A third principle is judicial review. Here i would just remind the committee about the supreme courts decision in trump versus mazar. The court said about this committee that in fact it has to conduct the investigation for a legitimate purpose. A Fishing Expedition is not a legitimate purpose. Moreover, the court in the trump case it is not a legitimate purpose for the house or House Committee to be conducting the function of law enforcement. I heard many references here to criminal misbehavior, to whether or not somebody should be thrown in jail. Criticisms of a prosecutor, mr. Weiss. That sounds to me like an attempt to really substitute for the properly legitimate proceedings of the house. Two other safeguards real quickly. One is that these proceedings should be based on principle, not partisanship. I fear that what were hearing today, which can be traced back to 2019, and accusations made against mr. Biden are driven bipartisan animus more than principle. A final safeguard is for the full house to authorize an Impeachment Inquiry. That comes from Speaker Mccarthy, not me. He said there should be the full houses approval and comes from mr. Trumps Justice Department who said there must be a committee must be authorized by the full house. That has not happened here. My concern is with the constitution. Thats what my devotion is to. And i hope all of us understand that there is nothing more serious than honoring our constitution and following the design the framers gave us. Thank you. I do want to state the fact in 2019 the d. C. District court judge ruled a vote of the full house was not required to commence an Impeachment Inquiry. Well begin the question and answer phase. We have 47 members here today that are going to ask questions. Were going to abide by the five minutes. I will begin followed by Ranking Member raskin. This week the Oversight Committee issued another Bank Subpoena targeting specific wires from beijing. Most of them have been for biden Family Associates accounts holting in thousands of pages of bank records and identified the Bank Accounts based on suspicious Activity Reports filed with the Treasury Department after being flagged by the banks. The bank records obtained this week showed that on august 2, 2019, jonathan lee and miss Tangling In Beijing sent hunter biden 250,000 listing joe bidens home address in wilmington, delaware stating it was for a personal investment. A second wire showed that on july 26, 2019, miss wang shin sent 10,000 listing joe bidens home address in wilmington, delaware. The 10,000 wire said it was a loan to beneficiary. Lets talk about the 250,000 personal investment. Looks like jonathan lee was making a substantial investment in the bidens after joe announced his run for the president in april of 2019. Who is jonathan lee . During archers interview he explained how Vice President biden developed a relationship with jonathan lee. Vice President Biden had could have eave with jonathan lee in beijing. He talked with him on the phone and even wrote a College Recommendation Letter for mr. Lees children. Hunter biden even met with jonathan lee after flying on air force two to beijing with joe biden. The beijing Bidens Cultivateed a relationship with jonathan lee and other chinese nationals for one reason only, to access their wealth. As we all know the bidens had nothing to sell except the brand, which was joe biden. Hunter biden sold the brand well making the biden Family Millions from china and elsewhere. While joe biden was Vice President , hunter biden became an investor in a Chinese Investment fund with jonathan lee and owned a percentage of partners through an llc. It was a political problem for his dad, the big guy, who was running for president. In october 2, 0192, months after the beijing wires Hunter Bidens lawyer claimed he served only as a member of the Board Of Directors in an unpaid position. An unpaid position. Abby lowell claims it is a loan from an individual. The bidens dewepters justification for the money isnt consistent with what we know from the suspicious Activity Reports from treasury. Im skeptical of lowells statement from the payments were a loan. The wire states it was a personal investment. Weve also reviewed documents at treasury that dont support mr. Lowells theory. In your experience, are they documented from loan terms and Repayment Schedules . Yes, mr. Chairman. You would see that. You would see documents setting forth the interest rates, terms of repayment. All of those. So would it be important to review Hunter Bidens bank records and see if hunter biden paid back the money to jonathan lee or if he sent the money to someone else . I dont know, using a cash years check for example . As somebody mentioned earlier it is important to follow the money. Thats very important in this situation. Thank you. Professor turley, we know what the payment is for. Influence peddling and selling the biden brand. To date we have shown the biden family and companies received more than 15 million without providing any known legitimate services between 2014 and 2019. If you include the Business Associates and their companies theyve received over 24 million. Based on evidence weve developed so far, what are some of the potential laws we should be analyzing during our Impeachment Inquiry . Thank you, mr. Chairman. I actually lay out what are the most obvious potential Articles Of Impeachment without saying those have been established but the ones that i recommend for the committee to focus on. One of the things i recommend is that the committee actually start by looking at potential crimes because ive said that in the past two impeachments. That it is an important thing to front load Criminal Acts for the reasons i laid out. It gives a very High Standard for impeachment quite frankly, higher than its binding. I said you can impeach for noncriminal conduct. I suggest starting there. As i talk about in my testimony, bribery, obstruction, conspiracy, abuse