House votes to make impeachment probe official

On Wednesday, House Republicans voted to continue an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, formalizing a House investigation that gained momentum under former Speaker Kevin McCarthy. After the vote, Republican lawmakers like Rep. Mike Lawler of New York stressed the investigation is different from impeachment charges.

“Look, since these investigations began, we have uncovered the fact that $24 million [was] transferred from Chinese, Russian, Romanian, and Ukrainian businesses and oligarchs to the Biden family and their associates,” Lawler said. “That warrants further investigation. This was not a vote on impeachment. This was a vote to investigate.”

The resolution, which passed along party lines in a 221-212 vote, changes little for the House’s ongoing inquiry into the Biden family’s record of international business and influence. Instead, the procedural vote shores up legal and political support for an inquiry that Democrats have dismissed as an unfounded attack on the president but that House Speaker Mike Johnson indicated would be a priority under his leadership.

“We’re following the Constitution,” Johnson said on Tuesday. “Remember, my background is constitutional law. I served on the impeachment defense team twice under President Trump. The impeachment inquiry is necessary now … because the White House is impeding that investigation. We have no choice.”

In a four-page letter to House Republicans last month, White House legal counsel Richard Sauber expressly cited the House’s lack of an inquiry to deflect requests to interview members of the Biden family while dismissing the investigation as politically motivated. The White House has denied any wrongdoing.

“Your latest steps follow an irresponsible set of subpoenas and requests for interviews, directed to multiple members of the president’s family, all of whom are private citizens,” Sauber wrote.

According to Matthew Green, professor of politics at the Catholic University of America, the stonewalling is not a new tactic. Past White House administrations have made similar stands. The Trump administration cited executive privilege as a reason it would not hand over evidence to the House. Refusing to cooperate until the House launches a formal inquiry, however, is a separate argument. It’s unclear how far the House could have pushed its demands without one.

For now, Green said the impeachment inquiry vote makes it harder for the White House to resist the investigation’s probes.

“This is not in the Constitution—I’m not sure it’s even in statute—but it’s how White Houses have interpreted the power of Congress. And this is probably the most important reason that the House would formally authorize an impeachment inquiry in this case because [Republicans] have argued their subpoenas have gone nowhere,” Green said.

The House Judiciary, Ways and Means, and Oversight committees have already attempted to connect the dots on a series of transactions surrounding the Biden family with the evidence they’ve collected so far.

Documentation shows that members of the Biden family—like Hunter Biden, the president’s son—received millions of dollars through companies and as many as 20 bank accounts under the family’s control. Transactions of interest include payments from entities such as CEFC, a Chinese energy conglomerate. In one such case, a 2017 payment of $5 million trickled through the hands of Biden family associates, made its way through one of their controlled companies into the personal checking account of James Biden, Joe Biden’s brother, and then ended up as a $40,000 check made out to Joe Biden.

“You had 170 suspicious activity reports—not filed by members of Congress, but by banks, financial institutions, questioning the legitimacy of these transactions,” Lawler said.

Republicans claim that the paper trail—and others like it—is unsettling enough to warrant further investigation.

While these transactions on their own are not evidence of wrongdoing, many Republicans question whether they could have been used to unlawfully sway the actions of then–Vice President Joe Biden or whether he used his position to benefit his son’s business dealings unfairly. The proximity to Chinese influence has also concerned Republicans who believe the family’s ties could pose a national security risk. Biden has said the transitions are legitimate, personal financial exchanges such as repayments for interfamily loans.

“Politician takes action, family gets money, and politician takes steps to hide it: a tale as old as time. And that’s the tale we face today with President Joe Biden,” Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J., said in a video news release, detailing the party’s resolve to continue the investigation.

Despite three months of digging, House Republicans are left with a few big-picture questions: Why did the Biden family take these payments? What services did they provide?

That Republicans don’t have concrete answers to those questions before launching an impeachment inquiry frustrates Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the ranking Democrat on the Oversight Committee.

“There’s simply nothing there. I mean if you ask any of them, ‘What is the crime that Joe Biden is accused of?’ or, ‘What is your best particle of evidence?’ they are speechless,” Raskin said.

Raskin noted that impeachment, by the letter of the Constitution, is supposed to be reserved for high crimes and misdemeanors. If Republicans can’t identify a specific crime, he said, they are recklessly using that power to pursue a hunch.

Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., believes Republicans can go part of the way down that road without necessarily forcing an impeachment vote. If there aren’t any “high crimes or misdemeanors,” Johnson believes the party can hit the brakes if needed.

“I mean—what member has told you that this vote makes a vote to impeach inevitable?” Johnson said. “I just haven’t heard anyone say that. I have heard a lot of honest people who want to go where the facts lead them but have been very careful to say—almost to a person—that we do not want to pre-judge facts.”