On July 25, 2019, President Donald Trump made a routine phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. During the conversation, Zelenskyy requested military aid from the United States, prompting Trump to ask questions about corruption in the country. In typical America First fashion, he wanted to verify supplies or money provided by hardworking American taxpayers weren't stolen or squandered.
"There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, what Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that, so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great," Trump told Zelenskyy, who agreed an investigation was warranted.
The mention of Hunter Biden was picked up by National Security Council staffer and political hack Andrew Vindman, who was on the confidential call at the time. Under the guise of being a "whistleblower," Vindman told House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff about the call. Conveniently, they waited until September to drop the call to the press, without a transcript, and that's when the Trump impeachment process started rolling.
The Democrats' main argument was that President Trump was using the power of his office to go after a political opponent. To them, it was not only corrupt but qualified as "high crimes and misdemeanors."
The facts told a different story, and Trump's suspicions about Joe and Hunter Biden's corruption were true.
Recommended
Hunter Biden was deeply involved with the notoriously corrupt Ukrainian company Burisma. The Obama White House was asked about it by reporters and senators on Capitol Hill also had concerns.
While Vice President Joe Biden was in charge of the Ukraine portfolio during the Obama administration, he demanded the prosecutor investigating Burisma, and by default, Hunter Biden's $80,000 per month paychecks from the company, be fired. Biden held up U.S. aid to the country until the firing occurred.
During the impeachment process, this was confirmed by a number of witnesses through public testimony. Former Ukrainian Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch was one of them.
"The Obama administration was so concerned about Hunter Biden's job on a Ukraine energy giant's board of directors that it prepped Marie Yovanovitch about the issue before her 2016 Senate confirmation," the New York Post reported in November 2019. "In response to questions from Republican counsel Stephen Castor, the ousted former US ambassador to Ukraine testified at the House Intelligence Committee's second public impeachment hearing on Friday that she had been informed about the lucrative gig the son of Vice President Joe Biden had landed with Burisma…Castor pressed her on why she took no action after learning of Hunter Biden's post, which paid him as much as $50,000 a month despite his lack of relevant experience."
But if using the federal government or office of the presidency to go after a political opponent is the standard gleefully set by aggressive House Democrats, then the FBI raid on President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home qualifies Biden for impeachment. After all, Trump is a political rival of Biden's and will likely run against him in the 2024 presidential election.
Biden denies knowing anything about the raid and the lead up, which is crumbling as his inept White House press secretary shifts her language from "not knowing anything" to "wasn't briefed" on precisely when the raid was going to occur. When Republicans win the House in November and take control of committee chairmanships, an investigation into what Biden knew, when he knew it and whether he helped direct or approve the raid is warranted. Attorney General Merrick Garland "personally approved" the warrant; what was Biden's role? If he gave DOJ any pressure to move forward with the raid of a home belonging to a potential 2024 political opponent, impeachment shouldn't be out of the question.