of power, those have all been raised in past impeachments. Abuse of power is the article that is very, very common. Tends to be a catch all and it is the one ive always been a little bit uncomfortable with and why i suggest you end there rather than start there because thats the article that brings in a lot of noncriminal conduct and frankly i think that you need to focus as much as you can on the evidence and whether you can establish these connections. Very good. Mr. Raskin. Professor gerhardt, ever an Impeachment Launch Evidence in the middle of a Government Shutdown. No. Why did the office of Legal Counsel opine that there must be a vote of the full house before a committee launches into an Impeachment Investigation . Why did Speaker Mccarthy insist on it and in fact say there would be one in this case . I think the office of Legal Counsel said that at least in part because an Impeachment Inquiry is deadly serious. It is again just about the most serious thing any House Committee ever undertakes. One safeguard against a Committee Acting on the basis of just lets say the party membership, is to insure that the full house is behind the Impeachment Inquiry. A dozen of our colleagues on the republican side have already called for impeachment. Im struck by the fact that of the four expert witnesses brought together today, not a single one of them argued that a sufficient quantum of evidence exists today to justify the impeachment of President Biden. Is there any precedent in our country for launching an Impeachment Inquiry absent evidence of wrongdoing by the president . No. In fact i would just point out that Richard Nixon and bill clinton and President Trump in 2019 the full house authorized those impeachment inquiries. Lev parnas sent a letter that was addressed to Chairman Comer that said the narrative you are seeking for this investigation has been proven false many times over by a wide array of respected sources. There is simply no merit to investigating this matter any further. He says please abandon this effort to investigate the bidens which is nothing more than a wild goose chase. He was Rudy Giulianis rights hand man trying to put together a case back in 2019 that joe biden had done something wrong. Do you agree that given that the evidence weve looked at over the eight months comes down to this discredited burisma conspiracy theory, we should hear from those responsible for concocting the story in the first place, specifically lev parnas and Rudy Giuliani . Absolutely. What did you think about the fact the First Act Of The Committee in its Impeachment Investigation was to reject the idea of Subpoenaing Lev Parnas and Rudy Giuliani, who are at the heart of the story thats the basis for impeachment . I think if there is going to be an investigation into the president , all the evidence, that is to say all the participants, anyone that has knowledge should be spoken to. We have lots of colleagues on this committee and off the committee who have called for the impeachment of joe biden, who also voted against impeaching donald trump for inciting a violent insurrection against the union. Hundreds of people have gone to jail in subsidiary acts under the umbrella of that insur insurrectionary process. The theory that will say i will vote to impeach joe biden for offenses unstated and evidence unknown but i will oppose and vote against the impeachment of donald trump for inciting a violent insurrection against the union, which is something that concurrent bipartisan majorities voted for in the house and senate . I cannot. I might just add as a law professor, that one of the things i suggest to my students in trying to assess the constitutionality of any governmental action is to take the names out. Switch the names or switch the Political Parties and see if the outcome is the same. In joe biden had incited an incident against the union and fight like hell would you consider that in the ensuing mayhem and chaos to be an impeachable event or not . Absolutely. To your mind in apply the law to the facts have you seen any evidence that joe biden has done anything remotely comparable to what donald trump did which earned him his impeachment in the bipartisan vote of the house. I have not. I might add with all due respect i heard the phrase biden family many, many times. I dont know who the biden family is. I dont know who is being referenced when people talk about the biden family. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, i would like to move for unanimous consent to introduce lev parnass record into this committee records. Jason smith from missouri for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. It is amazing to be sitting in your committee. A pleasure to be here. Yesterday we had a Committee Release over 700 pages of documents that came from the two i. R. S. Whistleblowers. Based on the last Oversight Hearing when they presented before this committee, where members both republican and democrat asked for Additional Information and we brought it forward. The other side of the aisle actually mentioned trump a whole lot more than they ever mentioned biden. It is happening over here, too. I think it is consistent both in the ways and Means Committee and in the Oversight Committee. Miss connor, my question is yesterday the ways and Means Committee voted to release Additional Information provided by gary shapley and mr. Ziegler. One of the documents shows that assistant u. S. Attorney leslie wolf ordered investigators not to pursue leads into possible Campaign Finance violations. We know that over 2 million of Hunter Bidens Tax Liabilities were paid off by a Big Democrat Party donor and hollywood lawyer who is named kevin morris. James biden, the president s brother, told investigators he did not know how hunter biden even knew this individual. But was later asked to thank him for the payment, quote, on behalf of the family. The biden family. The family. So how