Chaos reigns in House as hard-liners plot McCarthy ouster

There can never be too much chaos for Rep. Matt Gaetz and his malignant cohorts. With this weekend’s government shutdown now seeming inevitable, the Florida Republican and some of his unnamed compatriots are plotting to try to oust House Speaker Kevin McCarthy as early as next week, according to The Washington Post.

A shutdown isn’t enough disruption, nor is their trainwreck of an impeachment inquiry inquiry, so these hard-liners want to make the House an even more ridiculously dysfunctional place. There’s a real underpants-gnome vibe to the endeavor, with phase two of the plot—whom they’ll replace McCarthy with—currently a mystery. The only name seriously floated to the Post is Majority Whip Tom Emmer of Minnesota, who told the Post, “I fully support Speaker McCarthy. He knows that and I know that. … I have zero interest in palace intrigue. End of discussion.”

The other question is whether they’re capable of pulling it off. The House procedure is called a “motion to vacate,” and it has been voted on only once in American history—and it failed. In 1910, Speaker Joseph Cannon survived the vote, though his leadership was weakened. Later, in 1997, rebels plotting against then-Speaker Newt Gingrich talked about using it, but they never filed the motion. The only other time the motion has been filed was in 2015, when then-Rep. Mark Meadows (yeah, that Mark Meadows) filed it against then-Speaker John Boehner, but it was never deployed. Boehner ultimately resigned.

Campaign Action

A successful motion to vacate is clearly not an easy thing to pull off. Is this the crew that will make history and be the first to succeed? It’s just possible that McCarthy and team are hapless enough that it could happen. But what the hard-liners should worry about are the potential consequences: empowered Democrats.

McCarthy has brushed off any suggestion of getting help from Democrats to save his speakership, and in turn, Democrats aren’t in a hurry to rush to his defense. "I cannot imagine him paying the price that it would take for us to bail him out," Rep. Jared Huffman of California told Axios.

That price would be steep. "We want to get disaster aid out, we want to continue our support for Ukraine, and we want them to end this sham of an impeachment inquiry," Minority Whip Katherine Clark of Massachusetts told Politico last week. "If Kevin McCarthy chooses to ... get back to work for the American people, to do the right thing, we're going to be there to, you know, meet and compromise with him."

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is playing it very cool. He rejected “the notion that any of us would be dealing with inside parlor games when we’re trying to stop the extreme MAGA Republicans,” according to Axios. “I haven’t given it any thought,” he added.

McCarthy needs 217 votes out of his current 221-seat majority to save his speakership. (There are two vacancies in the House.) Presuming Gaetz can count, he won’t bring the motion to vacate unless he’s got four Republican members on his side willing to abandon McCarthy so the ploy can potentially succeed. However, Gaetz can’t and shouldn’t count on Democrats to help him—they can sit this one out by voting “present,” or they can vote to keep McCarthy.

That puts a lot of power into the hands of the 212 Democrats and the “Biden 18”—the freshmen Republicans in districts President Joe Biden won in 2020. If just four of them play their cards right—and cross the aisle on a vote—they could find themselves in a fairly comfortable position with Speaker Hakeem Jeffries. At the very least, they wouldn’t be blamed for the next government shutdown.

It’s a long shot that any of this ends with a Democratic speaker, but the only thing that’s predictable amid the chaos in the House is the unpredictable.

RELATED STORIES:

Republican incompetence sets the stage for a Sunday government shutdown

Here’s what the ‘pissing match’ between Gaetz and McCarthy costs

New day, same chaos: House GOP argues with itself in face of shutdown

Gallagher rolls out ‘DADDY Act’ to block family of executive branch officials from foreign business work

EXCLUSIVE: House China Committee Chairman Mike Gallagher is introducing a bill that would block immediate family members of officials within the executive branch of the U.S. government from working for certain foreign companies.

The bill, called the "Deterring Attempts at Dirty Deals by Youngsters Act" or the "DADDY Act," would apply to family members of the president, vice president and cabinet officials, to ensure that immediate family members — like a son, daughter, sister, brother, or in-law — cannot take roles sitting on the boards of foreign companies while their family member holds the office.

The bill would cover immediate family members of the president of the United States; vice president; secretary of State; secretary of the Treasury; secretary of Defense; attorney general; secretary of the Interior; secretary of Agriculture; secretary of Commerce; secretary of Labor; secretary of Health and Human Services; secretary of Transportation; secretary of Energy; secretary of Education; secretary of Veterans Affairs; secretary of Homeland Security; and the director of National Intelligence.

