confirmed he would have been reduced to being a (shudder) Federal Appeals Court judge.
Yes, you’re right, that is a ridiculous analogy. If back to high school is appropriate for a justice, back to kindergarten is appropriate for a President.
re: “How far back can an impeachment inquiry into a federal official go?”
As far back as the House members can get away with politically. There is no statutory or constitutional limit on the House’s ability to define what counts as “high crimes and misdemeanors”. There is only the limit that we voters will impose when the House members overstep their bounds.
Which means that House members of the President’s own party will be taken to task for allowing the discussion to happen at all while members of the opposition party will be celebrated for the wildest of accusations.
That said, I think even the most rabid opposition member would face significant barriers to investigating things that were widely known during or prior to the last election.
.
It can go back until birth. It’s “high crimes and misdemeanors,” not “high crimes and misdemeanors committed while one was holding one’s current office.”
It would be passing strange if Biden could be impeached for shooting someone on Fifth Avenue on 1/20/2021 at 12:01 p.m., but not for doing the same on 1/20/2021 at 11:59 p.m.
Right. I am very dubious that Biden did something impeachable. But the “it was too early to impeach” defense is a total dud.
That said, the word “high” in “high crimes and misdemeanors” means something. It means crimes directed at the state and its function. Like Treason and Bribery, the two crimes that are mentioned explicitly in the text.
If someone just committed murder unconnected to any official function, it’s not a “high crime” although it is a crime. Not impeachable, IMO.
That has a pretty complicated interaction with the standing DOJ practice to not pursue criminal charges against a sitting President. Seems like in the example of the President murdering a random person of Fifth Avenue, you’d want to either change that DOJ practice or potentially impeach the President to get him out of office so that the DOJ could then put him in jail.
I’ve heard the argument. I don’t buy it. Given that there was no other way to remove a president from office (well, other than Lee Harvey Oswald’s way) to say that the president can’t be impeached for rape or murder or whatever makes no sense.
(There’s also the 25th amendment, but that didn’t exist when the constitution was drafted or for the next 180 years, and it doesn’t apply to committing crimes.)
A few hundred years of American jurisprudence soundly rejects that bullshit theory.
You might want to check the history of impeachments before commenting next time.
Er, that should’ve been 11:59 a.m.
Depends. Did Joe help set up the cash flows that Hunter relieved during those years when he was VP?
Well probably yes, Hunter got hired by Burisma in 2014 and stayed on the board collecting cash until 2019.
Hunter set up his Chinese joint 10 days after he met with Chinese businessmen on a trip traveling with Joe to China on Air Force 2.
‘Well probably yes’
I.e. there’s no actual evidence for any of this.
So what is Calabresi calling for?
He’s calling for an investigation to see if the evidence develops.
Same thing I’ve been calling for, a full investigation.
You seem to think millions of cash flying around for no valid reason doesn’t require a closer look.
You should be calling for an investigation too in order to fully exonerate Joe and prove all his critics wrong.
This is an embarrassment. Please get this guy off this blog. It’s bad enough having Blackman posting partisan nonsense, although fortunately he seems to have reduced the frequency of his posts.
What’s embarrassing is your unwillingness to admit that nobody would hire Hunter to mow their lawn on his own merits with his track record, that the only rational reason to give him the time of day is to influence his father.
And yet people continually throw huge sums his way, have for years now, so it’s not irrational to assume that they’re getting what they’re paying for.
So, yes, the only sensible thing to do is to genuinely try to find out if he’s cheating all those people, or if the money is making it to Dad. If so, yeah, Joe should be impeached.
No, what’s embarrassing is that there is an army of Trumpists who spent four years arguing that giving Jared Kushner and the Trump Organisation money was not a crime absent evidence of a quid pro quo, who are now suddenly arguing the opposite.
SO you say “yes, Biden is guilty but because Trump was also guilty Biden is now not guilty”– yeah, wonderfully compelling
No, he’s saying the folks pushing Biden’s impeachment are full of shit.
That very well sums up his argument. It’s strikingly uncompelling.
I have long held a notion of an “over-educated idiot”…a person who is at least college educated, often enough with a PHD, who has all the same knowledge, verbal diction, and social refinement that you’d see in similarly situated intelligent people. They are very good at taking in facts and remembering them. And then they speak, putting forth a very simple argument just like that. It confuses me momentarily because it’s syntactically correct and refined. But in meaning, in semantics, in logic, it’s near groundless and useless. Intelligent reasoning can’t produce an argument like that.
I don’t remember anyone arguing that.
Apparently you all were in a coma at the time.
You’re kind of embarrassing yourself here. Calabresi is not a Trumpist.
True. But he is a far-right-wing extremist, who apparently has no problem whoring his integrity.
I do agree that, when making insulting observations (as I just did, above), it is important to be accurate, and I (genuinely!!!) think it’s a good idea that you accurately corrected the record regarding the OP and his support/non-support of Trump.
“he is a far-right-wing extremist”
Lemme guess: Is it his membership in a professional society of attorneys who hold seminars centered around the Constitution?
Because I want you to know that I’m not a FedSoc member. But I’m thinking I’m probably still a far-right-wing extremist. (I have a friend who voted for Trump. I think my friend is a reasonable person. Am I stained, or am I not?)
Companies trade on a famous name on their board all the time. Unavoidable given how capitalism works and human nature.
Hunter also had some business background, which helps.
But yeah, Hunter appears to have intimated he had access to his dad.
That’s not even illegal for Hunter to do, and says nothing about Joe Biden himself.
Joe may have helped with that “impression”
https://nypost.com/2023/08/30/house-oversight-panel-demands-files-on-hunter-bidens-use-of-air-force-two/
Must be nice to fly your son around on business on the government’s private jet.
The fact that powerful people in Washington can invite guests on government planes is not illegal. It is done all the time. We can question whether it should be allowed but that doesn’t fall on Joe Biden alone.
But when Joe consistently seems to do it with his son? Who is “coincidentally” on a “business” trip in that area? And Hunter picks up a few million here for “consulting”
Stretches the imagination that Joe wasn’t somehow involved.
Stretches, indeed. I like[d] the guy, and even voted for him. And it’s hard not to feel now that I’ve been played the fool.
“Consistently” meaning what, two or three times?
The linked article says at least 13 countries.
“The fact that powerful people in Washington can invite guests on government planes is not illegal. It is done all the time. We can question whether it should be allowed but that doesn’t fall on Joe Biden alone.”
If a Veep/President/Senator/SecState/whoever wants to take their son/niece/cousin/wife along on a trip to China to see the sights, no problem. It’s not like it costs much more to have an extra passenger on Air Force N. But when the son/niece/cousin/wife wants to be negotiating business deals, they need to take a separate trip on their own dime.
That does seem best practice. I see nothing indicating it is current practice, however.
I think that is the point. Don’t blame Joe Biden if the practice is broadly used.
“Don’t blame Joe Biden if the practice is broadly used.”
Are there a lot of examples of relatives of high government officials making business deals while riding along on official trips? I may not have been keeping up, and so I’d welcome some pertinent examples.
I can remember many instances of government officials traveling and taking businesspeople along on oversee junkets to drum up business. I am guessing that many of those business people were contributors. I would also note that in 2020 China fast tracked 41 Trademarks for Ivanka Trump. Ivanka traveled with her father on overseas trips, including several Asian countries. I don’t know if relatives, associates and friends traveling with officials on the government dime is good, I just know it happens. Joe Biden is not alone in being part of this behavior.
Fundamental Theorem of Government: Corruption is not an unfortunate side effect of the wielding of power. It is the purpose of it since some guys picked up clubs and wandered down to the farmer trading post.
“But what about Trump & Sons?”
“But what about Biden and Son?”
And?
“Companies trade on a famous name on their board all the time. Unavoidable given how capitalism works and human nature.”
Is there some other economic system we’ve seen in history that doesn’t manifest those same attributes?
“Companies trade on a famous name on their board all the time.”
Yes, our society IS becoming corrupt. Does that mean we have to embrace the corruption?
You voted for Trump, you jumped in with both feet yelling ‘Cannonball!’
It was definitely a lesser evil vote, that’s for sure.
Nobody forced the Republicans to nominate Trump. They chased that evil down and kissed his shoes.