would such payments that essentially pushed under the rug the president s sons tax problems, at least for one year, be considered a Campaign Finance violation on part of the Biden Campaign . Thank you for the question. I have no idea. I thought you were going to ask me why would leslie wolf not look into that. The answer to that is probably if its a Campaign Contribution then it im me indicates political person number one and that apparently is a big barrier that had been created throughout this entire investigation. As far as it being a Campaign Contribution, that 2 million was intended to satisfy the liabilities for two years of Hunter Bidens late filed and unpaid taxes. Is it unusual for an Assistant Prosecutor to say dont look at this individual, this person is off limits . As i mentioned in my Opening Statement thats how investigations develop. The agents follow the leads wherever they take them. In this case, a legitimate investigation was being done of money that was being paid and for the assistant u. S. Attorney, who is orchestrating the investigation, to say dont look at that anymore, i think the reason is related to another instruction of hers that she didnt want to get Public Integrity involved. She was looking beyond hunter biden and into a person whose activities would be subject to Public Integrity. Since you worked tax division for d. O. J. If kevin morris gave a gift of 2 million to help pay off Hunter Bidens debts, who has to report that on their taxes . Does mr. Morris have to report it or does hunter biden . As i understand it. The parties are claiming that it is a loan and that hunter biden will pay it back between 2025 and 2027. Would that have to be reported on tax records . If its a loan, no. But i havent seen any of the documentation of that loan. That is one im sure mr. Dab inski can tell you calling something a loan can claim its not taxable income. One quick question. We uncovered yesterday that the biden Family Associates received over 20 million from 23 Different Countries if they had business ties to or communications with. They also had over 20 shell llcs where they would transfer money in and out. If you were still sitting in your office in d. O. J. S Tax Division would this web of activities concern you . I would make sure that my prosecutors were concerned about it. Thank you. Chair recognizes miss norton from the district of columbia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Professor gerhardt. You referenced alexander am ill tons warning about the dangers of Trivializing Impeachment through petty partisanship. Let me ask you, mr. Gerhardt, do you think that initiating an Impeachment Inquiry against President Biden without any evidence of wrongdoing by the president meets any basic standard of proof . Not credible proof at all in my opinion. In fact, i think one thing to keep in mind about a hearing like this or any kind of Impeachment Inquiry is the critical importance of Building Public trust. And that gets built, in part, on the basis of credible evidence. Professor gerhardt, what is the risk to our constitution and even for the rule of law if impeachments are initiated without any evidence of wrongdoing by a president . They trivialize impeachment and the constitution and they ride roughshod over the rule of law. Nothing good comes from abusing the power, whether its done by a president or congress. Professor gerhardt, do you believe that initiating an Impeachment Inquiry without any evidence of wrongdoing by a president is consistent with the rule with the view that impeachment is a grave and solemn duty . Impeachment is a grave and solemn duty. All the more reason why evidence relating to burisma ought to be heard and considered. That would actually add credibility to what the committee is doing. I would be remiss if i did not add that it is incredible that we are holding this sham hearing two days before the government will shut down. Instead of this hearing, we could be discussing how to fund the government or we could discuss my bill to exempt federal Government Shutdowns federal and independent agencies that primarily federally funded but have jurisdiction over d. C. Civil and Criminal Justice matters, or we could be discussing how we are going to provide back pay to federal Contract Workers if republicans do push us into a shutdown. Instead, we are holding this sham hearing. I yield the remainder of my time to mr. Raskin. Thank you kindly, ms. Norton, for that. Mr. Comer referred to a 2019 wire to hunter biden while President Biden was not in office. He was a private citizen, so was hunter biden. Hunter biden has never held public office. Mr. Smith referenced the d. O. J. Email from 2020 during the Trump Administration. So professor gerhardt, what do you make of the idea of impeaching a president while he is in office for something that his son did or may have received when the president wasnt in office . Its not consistent with the american legal system. Imagine if the names are switched. Imagine if this was Jared Kushner or one of President Trumps sons. Mr. Smith talked about 20 million that he thought hunter biden had received and put in the names of different Family Members. I think the Washington Post has debunked that as recently as this weekend saying it was 8 or 9 million. Lets say it was 20 million. That 1 of the 2 billion that was brought back by Jared Kushner from saudi arabia to a company that Jared Kushner created the day after the Trump Administration ended. Assuming there were no other evidence, would it be fair to attribute that 2 billion that Jared Kushner pocketed with the 25 million Management Fee every year that Jared Kushner, would it be fair to attribute all of that to donald trump because its his soninlaw . No, not without any evidence showing the president knew it. Yeah. Or approved it. The principal of american pal people are responsible for their own conduct and not the conduct of their adult children. Is that right . Thats correct. Chair recognizes the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee mr. Jordan. It wasnt just a speech. He leveraged 1 billion of american tax money and did so at a time when our government was supportive of the prosecutor. Here is what our government said. Assistant secretary of state we have been impressed with the ambitious reform and anticorruption agenda of your government written to the it supports your fight corruption. The Interagency Policy Committee said this on october 1, 2015. The ipc recommends moving forward with a third loan gar arne tee to ukraine in the near term. Even after joe biden gives the speech on december 9th, the European Commission said their report said anticorruption benchmark is deemed to have been achieved by ukraine. The most telling evidence is what his Business Partner said. Devon archer when we deposed him under oath two months ago said this. The question, the request was help from the United States government to deal with the pressure they were under from their prosecutor. You know what his response was . Thats correct. Next question. What did hunter biden do after he was given that request . He called his dad. Thats what were investigating. Thats one of the three things Professor Turley talked about. The Influence Peddling scheme. I want to go to those three things. False statements and joe biden might have benefited. The third one first. Is the benefit to can a benefit to your family be a benefit to you . It is. There has been repeated statements that you need to show that President Biden accepted direct money in order for this to constitute a benefit even under criminal cases that deal with bribery, extortion and hobbs act. Courts have rejected that. They said money going to Family Members is a benefit and i dont really see any legal basis for that. Obviously the strongest case is if you have a direct payment. But this idea that you can have millions going to a politicians family and it is not a benefit i think is pretty fall arabous. How about the false claims. To the extent the president has used the white house i think this is a little broader. To the extent the president used white house staff to resist disclosures can fit into the type of nixonian abuse of power model. We know all kinds of false statements have been made by the white house. Joe biden said that. That was false. Ron klain said the president is confident his son didnt break the law. President Secretary Gene Sacky said never spoke to his son. The government of white house staff in Executive Branch staff has been really one of the trip wires that we saw in nixon to some extent and even in clinton. The degree to which you enlist support for a false narrative or to obstruct congress can go to abuse of power. If you look at past impeachment inquiries, once again in is an inquiry to find evidence. You arent voting on Articles Of Impeachment. Those allegations tend to develop last and you look at what you have found. How about the Attorney General . Im concerned about statements he made. March 1, 2023, in front of the senate he was asked a question about mr. Weisss investigation. He said mr. Weiss has full authority to bring cases in other jurisdictions if he feels its necessary. Last week he told us that weiss had the authority because i promised him he would have the authority if he asked it. That seems to be something different. What he said to the senate has full authority, no problem. Last week he told the House Judiciary Committee he had authority because i promised if he talked to me i would give him authority. False statements coming from the biden Justice Department. There is a concern. You dont stere to prejudge the evidence to say its part of the inquiry. What i dont understand is the opposition to the inquiry itself. It seems to me the test is would the alleged conduct, if proven, establish Impeachable Offenses. Is there a credible basis for those allegations. The answer is yes there is a basis to look at the president s conduct without prejudging whether that qualifies at the beginning of that inquiry as an article of impeachment. You dont need a full vote of the house to proceed in an Impeachment Inquiry phase of the constitutional duty to do oversight. The democrats did it. Four years ago i was in an impeachment Deposition Run by adam schiff in the bumpinger in the basement of the capitol. Impeachment deposition and went to the floor to vote on opening an Impeachment Inquiry. They did the same darn thing because you have authority when the speaker of the house makes that designation. Speaker nancy pelosi did initiate the impeachment and some cases you have a later vote. I have said in any re my testimony i consider that the best practice to have a vote of the house. But the court that was referenced earlier looked at this and said the constitution does not require resolution. Actually said if you look at all the impeachments often there wasnt a resolution. It doesnt mean it is not a good practice. But the constitution itself does not require such a resolution. Thank you. Chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. I do want to agree with the chairman that the witnesses we have here today do bring an awful lot of experience and expertise to the issue. What they dont bring is the facts, right . They dont bring evidence. Harris republicans are laying out the reason for this Impeachment Inquiry as they begin to put together the case to make for impeaching in full president joe biden. So this five minute per lawmaker, 47 in the room. After hearing from the witnesses, some of whom you might even recognize, Jonathan Turley is one of the witnesses in that hearing. I want to pull away for a second. We are getting a lot of the semantics now and i want to bring in another friend i lean on. Leo terrell, attorney and fox news contributor. Leo, i want you to tell me right now if there are 1 or 2 highlights youve seen so far to drill it down to the american people. Thank you for having me, harris, i bring 30 years of legal experience but what i see is the democrats playing to the public and republicans discussing facts to the public. The republicans are focusing on evidence, laying a foundation, providing a Chain Of Custody with documentation to investigate joe biden. Thats what they are focused on. What you just had with jim jordan is basically evidence being explained about what led them to this inquiry. The inquiry is collection of evidence, documentation, money directly to the biden crime family. The democrats are focusing on the closure of the government. They are focusing on President Trump. Thats not the issue here. One is playing politics to the public. The House Republicans are laying a foundation. They must establish credibility. Final point. Documentation does not lie. What the House Republicans are trying to do is establish a basis for evidence through documentation and Chain Of Custody. Harris the 700 pages that the Third Committee that is part of this. You hear oversight and judiciary. You will often hear me. I did on outnumbered yesterday talk about the house ways and means. Thats the money arm. They have a lot of power. That chairman jason smith and his team put out 700 pages of that documentation and files yesterday that included a lot of Text Messages and emails. We even have privy to some of that. I want to share late yesterday afternoon it came out and information gained from the i. R. S. Whistleblowers who were overseeing the hunter biden tax probe. One of the more notable files, leo, of all those 700 pages was august 2020. An email that shows a deputy for the now special counsel overseeing the hunter biden criminal probe, that deputy for david weiss directed colleagues to take out joe bidens name from a draft search warrant. Because there was not any legal basis to include his name. So i just want to get your thoughts. Put that into context. Why does that matter . Excellent question. Leslie wolf, she basically directed the investigators, the people who are collecting evidence, people who are gathering information about hunter biden and possibly the involvement of joe biden, she basically told the investigators, i dont want you to make any reference to joe biden. Why . Why is that her prerogative . She should have let the investigators go with all the facts to find out whats going on. To me thats a direct involvement from a political aspect, not a legal aspect, harris, of trying to prevent joe bidens name from getting involved in this criminal investigation. I thought that was me my Opinion Misconduct on the part of the u. S. Attorney. Harris all right. And, of course, all sorts of questions about political thumb on the scale type of things would come out of some of what weve seen in the 700 pages being reported. Quickly, so the hearing is going on right now. House oversight. Led by the chairman, james comer. At the very start of this just after 10 00 a. M. Eastern we heard from the white house, they put out a statement at the start of this hearing and here is a quote from it. There are 61 hours and 55 minutes until the government shuts down. Because of extreme House Republicans chaos and inability to govern. Nothing can distract from that, end of quote. Special Assistant To The President with a similar take yesterday. Lets watch together. I think theyre doing it because they dont want to talk about the shutdown. They want everybody to focus on their attacks on the president. The impeachment stunt that even members of their own party have said they dont have the evidence to do. Harris no one says a potential Government Shutdown would not be important. Everybody says those elected officials out to be able to do ten things at one time. Its clear the democrats dont want this Impeachment Inquiry to go forward so they are playing smoke and mirrors trying to distract. You are correct. The House Republicans, congress can do more than one thing at a time. This Impeachment Inquiry goes to whether or not there is corruption in the white house, whether or not joe biden should be impeached. That is a constitutional obligation of the house to investigate. But yet the democrats do not want this investigation to go forward. Harris leo, well talk to each other throughout this. I want to go straight to representative mike turner who is talking on the hill at this hearing. Focus on trying to guide our investigation. You said that it is not criminal for a president or Vice President to lie. You also said that it is not criminal that hunter biden received someone paying the child of a Vice President for doing nothing isnt necessarily criminal. Those are my words, not yours. But you did take the next leap that using your office, taking official actions to benefit individuals or third parties to induce them to financially benefit your family would be a crime. Would it not . It is. If you take a look at some of the treaties and source evers i cited the United States has combated Influence Peddling as a form of public corruption. Much Influence Peddling follows that pattern. Many people accept that what hunter biden did was rather raw and open Influence Peddling. The only question is was the president involved in that . Im not prejudging that. But there is an argument that now that you hear that they were just selling the illusion of access. The fact is you have to ask yourself one question. How do you know . Even if you accept selling the illusion of access is not misconduct, how do you know it was an illusion . Thats why i go next. Another concerning aspect of president joe bidens actions as Vice President for which there is currently an active criminal investigation. That is his misuse of classified documents. There has been appointed by the department of justice and Attorney General a special pros prosecutor for investigating the crimes that could have arisen from this president s misuse of classified documents. He had them at the Penn Biden Center and the wilmington private residence. Places where there were other people. One of those other people happens to be hunter biden. This committee in its scope of this investigation indicates that these classified materials are also relevant because, for example, the Oversight Committee requested information regarding the classified materials discovered in the president s home, where his son has resided during the time period relevant to the investigation and personal office. The white house has not provided this information. Obviously his son was receiving payments from romania, russia, ukraine, china. If there are in those documents documents that relate to, for example, the prosecutor in ukraine or burisma itself, or other aspects of ukraine or any of the parties or individuals that were making payments to hunter biden, that would be relevant, wouldnt it . It would be relevant. One of the things i address in my testimony i say that the most concerning line for me in this inquiry is preoffice conduct. What i say is there should be a type of Rebutable Presumption against bringing in preoffice conduct but there is precedent for it when it forms. He was in office at the time because he wouldnt have had access to classified documents. These are not things he did as a private citizen. He had documents given to him. In his scope as both senator and as Vice President , there has been a lot of talk that perhaps the president inadvertently ended up with these documents. An unbelievable number of documents. He is a classified document hoarder and mishandling them. Cant you infer intent by knowledge of the law . Here the President Biden knows how to handle classified documents and what mishandling is. Wouldnt that be attributed to his intent . That can all go to a question of establishing intent. In all these cases you dont have a confession. I am not too sure if the documents matter will become relevant to an Impeachment Inquiry. I have said earlier the issue that concerned me about the documents they ended up being distributed to different sources and different locations and accounts of being in the president s home. The question is were they divided and why . It is not clear to me whether it would amount to an Impeachable Offense or not. Ive seen some of the documents as the chairman of the intelligence committee. They are of the highest level of concern and threat to national security. We need to get to the bottom why was he taking them and what was he doing with them . Unanimous consent motion, mr. Chairman. Ask consent to introduce page 131 of the transcript of devon archers testimony where the question is asked but he did not provide the burisma executives with actual access to his father. The access to his father was an illusion of access. Gentleman is out of order. You will have time in your five minutes. Is it admitted . I object. The clock is ticking. What is the objection. He is taking your time. It is your turn. Taking time away from me unfairly. Distract, deflect, disassembly. Hold onto the words distract and deflect. This hearing is all about look over here, not over there. So professor gerhardt, ive heard concern about branding. So shouldnt we be concerned about all those biden powers All Over The World where foreign partnerships were formed and influence was used here in the United States . Ive seen these towers in indonesia, in the philippines, turkey, i saw one in chicago. Shouldnt that be a source of concern of this committee in terms of influence of foreign and domestic when President Biden became president . If there were such things as biden buildings. Was there anyone who did have them . I think we all know who held. Could you tell us . Give me the name. Professor. I think you are talking about mr. Trump. So when President Biden oy pointed his son to manage u. S. Foreign policy both in the persian gulf and middle east peace. He couldnt get a Security Clearance but mr. Biden gave it to hunter anyhow and leaving the white house getting a 2 billion deal. Were told by mr. Dab inski follow the money, shouldnt that be of concern to us that maybe a Sweetheart Deal occurred with the blessing of the president with foreign money and shouldnt we look at hunter biden for that given the fact that he handled middle east peace in the white house. It should have been concern of trump and his soninlaw. Trump. I got that wrong again. Im sorry. Lets see. Im looking at i heard again i think it was Professor Turley talking about, you know, he is not prejudging, of course. But he is just suggesting that maybe we want to look into criminal activity like obstruction, fraud, abuse of power. So lets take fraud. So shouldnt we be concerned that a new york judge just found President Bidens organization committed fraud every year for the last 10 or 15 years and under the martin law in new york that Biden Organization is now subject to dismemberment and dismantlement because of the fraudulent activity . Shouldnt that be a concern to us . It should be of concern to mr. Trump. Mr. Trump again. And in this case were not speculating. A judge made that ruling . Yes, sir. Huh. Should we be concerned about the personal while were at it since were loading on. Shouldnt we be concerned about the personal behavior of a president. For example. President trump or President Biden being found guilty of a Sexual Assault and defamation associated with that activity again in a civil court in this case in new york . We should be concerned as it relates to mr. Trump, yes. With mr. Trump again. I just think that one of the reasons we are here is because somebody has been indicted in four different locations, four different sets of concerns with, i think, 81, 91 actual counts. Has been found guilty in two civil proceedings. One involving sexual behavior and one on actual corporate fraudulent activity. We dont want to talk about any of that. We want to speculate about discredited testimony from discredited witnesses