Where are the rest of the calls to impeach Biden?

AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta

Now that Chuck  Grassley has released the damning FBI FD-1023 form showing that Joe and Hunter Biden received millions of dollars from the CEO of Burisma when the “Big Guy” was Vice President, you would think that this would be the biggest story dominating the news for months to come. But you would be incorrect. Most major news outlets continue to studiously ignore the subject or play it down if it’s mentioned at all. Congressional Democrats continue to suggest that the document “might be fake,” despite a complete lack of any information to the contrary. And while the Republicans conducting this investigation have expressed their collective outrage, many of them are drawing up short of what seems like an obvious next step in the process, failing to call for any definitive action that would involve removing Joe Biden from office. Just what will it take before these people decide that this is all a bridge too far? Matt Margolis has the details at PJ Media.

Advertisement

Joe Biden is once again facing calls for impeachment following the release of an unclassified FBI document detailing how he and his son Hunter Biden coerced the head of Burisma to pay them a bribe of $5 million each in exchange for pressuring the Ukrainian government to dismiss prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who was investigating the company for corruption.

According to the redacted FD-1023 form, which was released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Burisma co-founder and CEO Mykola Zlochevsky told the FBI’s confidential human source (CHS) during an August 2016 meeting that “it cost 5 [million] to pay one Biden, and 5 [million] to another Biden.” Special agents use an FD-1023 form to record raw, unverified reporting from confidential human sources…

The White House, however, insists on pretending there’s no “there” there. “It is remarkable that congressional Republicans, in their eagerness to go after President Biden regardless of the truth, continue to push claims that have been debunked for years and that they themselves have cautioned to take ‘with a grain of salt’ because they could be ‘made up,’” claimed White House spokesman for oversight and investigations Ian Sams.

To be clear, it’s not that nobody is calling for impeachment. There have been some relatively high-profile demands showing up and articles have already been filed.

Advertisement

There were a few others chiming in, including Lauren Boeber and Marjorie Taylor Greene. But most of the others seem to be waiting to see what Speaker McCarthy has to say about it. He had previously urged caution, understandably not wanting to mimic what the Democrats did during the last administration. Of course, this situation is considerably different. Donald Trump was impeached for things ranging from giving a speech to making a phone call. But we now have records of a Ukrainian businessman complaining about having to pay the Bidens millions of dollars to “avoid problems.” And Jim Comer has produced the bank records showing a spiderweb of LLCs that the Bidens used to launder money into family bank accounts. How much smoke do you need to see before you yell “fire?”

Equally culpable in all of this is the FBI and the rest of the upper ranks in the now-laughably-named Justice Department. They have been covering for the Bidens for years and obstructing all efforts to bring what Biden Inc. has been doing to light. As David Hasanyi correctly points out, the feds were never actually protecting Hunter Biden. They were protecting The Big Guy because they knew where the money trail would lead.

Sure, it’s fun to talk about salacious parts of the Hunter case, but the far bigger concern should be finding out why companies operating in authoritarian nations sent the Bidens $17 million. It would be a fair question even if there had been no criminal investigation.

Now, I’m not saying the feds were covering up proof of Joe Biden’s illegality — though circumstantial evidence and common sense say the family business couldn’t function without his participation. I’m saying it’s increasingly clear the Justice Department didn’t want to find out if there was any evidence. No one wanted a replay of the Hillary illegal server scandal. And that’s how Hunter got his sweet deal.

Advertisement

No matter how much further evidence is produced, impeachment remains a dicey option for several reasons. The House GOP would have to make absolutely sure that they can draw a clear distinction for the public between the dubious accusations against Donald Trump and the money trail leading from multiple adversarial nations to the coffers of at least ten members of the Biden family, including the President himself. Even with that proof being provided, it’s not clear that they could hold their entire caucus together to win an impeachment vote. And if they do, not a single Democrat in the Senate will vote to convict, so it will be a fruitless effort just as it was with Trump.

But let’s say for a moment that a couple of dozen Senate Democrats grew a spine and voted out the President. What then? We’d be stuck with cackling Kamala Harris as the Commander in Chief in the middle of a war with a second conflict potentially on the horizon. Does that make anyone feel more secure? Perhaps it might be better to just allow the House GOP to keep producing more and more evidence of corruption in the vain hope that the legacy media is finally shamed into covering the story. Then, assuming Biden remains in the race for a second term (still a big assumption), if there is any fairness left in the American electorate, we can just let the voters remove Uncle Joe from office the old-fashioned way.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement