The man charged with threatening to kill Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh will go on trial in June 2025, ABC News reported. California resident Nicholas John Roske showed up near Kavanaugh's home with zip ties, a gun, and a knife after the draft decision on the overturning of Roe v. Wade was leaked in 2022.
U.S. District Judge Peter Messitte took the first step in the case Tuesday and set the date for Roske's trial for next year. If convicted, Roske could face life in prison.
Roske was arrested after allegedly showing up near Kavaunaugh's Chevy Chase, Maryland, home after 1 a.m. with what appeared to be ill intent. The then-26-year-old arrived in via taxi wearing dark clothing and carrying the paraphrenia of a would-be assassin.
Jury selection for Roske's trial will begin on June 9, though Assistant U.S. Attorney Kathleen Gavin said the process "in this case could take a little longer" than usual. The trial is supposed to last only about a week.
Roske was arrested after calling 911 on himself, stating that he had suicidal thoughts and was carrying a gun, CNN reported at the time. He told authorities that he traveled from California to kill "a specific United States Supreme Court Justice."
The young man was incensed about the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade as well as the Uvalde, Texas, school shooting that happened in May 2022. He believed that Kavanaugh would reject gun control laws even after the shooting that was later pinned on the failures of the town's police chief in an indictment.
"Roske indicated that he believed the Justice that he intended to kill would side with Second Amendment decisions that would loosen gun control laws. Roske stated that he began thinking about how to give his life a purpose and decided that he would kill the Supreme Court Justice," an FBI report said.
Roske planned to break into Kavanaugh's home and commit a murder-suicide. He had a screwdriver, hammer, crowbar, nail punch, duct tape, and a pistol light, along with the other items that suggest he was prepared for several crimes.
This alleged crime came at a time when conservative justices were under additional threat. The news and political coverage of the forthcoming opinion brought protesters to justices' homes, though it seems Roske was the only one to carry out one of these threats.
One aspect of this case that received little attention was Roske's mental state. According to a Fox News report in August 2022, the FBI accessed several online profiles for Roske, and further analysis revealed disturbing evidence.
In his online world, Roske sometimes portrayed himself as a transgender woman named Sophie and sought perverse sexual activity. "I am looking for a Daddy to control my sexual life," one account the FBI linked to him said.
On other platforms like Reddit, Roske shared his "radical" opinions about abortion, including a post in October 2018 where he called himself a "negative utilitarian" who supported forced abortions. His post hints at a deep pain and twisted psyche.
"If abortion were mandatory for pregnant women, no new people would be born, and thus no new people would experience suffering. If no new people are born, humanity will end and thus human suffering will end. I am aware how radical this view is, but I do hold it sincerely," Roske wrote.
Roske thankfully turned himself in before something terrible happened at Kavanaugh's home. However, this alleged crime points to a larger issue surrounding the interplay between the political climate the left created and what it does to people already experience mental health problems.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Jack Smith is the hand-picked "special counsel" the Democrats appointed to carry a large part of their lawfare war against President Donald Trump, and he's brought a number of cases that so far have been stalled because of his decision to ignore, while creating the charges, the fact confirmed by the Supreme Court that presidents have much immunity for their acts in office.
But if one is to accept his interpretation of the federal law, it is the Democrats now who have committed a federal crime – by precipitously and arbitrarily pushing Joe Biden out of the 2024 presidential race. In fact, he already had earned the commitments of enough delegates for their convention, going on this week, to take the nomination.
Then he appeared in a debate with Trump, performed horribly, and the party elites decided he couldn't win so they pushed him out and installed their chosen, Kamala Harris.
It's that action that investigative reporter and columnist Julie Kelly now explains is a violation, according to Smith himself.
"If we apply Special Counsel Jack Smith's interpretation of the 'conspiracy against rights' statute included in the DOJ's J6 indictment of Donald Trump, Biden and the Democrats have committed a crime," she explained.
She describes what's known about the Democrats' scheme against their own president: that ex-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned him, because of his apparent inability to defeat President Trump, that it could be the "easy way or the hard way."