like Rudy Giuliani who were afraid to subpoena. Thats what this is all about. This isnt about i need to defend joe biden. In is about their need to make sure we get off topic. That we no longer talk about the pending criminal trials of the former president of the United States and if anything is worthy of examination, that is, not this. I yield back. Point of order. Point of order down here. Mr. Chairman. Chair recognizes mr. Donald for five minutes. You will have five minutes. No, you are out of order, mr. Goldman. When your time is you can introduce something. We go to the chair recognizes mr. Donald for five minutes. For a Point Of Order they absolutely do. The chair recognizes mr. Donald. And is mr. Donalds time ticking . Mr. Chairman. I have request the clock be set back to five minutes. Clock back to five minutes. Can i make a parliamentary inquiry. Are we not to make points of order . You keep speaking about no evidence. Im trying to introduce evidence. Youve already had your share of evidence. Mr. Donalds, five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to come to you quickly. On the screens in the room we have an organizational chart from the i. R. S. Investigative team looking into the Business Practices of hunter biden and his associates. This Org Nation Chart is from 2014. In my former life i was in community banking. Im comfortable with looking at organizational charts. The first thing i thought about was a developer. Not to demean developers in america but developers typically have multiple companies that float with various Business Interests and business lines. But the funny thing is, that in the Business Dealings of hunter biden, there is no real estate. None at all. So in your professional experience looking at this organizational chart of Business Structure what do you see here . A very complicated structure of entities interrelated and give me concern. I would want to know what is going on, who is behind them. How is the money moving between them and whats the substance of the transactions whats really going on here . Is it in the interest of this committee now in an Inquiry Phase to find out all of the flow of money between these entities and what the purpose was . Absolutely. Next slide, please. For my colleagues well Start Talking evidence. This is now a slide of the organizational chart of the hunter biden Business Companies and with associates from 2018 from the same i. R. S. Investigators who were broke down the Business Structure in 2014. Does this slide cause you the same concern . Yes, it does. Lets talk about some more. One point i want to make on this. Ladies and gentlemen, i know its kind of small so i would love to submittal this for the record. I would love my colleagues on the other side to see this. In 20141 of the key owners was devan archer who testified and who was under deposition under oath by the Oversight Committee and in 2018 devon archer is no longer listed but his wife christa is now listed. When you see a situation where Ownership Interest moves from one spouse to the other is that a concern of some level of fraud potentially . I would call it a red flag. Something i would look at. Again, try to get to the bottom of what happened there. Was it transferred, money behind it. What was going on . Next slide. This is to a text message between naomi biden. Let me get my stuff back. This is the whatsapp text message between jim and hunter biden. It clearly says anyway, we can talk later but youve been drawn into something purely for the purpose of protecting dad. This is between hunter biden and jim biden. Last time i checked the father of jim biden and joe biden has now passed away. I assume it is hunter biden saying to jim biden the president s brother you have brought into this for the sole purpose of protecting dad. Miss oconnor do you think this text message would lead this committee to get further information about the Business Dealings of hunter biden and how that actually links to jim biden, the president s brother and why they are so concerned with protecting dad, aka, joe biden, aka, the president of the United States . Yes. Thank you. Next slide, please. This is a text message between hunter biden and naomi biden. Everybody knows this one. The famous one that says i hope you all do what i did and pay for everything for this entire family for 30 years. Its really hard. But dont worry, unlike pop, i wont make you give me half your salary. If you saw a text message like this in a potential Money Laundering operation or pay for Play Operation would you be looking for information related to money going from son to father . Absolutely without a doubt. Thank you. Next slide. This is a fun one. Ladies and gentlemen, this one is from 2018. This is about four months before joe biden launched his campaign for president of the United States. December 2018. The highlight is this is a text message between jim biden and hunter biden. Hunter biden was in a bad way, by the way. He was really strung out. He lost a bunch of money and needed help. Jim biden says this can work, you need a safe harbor. I can work with your father alone. It will probably take several months and everybody can read the text. If you saw a text message like this between the president s son and brother wouldnt you be concerned about them trying to give plausible deniability for the president of the United States to not have any knowledge of said Business Dealings . It is worth investigating. I would agree. I would investigate this. I yield back. Thank you. Before i recognize mr. Mortay. Mr. Goldman i will recognize you for your Point Of Order. I just want to make sure that page 131 of the transcript of the Devan Archer Interview is record into the record. Without objection so ordered. The gentleman from illinois for five minutes. Professor turley, hunter biden is a private citizen not a federal official, right . Yes, sir. A special counsel investigating hunter biden recently