House Republicans, who are leading the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, still plan to invite Hunter Biden to testify at a public hearing, although sources familiar with their planning said the two sides have not worked on setting a date.
Hunter Biden initially refused to appear before the committee behind closed doors and insisted that the hearing be held in public. But after Republicans voted to formally authorize an impeachment inquiry and amid threats of a congressional contempt vote, the president's son's lawyers agreed to arrange his testimony.
Despite conflicting opinions on the effectiveness of closed depositions, the commission's chairmen continue to publicly support holding public hearings in the near future.
Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, Ky., argued that there were “inconsistent” aspects of Hunter Biden's deposition that should be aired in a public setting. Comer is leading the impeachment inquiry along with Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman R-Moy.
“Parts of Hunter Biden's testimony are inconsistent with the testimony of other witnesses,” Comer said in a statement. “It is clear that we need public hearings to get the truth out for the American people.”
Comer similarly said he heard “some conflicting statements that I think need further review” after the president's brother James Biden testified before the committee in early February, a sign that the two Biden family members who testified nor did they provide the commission with anything that directly substantiated their claims, so their best chance of success was to attempt to distort their testimony.
Attorneys for the White House and Hunter Biden did not immediately return requests for comment.
Members of the Comey panel and other House Republicans are skeptical that Hunter Biden's second appearance will be effective, and there is a growing sense in the caucus that the investigation has been stymied, making impeachment of the president unlikely.
“I don't care if he shows up or not,” said Rep. Troy Nels, R-Texas, a member of the Judiciary Committee. “I think we put the case there.”
The full transcript released by the committee reveals Hunter Biden has clashed with House Republicans on a wide range of issues. He has repeatedly countered their attacks on his personal life and defended his business history. At one point, he referred a series of questions about drug use to Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla.
Member of the Scrutiny Committee, Nick Langworthy MP, RN. .
“I think there's going to be a lot of street theater at that point,” Langworthy said, adding that he didn't find Hunter very close behind closed doors and didn't expect the public hearing to be more open.
“He was, as you know, extremely careful about what he said yesterday, and terribly restrained,
Democrats on the committee appear to agree that holding a public hearing with Hunter Biden would not add much value, but have also vowed not to block its progress.
“I don't see any particular purpose in doing this, given that President Comer has not wanted it done for a long time. I mean, it's a waste of everyone's time. It's a waste of taxpayers' money,” said Jamie Raskin MP, ranking member of the Scrutiny Committee. But “if it's something the parties have agreed to, we'll have no objection to it, because I suppose the whole country can see what a ridiculous waste of time this circus has been.”
The controversy over the value of public hearings for the president's son extends to perceptions of the investigation in general. A January YouGov/UMass Amherst poll found that 59% of respondents said the House should definitely or probably not impeach the president.
Even pro-impeachment Republicans like Nels are not convinced that a vote on articles of impeachment will ever pass the full House.
“Where there's smoke there's fire, but I think Americans right now are more concerned about the borders, the economy and the endless wars that we have under this administration,” he said.
U.S. Rep. Tim Burchett, also a member of the House of Representatives, supports making the articles of impeachment public, but doubts they will ever pass.
“I think the base demands that we move forward with this. It's just a numbers game. If there is a will, there is a way, and I don't think there is a will,” said Burchet.
Meanwhile, impeachment committees appear to be extending their investigation into the president in the hope they can uncover more evidence.
After the special counsel investigating the president's handling of classified documents declined to file charges, Republicans demanded documents related to the investigation. Republican chairmen followed up on the request last week by subpoenaing special counsel Robert Hurr for more information, even though he had already agreed to testify publicly before Congress on March 12.
Democrats believe it is long past time to end the investigation.
“It's time for Republicans to finally put this to bed,” said Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., a member of the House Oversight Committee. our border needs, Ukraine's needs, Taiwan's needs, the Middle East needs and stop this bogus impeachment that's going on and it's gone exactly what we've said all along. Nowhere”:
Other Republicans warn that moving forward with the vote could backfire.
“There's nothing that's come up so far that makes me think this thing is close to being ready for a vote, which means I haven't seen any impeachable crimes,” said Rep. Garrett Graves, R-La.
Graves warned that moving forward risks “cheapening” impeachment.
“Does it stink? Is there smoke around? Yes,” he said. “Have I seen a fire and flagrant violations of the law or anything remotely close to impeachment again? No, about the president.”
Source link
Leave a Comment