Chairman Comer has publicly stated that the alleged financial wrongdoing that
Committee Republicans are investigating, including the SARs, implicate “the entire [Biden]
family.”13 However, none of the SARs reviewed by Committee staff allege, or even suggest, any potential misconduct by President Biden, nor do they show President Biden’s involvement in Hunter Biden’s financial or business relationships.
from that earlier cited Raskin memo:
Comer keeps trying to equate “the Biden family” with Joe.
I think there is evidence enough to open an inquiry. For one thing, Joe Biden lied repearedly about his knowledge of Hunter’s business deals. He has claimed that he’s never spoken to his son about business, that he’s never met or talked to any of Hunter’s clients or partners, that there was an absolute wall between him and Hunter’s business. We know now that he met with Hunter’s business partners many times, that he met with clients, that he was on 20 phpone calls with clients, that he allowed hunter to ride along on Air Force Two to business meetings with foreign companies, etc.
Joe Biden maintained at least three pseudonymous email accounts that he used when dealing with Hunter and his partners.
Devon Archer testified that they were selling ‘the brand’, and the brand was Joe Biden.
The Biden family received millions of dollars through multiple accounts in small pieces, spread around at least nine family members. This could be straight-up tax evasion by Hunter, or it could be a means to hide transfers from foreign powers, or maybe there’s an innocent explanation. That’s what investigations are for.
But if any investigator found a family being paid off this way through multiple small payments through a collection of 20 different LLCs, they’d sure as hell investigate just on that alone. It reeks of at least money laundering or tax evasion. Whether it is or not - that’s what investigations are for.
When you offer zero cites, and cites you linked earlier were demonstrated to be dishonest or otherwise inaccurate, you can’t possibly expect us to just accept your uncited claims about the Bidens.
If you’re gonna make claims about the Bidens, link to the SPECIFIC documents, and the SPECIFIC words, you think support these claims. Otherwise you’re offering nothing.
You’re moving too fast for me. I do not agree with the proposition, if you are making it, that
If there is evidence that President Biden lied about his knowledge of or involvement in his son’s affairs, the House should open an impeachment inquiry.
Nor do I agree that evidence of pseudonymous email accounts is sufficient.
If you have the patience, could you please try and take it one step at a time, and start with a proposition we can agree on? This is the final argument form I’m looking for,
If there is evidence that President Biden [insert term here], then the House should open an impeachment inquiry.
This link provides evidence that President Biden [insert term here]: [insert link to evidence]
Therefore, the House should open an impeachment inquiry.
Devon Archer also testified that business was never discussed with Joe.
“The Biden family” is not Joe. There is no evidence that Joe received any of that money. The LLC’s were not shell companies; they were set up to handle these no-evidence-they-were-illegal payments. The Trump family has dozens, if not hundreds, of LLC’s set up.
You are inferring that business was discussed despite testimony to the contrary, but no evidence of any such discussions have been offered. Supposition is not grounds for an investigation.
Devon Archer and Hunter may well have implied connections that did not exist to sell their business. Unless the is actually something to suggest such a connection existed, it is innuendo.
This is the Fox “News” playbook: a string of supposition and implications to tailor a narrative of malfeasance while implying, but never presenting, purported damning evidence.
Based on your summary, it seems like a lot. Did we read the same cite? It was quite lengthy and basically addressed and debunked the stuff you’re relying on as evidence. It was the first Rankin link in the thread.
That cite and yours cannot be reconciled. Somebody is lying, either the details provided in the cite I mentioned or your sources.
Did you miss the part where Congressman Raskin’s memo points out that many of the 170 SARs were filed in response to media reports about Hunter or Vice President Biden, or some of Hunter Biden’s business associates?
In other words, media coverage of unfounded accusations about the Biden family creates SARs about financial transactions involving the Biden family, which then are used to create new unfounded accusations. How many of these are in this category? The Raskin memo doesn’t say, but certainly Comer hasn’t either.
I’ve gotta admire the self-licking ice cream cone aspect of it, but as far as finding out the quote truth of the matter unquote, the sheer number of SARs and the comparison to how many the “average American” generates is pretty specious.