I don’t think that’s actually true. There is credible evidence for the hypothesis that the media in 2016 primary season intentionally gave Trump free airtime and press coverage in an attempt to sabotage more “electable” republican candidates. Absent that distortion of the debates, it’s not at all obvious that the Rs would have nominated Trump on their own.
That’s pretty much SOP: The Democrats pick out the most plausible Republican nominee they think they’re sure of beating, then the MSM promote them. Sometimes it works and a Romney or McCain goes down in flames, sometimes they screw up and Trump narrowly wins. But they certainly try.
That said, I think Trump would have won the nomination in 2016 even without the media helping him; Most of the rest of the candidates were pure establishment dreck or second string, and the Republican base were sick of the establishment by then.
‘then the MSM promote them.’
Democrats, whom Republicans despise, picked Trump? The MSM, whom Republicans despise, persuaded them to vote for him? Are you actual real live people with brains of your own, or just remote controlled zombies?
Yes, Democrats promote objectionable Republican candidates. They even fund the campaigns of objectionable Republican candidates in some districts.
If you want Trump news, don’t bother with Fox. It’s too sparse and muted there. Turn to the NY Times, CNN, and the biggest perpetual Trump bash anywhere, MSNBC.
MSM ratings, and revenue, rise and fall on Trump. You know about MSM and money, don’t you Nige? Democrats don’t live on love of Joe; they live on hate of Trump (and a whole lot of other things).
Weird, Bwaah left out the MSM conspiracy part of Brett’s tin foil.
Dems don’t have much power over the GOP electorate, actually.
Trump was good for ratings, though unclear if he will sustain in the sequel.
Its hard to miss all the airtime CNN and MSN gave Trump in 2016, 5x the airtime they gave any other GOP candidate.
But no hard feelings, the voters liked what they saw enough to beat Hillary.
Yeah, again, the MSM apparently chose the Republican candidate, even though Republicans hate and mistrust the MSM?
‘If you want Trump news, don’t bother with Fox’
Heck, if you just want news don’t bother with Fox.
‘Democrats don’t live on love of Joe; they live on hate of Trump’
Ah, you mean the party attacks its political opponents. My God, how low can you get.
So the media, who are roundly despised and hated by Republicans, cleverly tricked them into nominating Trump. I swear to God even those defending them think they’re idiots.
Not what I said. Try listening this time. Lots of research shows that elections are strongly influenced by name recognition and recency bias. That’s the premise behind the old political adage that “there’s no such thing as bad publicity.” The media gave Trump loads of free airtime. Even among viewers who don’t trust the media, the volume of coverage has an influence. The media thought they could use that effect to “trick” R voters into nominating an unwinnable candidate. Instead, that effect influenced both R and independent voters enough to make Trump a winnable candidate (at least, against such a poor opponent as Hillary).
It’s been a thing since the 1800s.
You sure embrace Trump.
.
In what way is that corrupt? Are you some kind of radical egalitarian that thinks that networking is a betrayal of the socialist revolution?
“Companies trade on a famous name on their board all the time.”
Saying that something happens frequently is no longer a defense for conduct, ever since New York decided to criminally charge Trump with fraud for giving different valuations on his property to different entities. The conservatives did not open the Pandora’s Box of charging routine conduct as crimes.
Which is an admission that there is no evidence of any actual crime here.
The point of the investigation would be to uncover additional evidence using investigative tools. The threshold for commencing an investigation is naturally lower than the one for securing a conviction.
Additional to what? There’s usually supposed to be some sort of actual basis for investigations. Over-hyped partisan spin and endless lies and fake-outs do not a basis make.
In addition to the president’s dead beat, drug addict son being showered with millions of dollars.
I’m still waiting for some basis for an actual investigation. Having lots of money and being into drugs and a deadbeat arguably go together more often than not.
It is perhaps worth noting that New York did not criminally charge Trump with fraud for giving different valuations on his property to different entities.
Fraud is not “routine conduct.” (I mean, it probably is, for Trump.)
We’re not talking about shading the truth with small discrepancies here. We’re not talking about getting an appraisal at $140 million and saying, “Well, the appraiser ignored such-and-such amenity, so I think it’s worth more; I’m going to say it’s actually $145 million.” We’re talking about claiming that a 10,000 square foot apartment is actually 30,000 square feet.
Throwing money at a politician’s son, in the hopes that the son will advocate for your interests and provide access to the politician, is not a “bribe.” The Supreme Court has held that it may well be constitutionally protected.
It may appear sleazy, and it is, but it’s an engrained part of our capitalist and political system. Every obscenely wealthy person you’ve ever heard of (and thousands of other obscenely wealthy people you’ve never heard of) does stuff like this. And every Republican playing it up for the rubes understands this. They’re just as much on the take as Hunter is.
What has never been alleged is the quid for the quo. What, exactly, is Joe Biden supposed to have done, for what money or favor? Republicans have already been investigating this question, and have turned up nothing that stands up to any scrutiny. Their press releases fluffing up the latest scandal are embarrassingly scant on detail. When pressed, the most anyone of your ilk can say about it is, “Well, we’ve got to get subpoena power before we can know what Biden has done.” That is a fishing expedition. Clear as day. Don’t try to deny it.
“That is a fishing expedition. Clear as day. Don’t try to deny it.”
The natural course of events in a civilized society is authorities investigating a crime in order to find the culprit. Over the years of the Trump administration, Democrats turned the natural course on its head, instead endlessly investigating their culprit (Trump) in order to find a crime. Turnabout has always been fair play.
The natural course of events in a civilized society is authorities investigating a crime in order to find the culprit.
Where’s the crime?
Here were Trump’s crimes: he withheld military aid to Ukraine in order to extract political favors; he engaged in a multi-state conspiracy to overturn his election loss; he secreted classified documents from the White House and obstructed multiple attempts to get them back.
The Mueller investigation, which is usually what people are complaining about when they talk about “endless investigations of Trump”, was an investigation into foreign involvement in the 2016 campaign. It was not an impeachment inquiry, and did not result in an impeachment. It was, rather, a rather straightforward criminal investigation of foreign involvement in our elections, and indeed found such interference. It also largely absolved the Trump’s campaign in such interference (while finding enough circumstantial evidence to suggest that more might have been found, had Trump and his allies cooperated with the investigation).
You call it “turnabout,” but where is the crime that Biden is accused to have committed? We’re not talking about a “perfect call” that everyone knows about, an “insurrection” that we all witnessed, or a pattern of influence that was observable in 2016. We’re talking about Hunter, and then a series of financial transactions involving Hunter – transactions that are not remarkable for a wealthy person engaged in international business. But what is the precipitating act by Joe Biden that supposedly justifies this inquiry? What did Joe do?
For a time, it was claimed that Joe was corruptly influenced to push for the removal of a Ukrainian prosecutor. But that putative “crime” has been abandoned, and now Republicans are looking for something else. There is no apparent “crime” being investigated here. This is an inquiry looking for a reason to exist. It is completely unlike any of the times Trump has found himself under investigation.
.
Even if that were true, it’s irrelevant. Joe Biden is not responsible for what either Hunter Biden or Hunter Biden’s prospective employers do.
But it’s not true; you’re using hindsight. Now it is publicly known that Hunter Biden is a total fuckup in every respect, and that he’s also a criminal. At the time periods we’re talking about, it was known that he had some issues, but nothing like now.
It’s pretty irrational, given that we know that people were entering into business with Hunter Biden even when Joe Biden was retired.
You know what’s not irrational? Thinking that when Donald Trump tells people to attack the Capitol and they attack the Capitol, that Donald Trump is responsible.
But here’s the thing that’s particularly terrible about your argument that Joe Biden should be investigated: that already happened. The GOP has extensively investigated Joe Biden. And so far literally the only monies they’ve found going to Joe Biden were repayments for loans that he made to family members.
Comer has so little that he was touting the fact that he “discovered” that Joe Biden had received… $4,000. During a time when he was out of office. Even if weren’t documented that it was a loan repayment, it was… $4,000. You can’t bribe a veep/president for $4,000. (Maybe a small town mayor.)
