Connect with us

Published

on

Joe Biden used his influence to make money for his family and tried to hide it, claimed Republicans in the first hearing of their impeachment inquiry.

James Comer, the Oversight Committee chairman, said there was “a mountain of evidence” showing he “abused his public office for his family’s financial gain”.

“This is a tale as old as time,” added another Republican, Jim Jordan.

“Politician takes action that makes money for his family and then he tries to conceal it.”

Despite the claims, nothing has proven that Mr Biden abused his position during his eight years as vice president.

The White House has said the impeachment investigation is baseless and politically motivated ahead of next year’s likely election showdown with Donald Trump.

A forensic accountant, a former Justice Department official and two law professors appeared at Thursday’s session – but nobody with direct knowledge of the allegations.

More on Hunter Biden

Professor Jonathan Turley, an impeachment expert called by the Republicans, said the threshold for an inquiry had been passed but there was not enough to impeach.

“I do not believe that the current evidence would support articles of impeachment,” Professor Turley said.

The House Oversight and Accountability Committee holds an impeachment inquiry hearing into U.S. President Joe Biden, focused on his son Hunter Biden's foreign business dealings, on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., September 28, 2023. REUTERS/Jim Bourg
Image:
The House of Representatives Oversight Committee is conducting the inquiry

Forensic accountant Bruce Dubinsky backed up that assessment.

Another law professor and Democrat witness, Michael Gerhardt, said the evidence wasn’t even sufficient for an inquiry.

“A fishing expedition is not a legitimate purpose,” he told the hearing.

Republicans claim Mr Biden and his family profited from policies he pursued between 2009 to 2017 and that son Hunter took advantage of his father’s name.

Hunter Biden cashed in by arranging access to Joe Biden, the family brand,” Mr Comer told the hearing.

Central to the probe are allegations Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire a top prosecutor to stop an investigation into Burisma, an energy firm his son was on the board of.

However, multiple foreign and US officials have said he was only pursuing official policy to fight corruption in pre-war Ukraine.

Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH) speaks as he attends a House Oversight and Accountability Committee impeachment inquiry hearing into U.S. President Joe Biden, focused on his son Hunter Biden's foreign business dealings, on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., September 28, 2023. REUTERS/Jim Bourg
Image:
Republican representative Jim Jordan alleged it was an age-old tale of corruption

Read more:
Biden impeachment process – what you need to know
Biden’s dog bites another Secret Service agent

It is also claimed the Justice Department interfered with a tax investigation into Hunter Biden – who is set to plead not guilty to a gun charge next month and has struggled with drugs in the past.

Ahead of the hearing, Republicans released documents detailing money transfers from a Chinese businessman to Hunter Biden in 2019 – in which he put his father’s address on the form.

Republicans claimed it showed a definite link to the president.

U.S. President Joe Biden and son Hunter Biden disembark from Air Force One at Hancock Field Air National Guard Base in Syracuse, New York, U.S., February 4, 2023. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
Image:
Joe Biden and son Hunter Biden in February 2023

A lawyer for Hunter Biden said the money was a loan and that he had put down his father’s address because it was on his driving licence and his only permanent residence at the time.

“Once again Rep Comer peddles lies to support a premise – some wrongdoing by Hunter Biden or his family – that evaporates in thin air the moment facts come out,” said lawyer Abbe Lowell.

‘No smoking gun’

“If Republicans had a smoking gun or even a dripping water pistol they would be presenting it today. But they’ve got nothing,” said Jamie Raskin, the hearing’s top Democrat.

It’s unclear if Republicans, who have a slim majority in the House of Representatives, would have enough votes at the end of the inquiry to move forward with the impeachment process.

Political theatre – but there’s a hole in the script

Impeachment isn’t what it used to be.

Once a political nuclear weapon deployed on matters of grave consequence, it’s now the water pistol they can’t put down.

It’s the new politics on Capitol Hill, and its pursuit of Joe Biden paints the picture of a then vice-president abusing the powers of office – of using his position and influence to support his son’s business ventures in an effort to fill the family coffers.

As allegations, they reek of corruption. They would reek rather more if there was hard evidence behind them.

But in this act of political theatre, that’s the hole in the script.

There has been no paper trail produced, no recording, no first-hand eyewitness testimony that makes the link between dodgy business dealings and active participation by Joe Biden.

It is a shaky platform on which to build a case for impeachment. But, of course, this process of impeachment is about more than impeachment itself. It’s politics.

This hearing, and those to follow, lend traction to discussion around Biden and the whiff of corruption.

To some degree, it orientates the public gaze away from the legal travails of Donald Trump – creates an equivalence, false or not, between his behaviour and that of Joe Biden.

