After reviewing thousands of documents subpoenaed from four banks, the House Oversight Committee said in an interim report that some members of the Biden family, associates and their companies received more than $10 million from foreign entities, including payments made during and after President Joe Biden’s vice presidency. But the White House countered that GOP investigators could not point to “a single Joe Biden policy” that was unduly influenced.
A 36-page GOP interim report released by Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., accused some of Biden’s family members and associates of operating a “complex web” of more than 20 companies, mostly LLCs, created when Mr. n Biden was the vice president. , and used “gradual payments over time” to “hide large financial transactions.”
“Historically, we’ve never seen a presidential family receive such sums of money from adversaries around the world,” Comer said.
White House Press Secretary Ian Sams responded on Twitter that Comer offered “no evidence of any wrongdoing” by Mr. Biden, that “House Republicans have shown no evidence of any policy decisions that were influenced by anything other than the national interest of the United States,” and added that “[t]hey, you’re really just microwaving old debunked things.”
At a news conference Wednesday, Comer and panel members focused on payments from individuals in China and Romania, which are not adversaries of the United States. When asked about a direct link to Mr. Biden, Comer said the early stages of the investigation indicated a pattern of behavior.
“I don’t think anyone in America watching C-SPAN or any other network that’s covering this would think it’s just a coincidence that nine members of the Biden family got paid for this influence peddling scheme.” Comer said.
“Obviously, we believe the president was involved in this from the beginning. We will continue to look,” he said, though he did not name any direct or indirect payments to Mr. Biden.
“What we have quoted today and what we are updating you on today are the results of the four banks. We believe there are 12 banks. So right now we can say that we are in the early stages of this investigation.”
House Republicans have insisted that their investigation has several legislative goals: addressing “gaps” in ethics and disclosure laws, strengthening reporting requirements for family members of high-ranking elected officials and evaluating the Bank Secrecy Act and antitrust laws with money laundering.
House Oversight Committee ranking Democrat Jamie Raskin of Maryland said in a statement that then-Vice President Biden’s former business partner and financial adviser told Republican and Democratic Oversight Committee staff in March 2023 that “he was not aware of any President Biden’s involvement in the financial conduct of the business of the president’s relatives, especially any transactions to or from the bank account of the then-Vice President related to the business conducted by any member of the Biden family.”
Abe Lowell, Hunter Biden’s attorney, offered: “Instead of redoing old investigations that found no evidence of wrongdoing by Mr. Biden, Representative Comer should conduct the same review of former President Trump’s many organizations and members of his family.”
At the same time, there is a federal investigation into Hunter Biden’s business dealings that began in 2018 under the leadership of David Weiss, the U.S. attorney in Delaware. A 2019 federal subpoena obtained by CBS News sought financial and business records related to 15 business entities and Hunter Biden, the president brother Jamesas well as two business partners since 2014, when Joe Biden was vice president.
Two sources familiar with the matter recently confirmed to CBS News that the attorney for the IRS whistleblower who claims the Justice Department interfered in the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden met with members of Congress last week on behalf of his client.
The meeting was described as a proposal session with the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees to lay the groundwork for what a whistleblower can tell investigators and how he can do so without running afoul of taxpayer privacy laws.