They’ve reviewed financial records; they’ve interviewed people. Not one person has said that Joe Biden was involved in any of Hunter’s business deals. Not one person has said that Joe Biden did anything for Hunter Biden. The only thing that Joe supposedly did that people are citing as a quid pro quo was getting Shokin fired, and (setting aside that we know that accusation doesn’t hold water) that was something Joe Biden talked about publicly. At some point you just have to accept that even if “Where there’s smoke there’s fire” were a valid argument, you don’t even have smoke; all you’ve got is water vapor.
“repayments for loans”
They’ve found Hunter Biden passing for goods and services for his father’s use. And the only evidence that the money going to Joe Biden was a loan repayment is the memo line on that check.
“Not one person has said that Joe Biden was involved in any of Hunter’s business deals.”
Another lie: Both Devon Archer and Tony Bobulinski have said (Archer under oath) that Joe Biden was an active participant in the efforts to sell the “brand” of Joe Biden influence. Joe Biden has repeatedly lied by claiming he never communicated with Hunter’s business partners, and there are hundreds or thousands of records that show he did communicate with them, even without Hunter present or copied on emails. There is documentation of how his family planned ways to hold equity on behalf of Joe Biden, which links to the fact that Hunter and perhaps others spent such money for Joe’s benefit.
.
Devon Archer was deposed by the House Republicans, and he said exactly the opposite, under oath. Why are you lying?
Another lie. He said he never discussed Hunter’s business, not that he never talked to someone with whom Hunter might have done business.
Donald Trump never told people to attack the Capitol. You should be ashamed of yourself.
And a lot of people, including commenters here, point to money going to Jared Kushner’s Affinity Partners PE fund as evidence of Trump corruption, even though it was founded in summer 2021 — “when [Donald Trump] was retired” by your logic.
“Donald Trump never told people to attack the Capitol.”
No. But he did tell the world how much he loved the people attacking the Capitol while they were doing it. And as Commander-in-Chief, he watched and waited for a couple of hours before doing anything to stop it.
But again: you are correct.
Trump approved the use of troops at the capitol Jan 3, further approval was neither requested or needed.
Trump personally asked General Miley and he Secretary of defense a few days before the riot: ‘do you have a plan for Jan 6th, and he was answered ‘We have a plan and we have it handled’. He didn’t ask for more details and none were offered.
Its all in the Pentagon IG report on the Jan 6th response.
You keep misrepresenting this. The claim that no further authorization was needed did not appear to be shared by anybody on 1/6.
And what Trump asked was whether they had a plan to protect Trump’s mob, not a plan to protect the Capitol from Trump’s mob.
And what reason is there to give Jared Kushner $2 billion to invest, and pay him massive fees? Should that be investigated also?
Go ahead.
Yup. The embarrassment to Eugene Volokh’s eponymous blog (especially at a time Prof. Volokh is getting well deserved press) is the style of writing and complete lack of thoughtful legal analysis, in exchange for a raw attempt to get some clicks from people living in their mom’s basements reading articles about conspiracy theories. I really don’t care who or what party this purported exposé attacks while appropriating Volokh’s new readers that discovered this blog from Volokh’s recent widespread news articles. I’d be equally turned off if hyperbolic partisan argument was published under Volokh’s name attacking the Trump family. Eugene Volokh, UCLA law, and law schools and professors in general lose credibility when garbage like this is posted on this blog. I get that Volokh probably will take the hit of this trash being associated with his name and his position at UCLA, as he is very pro free speech. On the other hand, because of crap like this, Blackman, and Bernstein, I have not referred law students to read Eugene Volokh’s blog for a long time. Volokh’s blog used to be a great source for students to get ideas for writing assignments. Now I’m embarrassed to let students know I still read it. Freedom of speech, but not freedom from the consequences of speech, even if written by some one else but published under Volokh’s name, credentials, and good will.
.
UCLA’s problem in that regard appears to have been addressed.
Hey kids, prior to the digital age, they had something called records, round pieces of vinyl, on which a record player would produce sound using a needle and an amplifier. Problem was, if the record got scratched, the needle would jump back again and again, and the same few words would be repeated. It was called a “broken record.”
Now that we are in the digital age, we don’t have that technological problem. But we do have RAK around to remind us what a broken record sounds like.
Only solution is to discard the broken record in the trash. Sorry kids.
You love broken records when the tunes are
(1) frequent vile racial slurs
(2) trans parenting
(3) Muslims
(4) drag queens
(5) white grievance
(6) trans rest rooms
(7) more racial slurs
(8) Black crime
(9) lesbians
(10) trans sorority drama
(11) safe spaces for bigots
(12) more racial slurs
That double album is the Volokh playlist. You seem to adore it, clinger, no matter how often it is repeated.
That makes you a lousy person, a worthless culture war casualty, and part of this white, male, bigoted, right-wing blog’s target audience.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
I like how number 9 is just “lesbians”. No context necessary lol
Lesbians resemble Muslims in this context — a group the Volokh Conspiracy (and one Conspirator in particular) seems determined to present in a bad light.
Who doesn’t love lesbians?
Exactly my point. Tell me if I’m missing something here, but I don’t think of lesbians of be particularly persecuted in the west. My older sister is one. I went to my cousin’s wedding in 2016 in Texas where she married her wife. Even my 80 year old grandparents had no problem with it. Like, I’m sorry but I just don’t see it.
I think EV added him just to induce you to comment more.
It seems to be working.
I don’t think Hunter Biden’s personal travails are pertinent to impeachment, but the money definitely is. The money is what was spread across the entire Biden clan. The money is what can be traced. The money is what matters.
What I see so far is a mountain of “quid”; what I would expect to see in an impeachment trial is the corresponding “quo”. If a bribe doesn’t produce an outcome, then it’s not a bribe.
If a bribe doesn’t produce an outcome, it’s still a bribe, it’s just that you’ve bribed a cheat. But in this case, recall that the outcome desired may just be inaction.
1. Give something of value to bribee
2. Bribee is a publiv official
3. Value was given corruptly with the intent to influence an
official act.
Bribee does not have to be actually influenced, or a cheat.
Noted. Good point.
Very good point.
I wish I could say that Joe’s only sin is that of an endlessly faithful father helping his drug addicted son. But home life aside, Joe has a daytime job with some serious responsibilities, and even notions of propriety. Free rides on Air Force 1 so the kid can do what?
So we’ve narrowed down things that are actually provable about Joe Biden to ‘gives his kid a ride.’ Good work.
I don’t get it. Where’s the bribe? This is only a bribe in the over-broad sense that all money corrupts, and Republicans have never objected to that. If they wanted to bribe him couldn’t they just contribute to his campaign like every other dodgy oligarch?
If it “can be traced,” why hasn’t it been?
Dad controls the DOJ?
The same DOJ who are indicting the son?
The same DOJ that tried hard not to until the special treatment got exposed.
I won’t say the DOJ is Biden’s utter puppet, but it’s close to that, with some hold-outs.
This is unfalsifiable. All failure is DoJ corruption.
All suggestions of wrongdoing is incredible and surely mere smoke sign of bigger things and surely Presidential involvement hidden by DoJ corruption.
Joe Biden’s DOJ going after Hunter Biden PROVES the DOJ is protecting Hunter Biden for Joe Biden.
The DOJ that told the IRS whistleblowers they didn’t have any authorization to follow up any leads that might lead to Joe.
Might make it harder to do a real investigation that way.
But it’s clear that if they asked for authorisation, should the need arise, they would get it. Since the sticking point of your entire ‘authorisation’ outrage is investigators waiting until they need authorisation before getting it.
No. What the IRS whistleblowers said is they were told they were NOT authorized to follow those leads.
You’re confusing that with the already debunked talking point that Weiss just needed to ask for more authorization if he needed. He didn’t actually get the extra authority until the plea bargain collapsed and they couldn’t sweep everything under the rug with probation for 2 misdemeanors and diversion for the gun charge.
By “traced”, I meant bank records, emails, check images, witness testimpny, phone records, voice recordings, wire transrers, IRS investigator notes, and bank examiner alerts. All of which we have seen, in abundance.
.
Indeed we have. And none of it links to Joe Biden.
There apparently is case law stating that payments to a family member can be attributed to an office holder. If that is the case, then we need to see if the prerequisites for this attribution are present. Hunter’s corruption is not grounds to impeach the President; but the President’s participation in that corruption probably would be.
It’s a very big if.
Would right-wing bigots throw Clarence Thomas under that bus to try to hit Joe Biden?
Calabresi goes Full Idiot MAGA.
The House GOP can’t tie their own fucking shoelaces.
Sure go ahead and do an inquiry.
BTW, how’s the current Biden inquiry going?
The GOP don’t want that to come out in public either.
“The House GOP can’t tie their own fucking shoelaces.”
Indeed, they are a pathetic crew
Is taking a bribe “bribery” ? Or some other kind of crime ?
I’ve always imagined bribery was what was done by the guy offering the money and seeking the service.
Falls under US Code 201. Both the “Briber” and “Bribee”
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/201
Thank you. That’s statutory though and I would assume that “bribery” in the constitution would have meant whatever the common law thought bribery was at the time.
Anyway, hardly the most vital point to resolve.
No, then it wouldn’t be a crime. you can’t induce me to do what I wanted to do anyway and then say “okay, since he was going to do it, I am innocent” INTENT
Billy Carter was on the take as well (see ‘Relationship with Libya’) (and some free advice for Joe Biden: note Jimmy’s reaction).
Hunter Biden is sleaze with a capital S. And Joe showed very questionable judgement in e.g. letting Hunter use state trips as business junkets; if Jimmy took Billy along on state trips where Billy was negotiating lucrative deals, that would also have smelled really bad.
But talk of impeachment seems quite premature. I’m old enough to have watched the Watergate hearings: “what did the president know and when did he know it”. Those weren’t impeachment hearings. If/when you find the smoking gun (another Watergate favorite) showing Joe was actually involved in Hunter’s schemes, then you impeach (or Joe, like Dick, resigns). But this business of impeaching every president that comes along has got to stop; it’s no way to run a country.
Do you realize that Joe the Liar has been around publicly for 50 years !!! are you saying that you just now see he isn’t Mr Clean 🙂
Talk of impeachment isn’t premature; Going ahead and doing it is what’s premature. It’s certainly reasonable to open up an impeachment investigation, anyway, for all that the DOJ will be actively obstructing it.
Ought to get some good info from whistleblowers, anyway.
The entire world is against the American right, from the media to the DoJ to our schools.
But maybe whistleblowers will give us good info?
[Brett, you can’t have a huge and zealous foe but also maybe they’re weak and dumb.
Well you can, but that’s for-real Umberto-Eco-fascism.]
Heads up – the whole world is composed of lots more folk than the media, the DoJ and the schools. Those groups are just enemy concentrations.
Obama led efforts to purge the federal bureaucracy of anyone to the right of the median California voter are nearly complete but not completely complete. There may be a few heretics still hanging in there, with whistles.
“The entire world is against the American right, from the media to the DoJ to our schools.”
Too true, too true. But Lee Moore points to a larger, not-so-obviously-situated constituency:
“Heads up – the whole world is composed of lots more folk than the media, the DoJ and the schools.”
.
Is it surprising that institutions that value education, reason, modernity, inclusiveness, science and progress would disfavor the poorly educated, bigoted, backward, insular, and superstitious?
It definitely is premature to talk about a vote to impeach the President. But since the DOJ refused to do a serious investigation, it is appropriate for the House to open an inquiry.
Exactly what I’ve been saying for months.
Impeach Joe Biden!
::writes 22 paragraphs about Hunter Biden::
Indeed. I kept looking for any connection to Joe Biden beyond DNA. Anything. But there was none.
It was spelled out in the post. The theory is that foreign entities were showering resources on Hunter (who has laughable qualifications and a pathetic resume) as a means of influencing Joe. The post was primarily directed at showing how unqualified Hunter actually is, relative to his huge foreign income streams.
The claim is that he’s unqalified, but that seems to be based on the fact that he, while being paid a lot of money, did drugs and had lots of sex, as if he were an outlier amongst nepo babies who get paid lots of money, and we are expected to believe, from the people who voted for the guy who cheated on his wife while she was giving birth with a porn star, is somehow indiciative of poor moral character, something we have been assured doesn’t actually matter any more, and which does not reflect on competence or qualification.
I mean, that’s it. He did drugs and had lots of sex, therefore he must have been unqualified.
Most would recognize that the level of drug use by Hunter would get him fired and unable to obtain employment in spite of the “prior impressive qualifications. Apparently common sense and logic arent required for the left to intelligently defend the Biden family.
‘Most would recognize’
Citation needed. I admit I’m not up on the level of drug usage by the filthy rich.
‘Apparently common sense and logic’
You’ll believe the government is so corrupt that going after Trump for corruption is just downright unfair, but that high-level corporate boards are pure meritocracies and are shocked, shocked that drug taking, nepotism and the peter principle might be going on.
“I mean, that’s it. He did drugs and had lots of sex”
Which counts in his federal felony indictments are for doing drugs and having lots of sex? I must have missed those.
“we are expected to believe, from the people who voted for the guy who cheated on his wife…”
You should look up what a protest vote/protest candidate is. I vote for Trump because the worst people in the world tell me not to.
‘Which counts in his federal felony indictments are for doing drugs and having lots of sex? ‘
We’re talking about his qualifications for being given millions by coporations, not his crimes. Nobody has proven any crimes associated with the money he was paid beyond the tax stuff.
‘I vote for Trump because the worst people in the world tell me not to.’
Save your snivelling jutifications. ‘Look what they made me do!’ he bawled.
Question: Could there be a point at which the President’s son is such an OBVIOUSLY corrupt character that the President would have a responsibility to distance himself?
Guilt by association is a fallacy.
Let’s say that conservatives’ worst accusations against Hunter are all true. At what point, in your own estimation, would Joe be implicated? How much of Hunter’s ill-gotten gains would have to have made their way to Joe’s accounts before your threshold is satisfied?
You shifted from talking about mere association in the middle of your comment.
No new goalposts.
I’m not moving any goalposts. Let me plant them firmly for you to see: the president’s unqualified, degenerate drug addict son has been showered with millions upon millions of dollars from hostile foreign powers, and people are interested if any of that money made it from the son to the former VP and current president. Clear enough?
So the stuff about Joe Biden’s accounts was not something you meant to type.
Ok then! Back to guilt by association being a fallacy.
The question is not one of guilt by association. The question is when is there adequate suspicion to justify an investigation?
The question of guilt is one that comes down the road if, after investigation, a triable question of guilt is raised.
Does anybody really think Hunter’s million dollar a year jobs in Ukraine and China are based on his talents? Has anybody plausibly described his worth as being anything other than his relationship to his father?
And for what it’s worth, I think RICO laws are crafted to imply guilt by association, because we don’t have to turn a blind eye to the obvious. Joe’s not stupid, and he *is* continuing to not only association with, but to support an obviously corrupt, law-breaking individual.
It seems like if it looks like a duck, and it walks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, and it’s a Democrat, then it’s not a duck.
‘The question is when is there adequate suspicion to justify an investigation?’
The question is, is it adequate suspicion or just Republicans screaming and lying with no actual evidence of anything.
‘Does anybody really think’
It’s astonishing how much of this whole thing relies on appeals to incredulity.
‘continuing to not only association with, but to support’
His son.
‘then it’s not a duck.’
It’s Repulicans trying to put feathers on a stick with a Joe Biden mask on top and gluing themselves to the ceiling.
Who says he’s unqualified? Who says doing drugs is unusual in high finance? Who says mediocrities don’t get showered with millions all the time? Have you anything like an actual argument to make rather than just being outraged about capitalism?
“Guilt by association is a fallacy.”
Even when it’s Clarence Thomas?
Yes.
The issue with Thomas is actual money and value flow.
Loans? Plane rides? Weekend trips to the camp?
Comparing to what Thomas got only undercuts your handwaiving.
The crime is?
Being a black conservative.
LOL
A house for his mother. Cash to his wife. Votes for the positions of his wife’s benefactors. “Forgiven” loans. Six-figure luxury travel. Five- or six-figure gifts.
That we know of. So far.
Still not up to the level of your crimes, “Coach”
That’s certainly an argument for when you have no actual real evidence of corruption.
It’s not an argument, Nige. It’s a hypothetical question. I’m looking for sincere, reasoned answers. (Don’t even bother unless you want to change your game for a moment.)