That would mean Biden could voluntarily leave the race or be forced out through public challenges to his mental capacities.
"It is important to recall that Biden was forced out of the race not by Trump but by top Democratic Party officials including Pelosi, Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. And aside from the unseemliness of it all, what happened to Biden could constitute a federal crime—at least according to Special Counsel Jack Smith," Kelly explained.
That is because one of Smith's charges against Trump is his own interpretation of 18 U.S. Code § 241, conspiracy against rights, which states, "If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States; they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years."
Smith uses that to argue "Trump's claims about voting fraud in the 2020 election and plans to delay the certification proceedings on January 6 denied the rights of the (haha) 81 million Americans who voted for Bidem." Kelly explained.
He charges that Trump conspired to "injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate one or more persons in the free exercise and enjoyment of a right and privilege secured to them by the Constitution and laws of the United States—that is, the right to vote, and to have one's vote counted."
The analysis notes that Smith's logic then could apply such a charge to congressional Democrats, the corporate news media, and White House officials including Biden himself for "violating the rights of 14 million voters who selected Biden during the Democratic primary."
"By every measure, those parties collectively 'disenfranchised' voters by first freezing out potential Democratic primary opponents last spring and officially clinching the nomination in March only to later succeed in strong-arming Biden out of the race when it was clear he would not win," she explained.
She said the "criminal conspiracy" was launched after Biden's "disastrous debate" in June.
The New York Times already documented that the "short-tempered" Biden was "fuming" over those in his own party who began then to push him aside.
He didn't leave voluntarily, she wrote, "He got the hook."
"What happened was a number of my Democratic colleagues in the House and Senate thought that I was gonna hurt them in the races," Kelly reported Biden told "CBS News sycophant Robert Costa." "And I was concerned if I stayed in the race, that would be the topic."
"Rather than risk a loss at the polls in November, Pelosi took the losing matter of Joe Biden's candidacy into her own talons – and subsequently out of the hands of 14 million Americans," Kelly confirmed.
Thomson Mayor Benjamin "Benji" Cary Cranford is now facing felony charges after a controversial incident involving state prison inmates and alcohol, Fox News reported.
Mayor Cranford was indicted for allegedly placing alcohol in a path routinely used by inmates, questioning his future in office.
The scandal began on June 3, when Cranford allegedly bought a bottle of Seagram's Extra Dry Gin and strategically placed it in a ditch along Cobbham Road. This location is known to be on the route of a state prisoner work crew, suggesting that Cranford intended for the inmates to find the bottle.
The Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) took over the case on June 6 following a request from the Thomson Police Department to look into the allegations. This move highlighted the severity of the accusations against the mayor.
Shortly after the GBI’s involvement, agents arrested Cranford at Thomson City Hall immediately following a city council meeting. He was then booked into McDuffie County Jail and later released on a $5,000 bail.
Cranford, aged 52, is now battling felony charges of furnishing prohibited items to inmates and attempting to commit a felony, as stated in the indictment issued by McDuffie County Superior Court.
The charges have stirred not only legal troubles but also political ramifications. According to local officials, if a panel finds it necessary, Cranford could be suspended from his duties until the resolution of the case.
This situation is not unique as history shows other officials in similar predicaments have been suspended under analogous circumstances.
Despite the charges, the city spokesperson, Jason Smith, commented, "As we understand the charges in this case are not related to Mr. Cranford's duties as an elected official, we do not have a comment." This statement attempts to separate Cranford’s alleged actions from his responsibilities as mayor.
Nevertheless, the public and political observers are closely watching how this case might influence Cranford’s ability to govern, especially given the nature of the charges.
Added to the mix is Cranford’s background as a former paving contractor and a recent lawsuit related to his business before he took office. Earlier this month, he settled a lawsuit that accused him of attempting to hide assets from a bonding company involved with his company’s debts.