That will suit Republicans in the run-up to November 2024 – it doesn’t take a cynic to see a campaign strategy.

Even if the vote did go their way, it’s extremely unlikely the Senate – where Democrats hold a majority – would vote to remove Mr Biden from power.

Donald Trump was impeached twice during his presidency – one of them for allegedly allegedly pressuring Ukraine to investigate Biden ahead of the 2020 election.

He was acquitted both times by the Senate.

The impeachment hearing comes as House Republicans face off against Democrats over government funding for the fiscal year starting on 1 October.

Large parts of the government will shut down if they cannot agree.

Democrat Jamie Raskin scolded the panel: “We’re 62 hours away from shutting down the government of the United States of America and Republicans are launching an impeachment drive, based on a long debunked and discredited lie.”

Continue Reading

US

Trump signs bill to end shutdown – but doesn’t take questions after Epstein files released

Published

on

By

Trump signs bill to end shutdown - but doesn't take questions after Epstein files released

The US federal government’s longest-ever shutdown has come to an end after Donald Trump signed off a congressional vote with his presidential approval.

But the president was in no mood to field questions from the media after hailing the long-awaited funding bill, which he signed just hours after thousands of files related to Jeffrey Epstein – in which he was referenced – were released.

As it happened: Trump ends shutdown after Epstein files released

Mr Trump has always denied any wrongdoing in relation to the deceased billionaire paedophile, and said in a Truth Social post after their release that the “Jeffrey Epstein hoax” is a “trap” set by Democrats.

His appearance in the Oval Office came after the House of Representatives voted to reopen the government, after the Senate – the upper chamber of Congress – reached a deal on Monday.

The breakthrough came when a handful of Democrat senators rebuffed their party’s leadership – who’d spent weeks pushing for guarantees on healthcare subsidies – and teamed up with Republicans.

The deal then went to the president, who signed it into law.

“It’s a great day,” he declared, as he blamed Democrats for the 43-day shutdown that left federal workers without pay, food aid undelivered, air travel disrupted, and museums closed.

But the big media moment from behind the historic White House Resolute desk was short and sweet – with Mr Trump, unusually, taking no questions from journalists.

The bill will see the federal government funded until 30 January. Pic: AP
Image:
The bill will see the federal government funded until 30 January. Pic: AP

What’s in the latest Epstein files?

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee initially published several emails which they said “raises questions about Trump and Epstein’s relationship, Trump’s knowledge of Epstein’s crimes” and the president’s relationship to Epstein’s victims.

White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the “selectively leaked emails” were an attempt to “create a fake narrative to smear President Trump”. He has consistently denied any involvement or knowledge about Epstein’s sex trafficking operation.

It prompted Republicans to retaliate by releasing more than 20,000 pages from Epstein’s files and accusing Democrats of “cherry-picking” their documents.

Read more: What Epstein emails say about Trump

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The Epstein files: The main things you need to know

Epstein took his own life in prison in 2019 following a conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor, for which he was registered as a sex offender. He was awaiting a trial for sex trafficking charges.

In his Truth Social post, Mr Trump said the release of the latest files were a “deflection” from the shutdown.

Trump and the Epstein questions that will not go away

For years, Trump promised to declassify all Epstein-related files – a pledge positioning him as a truth-teller exposing elite corruption.

Now that others are releasing those materials first, the image that helped return him to the White House takes a hit.

Instead of leading the charge, he’s reacting to it, and among his base, there are many who remain convinced of an Epstein-related cover-up.

Legally, there is nothing new here pointing to liability, but reputationally, this is dangerous terrain for the president.

But he has weathered much worse – his survival often relies on turning scandal into proof of persecution.

That explains why the White House is doubling down on its claim that Democrats are releasing selective documents to the “liberal media” to smear Donald Trump.

The shutdown, which started on 1 October, has disrupted the lives of millions of Americans as all non-essential parts of government have been frozen.

It was the first shutdown in almost seven years.

As he put pen to paper, the president accused the Democrats of an “extortion” attempt over their push for healthcare subsidies – provided under the Affordable Care Act brought in by Barack Obama – to be extended.

“Republicans never wanted a shutdown,” he said.

“It’s cost the country $1.5trn,” he added.

Continue Reading

US

What do Epstein documents say about Trump, Andrew and Mandelson?

Published

on

By

What do Epstein documents say about Trump, Andrew and Mandelson?

Thousands of documents from disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein have been released, which reference Donald Trump, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and Peter Mandelson among others.

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee initially published several emails which they said “raises questions about Trump and Epstein’s relationship, Trump’s knowledge of Epstein’s crimes” and the president’s relationship to Epstein’s victims.

White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the “selectively leaked emails” were an attempt to “create a fake narrative to smear President Trump”. He has consistently denied any involvement or knowledge about Epstein’s sex trafficking operation.

Trump latest: 20,000 pages published in response to ‘leak’

Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein in 1992. Pic: NBC
Image:
Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein in 1992. Pic: NBC

It prompted Republicans to retaliate by releasing more than 20,000 pages from Epstein’s files and accusing Democrats of “cherry-picking” their documents.

Here’s what the emails say…

:: Epstein discusses Trump

Three messages, dated between 2011 and 2019, are between Jeffrey Epstein and his sex trafficking co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell and between Epstein and author Michael Wolff.

In the first exchange of emails, between Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, dated 2 April 2011, Epstein wrote:

i want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.. Virginia spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned. police chief. etc. im 75% there

Maxwell responded:

I have been thinking about that…

The name Virginia, refers to Virginia Giuffre, a prominent Epstein survivor who died in April and had never accused Mr Trump of wrongdoing.

Ms Giuffre made allegations of three sexual encounters with Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, who was stripped of his prince title, in her autobiography which was released last month – allegations Andrew has denied.

In the second exchange of emails, between Epstein and Michael Wolff, a journalist who has written several books about the Trump administration, dated 31 January 2019, Epstein wrote:

[REDACTED NAME] worked at mara lago. . she was the one that accused prince andrew. . trump said me to resign, never a member ever.. of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop

The third email exchange, between Epstein and Wolff, dated between 15 and 16 December 2015 shows that Wolff wrote:

I hear CNN planning to ask Trump tonight about his relationship with you–either on air or in scrum afterwards.

Epstein replied:

if we were able to craft an answer for him, what do you think it should be?

Wolff responded:

I think you should let him hang himself. If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency. You can hang him in a way that potentially generates a positive benefit for you, or, if it really looks like he could win, you could save him, generating a debt. Of course, it is possible that, when asked, he’ll say Jeffrey is a great guy and has gotten a raw deal and is a victim of political correctness, which is to be outlawed in a Trump regime.

Responding to the release of emails, Mr Wolff posted a video on Instagram: “I have been trying to talk about this story for a very long time now and perhaps we’re getting close to the smoking gun.

“These two men… had the closest of relationships for more than a decade.”

:: Andrew included in Epstein emails

In several email exchanges, Epstein refers to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and a picture of him with victim Virginia Giuffre.

A photo emerged in 2011 of Andrew, which has become infamous, showing the former prince with his arm around Virginia Giuffre, apparently taken in Ghislaine Maxwell’s London home.

The former duke, who was recently stripped of his titles, has previously said he didn’t recall meeting Ms Giuffre and claimed an image of the pair could have been doctored.

Although the name of the “girl” is redacted, Epstein appears in his email exchange to be referring to Ms Giuffre, who at the time had spoken to The Mail on Sunday, which had published the photo.

The now infamous photo that appears to show Andrew and Virginia Giuffre. Pic: Rex/Shutterstock
Image:
The now infamous photo that appears to show Andrew and Virginia Giuffre. Pic: Rex/Shutterstock

In an email from Epstein to a reporter on 1 July 2011, he said:

The girl has fled the country with an outstanding arrest warrant. The da (sic) after she accused others, said in writing that she has no credibility, she was never 15 years old working for me, her story made it seem like she first worked for trump at that age and was met by ghislaine maxwell.

Total horseshit, the daily mail paid her money, they admitted it, with the statement that it took money to coax out the truth.

Yes she was on my plane, and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew, as many of my employees have.

In a separate email to a publicist on 1 July 2011, Epstein writes:

The girl who accused Prince Andrew can also easily be proven to be a liar.

I think Buckingham Palace would love it. You should task someone to investigate the girl Virginia Roberts, that has caused the Queen’s son all this agro (sic).

I promise you she is a fraud. You and I will be able to go to ascot (sic) for the rest of our lives.

:: Mandelson and Epstein talk Trump

According to the documents, Peter Mandelson, who was sacked as the UK ambassador to the US in September, was continuing his connections with Epstein in 2016.

Sir Keir Starmer dismissed him after learning about emails between him and Epstein from 2005 to 2010 – including after Epstein’s conviction for soliciting a minor for prostitution.

Andrew and Peter Mandelson at a reception in 10 Downing Street in 2009
Image:
Andrew and Peter Mandelson at a reception in 10 Downing Street in 2009

In an exchange between Epstein and Peter Mandelson on 6 November 2016, Epstein wrote:

63 years old. . you made it

Responding to the message referring to his birthday several days before, Mr Mandelson replied:

Just. I have decided to extend my life by spending more of it in the US.

On the same day, and just before the 2016 US presidential election, Epstein then replies:

in the donald white house

Epstein goes on to refer to Andrew and Mr Mandelson’s partner, now husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva:

trump/ and having agreat [sic] deal of fun. In hindsight. you were right about staying away from andrew. I was right in your staying with rinaldo [sic]

According to the documents, Mandelson responds:

Of course, donald in WH. Will he get there? Yes, without Andrew it would not have gone nuclear. Did you advise me to stay with R ? Such a handful but loyal and never embarrassing.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Exclusive: Mandelson challenged on Epstein links

In a separate email from 7 March 2011, Epstein received an interview request from the BBC via his lawyer:

We are keen to explore the possibility of conducting an interview with Mr Epstein, on the subject of the stories which are circulating, however inaccurately, about both him and Prince Andrew, the Duke of York; we’d be keen to hear from Mr Epstein first hand so that the various and at times, speculative reporting which is at large in the UK press can be better
scrutinised?”.

The message was forwarded to Mr Mandelson, who replied, bluntly:

No!!

In May this year, Mr Mandelson was asked by Sky News about his relationship with Epstein: “I’m not answering any questions about him. My knowledge of him is something I regret, I wish I’d never met him in the first place.”

Read more from Sky News:
Key claims by Virginia Giuffre in memoir
Ghislaine Maxwell appeals to Trump
US Congress summons Andrew

Sky News’ US news partner NBC News has reached out to lawyers for Michael Wolff, Maxwell and the family of Virginia Giuffre for comment.

The top Democrat on the House committee, Robert Garcia of California, said in a statement that the released emails “raise glaring questions about what else the White House is hiding and the nature of the relationship between Epstein and the President”.

The Oversight Committee Democrats say the emails strike “a blow against the White House’s Epstein cover-up”.

But White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt said in a statement: “The Democrats selectively leaked emails to the liberal media to create a fake narrative to smear President Trump.

“The ‘unnamed victim’ referenced in these emails is the late Virginia Giuffre, who repeatedly said President Trump was not involved in any wrongdoing whatsoever and ‘couldn’t have been friendlier’ to her in their limited interactions.”

Continue Reading

US

Trump and the Epstein questions that will not go away

Published

on

By

Trump and the Epstein questions that will not go away

The newly released files have dragged Donald Trump’s name back into one of the darkest scandals of modern American life.

Emails from the estate of Jeffrey Epstein, released by a congressional committee, don’t allege any criminal activity by the president.

But the Democrats say they raise fresh questions about what he knew about the paedophile and when he knew it.

The key detail comes from two Epstein emails, one sent to his girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, another to author Michael Wolff.

In 2011, he wrote to Maxwell: “I want you to realize that the dog that hasn’t barked is Trump. VICTIM spent hours at my house with him… he has never once been mentioned. police chief etc. I’m 75% there.”

Trump latest: 20,000 pages published in response to ‘leak’

Undated picture of Ghislaine Maxwell with Jeffrey Epstein. File pic: US Department of Justice
Image:
Undated picture of Ghislaine Maxwell with Jeffrey Epstein. File pic: US Department of Justice

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Democrats had redacted the name because the victim in question was Virginia Guiffre, who never accused the president of wrongdoing.

In a 2019 exchange with Wolff, Epstein wrote: “trump said he asked me to resign, never a member ever. of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop”.

Those words are ambiguous and we don’t know the context in which they were written but earlier this year, Trump said he had fallen out with Jeffrey Epstein after he “stole” young women who worked at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida and it could be a reference to that dispute.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Karoline Leavitt defends Trump

For years, Trump promised to declassify all Epstein-related files – a pledge positioning him as a truth-teller exposing elite corruption.

Now that others are releasing those materials first, the image that helped return him to the White House takes a hit.

Instead of leading the charge, he’s reacting to it, and among his base, there are many who remain convinced of an Epstein-related cover-up.

Legally, there is nothing new here pointing to liability, but reputationally, this is dangerous terrain for the president.

Read more:
What do Epstein documents say about Trump, Andrew and Mandelson?
Andrew did have photo taken with Virginia Giuffre, Epstein said

Author Michael Wolff.  Pic: AP
Image:
Author Michael Wolff. Pic: AP

The mention of a “victim” spending hours with him at Epstein’s home, without clear context, invites headlines and speculation that could linger for months.

But he has weathered much worse – his survival often relies on turning scandal into proof of persecution.

That explains why the White House is doubling down on its claim that Democrats are releasing selective documents to the “liberal media” to smear Donald Trump.

Continue Reading

Trending