indicted him for various illegal acts. Im sure you are aware of the indictment. Nowhere in Hunter Bidens indictment is there any allegation of joe biden having committed any wrongdoing, right . Thats correct. Not a parking ticket. Not a moving violation, not a library fine, not a high crime or misdemeanor. On page 19 of your Written Statement that you submitted you said, quote, the Current Record does not establish any crime, let alone an Impeachable Offense. Lets further explore what has been established about joe biden. The hill reports senator Marco Rubio Quote noted that House Republicans are discussing a special Impeachment Inquiry to obtain evidence of criminal behavior that they have not been able to dig up through the house Oversight Committee. Rubio warned that setting up a special impeachment council without strong evidence of a crime could trivialize the process. He is a republican, right . Yes, sir. Lets talk about whether this evidence mr. Rubio was referring to exists. Our colleague ken buck, a Senior Member of the judiciary committee, said the following regarding evidence linking President Biden to an alleged crime. Quote, that doesnt exist right now. Now, sir, ken buck is a republican, correct . Yes, sir. Senator mitt romney of utah said, quote, there hasnt been any allegation yet, any conduct which reaches the constitutional standard for impeachment. And sir, mitt romney is a republican as well. Correct . Yes, sir. Miss oconnor, here i have a poster of an entry from your professional linkedin account. There is your picture and it says law office of eileen j. Oconnor. We printed here what you posted roughly one week ago. It says, quote, the Biden Administration is promoting and enabling the invasion. Thats what your post says, right . Yes, it does. It further goes on to say if this doesnt stop quickly, then the entire usa will be invaded with millions of militaryage men from many Different Countries who are ready to cause total havoc while getting paid 2200 a month in welfare to do so . Did i write that . You reposted it. It is an engineered death spiral. Another posting you put up on your professional linkedin account. The this is another posting from your professional linkedin account that says announcing Michigan Telethin that raise funds for 16 alternate electives who maam, that is your professional link evidence in account, right . It is. Now let me turn to you, mr. Turley. Professor turley, in 2006 you wrote an oped in the guardian entitled, quote, stop persecuting polygamists. You like en them to, quote, persecuted minorities and said polygamy is a practice with deep and good faith religious meaning. Isnt that what you said . I represented the sister wives family in challenging a polygamy prosecution. You have been cree siding for legalizing polygamy for years. An oped in the usa today you said a Utah Polygamist named tom green convicted of pedophilia for raping his 13yearold stepdaughter should not have been charged with polygamy. Now, mr. Chairman. Can i respond . It is not entirely accurate. I criticized him. What i was dealing with was the constitutionality of what is called morals legislation. I am pretty libertarian, i admit. I the answer is yes. Mr. Chairman, mr. Chairman, were counting down the hours until the Government Shutdown and we have a hearing where we have one witness who defended a polygamist convicted of pedophilia and rape and another witness with linkedin accounts with extreme views posted. I think that unfortunately this speaks to the credibility of the witnesses and the credibility of the Impeachment Inquiry. Yield back. Point of order. Mr. Chairman, when a member of the committee impugns the integrity of a witness, is it against the rules to allow those witnesses to respond to that malicious statement . Im quoting the im not asking you, im asking the chairman. I have asked for a ruling on that. Mr. Chairman, he can use his own time. I was recognized on a Point Of Order. Point of order. What is your point . My point is that the ruling the way weve always proceeding. I ask for a ruling on my Point Of Order first. Here is the ruling. The witnesses have the opportunity to address that during a line of questioning. If mr. Turley wants to address that during another members line of questioning he is more than welcome to do that. Remind everyone were on the fiveminute clock and the chair recognizes miss mays from South Carolina for five minutes. In 2019 representative raskin didnt think a house vote was needed for an actual Impeachment Inquiry. To quote him, he said in 2019, there is no normal constitutional or statutory or even the house rule for how an Impeachment Inquiry is to begin. I dont want to hear another word from the left or anyone about Impeachment Inquiry. Today well bring the facts and evidence. In 2017, the joe biden family teamed up with Chinese Company cefc to make millions off of granting access to joe biden. Hunter even arranged for joe biden to Share Office Space with the ccp aligned companies. My democrat colleagues say it is not relevant because joe biden wasnt Vice President when the family did the shady deals. Turns out thats bullshit. A lie. Hunter biden referred to access to his father as the keys to his familys only asset. Those words are going to come back and haunt hunter biden. And his family forever. Yesterday the ways and Means Committee released an f. B. I. Memo on the interview with tony bobulinski, a former biden partner in crime. Ill read a bit of that right now. The work conducted by james biden and over the proceeding two years was discussed if detail and particular cefc was closing significant investment deals in several countries during this period of time. Period of time is in reference to the years 2015 and 2016 when guest what . Joe biden was Vice President. As an aside rob walker in previous testimony also confirmed that joe biden attended a meeting with the head of cefc. We have know they were working with th