Elected earlier this year after defeating incumbent Kenneth Usry, Cranford’s tenure as mayor of Thomson has been short but eventful. His administration is now under a cloud of controversy that could affect his political future.
The potential for suspension stems from a protocol that applies to elected officials who face serious charges unrelated to their official duties but could still impact their capability to perform in office.
This protocol aims to maintain public trust in the governance of the city, ensuring that those in power are not only effective but also beyond reproach regarding legal matters.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Democrats and the media are in a quandary to explain why Americans so underappreciate all that President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris have done for the economy. Or, should I say, TO the economy?
They act as if these are the salad days for American families, with inflation falling and jobs aplenty. For now.
So why are Americans so dour? A recent Pew poll found that only 22% of Americans believe the country is headed in the right direction.
Another poll revealed that more than half of Americans think the U.S. is in recession.
A CNBC headline from last week treated the poll finding with shock and amazement: "59% of Americans Wrongly Think U.S. Is in a Recession."
According to the article: "Economists have wrestled with the growing disconnect between how well the economy is doing and how people feel about their financial standing. … The U.S. economy has remained remarkably strong even amid persistent inflation."
Stop right there.
Yes, the GDP is indeed growing, which means we are NOT in a technical recession.
But the economy is "strong" for whom exactly? Academics isolated in their ivory towers? Those cloistered inside the Washington Beltway? The people with cushy jobs in the newsrooms across America?
The poll cited above found that a major reason Americans say they are pessimistic is "higher costs and difficulty making ends meet."
This isn't a figment of their imaginations. The average household has LOST roughly $2,000 of purchasing power since Biden came into office. They are POORER today than four years ago.
I would submit that when most families have lost real take-home pay over four years, THAT is a recession. And apparently, six of 10 Americans agree with me despite the media cheerleading for the Biden economy.
The other night in his Democratic National Convention speech, Biden boasted that "wages are up." But they are only up BEFORE inflation. When we take into account the cost of living is 20% higher today than four years ago, there are only real wage declines for most workers.
One way to measure how much families are struggling under Bidenomics is to examine household debt. Credit card debt recently hit an all-time high, and delinquencies are rising. The federal government can borrow until the cows come home (or investors around the world stop buying the bonds). But households have to repay debt. This means that if things don't improve quickly, more and more families will be underwater.
Harris' only plan to relieve this middle-class fiscal squeeze is to pass out more free dollars. She wants to pay people up to $25,000 to buy houses. The Wall Street Journal is wondering whether the government is going to start bailing out unpaid mortgages and credit card debts – just as Uncle Sam is paying off deadbeats who refused to pay back student loans.
Where is the money going to come from for all those trillions of dollars of bailouts? From the Chinese?
Meanwhile, most of these jobs Biden and Harris are gloating about are direct or indirect government jobs. Why is a government so awash in debt on a hiring spree?
Americans have a sixth sense tingling, warning that something is very wrong with our economy. Harris and the media say: Don't worry; be happy.
Just who's living in La La Land?
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Those mRNA COVID-19 shots, turned out in double time by an industry in the pay of the federal government at the time, are "far more" dangerous to those who took them, including those forced by government officials to take them, than getting COVID, a new report explains.
The study results appeared in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research.
The researchers included M. Nathaniel Mead of the McCullough Foundation, MIT's Stephanie Seneff, independent researcher Jessica Rose, Research Triangle Park's Russ Wolfinger, Nicolas Hulscher and Dr. Peter A. McCullough, an M.D. practicing in internal medicine, cardiology, epidemiology and more.
The report said, "They found that the modmRNA injections carry such a high risk of dangerous adverse events, that it would be safer to catch the virus without being vaccinated than to take one of the shots."
The report said, "The study categorizes the principal adverse events associated with the mRNA products with a brief systems-based synopsis of each of the six domains of potential harm: cardiovascular, neurological, hematologic, immunological, oncological and reproductive.
The shots "dramatically increase the risk of becoming severely ill or dying from potentially fatal conditions such as cancer or heart failure," the report said.
It said the study actually is No. 2, a followup to an earlier assessment that found, "health-related risks and drawbacks were drastically misreported and underreported in the Pfizer and Moderna trial evaluations of these genetic products."
The scientists concluded, among other things, it would be more accurate to refer to "mRNA vaccines" as "modified mRNA gene therapies" or "modmRNA" shots.
They found, "The COVID-19 modified mRNA (modmRNA) lipid nanoparticle-based 'vaccines' are not classical antigen-based vaccines but instead prodrugs informed by gene therapy technology."
Further, they wrote, "This leads us to consider how and why so many published papers and authorities have claimed that myocarditis [heart failure] shows a stronger association with SARS-CoV-2 infection than with the COVID-19 modmRNA injections. This single claim is patently false, and yet it has been used to justify ongoing injections despite myocarditis being recognized as a signal by the CDC and other authorities."
The results appeared on Substack, where McCullough wrote, "This manuscript evaluated all of the published data and has completely overturned a false narrative held by government agencies and the American College of Cardiology who erroneously assert that SARS-CoV-2 infection poses a greater risk of heart damage than vaccination."
It said, in fact, "The risk of suffering from myocarditis from the shots was 37 times greater than from the infection."
And it warned further recommendations to impose the shots "seems unconscionable in the extreme."
There also were higher numbers of brain disorders reported among those who took the shots.
Other complications that appeared related include "encephalitis, other encephalopathies, meningitis, myelitis, autoimmune nervous system disorders, cerebrovascular events, facial palsy" and more.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Voters in Arizona can be told about an "unborn human" in an election campaign about the state's abortion laws, according to a court ruling.
The decision from the state Supreme Court said lawmakers can use that term in place of "fetus" in a pamphlet describing an abortion proposal on the election ballot.
Terminology long has been a huge issue for the abortion industry, as disposing of a "clump of cells" or "tissue" is far less objectionable to people than the truth, which is that the industry routinely tears apart the bodies of unborn infants to complete an abortion, sometimes using a vacuum to suck out the brains.
A report at Courthouse News notes the new development in which five of the seven justices on the high court overturned a lower court's decision that using the phrase is partisan.
The Supreme Court reverse that decision based on the fact that the phrase is, in fact, found elsewhere in Arizona law.
"We conclude that the analysis provides the information required by A.R.S. § 19–124(C) and 'substantially complies' with the statute's impartiality requirement," the justices wrote in their initial opinion, which will be followed by a full legal analysis soon.
An organization promoting abortion claimed that the phrase is "a watchword for anti-abortion advocates" and it actually has "no basis in medicine or science."
The fight erupted over plans to have on the ballot this fall a plan to have virtually unlimited abortion access in the state.
The report said, "Before they cast their ballots, voters will have the chance to review a publicity pamphlet with detailed descriptions of each race and ballot initiative they'll vote on. Written by a committee of state lawmakers called the Legislative Council, ballot initiative descriptions must be impartial."
Abortion industry promoters sued the Legislative Council after it finished its description of the plan because it uses "unborn human being."
The members of the council said that the language is impartial because it's factually true, and it also appears in Arizona's current abortion law.
Ben Toma, the state House speaker and chief of the council, said, "The ballot analysis prepared by the legislative council is intended to help voters understand current law. Arizona's 15-week law protects unborn children, while the abortion initiative essentially allows unrestricted abortions up until birth. It's really that simple. The Arizona Supreme Court's ruling is correct."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
After the high-profile discussion between Donald Trump and Elon Musk last week, the former president is now floating the possibility of making the billionaire entrepreneur a top adviser or member of his cabinet, should he win the White House race in November.
"He's a very smart guy," Trump said of Musk when asked Monday if he'd consider naming Musk to an advisory role or cabinet job.
"I certainly would, if he would do it, I certainly would. He's a brilliant guy."
Monday night, Musk posted a response to the possibility, indicating he's "willing to serve" as head of the Department for Government Efficiency.
Musk, who calls himself a "moderate Democrat," has endorsed the Republican Trump, sounding the alarm about a potential Kamala Harris victory in the 2024 presidential race, saying, "I think we're in massive trouble with a Kamala administration."
"It's essential that you win for the good of this country and that's understating my position," Musk told Trump during the Aug. 12 conversation on X, which has been seen more than a billion times.
"You are the path to prosperity, and Kamala is the opposite," Musk told Trump. "I'm just trying to tell people my honest opinion."
"Now I feel like we're at a critical juncture for the country," Musk added. "We're gonna see an even further left administration with Kamala."
"Her dad is a Marxist economist – you can Google it … that's how she was brought up."
"America is in a fork in the road … We're at a fork in the road in the destiny of civilization and I think we need to take the right path, and I think you're the right path. … We're in deep trouble if it goes the other way."
In addition to pondering Musk as a top adviser, Trump on Monday said if elected, he'd consider ending a $7,500 tax credit for purchases of electric vehicles.
"I'm not making any final decisions on it," Trump said of the EV tax credit.
"I'm a big fan of electric cars, but I'm a fan of gasoline-propelled cars, and also hybrids and whatever else happens to come along."
He repeated his promise to eliminate rules by the Biden-Harris administration pushing carmakers to build more EVs and plug-in hybrids, indicating there's a "much smaller market" for those vehicles due to their high cost and limitations of battery range.
A retired NFL star was arrested for a disgusting act on an overnight flight that forced his plane to turn around.
Haitian native Gosder Cherilus, 40, urinated on another passenger on a Delta Airlines flight to Ireland. The plane returned to Boston around 2 a.m. Sunday and Cherilus was hauled away in handcuffs.
Trouble began before takeoff, when Cherilus argued with another passenger about seating arrangements, the police report said.
About an hour into the flight, he exposed himself in front of an elderly woman and "emptied his entire bladder for approximately 20 seconds." The incident left the passengers and crew in fear for their safety.
Cherilus also struck an elderly man with his hand, prompting the crew to turn the plane around and request assistance from state police.
When the plane landed at Boston Logan International Airport, Cherilus appeared to be drunk, the police report said. He refused the commands of officers, prompting them to escort him off the plane in handcuffs.
"Troopers verbally commanded Cherilus to leave the plane, but he became irate and uncooperative. Eventually, Troopers escorted Cherilus to the jet bridge and placed him under arrest for Disorderly Conduct and Disturbing a Flight Crew," police said.
The other passengers were rebooked onto a different flight to Dublin that was due to arrive Monday morning.
"Delta flight 154 from Boston to Dublin on August 17 returned to Boston Logan due to an unruly customer and was met by law enforcement," a Delta spokesperson said.
"Delta has zero tolerance for unlawful behavior and will cooperate with law enforcement to that end. We apologize to our customers for the delay in their travel."
The former offensive tackle, of Wakefield, Massachusetts, was released on $2,500 bail, pleading not guilty at his arraignment Monday to interfering with the operation of an aircraft, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. He ignored questions from reporters while leaving court in Boston.
Former NFL lineman Gosder Cherilus leaving East Boston District Court today after allegedly urinating on another passenger during a Delta Airlines flight to Dublin. He is out on a $2,500 bail. @wbz @CBSNews pic.twitter.com/rhnjD7dWtT
— Penny Kmitt (@pennylikeacoin) August 19, 2024
The former Boston College football star retired from the NFL in 2017 after stints with the Detroit Lions, the Indianapolis Colts, and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Eugene Vindman, the onetime military officer whose claim to fame is that he listened to complaints from his brother, Alex, about President Donald Trump's telephone conversation with Ukrainian officials and then worked in the Washington, D.C., system to make the claim that the conversation was an abuse of power, now is running for Congress.
He's attracted support from some of the extremists in Congress, like Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.
And he's accused in a Free Beacon report of violating the law.