COMER SUBPOENAS PERSONAL, BUSINESS BANK RECORDS FOR HUNTER BIDEN, JAMES BIDEN AS PART OF IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

Immediate family is described in the bill as a spouse, child, mother, father, sibling, grandchild, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, sister-in-law, and brother-in-law; as well as adopted and step relatives.

Gallagher’s bill comes amid the House impeachment inquiry against President Biden, and House Republicans’ investigations into the Biden family’s overseas business dealings.

The House Oversight Committee said this week that, through bank records, it has uncovered that the Biden family and their business associates raked in more than $24 million from foreign countries in 2014, 2015, and 2016 — when Joe Biden served as Vice President — through 2019 when he announced his presidential campaign.

HUNTER BIDEN'S $250K WIRE FROM CHINA LABELED AS A 'PERSONAL INVESTMENT'

Lawmakers have focused in on Hunter Biden’s business deals in China, Ukraine and other foreign nations, as well as his lucrative role on the board of Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings while his father served as vice president in the Obama administration and ran Ukraine policy. His former business associates have testified to Congress that Hunter Biden was "selling Joe Biden as ‘the brand’ around the world."

"Hunter Biden is the ultimate swamp creature," Gallagher told Fox News Digital. "His shameless degree of influence peddling and profiteering is exactly what’s wrong with Washington, and it’s shocking this kind of behavior isn’t illegal already."

"This bill helps end this kind of corruption and ensures any family member of an executive branch official can’t profit off their family’s position in government," Gallagher said.

HUNTER BIDEN RECEIVED $250K WIRES ORIGINATING IN BEIJING WITH BENEFICIARY ADDRESS LISTED AS JOE BIDEN'S HOME

The bill’s focus would be on companies in countries that are adversarial to the United States. It would allow exemptions for companies in NATO countries, members of the Five Eyes Alliance — meaning Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States as well as Japan, South Korea or Israel.

If passed, violations of the law would be punishable by a fine of up to $250,000, up to five years in prison, or both.

The bill comes after House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer subpoenaed personal and business bank records belonging to Hunter Biden and the president's brother, James Biden, as part of the House impeachment inquiry.

"Bank records don’t lie, and coupled with witness testimony, they reveal that Joe Biden abused his public office for his family’s financial gain," Comer said Thursday night, adding that the financial records that his committee has obtained to date "reveal a pattern where the Bidens sold access to Joe Biden around the world to enrich the Biden family."

The 5 best moments of the House ‘impeachment inquiry’ farce

The impeachment inquiry that Republicans started on Thursday was demonstrably without merit and initiated in violation of House rules and precedent. At the end of the day, after hearing from three Republican non-fact witnesses chosen because of their commentary in right-wing media, not a single hint of evidence was produced to justify the inquiry.

Even so, the hearing was extremely revealing—only that most of what it revealed was how ready Republicans were to manufacture false claims and wheel out conspiracy theories that have been widely debunked for years. This was partly because they had nothing else. Mostly, it was because every single Republican treated their five minutes of camera time as if they were doing a one-person play for Newsmax.

Through the course of the day, not only did Republicans showcase their lack of interest in facts, they also demonstrated that they are absolutely terrified of anything that looks like a fact witness.

Here are five highlights showing that the all-day event definitely had value.

5. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calls out manufactured images

During his five minutes, Republican Rep. Byron Donalds trotted out a series of images that were reportedly messages from Hunter Biden. They appeared to be screenshots of phone messages, complete with little green bubbles. However, these images, many of which came straight out of sites associated with QAnon, were neither actual screenshots nor at all accurate.

It fell to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to call out one of the worst.

AOC: That screenshot of what appeared to be a text message was a fabricated image. It was a fabricated image, I don't know where it came from, I don't know if it was staff of the committee, pic.twitter.com/Hv6s9oii3a

— Acyn (@Acyn) September 28, 2023

In the actual message, Hunter Biden is worried about his ability to pay his alimony and is planning how he can get his life back together as he recovers from both drug addiction and a divorce, while hoping to find a way to pay back what he owes to members of his family. A friend replies offering Hunter a place to stay and help in planning his next steps.

But Donalds showed scraps of this conversation pasted together, which were meant to make it seem as if one of Hunter’s business partners was scheming to make a payment to President Joe Biden. It was about as close to the actual message as a ransom note generated though cutting words out of magazines.

And you can see exactly how concerned Donalds was about being caught committing absolute fraud.

Byron Donalds and his smug face while AOC points out that his text message presentation was a fabricated image that omitted key context. Tells you all you need to know about Byron Donalds. pic.twitter.com/t7xdn95TQk

— John G (@JohnnyG0626) September 28, 2023

Why wasn’t he concerned? As Ocasio-Cortez pointed out, everyone in the room other than the witnesses were protected by the “speech and debate clause” of the Constitution. That allows members of Congress to lie with impunity, and Republicans put that ability into heavy rotation during this hearing.

4. Rep. Jamie Raskin shows that Republicans are allergic to facts

Throughout the day, Republicans returned again and again to one claim: While serving as vice president, Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to dismiss prosecutor Viktor Shokin to protect the company Burisma, where Hunter Biden was on the board. That claim wasn’t simply an item on a list, it was the only claim that many of the Republican members talked about. That includes Rep. Jim Jordan, who used it both as his opening and in his sweaty, ranty closing remarks.

The problem with this claim is that it’s simply a lie. It’s a lie that was debunked literally within two weeks of when it first appeared, in 2019. The story did not exist before Giuliani brought it to The New York Times. It was immediately shot down. It was the basis of the phone call that Donald Trump placed to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in an attempt to blackmail him into producing false claims about Joe Biden. It has been debunked by everyone involved in every way possible.

Now Republicans are wedded to this baseless lie as the heart of their “inquiry.” That leaves them fighting desperately to prevent any facts about these events from entering the hearing room. That even extends to preventing Republican witnesses from appearing.

Rep. Jamie Raskin just moved the House GOP's Impeachment Inquiry to subpoena Rudy Giuliani and @levparnas for direct eye-witness testimony about their main allegations against President Joe Biden. Republicans just voted 20-19 to TABLE THE MOTION, keeping the key witnesses away! pic.twitter.com/cuNTFQjBLJ

— Grant Stern  (@grantstern) September 28, 2023

The biggest chuckle of the whole thing is how Jordan tries to pretend that somehow the Burisma lie can exist independent of Giuliani when everyone involved confirms that the story did not even exist until Giuliani began shopping it around in 2019. Everything that they are leaning on now, including that infamous FBI form 1023, was created in an effort to prop up Giuliani’s massive lie.

3. Rep. Robert Garcia shows what actual corruption looks like

Over and over throughout the day, it became obvious that there was one name missing from the “evidence” that Republicans kept repeating: the name of the guy they were supposedly investigating, Joe Biden. Republicans showed charts of an array of businesses. They went through stacks of phone texts and emails. They detailed meals almost down to the menu. But what was missing from 99.9% of the things they brought up was any whiff of the president.

Here’s Jordan’s tweet from last week that practically represents a summary of the hearing.

-The Biden “brand.” -10% for the Big Guy -50% of earnings -Shakedowns -Fake Names -Shell companies -Multiple family members getting paid -Multiple times the White House changed their story -Dinners -Meetings But according to Democrats, no need for an impeachment inquiry.

— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) September 13, 2023

Unable to find anything that Joe Biden has done, Republicans declared that there was a Biden “brand” that they could then use as a proxy for Joe Biden. What does this mean? Were there license agreements? Biden water? Biden steaks? Maybe big gold letters spelling “BIDEN” above the doors of hotels actually owned by foreign corporations? None of that.

What the “Biden brand” and “the Biden family” really translates to is “We have nothing on Joe Biden.” But in case Republicans had forgotten what real corruption looked like, Rep. Robert Garcia came complete with pictures of someone who genuinely had worked in the White House, visited with foreign leaders on official business, then collected $2 billion from those leaders the day after Trump left office.

Rep. Garcia uses his time to highlight the brazen corruption embodied by the presence of Jared Kushner and Ivanka in the Trump White House pic.twitter.com/ZoutPuJ86d

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 28, 2023

2. Rep. Jasmine Crockett delivers one of many fantastic takedowns

The whole affair was such a shambles that as the day wore on, Democrats in the hearing were clearly having fun. Whether it was Raskin’s opening remarks that made it clear exactly what was going to happen, or Rep. Daniel Goldman repeatedly forcing a clearly exasperated Jordan to accept documents on the record following Republicans lying about those documents, there was a good deal of fun to be had from this pointless farce of a hearing.

Just watch Rep. Jared Moskowitz.

Almost from the opening bell, things went so poorly for the Republicans that it was obvious why even Fox had relegated this thing to their business channel. Five years of investigating the same false claims had not brought them even a speck of evidence.

On any ordinary day, Moskowitz delivering the line, “As a former director of emergency management, I know a disaster when I see one,” would be a sure winner. But sorry, Rep. Moskowitz, that moment has to take second place to Rep. Jasmine Crockett’s remarks.

First, Crockett tried to enter a fact sheet into the record. When Jordan and Rep. James Comer objected, Crockett wasn’t even phased. “Of course y’all gonna object,” she said smoothly, “but we gon’ talk about it.” Then she moved on to a moment of absolute destruction.

Not only did Crockett absolutely slay Republicans over the idea that nothing they were talking about showed any connection to Joe Biden, but also she took the time to review some of the genuine threats raised by actions of Donald Trump. That included waving some of the images that were taken during the FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, where boxes of classified documents were stacked in a bathroom.

Crockett: “When we start talking about things that look like evidence, they [Republicans] want to act like they’re blind. They don’t know what this is. These are our national secrets! Looks like in the shitter to me.”

1. Rep. Greg Casar blows apart the entire basis of the Republican ‘inquiry’

Throughout the day, in their hundreds of mentions of Hunter Biden, Republicans kept insisting that they were all about “equal treatment under the law,” and that Joe Biden’s son was getting off too lightly because of that “Biden brand.”

But when it came right down to it, Casar simply blew away that claim—as well as any claim that Republicans were concerned about justice at all—with one simple action.

Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX) asks House Oversight Committee members to raise their hands if they believe both Hunter Biden and Donald Trump should “be held accountable if they’re found guilty.” All Democrats raise their hands; no Republicans do. pic.twitter.com/NnPxjkGZyW

— The Recount (@therecount) September 28, 2023

Casar: “Will members of the Oversight Committee please raise your hand if you believe both Hunter and Trump should be held accountable for any of the indictments against them if convicted by a jury of their peers?”

Casar’s hand went up. The other Democrats on the committee raised their hands. Not one single Republican joined them.

In 30 seconds, Casar demonstrated absolutely that far from being about “equal justice,” Republicans are there to ensure unequal justice and to do the bidding of Donald Trump. It was a masterclass in simply calling on people to put up or shut up. And it should be an example that is not forgotten.

Sign and send the petition: NO to MAGA impeachment. Focus on what matters.

Abbreviated Pundit Roundup: It’s been a bad week for Republicans and a good one for the rule of law

New York Times:

Trump Lawsuit Against Judge in Fraud Case Rejected by Appeals Court

Former President Donald J. Trump had accused Justice Arthur F. Engoron of ignoring an earlier decision that could have barred evidence from the case.

The appeals court, in a terse two-page order Thursday, turned aside a lawsuit Mr. Trump filed against the trial judge, Arthur F. Engoron, which had sought to delay the proceeding.

The ruling came two days after Justice Engoron issued an order that struck a major blow to Mr. Trump, finding him liable for having committed fraud by persistently overvaluing his assets and stripping him of control over his New York properties. Justice Engoron sided with the New York attorney general, Letitia James, who last year sued Mr. Trump, accusing him of inflating his net worth by billions of dollars to obtain favorable loan terms from banks.

Another House GOP staffer tells me “Comer and staff botched this bad.” Tells me the information presented by Republicans has been “confusing” and Democrats are “on message.” “How can you not be better prepared for this?”

— Stephen Neukam (@stephen_neukam) September 28, 2023

New York Times:

Trump’s Sprawling Legal Defense Effort Comes Under Strain

Former President Donald Trump’s team has found lawyers for others caught up in his prosecutions and has paid many of their legal bills. That arrangement may not be sustainable.

In an interview, Mr. Rowley said he was simply trying to help witnesses who did not have lawyers or did not know how to find one, and that he never sought to influence anyone’s testimony. And legal experts said the voice mail, while somewhat unusual, did not appear to cross any ethical lines.

But as Mr. Trump’s legal problems have expanded, the ad hoc system has come under intense strain with the PAC doling out financial lifelines to some aides and allies while shutting the door on others. It is now running short of money, possibly forcing Mr. Trump to decide how long to go on helping others as his own legal fees mount.

Prosecutors have also brought conflict-of-interest questions about some of the arrangements before the courts, and witnesses and co-defendants may begin to face decisions about how closely they want to lash their legal strategies to Mr. Trump’s.

David Cay Johnston/DC Report:

Judge Gives Trump Organization the Corporate Death Penalty

Donald Trump is no longer in business.

Worse, the self-proclaimed multibillionaire may soon be personally bankrupt as a result, stripped of just about everything because for years he engaged in calculated bank fraud and insurance fraud by inflating the value of his properties, a judge ruled Tuesday.

His gaudy Trump Tower apartment, his golf courses, his Boeing 757 jet and even Mar-a-Lago could all be disposed of by a court-appointed monitor, leaving Trump with not much more than his pensions as a one term president and a television performer.

Democrats are KILLING IT at the sham impeachment inquiry. Just killing it. Every day is a good day to be a Democrat; today is a fantastic day to be a proud Democrat. https://t.co/CEhtO48hod

— HawaiiDelilah™ 🟦 #MauiStrong (@HawaiiDelilah) September 28, 2023

Chris Lehmann/The Nation:

The Great Rolling Trump Fraud

A summary judgment in the legal case against the former president rules that he’s exactly as shady as he looks.

Engoron made similarly short work of the two-pronged paper defense Trump and his attorneys mustered for the billions in dodgy valuations they racked up—the magical disclaimer supposedly stipulating that the estimates supplied to bankers, loan officers, and insurers were “worthless”; and the allied contention that any reasonable financial officer would soon override such valuations via standard due-diligence research. “Defendants’ reliance on these ‘worthless’ disclaimers is worthless,” he drily noted. “The clause does not use the word ‘worthless’ or ‘useless” or ‘ignore’ or ‘disregard’ or any similar words. It does not say, ‘the values herein are what I think the properties will be worth in ten or more years.’ Indeed, the quoted language uses ‘current’ no less than five times, and ‘future’ zero times.” And he observes that the due-dilgence dodge is little more than a license to frontload systemic fraud into any company’s business model: “Defendants’ stance is, practically speaking, that they may submit false [suspected fraudulent claims] so long as the recipients know, from their own due diligence, that the information is false.”

Still, there is one limited sense in which Trump’s defense was anchored in reality. In a deposition, Trump contended that he could affix any value he saw fit to any property in question, for the simple reason that he could always “find a buyer from Saudi Arabia” to accept the price.

I wrote about Jim Jordan's dishonesty in today's hearing and the GOP's reluctance to correct the record. No paywall: https://t.co/j4dvgTyiB5

— Philip Bump (@pbump) September 28, 2023

Philip Bump/Washington Post:

How much would your house be worth if the Trump Organization owned it?

The New York Post, appearing eager to side with the longtime star of its gossip pages, scoffed at the objective appraisal included in the judge’s ruling, insisting that other assessments put the value of Mar-a-Lago at somewhere around $300 million. Those well-versed in mathematics will notice that this would still mean the $612 million Trump valuation was twice the actual worth of the property.

But here is a different approach. Instead of defending the Trump Organization’s inflation efforts, you can put them to work for you. The tool below allows you to choose a property value between $100,000 and $1 billion (for especially lucky readers) and see how those values might have been presented to investors had the Trump Organization’s inflationary metrics been applied. All of the calculations here are taken from the judge’s ruling, in which the presented value and assessed values are offered explicitly — as in the Seven Springs example above.

The tool is set at $400,000 to start, about the median sales price for U.S. homes this year.

This is a really interesting poll, especially for anxious Democrats. Biden's approval rating with Dems is around 77% (same as BHO at a similar point). In 2012, as the campaign heated up, Dems returned to the fold, pushing Obama to 91%. I'd expect a similar trajectory for Biden pic.twitter.com/zNQcgQiVQc

— Michael A. Cohen (NOT TRUMP’S FORMER FIXER) (@speechboy71) September 28, 2023

Matt Glassman/X via Threadreader:

Why is defeating the Previous Question on a rule so much more powerful/dangerous than defeating the rule?
The answer is that defeating a rule is *negative* agenda setting, while defeating the PQ is *positive* agenda setting. 
When you defeat a rule, the leaders who brought the rule cannot set the agenda. But that's the end; you block them from doing something, but that's it. They go back to the side rooms and try to figure out what to do next. 
When you defeat the PQ on a rule, you block a *vote* on the rule and leave it live on the floor, open to amendment. You can then propose an amendment to it, and if your coalition that defeated the PQ holds together, you can pass your amendment.
In effect, YOU set the agenda.
This is why it terrifies leaders so much more than a rule defeat, and why it's truly a declaration of war against the leadership. You aren't just saying no to their agenda, you are seeking to substitute *your* agenda. 

Of course, I could be wrong (I’m on record as saying I didn’t think we’d get to where we are now re: a shutdown!) but I tend to think this ends the old-fashioned way (as much I would love to see a vote on overruling the chair on a question of what's germane to a special rule).

— Molly Reynolds (@mollyereynolds) September 27, 2023

Mona Charen/The Bulwark:

The Fear Factor in Republican Politics

The MAGA movement has made political violence and intimidation a regular feature of our public life.

This is not new, but that shouldn’t diminish our outrage. On at least 24 occasions, the former president has accused critics of treason. They ranged from Peter Strzok, whose offense was exchanging worried texts with his lover to the then-anonymous administration official who penned a New York Times op-ed saying that many insiders in Trump world were aware of his unfitness to Democrats who declined to applaud at the State of the Union address. Yes, these examples seem like something out of Idiocracy, but millions of Americans, contra Salena Zito, take him literally and seriously.

Now Trump has upped the ante by including a reference to the death penalty, which is in fact a punishment available in cases of treason, not just “in times gone by.” Trump knows full well that some of his more rabid followers may interpret this as an invitation to assassination, just as the January 6th crowd chanted “Hang Mike Pence.” That thuggishness, that play of the finger near the trigger, places Trump in a category all his own in American politics.

That’s why Biden gave that speech on democracy yesterday.

Biden closes his powerful speech in Arizona on behalf of democracy pic.twitter.com/JzgwOlweEg

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 28, 2023

From Matt Robison:

Democrats’ new Hunter Biden talking point: Biden only guilty of being a loving father

House Democrats are now claiming that President Joe Biden actually is guilty - of loving his son Hunter.

The House Oversight Committee held an impeachment inquiry hearing Thursday that delved into the relation to between President Biden and his involvement in his son Hunter's foreign business dealings.

Democrat Reps. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., and Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas., fumed at House Republicans during their 5-minute remarks, attempting to argue that the president is innocent on the basis that he is just "a father."

DEMOCRATS SEEK TO SWITCH BIDEN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY HEARING FOCUS TO TRUMP

"This entire fake impeachment inquiry isn't about the United States; it's about Hunter Biden. And the only thing the president can be guilty of here is being a father," Bowman said during the hearing.

After using up most of her time shifting the focus from Biden to former President Donald Trump, Crockett also claimed that Biden is nothing but "guilty of loving his child unconditionally."

"Tell you what the president has been guilty of. He has unfortunately been guilty of loving his child unconditionally, and that is the only evidence that they have brought forward. And honestly, I hope and pray that my parents love me half as much as he loves his child."

HUNTER BIDEN'S $250K WIRE FROM CHINA LABELED AS A ‘PERSONAL INVESTMENT’

House Republicans launched the inquiry pledging to provide "accountability" as they investigate Biden family finances and business dealings. 

Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer alleges they have a "mountain of evidence" indicating that President Biden had previously leveraged his public office for personal gain for his family.

"The bottom line is that the committee has shown the Bidens alone brought in over $15 million in their foreign influence peddling, over $24 million if you account for their associate's earnings from the schemes," Comer said.

"We have established in the first phase of this investigation where this money has come from Ukraine, Romania, Russia, Kazakhstan, China; it didn't come from selling anything legitimate," he continued. "It largely went unreported to the IRS. It was funneled through shell companies and third parties to hide the Biden's fingerprints."

"This deserves investigation," he added. "This deserves accountability. The American people expect this committee to investigate public corruption."

Comer then outlined the committee's next steps in the inquiry.

"Now we know much of the money goes -- Hunter Biden, Haley Biden, James Biden, Sarah Biden, other Biden family members and their business entities," Comer said. "What we need to understand is where it goes next. That is the question this committee has to answer. And the evidence supports that next step."

Comer said he would subpoena the bank records of Hunter Biden, James Biden and their affiliated companies.