I know. Hypotheiticals and elaborate insinuations are all you’ve got.
The next steps in the investigation are pretty clear.
An audit of Joe Biden’s finances. See what went in, what went out, from what sources, from 2012 to 2023. Pay particular attention to 1. “loans” for family members,
a. Did they actually go out.
b. Were they repaid? How many times?
2. Large cash deposits,
3. Joint bank accounts with family members (Hunter) receiving substantial outside income that both parties drew from
4. Large payments by other people for common services Joe Biden used.
Additionally, bringing in Hunter, James, and Sara before Congress to testify on the record would be good.
Additionally, access to the e-mails Joe sent to Hunter’s business partner would be quite useful
https://nypost.com/2023/12/06/news/biden-used-shadow-email-account-to-exchange-hundreds-of-messages-with-sons-business-partner-schwerin/
I have asked this before and I will ask it again, is a private loan to a family member any of the government’s business? We saw that the Chairman Comer himself has done this type of money exchange in the family. I suspect that many Americans make such loans, especially to children to help in the purchase of a house, a car, an education.
The IRS does claim that it is the government’s business. Loans to family should have signed, written documentation which clear statements about interest and repayment schedules. Otherwise they may be indistinguishable from gifts which he IRS says are its business.
Loans to family should have signed, written documentation which clear statements about interest and repayment schedules.
I also get a notarized valuation of the meal I cook for Thanksgiving.
This is ridiculous.
The IRS has a de minimis amount which it ignores.
But a $200,000 loan is well above that de minimis amount, and has tax implications the IRS very much cares about.
https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-calls-on-president-biden-to-produce-proof-of-loan-to-his-brother%EF%BF%BC/
As usual, S_0 finds excuses for fellow travelers.
Engage with the comment don’t just insult the commenter Don! Why did you suddenly get so shitty?
The point of the 3 felonies a day book is not that we should all be in jail.
Hidebound formalism is not how people or law enforcing institutions operate.
“Hidebound formalism is not how people or law enforcing institutions operate.”
May I direct you to Donald Trump’s NY fraud trial?
I don’t know the law there. Could be.
It’s funny how selective your ignorance and ensuing agnosticism is.
But not ha-ha funny.
It’s not ignorance it’s humility.
You don’t know either. Difference between you and I is you don’t let that’s too you.
.
Maybe he just recognized that his superstition-addled, bigoted, old-timey right-wing preferences are (and should be) doomed in modern America, making him especially disaffected and desperate.
Don has always been shitty.
He just tried to convince everyone else that his saddle was much higher.
“I also get a notarized valuation of the meal I cook for Thanksgiving.”
What an asshole reply!
The guy who claims to be a government official just scoffs at IRS rules. What a great example to yopu coleagues and kids.
I understand the difference involved in actual policy implementation.
Your table pounding about how outraged you are about realism does not make an argument to open an impeachment investigation.
It just makes you look overdetermined.
.
They “should” in the sense that it’s good practice, makes it easier to prove the situation in the case of an audit, etc. But it’s not a legal requirement or anything.
When I borrowed a chunk of money from my dad to help renovate my house, I did prepare a formal promissory note. But that’s me, and I don’t think many people do so. (Also, that was a multi-year payment plan, not a short term loan like Biden’s. If I had been planning to pay it back in two months, I doubt I’d have bothered.)
The IRS thinks otherwise.
https://blog.taxact.com/family-loans-lend-my-kids-money/#:~:text=In%20most%20cases%2C%20you%20won,the%20lifetime%20gift%20tax%20exclusion.
Nice to see the IRS getting some support.
I.e., they’ve completely failed to come up with anything so far, better keep digging, it’s not the signal, it’s the noise.
This is really pathetic and mars what little reputation as a serious legal blog the Volokh Conspiracy has managed to retain from its earlier years when it retained it. Professor Calebresi makes no pretence of the existence of any evidence against President Biden. He simply asserts that because President Biden’s son Hunter didn’t pay taxes on his income, that means President Biden must be guilty of something.
The “sworn duty” rhetoric is nothing but absurd posturing. Congress needs actual evidence to launch an impeachment inquiry that is based on duty rather than political witch-hunting. Prior Presidents have had less than stellar relatives. Remember Billy Carter? Past Congresses had greater sense of their legal responsibilities.
I haven’t often used the word “bullshit” to describe a Conspiracy post. But no other word will fit this one. Professor Calibrisi here isn’t just being a partisan hack. He’s bullshitting. Shame on him.
This is the way academic hacks in dictatotrial regimes talk when they want to signal their loyalty, or keep their jobs and perhaps their lives. It is not the way self-respecting scholars in countries with democratic forms of government talk. It is propaganda, not scholarship.
You’re free to take your patronage elsewhere. For what it’s worth.
If course he is, but Calabresi’s OP is pathetic.
I’ve wasted little time on the Hunter Biden story because there’s way too much partisan drivel in it from all the usual partisan suspects.
But I took the time to read this one because VC writers tend to be considered, and somewhat moderate, in their posts. (If the Rev were dead he’d be turning in his grave right now.)
This seems to me like a pretty salient summary of 25 years of Hunter Biden. And it suggests that the kid is so corrupt ($700,000 in ATM withdrawals in 2018) that his father must certainly know that. And knowing that might bring some responsibilities to the father who supports him, a.k.a. the President of the United States.
Is there no legitimate question of the President’s integrity here?
Withdrawing money from ATMs is corruption now?
None are so blind as he who will not see.
What, you saw him take the money from the ATM? What does that prove?
People generally do illegal transactions, (Hiring hookers, purchasing cocaine.) via cash. When somebody is making $700K in ATM withdrawals in a year, you can be fairly sure they’re not heavy tippers, they’re purchasing illegal goods and services.
Because nobody who’s dealing above the table wants to have to handle that much cash.
And? He did drugs and hired prostitutes, this is not news.
I use cash for legal purchases all the time, even my House, the Roosh-un owners we bought it from insisted on it, umm, OK, maybe “Semi-Legal” purchases to.
And I’m guessing most people who intend on engaging in illegal acts with cash aren’t going to make frequent trips to the ATM, which is easily traceable and the first place the authorities check. It takes your picture every time you withdraw, for God’s sake.
You got me, Nige! That’s EXACTLY what I was saying.
“Withdrawing money from ATMs is corruption.”
Thanks for Nigesplaining that. Everybody will surely understand the point better with your cogent, sincere, characterization of my comment.
I feel so stupid now.
(Come on, Nige…take it…take it…take it)
No, it’s what you were avoiding saying, because that’s what it amounts to.
Nige-bot takes it.
I feel even stupider now.
Not nearly stupid enough.
“He simply asserts that because President Biden’s son Hunter didn’t pay taxes on his income, that means President Biden must be guilty of something.”
My understanding of the OP was this:
1) Hunter is utterly unqualified in all respects,
2) Nevertheless he was showered with millions and millions of dollars from foreign powers,
3) The only logical conclusion is Hunter received this money as a means of influencing his father
Further details will of course need to be filled in by the investigation, but the above framework seems clear enough to me.
1) is certainly an article of faith, both in the sense that there’s no real evaluation of his competence, and in the sense that there’s no base-line level of the necessary competence of nepo-babies at that corporate level.
2) Elon Musk is showered with millions and millions by the US government for rockets that explode.
3) No, that’s still evidence-free forced reasoning.
.
Someone should ask the UCLA law dean to post an assessment of the reputation, quality, and character of the Volokh Conspiracy.
The dean might be happy enough to do it.
Before we start any inquiry I would like to see the House Committee take public testimony from Hunter Biden. If they are unwilling to do that the House should move on to some real business.
I agree. They should hold a public hearing.
Why public testimony? Since when does the person being subpoenaed get to determine whether their testimony is public or private before Congress?
When Congress doesn’t have something to hide.
Congress has nothing to hide.
And since he has criminal charges, Hunter would plead the fifth to every question.
What would be the point, exactly?
If they thought he’d take the Fifth they’d be rolling out the carpet for his pubic testimony.
Again…what would be the point?
No questions will be answered. It’d be a waste of time.
That’s Republican legislative policy these days – waste time and money and acheive nothing.
Why private testimony? Matters of national security aside, the people’s business should be conducted in public.
First you take a detailed many hours long deposition.
