The Biden Impeachment Inquiry

 (Note.  The House has opened up an impeachment "inquiry" into President Joe Biden.  In the 9/3/23 post, "Meanwhile, Back at the Bidens..." I discussed some of the facts that should warrant further inquiry - even by the D-MSM.  Things like Hunter flying to China with his father multiple times, Hunter setting up numerous shell corporations, Joe having multiple anonymous email accounts, Hunter collecting millions of dollars from foreign countries while his father was VP.  And what may have continued even after Joe Biden was elected president.  Although, I just heard today from someone on the left with no interest in any of those matters.  So let's see what the conservative media thinks.)

"...even if he (Joe Biden) never received a nickel from his son's businesses, his cooperation in Hunter's selling of the Biden brand was corrupt.  Ditto for President Biden's Justice Department, which repeatedly sabotaged the federal investigation into Hunter."  And:  "It's disingenuous to argue there's no evidence while you are working overtime to thwart any attempt to find evidence."  (From an Op-Ed by William McGurn in the 9/12/23 Wall Street Journal.)   

McGurn goes on to discuss evidence uncovered by the House committees investigating Biden.  "This includes learning that Joe Biden lied during the 2020 debates when he categorically denied Hunter was paid millions from China and said the laptop was Russian disinformation.  And that the then-vice president had dinners with his son's business partners, and spoke to them on speaker-phone when Hunter called."  I understand that an argument can be made that a president may not be impeached over acts done prior to assuming office.  I question whether that should apply to lies covering up possible corruption while campaigning for that office.  

 After noting that House Oversight Chairman, James Comer, was a banker, Kimberley Strassel told us that "His team started by going through the U.S. Treasury's 'suspicious activity reports' related to the Biden family (including Hunter and his uncle James) or Biden associates."  According to Strassel, these reports are generated "when they see a transaction fishy enough to suggest possible illegal activity."  While acknowledging that banks may over-report such transactions, she asks how many such reports the average American, even top business people, might generate.  "Hunter and his pals racked up 170."  (From Strassel's Op-Ed in the 9/15/23 WSJ.)

Strassel:  bank records allowed Comer's committee "to nail down the many shady sources of some $20 million in foreign payments - Ukrainian energy firm Burisma, a Chinese entity, Russian oligarchs, Kazakh and Romanian businessmen.  It also allowed them to document how money flowed first to Hunter associates, then on to Hunter via more shell companies."  If these allegations are proven to be true, it would seem to me that what we are talking about might be the largest case of government corruption in US history.  Bigger than Teapot Dome.  

But, as Strassel opines:  "The White House (and the media) keep changing the definition of what counts as Joe Biden's culpability in aiding his son's influence peddling, and have now settled on the line that there is no evidence 'directly linking' Hunter's business dealings with his dad."  Sadly, there is no reason to expect better from the D-MSM.  There is no reason to expect the type of investigative journalism that would likely occur if the people involved had the last name Trump.    

In their lead editorial in the 9/13/23 edition of the paper, the WSJ made it clear that they were not fans of endless impeachments.  But they did tell us this:  "Some $20 million has already been found to have gone to Biden family members and associates via shell companies.  Shell companies are what you use when you don't want anyone to know what you are doing."  Indeed.

The Democratic Party - Mainstream Media Complex

(Note.  Over the course of this blog, I have done many posts, in whole or in part, discussing the "bias" of the mainstream media.  But that was not entirely accurate, because it far more significant than bias.  At the beginning of the 8/20/23 post "I'm Sick Of It!  Part II," I begin with a discussion of the Democratic Party - Mainstream Media Complex (hereafter, referred to as the D-MSM).  If anyone still has doubt that this is real, read further.  And, if you do not believe that the D-MSM is a threat to our democracy, then I would like to hear from you.)

I, for one, would like to know how it became the business of the White House Counsel's Office to instruct the media about what they should investigate and write about.  But here is what Ian Sams of that office wrote in a letter to executives at various news organizations, including CNN, The New York Times, Fox News, the Associated Press, CBS and other news outlets:

"It's time for the media to ramp up its scrutiny of House Republicans for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies."  Sams thought it was appropriate to write this the day after House Speaker Kevin McCarthy announced an impeachment inquiry to President Biden.  Anybody else curious as to whether the letter was sent on Biden's instructions?  And no, all this information is not from Fox.  It is from CNN.  Is this Biden attempting to stay above the fray, and having his attack dogs in the D-MSM do the fighting for him?  Thank you, Mr. Sams, for letting us know that all the allegations against President Biden are lies.  

Here is more from Sams:  "Covering impeachment as a process story - Republicans say X, but the White House says Y - is a disservice to the American public who relies on the independent press to hold those in power accountable."  Sams is telling the D-MSM not only to fight for the WH, but how to do it.  And it is clear that he does not want to see or hear any allegations against Biden put forth in the D-MSM.  Because that would be a disservice to the American people to actually print both sides.  For Mr. Sams, printing both sides is not something an "independent press" should do.  Oh.  On the other hand, I do recall prior to the 2020 election, the New York Times Sunday Opinion section printed 10 pages of Op-Eds against Trump, but could not find the space for one pro-Trump article. 

Sams:  "And in the modern media environment, where every day liars and hucksters peddle disinformation and lies everywhere from Facebook to Fox, process stories that fail to unpack the illegitimacy of the claims on which House Republicans are basing their actions only serve to generate confusion, put false premises in people's feeds, and obscure the truth."  Let's see.  Fox is disinformation.  If it were not for Fox, we would not be able to see the thousands of people illegally entering our southern border every week.  Although, squad member Ayanna Pressley (not the first Dem to do so) just told us that the border is secure.  You going to believe her, or your lying eyes?  I wonder where she thinks all those "migrants" flooding our cities came from.  

Sams is also telling the D-MSM that the claims of the House Republicans are "illegitimate."  In case the D-MSM had any doubt about what the WH expected of them.  Think about that, as it bears repeating.  The White House (that's Joe Biden) is telling the D-MSM what to do and what to think.  That should disturb everyone.  As if on cue, the writer of this CNN article ended with this:  "The Republican House-led investigations into Biden have yet to provide any direct evidence that the president financially benefitted from Hunter Biden's career overseas." 

I don't think the White House needs to worry.  It is clear that the D-MSM has no interest in asking any questions about Biden's relationship with Hunter's business pals.  No curiosity whatsoever.  Thankfully, the conservative media is willing to ask those questions - see the next post.