Tangle - Republicans formally authorize Biden impeachment.

Episode Date: December 18, 2023

Biden's impeachment inquiry. On Wednesday, the Republican-controlled House voted to formally authorize its impeachment inquiry into President Biden, likely increasing its ability to enforce subpoenas and throwing Congress into its third presidential impeachment of the last seven years.You can read today's podcast ⁠⁠here⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story here, and today’s “Have a nice day” story here. You can also check out our latest videos, and interview with presidential candidate Marianne Williamson here and a look at what a potential second term for Donald Trump could look like, here.Today’s clickables: Quick hits (0:58), Today’s story (3:16), Left’s take (6:14), Right’s take (10:00), Isaac’s take (13:40), Listener question (19:30), Under the Radar (22:34), Numbers (23:24), Have a nice day (24:40)You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the poll. What do you think of the House's impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden? Let us know!Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Jon Lall. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Will Kaback, Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo.--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight.

Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. Breaking news happens anywhere, anytime. Police have warned the protesters repeatedly, get back. CBC News brings the story to you as it happens. Hundreds of wildfires are burning. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly.

Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to

your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca. From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode,

we're going to be talking about the Biden impeachment inquiry, more specifically, the fact that Republicans in the House just voted to formalize that inquiry, what it means, and what we have as far as evidence so far. And of course, as always, going to share some views from across the political spectrum. Before we jump in, though, we'll kick things off with some quick hits. First up, three Israeli hostages were killed by Israeli military forces in Gaza who mistakenly identified them as a threat. Separately, Israel's Mossad spy agency met with Qatari's prime minister over the weekend, looking to renew a ceasefire deal and negotiate the release of more hostages. renew a ceasefire deal and negotiate the release of more hostages. Number two, at least 61 migrants died after a ship they were aboard sank off the coast of Libya. The migrants were reportedly en route to Europe. Number three, a Senate staffer, Senator Ben Cardin, the Democrat from Maryland,

was fired after he was caught filming a sex tape in the Senate hearing room. Number four, Senate negotiators continue to cite progress on a deal to tie U.S.-Mexico border policy to military funding for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan. And number five, a jury ordered Rudy Giuliani to pay $148 million in damages to two Georgia election workers for defaming them with allegations they helped Biden win the 2020 election. Giuliani vowed to appeal and stood by his assertions about the women outside the courthouse. We are following breaking news tonight. The House vote to formalize the impeachment inquiry into President Biden. It has passed.

The House voted along party lines to formalize investigations that have been ongoing for the last year. That work has yet to turn up evidence that the president has committed a high crime or misdemeanor. But Republicans say new tools will help them dig deeper. Republicans say new tools will help them dig deeper. They've got a mountain of evidence, but all the evidence shows that Joe Biden is not guilty of any presidential offense. In fact, their own witnesses came to their only public hearing on impeachment and to a witness said that they did not see sufficient evidence to justify impeachment. Evidence uncovered has shown a very disturbing trend by the Biden family. We've spent months in this investigation accumulating evidence.

We have a simple question that I think a overwhelming majority of Americans have. What did the Bidens do to receive the tens of millions of dollars from our enemies around the world? On Wednesday, the Republican-controlled House voted to formally authorize its impeachment inquiry into President Biden, likely increasing its ability to enforce subpoenas and throwing Congress into its third presidential impeachment inquiry in the last seven years. The vote to formally launch the inquiry passed along party lines 221 to 212 and came just hours after President Biden's son

Hunter defied a congressional subpoena to testify on Capitol Hill. Hunter arrived in Washington, D.C. and challenged Republicans to depose him publicly rather than privately, saying he would not allow them to use his closed-door testimony against him out of context. Republicans vowed to hold him in contempt of Congress. So far, Republicans have heard testimony that President Biden met with his son's business associates before being elected, but have not uncovered any evidence that he had ties to his overseas business dealings or ever profited from them. House Oversight Chairman James Comer, the Republican from Kentucky who has repeatedly accused Hunter and other Biden family members of engaging in shady business practices,

concedes he has not brought forward any concrete evidence of wrongdoing or influence peddling. Still, Republicans say there's enough circumstantial evidence, like a $200,000 check President Biden's brother James made out to him, that further investigation is needed. NBC News reported on documents showing President Biden made a $200,000 loan to his brother in 2018, and the check was a repayment for that loan. Republicans are also accusing the White House of weaponizing the Department of Justice and other federal agencies to protect Biden's family. In July, two IRS agents publicly testified that the U.S. Attorney for Delaware and other federal prosecutors were slow-walking a tax evasion investigation into Hunter Biden, which resulted in a collapsed plea deal for tax evasion and a gun charge.

Last week, Hunter was indicted on new charges that he had evaded taxes on millions of dollars in income from foreign firms. President Biden said Republicans are choosing to waste time on a baseless political stunt and attacking him with lies. Democrats have remained united around the president, saying Republicans are simply trying to damage him ahead of the 2024 election and seeking payback for the impeachments of former President Donald Trump. No amount of evidence could convince Republicans that President Biden did nothing wrong because they're not looking for truth, Representative Jim McGovern, the Democrat from Massachusetts, said. They're looking for revenge.

Plenty of Republicans concede they do not yet have evidence to impeach Biden, but say formalizing the inquiry will allow them to seek that evidence out. We need to have a formal inquiry to get the information, Representative Don Bacon from Nebraska said, and I do not directly think this is going to lead to an impeachment. Today, we're going to get some arguments from the left and the right about the inquiry and then my take. We'll be right back after this quick commercial break. First up, we'll start with what the left is saying. The left criticizes the impeachment inquiry as a baseless attack on Biden meant only to appease Trump and the GOP base. Some suggest Republicans are improperly conflating the alleged crimes of Hunter Biden with his

father. Others say the inquiry will fail to produce any evidence of wrongdoing and end up benefiting Biden in next year's election. In New York Magazine, Ed Kilgore said the Biden impeachment inquiry is about placating the MAGA base. This inquiry is at best an authorization of a fishing expedition for evidence of misconduct that doesn't seem to exist at the moment. At worst, it's a phony baloney procedure, Kilgore wrote. The fact that the vote to formalize the impeachment inquiry was unanimously Republican tells you a lot about its ultimate meaninglessness. It was the last step the conference could take without consequences that might discomfort House members in competitive 2024 districts. Thus,

announcements of support for this step were often coupled with declarations that nobody has the kind of dirt on Biden that might justify impeachment. Many Republicans believe the two Trump impeachments represented an abuse of impeachment power, but the decision also represents a nod to the GOP's MAGA base, which shares the 45th president's thirst for vengeance, Kilgore said. Moving as far toward a first impeachment as the House balance of power allows provides the only morsel of nourishment the congressional GOP is in a position to give to Trump and his minions. Conversely, voting for this empty gesture is sort of the price of admission for non-Trumpy House Republicans who can now scoff at it without earning themselves a primary opponent. The Washington Post editorial board wrote that

the Hunter Biden indictment is sound. The Joe Biden impeachment inquiry is not. The Justice Department has strong criminal cases against Hunter Biden for allegedly failing to pay federal taxes, claiming false deductions, and lying about his drug use on paperwork to buy a gun. Congress, by contrast, lacks any reasonable basis for moving forward with impeachment against President Biden over his son's dubious business dealings and personal conduct. This major step is retaliation for the two impeachments of Donald Trump, both of which had legitimate grounding and a play to make Mr. Biden appear as tainted as Mr. Trump ahead of the 2024 election, the board said. While Hunter Biden used the illusion of access to make money and

coarsely invoked his father in text messages seeking payment from a Chinese business associate, that does not mean Joe Biden took official acts at the behest of his son. The legal process will now decide Hunter Biden's fate, but on the current evidence, the sins of the son should not be visited upon the father, the board said. Oversight is an essential role for Congress, but impeachment should be reserved for egregious misconduct by a president in office. In the New Republic, Michael Tomasky argued the inquiry will do more to re-elect Biden than anything Biden could do himself. The 118th Congress will impeach Joe Biden, a completely blameless Joe Biden, a Joe Biden whose only known true crime has been to make the occasional bad judgment in defense of his deeply troubled son, but who, in 50 years of public life, has never once been credibly accused of pocketing a dirty dollar, Tomoski wrote. The good news is that this will backfire like a badly

tuned 1975 Pontiac Grand Am. These people are disgusting, Tomoski said, and next November, they'll learn that the American people see through them. I'm old enough to remember how badly the 1998 impeachment of Bill Clinton backfired against Republicans. Bring this impeachment on, it will fill the news, expose these cranks, reveal their profound cynicism, and do more to re-elect Joe Biden than anything Biden himself could do. All right, that is it for the leftist saying, which brings us to what the right is saying. The right mostly believes enough evidence has been brought forward to justify an impeachment inquiry, but wonder if it is prudent to do so. Some argue Republicans have uncovered enough evidence of potential wrongdoing to justify this move. Others suggest the impeachment effort is a waste of time and

say voters should be the ones to decide Biden's future. In the Wall Street Journal, Kimberly A. Strassel wrote about the path to Biden impeachment. Impeachment, once rolling, takes on momentum like the Boulder and Raiders of the Lost Ark. The more evidence Republicans collect, the greater the pressure will be to impeach Mr. Biden. But is it warranted, and is it worth it, Strassel asks? Absent a smoking gun, however, there is a risk that the solemn tool of impeachment gets watered down so that it amounts to a partisan House censure of the president. Democrats kick this off with their 2019 impeachment of Mr. Trump over his Ukraine dealings, and it's eye-rolling to hear them whine that Republicans are weaponizing and abusing impeachment now. Impeachment might also pose a political risk to the GOP.