The brothers Vindman were the impetus behind the unfounded claims that Trump was abusing the system by asking Ukraine for an investigation of the hanky-panky going on with Hunter Biden's million-dollar payments from Burisma as well as Joe Biden's threat he would withhold a billion dollars of American help if officials didn't fire a Ukrainian prosecutor investigating that company.
Ex-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi based one of her failed impeach-and-remove attempts against President Trump on their statements.
But, in Eugene Vindman's campaign as a Democrat in Virginia's 7th congressional district, his campaign recently referred questions to an outside organization, in what the report explains is a violation of campaign law.
"Something funny happened when the Washington Free Beacon contacted the campaign of Trump whistleblower turned congressional candidate Eugene Vindman last week. Vindman, a 24-year Army veteran, says he 'served our nation in combat.' A 2019 Daily Mail piece said he 'has not seen combat.' The Free Beacon asked the campaign to explain the discrepancy," the report said.
The report noted Vindman's campaign manager, Jeremy Levinson, referred the caller to a worker for a political action committee and insisted "future questions" could be directed to the PAC worker identified as Travis Tazelaar, political director for VoteVets PAC, a leftist organization.
That group already has endorsed Vindman and donated the maximum $10,000 allowed to his campaign.
Subsequently, Tazelaar, identifying himself as political director for the PAC, issued a statement about Vindman going to Iraq as a lawyer.
"The statement was unremarkable, but the campaign's decision to use Tazelaar to handle its communications is a big deal. It baffled ethics experts, who say it is almost certainly a violation of campaign finance laws," the report said.
It explained, "As a 'hybrid PAC,' VoteVets is permitted to make $10,000 in direct contributions to Vindman, a threshold the group hit in May. Its subsequent communications work for the campaign, Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust executive director Kendra Arnold explained, is considered an 'in-kind contribution' that places VoteVets above the legal contribution limit."
Further, federal election law bans campaigns and PACs from working together, except under certain circumstances.
That makes VoteVets' role as the Vindman campaign's communication arm in violation of the law, Arnold explained.
"Super PACs and campaigns are not permitted to work together on communications, which prohibits campaigns altogether from using super PACs as vendors for communications. In my opinion, this would most certainly extend to hybrid PACs."
That opinion was like that of campaign finance and election law attorney Jason Torchinsky, who said in an interview with the Free Beacon that Vindman's campaign "would be vulnerable to an FEC complaint and possible FBI complaint as well."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A congressional report, just as Democrats were starting meetings aimed as formally removing him from the party's 2024 presidential ticket amid riot fears in Chicago, has dealt the outgoing Joe Biden a massive blow: a determination that he is impeachable.
"First and foremost, overwhelming evidence demonstrates that President Biden participated in a conspiracy to monetize his office of public trust to enrich his family. Among other aspects of this conspiracy, the Biden family and their business associates received tens of millions of dollars from foreign interests by leading those interests to believe that such payments would provide them access to and influence with President Biden," said the report.
"As Vice President, President Biden actively participated in this conspiracy by, among other things, attending dinners with his family's foreign business partners and speaking to them by phone, often when being placed on speakerphone by Hunter Biden. For example, in 2014, Vice President Biden attended a dinner for Hunter Biden with Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina. Following the dinner, Baturina wired $3.5 million to Rosemont Seneca Thornton, a firm associated with Hunter Biden. Then, months later, as Hunter Biden and his business associates continued to solicit more money from Baturina, Vice President Biden participated in a phone call with Baturina and Hunter Biden where Vice President Biden told Baturina, 'you be good to my boy.' Moreover, President Biden knowingly participated in this conspiracy. Based on the totality of the evidence, it is inconceivable that President Biden did not understand that he was taking part in an effort to enrich his family by abusing his office of public trust."
However, the House report left it unclear whether or when they would push for an impeachment vote for Biden, who already has been encouraged to walk away from the office amid his publicly recognizable issues with cognitive decline.
The report, 291 pages, was assembled by three House committees that charged Biden profited from an influence-peddling scheme to enrich not just himself but also members of his family through foreign business dealings beginning in 2014.
"The committees present this information to the House of Representatives for its evaluation and consideration of appropriate next steps," the report said.
Democrats, who staged multiple – and failed – impeach and remove attempts against President Donald Trump, including one when he already was out of office, have criticize the investigation of evidence of real crimes.
According to Reuters, "The House investigators say that Biden used his influence to benefit the business dealings of his son, Hunter Biden, with partners from Ukraine, China, Russia and other countries. Hunter Biden has been convicted on charges that he lied about his illegal drug use to buy a gun and is awaiting trial on charges of tax evasion, including an allegation that he accepted payments from a Romanian businessman who sought to influence U.S. government agencies in connection with a criminal probe in Romania."
The committees who contributed to the fact-finding about Biden's pay-for-play operations included the Judiciary, Oversight and Accountability. Their report concluded Biden "committed impeachable offenses."
The report details evidence to establish President Biden abused his office and violated his oaths of office as Vice President by engaging in a conspiracy to peddle influence to enrich his family. "As President, Joe Biden and the Biden-Harris Administration obstructed the House of Representatives' impeachment inquiry and the criminal investigation of President Biden's son," the report states.
"Our impeachment inquiry shows conclusively that Joe Biden abused his public office for the private financial benefit of the Biden family and Biden business associates. The facts speak for themselves, and Democrats can no longer stretch the truth to cover for President Biden. As Democrats celebrate Joe Biden and crown Kamala Harris as his heir apparent this week, Americans should remember the reality of the Biden-Harris Administration: crime, chaos, and corruption," said House Committee on the Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.
Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., chief of Oversight, added, "President Biden's legacy is marked by abuse of public office, corruption, and obstruction. The evidence produced by our impeachment inquiry is the strongest case for impeachment of a sitting president the House of Representatives has ever investigated. Americans now know Joe Biden was 'the brand' the Bidens sold around the world to enrich the Biden family, and Joe Biden knew of, benefitted from, and participated in his family's influence peddling schemes. The entire Biden influence peddling model relied on Joe Biden's presence—at meetings, on the phone, or at dinners—to demonstrate his family members' influence over him, and he repeatedly provided it. Throughout our impeachment inquiry of President Biden, the Biden-Harris Administration has sought to obstruct us every step of the way. Despite this obstruction, we have exposed the truth to the American people, and they now know the extent of President Biden's corruption."
Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., chief of Ways and Means, continued, "The Biden-Harris Administration has lied to the American people time and again to cover up and obstruct the investigation into tax crimes committed by a Biden family business enterprise that capitalized on political power. The American people have been shocked to learn the magnitude of the scheme going back to the President's time as Vice President, when Biden family members were allowed to use Air Force Two as their own private business jet. None of this would have come to light had it not been for the two IRS whistleblowers who were tired of watching their investigation into the President's son become obstructed, delayed, and denied the ability to move forward as the pursuit of truth demanded. Their testimony in the face of political interference has stood up under scrutiny at every step. House Republicans' efforts have been thorough and exhaustive, uncovering reams of information that otherwise would not have seen the light of day, and ensuring that a sweetheart plea deal for the president's son never went forward. We will not tolerate a two-tiered system of justice, one for the wealthy and politically connected, and one for everyone else."
Key findings included:
From 2014 to the present, as part of a conspiracy to monetize Joe Biden's office of public trust to enrich the Biden family, Biden family members and their associates received over $27 million from foreign individuals or entities. In order to obscure the source of these funds, the Biden family and their associates set up shell companies to conceal these payments from scrutiny. The Biden family used proceeds from these business activities to provide hundreds of thousands of dollars to Joe Biden—including thousands of dollars that are directly traceable to China. While Jim Biden claimed he gave this money to Joe Biden to repay personal loans, Jim Biden did not provide any evidence to support this claim. The Biden family's receipt of millions of dollars required Joe Biden's knowing participation in this conspiracy, including while he served as Vice President.
The Biden wealth apparently came from Russian, Romanian, Chinese, Kazakhstani, and Ukrainian individuals and companies.