A reluctant witness has to dodge and weave against real lawyers for 10 hours. Hard to do even if you’re smart and well prepared.
Then you do the public hearing, using the deposition testimony as a scourge.
This is not rocket science.
The fact is that the House can do a public deposition for as long as it takes. Hillary Clinton has several multi-hours depositions as Secretary of State. Also, the Committee can have lawyers on staff do the public deposition. That does of course mean members giving up their time for public rambling. Something members cherish very much.
They did the J6 committee depositions privately, but you heard no angst from Nige, Absaroka and ReaderY about it.
It is any committee’s right to choose how they want to hear testimony, but they cannot demand the method of testimony. Generally, that is negotiated. People testifying before J6 accepted private depositions. Had they insisted on a public deposition, the J6 Committee would have had to either the offer or skip the testimony. Comer’s committee can do the same.
That’s a really good point, except for being completely wrong.
The committee can compel testimony in the location and manner it chooses.
Congressional Committees can request testimony at a location and manner of their choosing, but I doubt they can compel that testimony when public testimony is offered. Can you cite a case where the courts compelled private testimony when public testimony was offered? My guess is the court would tell the committee and Hunter to work it out. Any lawyers care to weigh in on that opinion?
Since the FBI won’t investigate, Congress should. It should hold public hearings. They should do this even if the evidence eventually shows that Biden was not criminally responsible and the House votes not to impeach.
Of course, there may be evidence of wrongdoing; under the current environment, the Senate will never vote to impeach, even if there were conclusive, undeniable evidence that Biden accepted bribes or committed extortion. The House should then vote to censure the President.
“Congress should […] hold public hearings.”
You mean like a Republican show trial? The next one? (Isn’t somebody still going on about Benghazi?)
Why not just beat a drum and see who gets off on it?
For all those saying this is below the Conspiracy, they did used to have empty bloviators like this alongside more serious legal scholars; most of those folks have moved on, while the serious legal scholars seem to have become less serious.
Or maybe your opinion of what’s serious has shifted over the years.
I was a liberal in college. I shifted to moderate by my thirties.
Thirty years later, without any change in my position, I’m a “right-wing extremist.”
What with the “genocide” of Palestinians, the rise of “fascism” in the Republican party, the advance of the “police state,” and the unfolding “Climate catastrophe,” the only thing I think I’m clearly misunderstanding is the import of this moment.
Orin Kerr left for a reason, and Blackman came on board for a reason.
Specific shifts I’ve seen are:
-social media company should be made a common carriers
-Dems secretly wanting a full gun ban
-In general the number of stories of purely partisan valiance versus back in the day.
Those three things look like interesting points (seriously). But I’m not sure what you are saying about those points. Can you clarify? What do you mean by “specific shifts I’ve seen?” Are those the newer prevailing beliefs of VC commenters? Of VC posters? Are they increasingly the subjects of posts? (Not moving toward debate here; just wanting your take.)
OK, you’ve convinced me: Hunter Biden should not be president. Strange, though, that I don’t see an entire word in Calabresi’s post about any actual wrongdoing by Joe Biden; it’s all Hunter. Doesn’t Joe Biden have to do something himself to get impeached?
Time to trace the money from Hunter and see where it went.
Is that an acknowledgment that at least for now there’s nothing on Joe?
No, there’s plenty of evidence around it. Enough to justify a full audit
Fine, let them investigate. My prediction is they’ll find bupkis, but at least they will be able to say that Joe Biden is under investigation.
Multiple fake emails while VP used to reach out to Hunter’s business associates seems a BIT odd, would you not agree?
Also a lot of lies about Joe’s communications with Hunter’s business partners that suggest knowledge that those communications look corrupt.
‘Around it’ doing so much heavy lifting here.
I want to commend you for saying you don’t think an indicted person should be President, too bad more people don’t think that. Hunter has what about 10 indictments, image if he had 91 and still wanted to be President.
Ted Kennedy had no Indictments and ran for President. I seem to remember something about an Oldsmobile and a Bridge.
Was Ted Kennedy ever nominated?
That’s a very important point. After Chappaquiddick, Ted Kennedy had no real shot at winning the Democratic nomination, unlike Trump, who, despite his obvious and multitudinous character flaws, will likely be the GOP nominee three times in a row. If Frank wants to engage in 50 year old what aboutism maybe he could find something that’s actually analogous.
Sometimes, I think Frank is less-than-sincere in his analysis.
If legal peril for Trump threatens Republican political prospects, will the entire Biden family end up charged with treason?
Joe Biden played high school baseball with a brother in law of mine. Before now, I had no reason to suppose my brother in law was not on the up and up. I should have known better. Come to think of it, I have another brother in law. That makes two brothers in law. They both own a laptops. The both live in Wilmington. And they both have historical connections to the Biden crime family. There has to be a limit to what you can explain by pure coincidence. If Jack Smith prosecutes Trump, they may all be guilty of treason.
Other stories I’d be interested in.
On May 19, 2018, Hunter moves from his cottage at the Chateau Marmont to a cheaper hotel in West Hollywood, The Jeremy, where rooms are $469 per night. He orders an escort from Emerald Fantasy Girls. She stays for a couple days and wants to be paid. The problem is Hunter’s debit cards aren’t working and she’s not leaving without the $8,000 he owes her for the extended callout. On the morning of May 24, hung over and out of sorts, Hunter adds a new recipient on the cash transfer app Zelle, a woman named Gulnora, the registered agent for Emerald Fantasy Girls.
He transfers $8,000. It doesn’t work. A few minutes later, Wells Fargo sends him a fraud detection alert. He reaches into his wallet , pulls out a card and attempts to transfer the $8,000 but it apparently doesn’t go through. He rifles through his wallet again. No luck. He pulls out another card. Bingo.
What we do know from the laptop is that a few hours after Hunter’s debit-card woes began, text messages start arriving that are labeled as being from Robert Savage III. Savage was once the Secret Service’s special agent in charge of the Los Angeles field office and a contact card for him appears on the laptop, with a photographic avatar, phone number and Secret Service email address.
The activity recorded on Hunter’s devices shows Savage sending Hunter an urgent missive on May 24 at 6:37 p.m.: “H – I’m in the lobby come down. Thanks, Rob.”
Hunter replies: “5 minutes.”
Five minutes later, Savage texts again: “Come on H, this is linked to Celtic’s account. DC is calling me every 10. Let me up or come down. I can’t help if you don’t let me H.”
“Celtic” was Joe Biden’s Secret Service code name when he was vice president.
Did one of the credit cards used to pay Gulnora belong to Joe Biden? Was it a shared account?
Hunter replies: “I promise be right down. Sorry.”
Interesting…
https://nypost.com/2021/06/22/did-joe-inadvertently-pay-for-hunter-bidens-wild-night-at-chateau-marmont/
My only reaction to Joe buying $8k of hookers for his son is jealousy; my father never did that for me.
If you want to go after Joe, you need Hunter paying $8k of Burisma money to buy Joe a wild weekend.
You don’t think it’s at all odd that Hunter Biden was that closely wired into his father’s bank accounts?
I’m not really surprised. We know some families with wastrel adult kids; their bank accounts are pretty tightly coupled with Mom & Dad’s, as in M&D put the money in, and the kids spend it.
Having kids is a risky business.
That interests you in the way vile racial slurs interest Prof. Volokh.
That is nothing of which to be proud, clingers.
If I thought anyone associated with this blog was capable of embarrassment this would be really sad. As it is, congratulations on your next FedSoc speaking engagement, Professor! This might even get you an invite to the next Thomas-Alito Funtravaganza at Leonard Leo’s house.
On the subject of Hunter Biden, I would be curious as to how many conservatives here agree with the following Ann Coulter column:
https://anncoulter.com/2023/07/12/hunters-love-child-and-conservative-madness/
Ann’s right about most things.
Do *you* agree with her? Should we treat bastards like dirt simply because their parents were not married?
Did you recall that shortly after Coulter wrote that column, Joe Biden finally did acknowledge Navy Biden as his seventh grandchild? And that this year he stopped hanging Christmas stockings for his grandchildren?
Of course I disagree with her, but then again she’s not from my side of the aisle.
I don’t even think An Coulter agrees with Ann Coulter. She’s a professional troll.
The steady ‘drip, drip’ continues. Don’t say I didn’t tell you so… 🙂
Hunter has the drip?
You bravely predicted that the Republicans would keep going after Joe Biden through Hunter Biden? Really laid it on the line there.
No, XY.
They are recycling old drips, such as they are.
Hunter Biden thus has five children by three different wives.
How does Calabresi feel about Trump for doing the same? Or is that different because reasons?
Technically, five children by three different “women”. He never married the dancer.
You object, Brett? Find it immoral?
Can’t stand sexual promiscuity? Think the guy who does it is a skunk?
Is that right?
Pardon me while catch my breath after laughing for ten minutes.
Well, yeah, I think he’s a skunk on multiple basis, such as trying to get out of supporting his kid.
Go ahead, mock conventional morality.
Woosh.
I agree Hunter is a skunk.
I wasn’t mocking conventional morality. I was mocking you for criticizing Hunter for lack of it, while you embrace Donald Trump.
Is he a moral exemplar? Do you want your son adopting Trump’s moral codes? I doubt it.
Yet you have no qualms about vigorously supporting and defending him, even expressing admiration.
If they gave birth, no reason to call them “Women”
Giving birth will make you a mother, it doesn’t make you a “wife”.
Steve-O – this is a blog where reason, not inflammatory rhetoric, is preferred.
Here, where law professors and law practitioners congregate (with more than the desirable amount of participation by loudmouthed non-lawyers), an argument will be more persuasive if it employs sound reasoning and valid premises. Flim-flammery and gobbledygook will only get you so far. That kind of rhetoric may be useful in the political realm, where people are just looking for words to suit their political ends, and don’t care so much about the “whys” and “therefores,” etc. But here, I’d like to think a higher standard applies.
And, according to that higher standard, your post largely fails. You pretty obviously concede the weakness of your point – its being about the impeachment of Joe Biden – by saying so much about Hunter Biden, drawing what you do say about Hunter from right-wing mischaracterizations, and saying virtually nothing about how all this stuff about Hunter is supposed to implicate Joe. Too much is “left as an exercise for the reader,” so to speak.
Which, again – that’s fine when your audience doesn’t care so much about the validity of the argument as its conclusion. It’s also true that many commenters here fit that description. But you really do yourself and the VC a disservice – and insult your fellow Conspirators – when you use this platform for this kind of screed. It’s not worthy of the VC’s history or reputation, and brings the level of discourse here down another rung (from a level that is already greatly diminished from the days when it was an independent outlet).
This is a fair criticism. The scandalous and inflammatory language used in the post reduces its credibility. However, the reduction in credibility does not negate the importance of this post. The security state was covering for Hunter; at the same time it was aggressively pursuing Trump.
Did this Calabresi asshole work on the Starr Report?
Biden Inc. shell companies
https://media3.locals.com/images/chat/originals/2023-12-12/944583/944583_pqxlrtusbx1m8t5.jpeg
You’re using big boy terms you don’t understand. They’re not “shell companies.”
Typical Repubiclown move, even if it works (it won’t) we get Common-Law Harris as POTUS.
Actually best thing for Hunter would be some time in a Club-Fed, he’d have his Secret Service protection and maybe get off the Crack.
Left to his own devices he’s Jim Morrison circa June 1971.
Frank
The argument here seems to be: Hunter Biden was treated so inappropriately nicely that the ones who treated him nicely simply must be hoping to get favors from President Biden – they are bribing him through his son.
OK. Now all you need is some evidence to support your hypothesis.
It’s not illegal to do special favors for a president’s children. It’s not pretty, but it’s not evidence of bribery. “Only an idiot would look at this and believe that the President is innocent” is not evidence. “The suspect’s son is behaving like someone who expects to be shielded” is not evidence either.
I had come to expect better from the Calabresi family.
Wake me up when something actually happens. Meanwhile, why not enjoy the fact that Joe Biden hasn’t used the power of executive clemency in order to shield his son or cover anything up. You know that that is what Trump would do. Heck, it’s also what any of the Bushes would have done.
.
Huge mistake. Could it be partisan blinders?
“Meanwhile, why not enjoy the fact that Joe Biden hasn’t used the power of executive clemency in order to shield his son or cover anything up.”
Around these parts the conventional dipshittism is that every statute Hunter is *not* indicted under is *evidence* the DOJ is doing exactly that.
“Now all you need is some evidence to support your hypothesis.”
Which is why he called for an investigation. See my posts below about grand jury investigations, which is the closest analogy to what we have.
Again, no limiting principle here for when you wouldn’t investigate.
By this fishing expedition logic every President gets an impeachment inquiry off the break.
.
What
Yeah. That was a very misleading OVER-statement of the seriousness of that “crime.” (A “call to authority fallacy,” what the *government* thinks, along with a worst-case fallacy, the maximum sentence, which differs from likely jail time of, say, none?)
Hunter should have taken care of the Ticket back in Brainerd
Wow, someone is really trying to steal Blackman’s crown of “most embarrassingly incompetent partisan hack”.
I mean, after opening with the headline The House of Representatives Needs to Open An Impeachment Inquiry Into President Joe Biden at least Blackman would remember to tie his screed back to Joe Biden in some reasonable fashion. From what I can tell the argument is “impeach Joe Biden because his son is a screw-up”.
Yeah, he basically asserts “if Joe Biden knew his low-life son was getting paid by foreign entities he’s guilty of bribery and should be impeached” without explaining *why* that’s the case.
To be fair, he is saying that the matter requires investigation first.
Failure to state a claim is not solved by allowing discovery.
Stop beclowning yourself. Investigation precedes “stating a claim.”
Or, a better analogy, a grand jury investigation precedes an indictment.
Impeachment inquiry is not like shoe leather and door knocking.
Good thing I did not compare it to shoe leather and door knocking, then.
Now deal with what I DID compare it to.
So all the crying over insufficient factual predicate to investigate Trump (in the minds of the right), was that all eyewash?
You appear to not care if there is no facts or legal theory now; investigations for everyone!
Please cite where I “cried” over that.
“You appear to not care if there is no facts or legal theory now; investigations for everyone!”
Keep beclowning yourself. Or try reading the post.
You didn’t take the right to task on that at the time on here, for sure.
Bottom line your issue with my point lacks a limiting factor. If the right analogy is a simple law enforcement investigation, then Congress can and should open an impeachment investigation of everyone they don’t like who holds public office.
No, bottom line is, you are being a clown again.
To summarize the post:
1. Hunter Biden is a corrupt scum bag.
2. Hunter Biden sold influence to foreign interests for money. The “influence” was access to his father, who was then VP.
3. His father knew Hunter was doing this.
4. Some of the money that went to Hunter ended up in his father’s bank accounts.
5. As a general matter, moneyed interests don’t expend and keep on expending for the purpose of obtaining influence if they get nothing for it. Corrupt is not the same as stupid.
All of the above is sufficient to investigate, although not impeach, IMO. When you have the same set of facts about someone else, then by all means, open an investigation.
Bored Lawyer: good summary of cause for investigation
Smoke not fire? Impeachment inquiry time!
No, BL. You can’t res ipsa yourself into an impeachment inquiry and pretend it’s legitimate.
Under that standard every President would be investigated in the modern era.
That is not what has happened.
If you’re calling for a new standard, do so. But pretending this is just naturally called for by the pathetic OP is nonsense.
‘All of the above is sufficient to investigate,’
Apart from the fact that it’s entirely circumstantial, speculative and conjectural and there have already been investigations.
Correct, in the US system a grand jury doesn’t really do any investigation. Instead, it reviews the evidence brought by the prosecution and then typically returns an indictment bringing about the trial.
No one goes into a grand jury still trying to dig up actual evidence of a crime.
If Congress thinks Joe Biden committed a crime worthy of impeachment they have more than enough investigatory powers already.
No, there is such a thing as a grand jury investigation. A grand jury can subpoena witnesses to see if there is a crime.
Blair v. United States, 250 U.S. 273, 282 (1919).
In theory yes, but in modern practice a grand jury is largely just there to review evidence and deliver indictments.
And why launch an impeachment inquiry just to investigate? Unlike the individuals in a grand jury Congress already has the power to investigate.
