[If you appreciate my writing you can join my Substack, it has a free tier. Subscribe now Thanks.]
Reposted from My Substack
The behind-closed-doors deposition of Hunter Biden as part of the Shambolic Impeachment effort against Joe Biden was a tour de force of debunking and denial of all the crackpot theories that the GOP has been parroting from Russian Intelligence.
Ranking Democratic House member Jamie Raskin declared:
He pretty much debunked and demolished every theory that’s been floated and he kind of knocked down every piece of flotsam and jetsom of this impeachment expedition shipwreck the Republicans have left us with. It’s been a comedy of errors from the beginning. But of course the original witness [Alexander Smirnov] is now in jail in California as a flight risk after being indicted by US Attorney/Special Counsel David Weiss who wa named by Donald Trump, and he was indicted for lying to the FBI in constructing a false record.
[…]
The whole thing has a very strong wiff of Russian Propaganda and Disinformation now because of the recent revelations in that California prosecution.
Based on nothing but lies and fraud, this failed inquiry has stumbled on. And yet the GOP refuses to give up and has only continued to double down.
[If you wish to see the full picture of false stories against Hunter Biden going all the way back to 2019 — you can find a collection of my diaries on the entire Hunter/Ukraine Russian Disinformation Campaign Here!]
Because of the arrest of their primary witness for Bribery against Hunter and Joe, James Comer and Jim Jordan have doubled down and still claim that the allegations of lying and using information from Russian Intelligence is merely a ploy to protect President Biden.
Republicans want to know how Alexander Smirnov was vetted and how much he was paid. According to HuffPost, they also suggested that Smirnov's recent arrest was designed to protect President Joe Biden.
Smirnov was accused last month of fabricating a bribery allegation against President Biden.
According to reports, that allegation was boosted by Republicans despite the fact that they were warned by the Department of Justice that the claim was flimsy.
“Only after Mr. Smirnov reported that President Joe Biden accepted a bribe from a Ukrainian energy company in exchange for using his official position to oust the Ukrainian Prosecutor General did the FBI apparently take a hard look at this CHS [confidential human source],” House Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-KY) and House Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) wrote in their letter.
“This episode is just another example of how the FBI is motivated by politics,” Comer and Jordan wrote.
And yet, they do not explain why a Special Counsel — who was chosen by Donald Trump — would ever want to protect Joe Biden with a false indictment. Unless the indictment isn’t false at all and the reason David Wiess looked more closely into this issue is because these very same Republicans had made these allegations from his 1032 form an issue - which the FBI had previously dismissed as not credible.
If you actually read the Hunter Biden deposition, you will find in his opening statement that he completely denied that his father Joe Biden ever had anything to do with any of his businesses.
Mr. Biden. Thank you.
I am here today to provide the committees with the one uncontestable fact that should end the false premise of this inquiry: I did not involve my father in my business, not while I was a practicing lawyer, not in my investments or transactions, domestic or international, not as a board member, and not as an artist, never.
You read this fact in the many letters that have been sent to you over the last year as part of your so-called impeachment investigation. You heard this fact when I said it weeks ago standing outside of this building. You heard this fact from a parade of other witnesses, former colleagues, and business partners of mine, including my uncle, who has testified before you in similar proceedings. And now, today, you hear this fact directly from me.
For more than a year, your committees have hunted me in your partisan political pursuit of my dad. You have trafficked in innuendo, distortion, and sensationalism, all the while ignoring the clear and convincing evidence staring you in the face: You do nor have evidence to support the baseless and MAGA-motivated conspiracies about m father because there isn't any.
You have built your entire partisan house of cards on lies told by the likes of Gal Luft, Tony Bobulinski, Alexander Smirnov, and Jason Galanis. Luft, who is a fugitive, has been indicted for his lies and other crimes; Smirnov, who has made you dupes in carrying out a Russian disinformation campaign waged against my father, has been indicted for his lies; Bobulinski, who has been exposed for the many false statements he has made; and Galanis, who is serving 14 years in prison for fraud.
Rather than follow the facts as they've been laid out before you in bank records, financial statements, correspondence, and other witness testimony, you continue your frantic search to prove the lies you and those you rely upon keep peddling. Yes, they are lies.
To be clear, I have made mistakes in my life, and I have squandered opportunities and privileges that were afforded to me. I know that. I am responsible for that.
And I am making amends for that. But my mistakes and my shortcomings are my own and not my father's, who has done nothing but devote his entire life to public service and trying to make this country a better place to live.
During my battle with addiction, my father was there for me. He helped save my life. His love and support made it possible for me to get sober, stay sober, and rebuild my life as a father, a son, a husband, and a brother. What he got in return for being a loving, supportive parent is a barrage of hate-filled conspiracy theories that hatched this sham impeachment inquiry and continue to fuel unrelenting personal attacks against him and me.
Over the last year, Republicans have taken my communications out of context, relied on documents that have been altered, and cherry-picked snippets of financial or other records to misrepresent what really happened. Examples of this include a few references to my family in emails or texts that I sent when I was in the darkest days of my addiction. If you try to do that today, my answers will reveal your tactics and demonstrate the truth that my father was never involved in any of my businesses.
My testimony today should put an end to this baseless and destructive political charade. You have wasted valuable time and resources attacking me and my family for your own political gain when you should be fixing the real problems in this country that desperately need your attention. Thank you.
So that was a strong beginning.
Biden made it very clear that during his entire life, he and his entire family knew better than to involve Joe in any financial deals.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Biden, you state -- there's a diamond in the rough here -- "I did not involve my father in my business." And you go on to state, that was true as a lawyer, in any of your investments, your transactions, not as a corporate board member, not as an artist, never.
Will you just give us the rationale behind that? Was your father trying to be involved in your businesses and your legal practice and so on and you had to keep him out? Or was it just an assumption both of you had?
The Witness. Yes. I think number one is, it's just a natural family relationship. I was a professional adult and I had my business, and my dad had his business. But there was one thing that we -- that I was fully aware of my entire life, is that my dad was an official of the United States Government, and there were very bright lines that I abided to and that I was very, very cognizant of. And I made certain that I never engaged with my father in asking him to do anything on my behalf or on behalf of any client of mine.
So not involving Joe in financial deals wasn’t just an accident, it was a conscious decision on his part and on the part of everyone else in the family. They knew the rules and they knew where the line was drawn.
The GOP has long argued that Hunter had no experience or reason to be on the Board of Burisma, but that is false as he lays out in great detail. What has been ignored this entire time is that Hunter is a Yale Law School graduate, and he brought every bit of that education to his deposition.
Q I mean, you've said yourself, I believe to ABC, that the reason you were picked for the Burisma board was because you're a Biden.
A I didn't say that. I didn't -- I -- I -- again, what I said, just to be clear, if you'd like to read the actual quote -- but what I think I said, and I will paraphrase, is that, in my entire life, it's a commonplace name.
It is -- my dad -- I live in a State that has 900,000 people. You know, when I got pulled over when I was a kid for speeding, the cop wouldn't let me go. He'd say, "Your dad's going to kick your ass" and laugh about it. And that's what would happen.
And so, for me, I've always had the last name "Biden," and it's been something that has been both an incredible -- number one --
Q Uh-huh.
A -- more than anything, an incredible honor, and it's been a -- and it's also an incredible responsibility.
And as I said before, I screwed that up when I was -- when I had addict- -- when I was in the darkest days of my life and when I lost my brother and ended up with a divorce and everything fell apart.
And -- but the one thing that I am absolutely aware of is that -- cognizant of the fact that, when people engage with me, is that, are they engaging with me because of my skills -- like, for instance, you guys have gone out and said I had no credibility, no -- that there's no way that I should've been serving on the board of Burisma. I just read you my resume. I'd put my resume up against any one of you, in terms of my responsibility. I don't know anybody that was -- at that time that was teaching the number one-rated course at Georgetown's School of Foreign Service in the master's program in terms of foreign policy and advocacy. I literally was on 17 -- like, 12 different boards. I only listed like, you know, 10 of them. And so I had an enormous amount of reasons to be on it.
So, when I say -- I'm always cognizant of the fact that there is -- in many instances, somebody may have an ulterior notion. And it's my job to be able to balance that and to create boundaries.
Hunter had previously been an investment banker and a DC Lobbyist. He had been on the board of Amtrak and other companies. When he took the job on the board of Burisma he was their lawyer with the David Bois law firm, advising them on how to properly abide by U.S. laws. He was valuable to them in any number of ways behind being his father’s son.
He responded to the argument that “Joe Biden was the brand” of the family.
Q Uh-huh. Mr. Archer testified about the brand, the Biden brand, and that was, you know, an asset for your joint business activities, that --
A Yes. And, you know, here's the thing. Here's the way that I think about the brand. The brand is this: is my dad, with the support of his family -- in particular, my mom; my Aunt Valerie, who's run every one of his campaigns; my grandparents; everyone -- it's their legacy. Primarily, the name "Biden" is my dad's legacy. And he passes it down to me and, when my brother was alive, my brother, my sister, now to my children.
It's our responsibility to not screw that up. It's to live to what I think is the person that I hold in the highest regard of any human I've ever met in my life, is my dad.
And, to that end, is that, whenever I -- I don't remember any times I talked about it as a brand, but that's my view of the brand. If other people saw the brand as something that they could market, it's not -- it was not with my -- without going through me first. And if they did so, they didn't go through me first.
And he answered the question of whether Burisma wanted him on their board because his father was Vice President.
Q Is it fair to say, though, that Burisma wanted you on your their board because your dad was the Vice President?
A No, I don't think that it's fair. Again, , I really don't. I really don't think that it's fair to say that -- for that to be the entire sentence. I can say to you this: I know why President Kwasniewski of Poland wanted me to be on the board. He is the one who convinced me, ultimately, to be on the board.
He's one of the first democratically elected Presidents of Poland.
He called me up and he told me this. He said, if people in the West do not stand up against Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Putin's aggression and they allow for companies like Burisma -- whatever you think about Burisma, it was a bulwark against Russian aggression in a moment in time when the single purpose of Vladimir Putin, in his taking Crimea and his incursions into Donetsk and to Donbas, was to take over the natural-gas fields, was to take over their energy supply.
And that still remains the single biggest goal. Ukraine is not necessarily for the people; it's for their natural resources. It's for a pipeline to the West. It's to be able to choke off Europe. That's what it's for.
He directly answered the issue of whether former Prosecutor Viktor Shokin was in the process of investigating Burisma head Mykola Zlochevski who was under suspicion for self-dealing several years previously by directing contracts to his own company when he had been Minister of the Environment.
Q But Mr. Zlochevsky, at the time, was under investigation by the prosecutor general in Ukraine, Mr. Shokin.
A In 2015? No, that's the exact opposite of the truth. And I think you can go to, I don't know, maybe 15,000 public reports. And you can talk to the IMF, and you can talk to the -- you can talk to the World Bank. And you can talk to the EU, the EU Commission on Energy and the EU Commission as it related to democracy.
And you can talk to the State Department, or any State Department official that testified before your committee, Mr. Jordan, or when you were impeachment. And they can say the exact opposite.
Mr. Zlochevsky was not [under] investigating the -- many of the oligarchs, including a company like Burisma at that time.
Q How about Ambassador Pyatt? What do you think he would have said?
A Ambassador Pyatt actually gave a speech at the time after I joined the board in December of 2019, criticizing Mr. Shokin for not investigating, in particular, Burisma.
So if Shokin was not investigating Burimsa, why exactly would Zlochevski have a reason to offer Hunter and Joe a $5 Million bribe each, to get Shokin fired?
This has been heavily reported as shown by this story from PBS who interview former Ukranian President Poroshenko.
This story has been repeatedly debunked.
It was pushed by Rudy Giuliani to Trump after he had been told this claim by Ukrainian politician Andriy Derkach who has been documented as a Russian spy.
A Ukrainian politician and businessman accused by both the Biden and Trump administrations of being an “active Russian agent,” described Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani as “very useful for me,” Time reports. In multiple meetings with Giuliani in the run-up to the 2020 election, Andriy Derkach fed the former New York City mayor information on Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden and leaked tapes in hopes of damaging Biden’s presidential campaign. In particular, Derkach advocated the theory that the Ukrainian government, not the Russian one, had been the principal interferers in the 2020 election, and were attempting to get Biden elected. Recounting one meeting with Giuliani to a Time reporter, Derkach fondly recalled Giuliani’s note-taking abilities. “I appreciate his meticulousness,” said Derkach. “He records everything. He writes everything down in his notebook.”
One Russian Spy concocted this bogus story, and an FBI informant repeated that story in his accusation that Zlochevsky paid the Bidens a bribe based on lies he was told by Russian Intelligence.
Along this line, they questioned Hunter Biden about Devon Archer’s testimony that he had stepped out during a business dinner to make a call to his dad about firing Shokin.
Q At that December 2015 board meeting, it's been reported that you broke away with Mr. Pozharsky to call your dad.3
A No, I didn't know that that was reported.
Mr. Lowell. Wait, wait.
The Witness. Yeah.
Mr. Lowell. Can I see the report?7
. It's the Devon Archer transcript.
[…]
A And I can answer you this is that that never happened.
[…]
Mr. Lowell. Why don't we read into the record the question and answer so that we can have an accurate statement of what it is he said, please.
. Of course.15
The Witness. I found it if you want me to --
Mr. Lowell. Go ahead. Why don't you read it?
The Witness. Okay. So it says, question, What did -- start at number 15 or18 number 16, or number 14 here on this, on page 36. What did Hunter Biden do after he was given that request?
This is your question, .
And Devon says: Listen, I did not hear this phone call but he -- he called his dad.
Question: How do you know that?
Answer: Because he, because I think Vadym told me. But again, it's unclear. I just know that there was a call that happened there. I was not privy to it
What did Vadym tell you about the call?
Again, it's not like -- there was not a -- there was not, Oh, we've got all our problems solved kind of revelation. I was -- I was not on the side of the equation, kind of working in the lobbying side of the business. And my point is, is that, number one, this is Devon talking about a call that I made to D.C. And I never would have called, and never did my father on behalf of Burisma with Vadym Pozharsky to ask for anything. It never happened.
Archer was not a witness to this supposed call, he was told something about it by Mr. Poharsky who just made an assumption. But Hunter wouldn’t have had a reason to make that call because, at that time, he wasn’t working as a lobbyist for Burisma.
Then they questioned him about who he did call.
Q Okay. Who did you call?
A I don't -- have no idea whether there call ever took place. I have no recollection of a call --
Q Okay.
A -- that was over 10 years ag go from a -- from, you know, in which, I called D.C. If I called D.C., most likely I called back to my office. Most likely I called back to my -- my wife. Most likely I called back to one of my daughters who were in high school.
But that's who I would call. I wouldn't, in any way ever, you know, call my dad to get him to do something that is business, which I think is obv -- is made, you know, clear by the evidence.
Q Okay. Is it possible you called Secretary Blinken?
A No.
Q Future Secretary Blinken?
A Absolutely not possible I called Secretary Blinken at that time.
They asked him about a WhatsApp message he sent to a business partner who owed him money and he supposedly threatened him with “My dad is sitting here right now.” He testified that that was a lie at the time as he was under the influence of drugs and alcohol. And also, the message was sent to the wrong person.
Q. Zhao responds, "Copy. I will call you on WhatsApp.” You respond, "Okay, my friend. I'm sitting here, waiting for the call, with my father. I sure hope whatever it is are you doing is very, very, very important." Then Zhao says, "Hi, Hunter. Is it a good time to call now? Hi, Hunter, Director did not answer my call, but he got the message you just mentioned."
A Yeah.
Q Do you have any recollection of sending these?
A No, but I've seen this and --
Mr. Lowell. Is there a question?
. Yes. Does he have a recollection of sending the message?
The Witness. And I do not, but I do know this. I have now seen it, which it's been presented. I would say two things about this message.
Mr. Nadler. Can you speak up?
The Witness. I would say two things about this message. The first thing is this. Is that the Zhao that this is sent to is not the Zhao that was connected to CEFC.
Q Okay.
A Which I think is the best indication of how out of my mind I was at this moment in time. Again, I don't -- my addiction is not an excuse, but I can tell you this: I am more embarrassed of this text message, if it actually did come from me, than any text message I've ever sent The fact of the matter is, is that there's no other text message that you have in which I say anything remotely to this. And I was out of my mind. I can also tell you this: My father was not sitting next to me. My father had no awareness. My father had no awareness of the business that I was doing.
Then they question him about having his father meet his business partners, even though Joe was not in office at the time, but then Hunter turns the question around to the actions of Jared Kushner with Saudi Arabia.
Q The whole thing is that the former Vice President is coming to meet potential -
A But he didn't, number one. You know that he didn't. Number two is that you know that I never involved him in any of my business. Number three is --
Q Well, that's --
A -- he never benefited from any of my business. Number four, you know there are no evidence of any transactions in which I sent money for my dad or my dad took action to benefit me or any of my businesses. You know all of those things. But you look at one text message out of context.
And when I say, Hey, my dad's going to be in town. He's also visiting my daughter, I'm going to have lunch, maybe we'll all get to see each other, because it's also with my uncle, I'd love him to meet my new partner, you say there's something wrong with that? I really mean it. He's out of office.
Q I mean, I think it raises questions.
A No, he's out of office. You're saying he can't do that. So when you -- when Jared Kushner flies over to Saudi Arabia, picks up $2 billion, comes back, and puts it in his pocket, okay, and he is running for President of the United States, you guys have any problem with that?
Mr. Gaetz. The clock has stopped.
. Anyway --
The Witness. No, the clock has not stopped.
Do you guys have any problem with that? I'm asking.
. I have one more question before our hour is up.The Witness. It's unbelievable to me.
Mr. Lowell. You said there's one more? Go ahead.
The Witness. So my dad can't go to dinner?
They asked him about the “10 for H to hold for the Big Guy?” message and it turns out that message didn’t come from Hunter, it was a suggestion from someone else, and neither Hunter nor Joe followed up on it. Joe didn’t receive any money from Hunter’s Burisma contract he was never part of the deal.
Q "20, TB." Is that Tony Bobulinski?
A Yes.
Q "10, Jim," is that your uncle?
A Yes.
Q And then "10 held by H," which would be you, "for the big guy," which presumably is your dad, correct?
Mr. Goldman. Question mark, correct?
Q Question mark.
A Question mark. Not only question mark, but all I know this is, is that, number one, there's only one agreement that includes Tony Bobulinski, that is executed, that is signed by me. There's only one message that I had as it relates to any involvement that I had with Tony Bobulinski, James Gilliar, my uncle, and Rob Walker, and it did not involve my dad.
There's an executed agreement in which I got 20 percent, Jim got 20 percent, Rob got 20 percent, Tony got 20 percent, and James Gilliar got 20 percent. Nothing do with Joe Biden.
And the only agreement that was drafted before that had 50-50, and I was -- I was the one 50. I was 50, and Mr. Ye was the other 50.
And the only company that ever existed that had any involvement with Mr. Ye that was ever an actual operating company was the company Hudson West Three, in which I owned 50 percent, and Mr. Ye owned 50 percent.
So this idea that because James Gilliar goes out and he says to Tony, You guys have seen the communications of Tony. You have the communications of Tony.
I told Tony literally weeks after I met him that he was out of his mind, that he was going around, trying to promote the idea that my dad was somehow going to be involved in this. And that's why I never did business with Tony. And that's why Tony is a bitter, bitter man that did not get in on a deal that he wanted to get in on, because I thought that he was both incompetent and an idiot. And he's proved himself to be so by the complete misstatements that he's made.
And then he goes on to continue attacking Tony Buboliski's integrity, where Buboliski has claimed that he was misquoted by the FBI. And he gives Marjorie Taylor Greene the business about “liars.'“
I do know that Tony said that he was never at a meeting with Mark Meadows at a rally in, I forget where it was in Missouri and that he never wore a ski mask until the next day you get a picture with Mr. Meadows behind a car with Tony Bobulinski with a ski mask. '[This picture was taken by Casssidy Hutchinson']
Did he say that to you under oath, Mr. Comer? Did he tell you that under oath? Because he also said under oath to the FBI that he was at a meeting with Mr. Ye in Miami. And then he said -- he said it under oath to the FBI is he went in --12
Q But that was a 302.
A Oh, wait a second.
Q And he contested the FBI got it wrong.
A You guys are going to tell me that 302s are not -- you guys are going to tell me that you can't trust a 302 --
Q We are going to tell you --
A -- but you can trust a 1020. So you guys are actually going to tell me that you --
Q We're going to tell you --
A -- you can't trust a 302 but you can a 1023. You can trust that one.
Q We're going to tell you that Mr. Jordan has a bill --
A Can you tell me that, Ms. Greene?
Ms. Greene. I said it was their most credible informant. So truly not be able to believe that that --
The Witness. So should I not believe the credible FBI? Should I not -- so you're saying the FBI are liars.
Ms. Greene. I thought you were -- I didn't think you --
The Witness. Alexander Smirnov who has Russian contacts is not a liar.
. Before we go off the record, I want one last question.
The Witness. No, let's stay on the record for this discussion.
. Well --
The Witness. Let's talk about it.
So you're telling me, Ms. Greene, you don't trust the FBI notetaker, six of them, six of them.
Democrats come back and asked Hunter even more about the “10 for H to hold for the Big Guy?” message which apparently came from Mr. Gilliar.
Q If that's the case, though, why is Gilliar drafting something like that?
A Because I think that it was just as Rob Walker said. I think that it was pie in the sky. Like Joe Biden's out of the office. Maybe we'll be able to get him involved. Remember, again, is that Joe Biden, for first time in 48 years, is not an elected official and is not seeking office. And so James is probably, like, wow, wouldn't be great if a former Vice President could be in our business together?
And I say you're out of your mind. My dad knows less about doing cross-border blah, blah, blah, than he does about -- I mean, it's just ridiculous. It's absolutely ridiculous.
And so I shut it down, and the evidence of me shutting it down is the actual things you have as evidence. Remember that. The agreement, the executed agreement, the executed agreement to create a company that was never operated, that's what happened. That's the evidence you have. You have the evidence of the executed agreement between Hudson West Three, me, and Mr. Ye. You have that.
Nothing to do with my dad, zero.
And then Eric Swalwell comes in and asks a bunch of hilarious rhetorical questions.
Mr. Swalwell. I can tell you the date wasn't any time recently, because this is from a Blackberry. They don't make those anymore. We might get the pager code later from the majority. Any time your father was in government, prior to the Presidency or before, did he ever operate a hotel?
The Witness. No, he has never operated a hotel.
Mr. Swalwell. So he's never operated a hotel where foreign nationals spent millions at that hotel while he was in office?
The Witness. No, he has not.
Mr. Swalwell. Did your father ever employ in the Oval Office any direct family member to also work in the Oval Office?
The Witness. My father has never employed any direct family members, to my knowledge.
Mr. Swalwell. While your father was President, did anyone in the family receive 41 trademarks from China?
The Witness. No.
Mr. Swalwell. As President and the leader of the party, has your father ever tried to install as the chairperson of the party a daughter-in-law or anyone else in the family?
The Witness. No. And I don't think that anyone in my family would be crazy enough to want to be the chairperson of the DNC.
Mr. Swalwell. Has your father ever in his time as an adult been fined $355 million by any State that he worked in?
The Witness. No, he has not, thank God.
Mr. Swalwell. Anyone in your family ever strike a multibillion dollar deal with the Saudi Government while your father was in office?
The Witness. No.
Mr. Swalwell. That's all I've got.
The Witness. Thank you.
Finally, Hunter confronts them directly on their lack of evidence. They don’t have any documents that show a business transaction between Joe and the rest of his family.
The Witness. Have you ever gone out to dinner with your dad and paid?
Mr. Gaetz. This is not about me and my dad.
The Witness. I'm asking you, have you ever been out to dinner with your dad?
Mr. Gaetz. Me and my dad aren't involved in international bribes, Mr. Biden.
The Witness. It's a normal question. Mr. Swalwell. Hey, hey, hey. Come on.
The Witness. Well, I am not involved in international bribes. That literally is slander.
Mr. Swalwell. Just ask the question.
Mr. Gaetz. I am asking the question. The Witness. We've already determined that.
Mr. Swalwell. You're making statements.
Mr. Lowell. I would like everybody to stop and let a question be asked and an answer be given, and that includes you, Congressman Gaetz. Please, let him answer a question. And if you're going to make a speech or make an allegation of bribery, you can do that, you can do it on the floor, you can do it today, but it's not really a question, and you know the point. So why don't you keep going.
Mr. Gaetz. Happy to. How many times did you pay for your father's household expenses?
The Witness. I don't know. I can't answer that.
Mr. Gaetz. More or less than 10?
The Witness. I can't answer that here.
Mr. Gaetz. More or less than 20?
The Witness. I am under oath, and I'm not going to answer with any specificity or generality whatsoever. I do not know.
Mr. Gaetz. More or less than 50?
The Witness. Again, Mr. Gaetz, I cannot answer with any specificity --
Mr. Lowell. Why don't you go to 100 or 200 or 500, because the answer will be the same.
The Witness. I do not know. Yeah.
Mr. Gaetz. Okay. More or less than 500 times have you paid expenses for your dad?
Mr. Lowell. Go to 1,000. He just said he doesn't know. Take any number you want.
Mr. Gaetz. I did. I picked 500.
Mr. Lowell. Okay.
Mr. Gaetz. Can I get an answer?
The Witness. I think I already answered it. I'm not --
Mr. Gaetz. No, you didn't answer as to 500.
The Witness. Five million. I don't have any recollection, no matter how large you make the number or how small you make the number. I don't have, with any specificity, without any documentation in front of me, to be able to quantify how many times over the course of my 54 years of life and my adulthood in which I paid an incidental bill or dinner for my dad or, you know, the ski rentals when we went skiing together. I don't know.
Mr. Gaetz. So it sounds like your finances were pretty interwoven
Mr. Lowell. Will the record show that we're all laughing?
The Witness. I mean, are you kidding me? No. I don't -- again --
Mr. Gaetz. So do you --
The Witness. I'm sorry, Mr. Gaetz, I'll take you seriously. And it's hard to do --
Mr. Lowell. Why would you do that?
The Witness. -- but I will. I will take you seriously, but it's hard to do. I disagree with your characterization of what you just said. No, our finances aren't interwoven. What are interwoven is that we're a family. And I don't think that it is any different than any other family in which you have adult children, you have grandchildren that are adult children, and that, you know, sometimes I pay for dinner, when I was earning enough money to be able to do it, but most of the time my dad would pay for dinner, if he could pay for dinner, if he didn't forget his credit card, which 90 percent of the time he usually does.
Mr. Gaetz. Mr. Biden, I have not asked you any questions about dinner. I'm asking questions about household expenses, which you say --
The Witness. I answered the question.
Mr. Gaetz. -- are the basis for this.
The Witness. No, I said -- I answered the question. There was never a time in which I paid for something that my dad did not pay me back. There was never a time in which I gave my dad money --
Mr. Gaetz. Did you keep receipts?
The Witness. You have all my receipts. You have every bank account that I've ever had. You have every bank record that I've ever had. You've subpoenaed, I have not objected to your subpoena, over 10,000 pages, 14,000 pages of bank records. You have every transaction that I've ever made.
Do you see a transaction, Mr. Gaetz? It's not incumbent upon me to point to you to something that doesn't exist. It's incumbent upon you to create something, to come up with something based upon the voluminous evidence that you've collected, which shows no involvement.
They have no evidence. None. Not one single bank record or document that puts Joe Biden into the middle of Hunter or James Biden’s business.
All this demonstrates is that this entire effort is a farce. It’s a joke. As The Who used to say it’s an “Eminence Front”, “It’s a Put-on.”
It’s bullshit from top to bottom.
And even Right-wing media is finally starting to notice.
Have a listen to my new Vocal Cover — "Blame it on my youth" originally by Mr. Big.
Check out my new Patreon where you can download copies of my covers and original songs. You can also stream tracks from my previous Solo CD from ReverbNation.
And You can send Funds to Support me via Paypal