The only time to launch an impeachment inquiry is if you have a strong expectation of impeaching (otherwise, why risk the embarrassment). So do you really think the GOP thinks to launch an impeachment inquiry, and if nothing else shows up, absolve him? Or do you think that impeaching and sending to the Senate is a foregone conclusion even though there’s no evidence of wrongdoing.
I doubt members congress Congress will have any appetite to go after this type of corruption too aggressively because many of them are doing the same thing with their own children.
Problem is not new.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
The Roman poet Juvenal said that 2000 years ago.
Aside from the drugs and such, this is all not much different from Clinton and the majority of others who have been higher ups in Washington D.C. It’s a swamp. A really nasty swamp that needs drained. Hunter Biden was messy, not dotting the Is and crossing the Ts. This pervasive activity resides in the realm of “soft corruption” and surrounding legal gray areas, so those little details can make a difference at the margins, but mostly it’s just politics or war by other means.
But for years now, there’s been a thousand times more evidence of something that “oughtta be investigated” by your opponents, or the “big there there” in the words of Peter Strzok, with Biden and Ukraine and China, then there ever was with Trump and Russia. Imagine if in the midst of all the “explosive” media reports and jaw-dropping fits of hysteria and mental illness, it came out that Trump Jr. received millions of dollars from a shady corrupt Russian entity. Trump would have actually been impeached and removed with the help of Republicans.
‘But for years now, there’s been a thousand times more evidence of something’
And yet Republicans keep failing to produce any of it, much like the overhwelming proof of voter fraud that was not produced in the court cases.
“Hunter Biden thus has five children by three different wives.”
Well actually two wives and a special friend.
Hey, who else has at least five children by three actual wives?
Which is enough to have a low opinion of someone. Not impeach them, or their relatives. Hunter Biden may be a scum bag in his personal life, but those are a dime-a-dozen in Washington.
Who? Where? Which?
They may be scum bags, but they sure do work in fancy buildings.
Government buildings are brutalist shit-boxes made in the 1970s.
The 1970’s you say? And likely not one square yard of mohair in any of them. “Fancy” indeed…
What’s wrong with looking into that whole Bursima thing?
Did Brandon get that prosecutor fired to cover up corruption? An unbiased inquiry can settle the truth.
We know the facts here.
It wasn’t a coverup; that’s well established outside the smoke-swinging bullshitters and those who swallow the swill they sling.
That’s why the GOP won’t investigate; an unbiased inquiry would not go well for them. And they’ve squeezed the stone of biased inquiries dry on the issue.
It has already been looked into. And the answer is no.
Payments to Hunter Biden between “2016 and 2020,” when Joe Biden was a private citizen, cannot reasonably be viewed as Joe Biden accepting bribes as in his capacity as president. This is drivel.
Fucking hilarious…
https://newrepublic.com/post/177505/republicans-reject-open-transparent-clause-biden-impeachment-rules
The MAGA House will not be held to an “open and transparent” impeachment inquiry because the phrase “open and transparent” is too wordy. And not only will the MAGA House not commit to an open and transparent inquiry, there’s also no requirement they hold a single public hearing.
But I’m sorry for interrupting. Please, finish your thought, Professor Calabresi.
Could somebody please point me to Professor Calibrisi’s insistence that Congress investigate Mr. Trump when he was President? After all, Mr. Trump’s children were also showered with money and had their businesses (And Mr. Trump’s businesses that he put them in charge of) when Mr. Trump was President. And it’s not like any of them (Mr. Trump included) were the most brilliant business people around. Multiple bankruptcies etc.
So where was the high-principled call that duty demands that Congress investigate Mr. Trump and his children for doing exactly this?
Queen, the Democrats are going to spend 2024 talking about how they want to make life better for the American people, and Trump is going to spend 2024 talking about how the last election was stolen, his trials are all witch hunts, he’s going to take revenge on the Democrats, and oh yes, Hunter Biden. OF COURSE MAGANs are afraid they won’t win that argument (at least the ones with sufficient intelligence and awareness to have actually thought it through). Their only hope is that the electoral college again rejects the will of the American people.
Recent CNN poll has Trump beating Biden in both Georgia and Michigan, the latter by ten points. Seems like whatever the GOP is doing is working.
What are Prof. Volokh’s trans fetish and racial slur Tourette Syndrom a sign of?
The Democrats can TALK about it, but there are now years of experience showing the opposite. They also seek to limit your freedom to move and to limit what you can do by demanding more and more usage of electricity with no real improvement in the capacity to provide it.
That’s hilarious, because right now Democrats mostly talk about how bad Donald Trump is. They pivoted away from “Bidenomics” because most of the public understands that Joe Biden made the economy — and their personal situation — worse.
Polls a year out are worthless. Let’s see what they look like next September.
The GOP isn’t doing jack squat. I mean, I guess, they’re standing aside and letting Biden bear the brunt of voter anxiety over inflation, the economy, and world events.
Biden’s numbers aren’t down because of the impeachment inquiry or a perception of “corruption.” They’re down because voters are upset. And Republicans have nothing to offer as an alternative, besides “let’s try something else.”
That I didn’t grad-jew-ma-cate from Yale Law School.
And if I was going to go back to College, I’d go somewhere not as Anti-Semitic, like the University of Terror-Ann
Frank
I’ve never been fired from a job for any reason, much less illegal drug use. And I’m not sure if getting into a high octane school when your parent is a sitting U.S. senator says more about the person or their parent. Also, Hunter is 50+ years old; a bit long in the tooth to still be hanging his hat on his alma mater, lol. What has he done in the subsequent three decades?
Would you hire Hunter to represent you on anything other than a traffic violation?
LOL. Indeed.
I am!
Rodney Dangerfield used to have a bit about sons who go into business with their dads, fits the Hunter/Joe Sitch-you-Asian perfectly,
went a little like this….. (Rodney D voice)
“….I hate these sons who go into business with their dads, “I’m in Business with my dad, my dad owns the business, he got it from his dad, and it’s a good thing, because me and my dad, we’re both fucking Idiots!….”
Frank
Never been fired? Well neither was Ted Bundy.
That is, in essence, my question. *Could* a President’s son be so corrupt that, in combination with a failure of the President to distance himself, that would rise an impeachable offense?
I haven’t staked out an answer to this. Like if Hunter were Orange Man’s son, and Orange Man was screwing with the Ukrainians (as he did) while Hunter rode with him on Air Force 1 to collect his money from Burisma, how might you answer?
No takers? Orange Man gets away with it? (Like in what universe?)
‘The GOP isn’t doing jack squat’
They’re showing exactly what they think of women who are in serious pain, at risk, victims of rape, or carrying non-viable fetuses. That’s doing something.
“The GOP isn’t doing jack squat. I mean, I guess, they’re standing aside and letting Biden bear the brunt of voter anxiety over inflation, the economy, and world events.”
Why should they step in and save Biden from himself?
Yup. And they honestly don’t get the electoral disaster that that’s shaping up into for them.
Imagine actually believing even a single percent of abortions are from the groups you describe. The reddest of herrings.
The transphobia backlash is not as strong, but it’s there, too.
There is no such thing as “transphobia”.
There is “not humoring delusions”
Even if they wanted to, they can’t do much. Joe Biden’s preferred policies would make things even worse. They’re helping him by helping the country tamp down those preferred policies.
That was the Biden play book in 2020. Sit back and let Trump annihilate himself. I seem to recalled that play work well by 3 million votes.
In which alternate universe did Joe Biden make the economy worse? Have you seen the latest numbers? Unemployment is way down, inflation is down, all of the economic indicators are positive. Name a single economic indicator that isn’t looking good right now.
From one who has been fired, I really appreciated this.
I am objectionable. But I am not an animal!
Bundy even served on the Seattle Crime Prevention Advisory Committee. I was never so community minded. (I think it has since been supplanted by the Seattle Criminal Equity Advisory Committee.)
He also worked for the Washington State Republican Party. They were probably just trying to curry favor with the women, as they do.
I’m absolutely DYING to hear Trump’s proposals to deal with wage stagnation, job insecurity, workers getting nickel and dimed at every possible opportunity, housing costs and medical bills.
Then they’ve nothing to worry about.
There are enough to end up with high-profile cases where Republicans act like fanatical women-hating jackbooted thugs for everyone to see.