Mr. Biden is unpopular thanks to his own poor governance. Would Americans, especially those in swing districts, appreciate a formal impeachment? Or might there be a backlash from voters who feel lawmakers don't trust them to make their own decision about Joe's fitness at the ballot box, Strassel said. What's already beyond doubt is that it's the past and current actions of this White House and the president's son that have led the country to this new moment of political and constitutional upheaval. National Review's editors said the most important thing is that the investigation keeps going. At the end of the day, the House investigation into the Biden influence peddling business is about uncovering as many

facts as possible for the sake of public accountability and, in sheer political terms, convincing the public the president was part of an inherently corrupt scheme to profit off his influence and prominence, since this seems pretty clearly to be true, they said. Impeachment might help by bringing some more attention to the true, they said. Impeachment might help by bringing some more attention to the investigation, but it also adds an element of complexity since the standard no longer is whether what Joe Biden did was dishonest or wrong, but whether it constitutes bribery or another high crime or misdemeanor. The most important thing is that the investigation keeps going, they added. Republicans documented the ungodly amount of

foreign money that sluiced through the Bidengodly amount of foreign money that's sluiced through the Biden accounts. They've demolished Biden's lies about not knowing about or being involved in the family business. And they have even produced checks to Joe Biden, including 10%, oddly enough, of a $400,000 tranche of Chinese money. In the Washington Post, Jim Garrity said impeachment is pointless and House Republicans should instead let Biden's problems keep drip, drip, dripping. The ceiling for impeachment appears to be 48 Republican votes, and even that insufficient total is hardly guaranteed. Removal from office would require two-thirds of the Senate, which is an extremely tall order in the current political environment, Garrity said. And that feels like a waste of the Senate's time

and energy, particularly as a presidential election year approaches. That, I suspect, is one other reason there's no burgeoning appetite for impeachment, even as Biden remains unpopular. It isn't that the complicated series of payments to Biden's family members, certain to figure prominently in the articles of impeachment, doesn't stink. It does, Garrity said, but this is the sort of matter that is best left to voters to evaluate. Let them make the call. A steady drip, drip, drip of new information about these payments is likely to be much more harmful to Biden's chances of a second term than yet another impeachment effort that breaks down along partisan lines. All right. That is it for the story to you as it happens.

Hundreds of wildfires are burning. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly. Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu,

a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. So in September, when Republicans announced their impeachment inquiry, I said that then House Speaker Kevin McCarthy seemed out over his skis. It turned out that was true, but maybe not for the reasons I was arguing then.

At the time, my reasoning was pretty straightforward. Politically, I genuinely think most of the country is exhausted by the nonstop stream of investigations and impeachment threats. And I think there's a good chance that if Republicans can't land the plane here, so to speak, this could blow up on them. The why are you wasting your time and our taxpayer dollars on this when the country needs so much else line basically writes itself. There's been a lot of smoke around the Biden family. Traditionally, though, you need some fire before you take this extraordinary step.

Even Republicans admit they don't have that. One thing I've heard a lot of Republicans say is that Nancy Pelosi lowered the bar for impeachment by going after Trump for his phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which he appeared to threaten pulling U.S. military support if Ukraine didn't launch an investigation into the Biden family. But that accusation had a lot more meat on the bone. Democrats had receipts, a whistleblower in the national security apparatus, Alexander Vindman, a recorded phone call, and a clear narrative, quid pro quo. Trump dangled aid in exchange for a foreign government going after a political opponent. Regardless of whether you

think what Trump did was an impeachable offense or not, or even if the quid pro quo was real, I happen to think it was, Democrats had a combination of hard evidence and a simple narrative. And, of course, they were pushing impeachment over something Trump did while he was president. Republicans don't have any of that. So if that trial lowered the bar for impeachment, this is knocking the bar to the ground. Praveen Fernandez, the vice president of the Center for Constitutional Accountability, put it this way, quote, despite months of House hearings, the proponents of impeaching President Biden haven't produced a shred of direct evidence that he did anything legally wrong, let alone anything that meets

the high crimes and misdemeanor standard articulated in the Constitution. And this paucity of evidence has reportedly been acknowledged by Speaker Johnson in his communications with his own caucus. Again, I have no doubt that Hunter Biden is a shady character, and I've said repeatedly as we've covered his legal troubles that federal prosecutors and Congress should investigate him with no concern for who his dad is. There's a reason Hunter is facing multiple federal charges in court and fighting many damaging stories in the press right now. And while there isn't any fire, there is also definitely smoke. Cash was flowing to various bank accounts

associated with members of the Biden family. Joe Biden obviously lied that he never discussed business dealings with his son. We've since found out he was sometimes in meetings. Emails uncovered on Hunter's laptop referred to money being put aside for the big guy, an obvious reference to President Biden. But the most important question here is not if Biden's son sold his family name to make lucrative business deals, or even if he intended to give some of those profits from those deals to his dad. It's if Republicans can prove Biden was ever actually involved. The second most important question is whether Biden has committed any high crimes or misdemeanors as president. Senate Republican Mark Wayne Mullen, the Republican from

Oklahoma, even warned House Republicans that Biden could not be impeached for actions he took before being elected in 2020. Otherwise, Republicans could at best try something novel and hold him to account for actions he took as vice president. When pressed on this, nearly every Republican intimately involved with this inquiry has said some version of, we don't have smoking gun evidence, but that is why we need an investigation. This is actually a pretty straightforward and simple line of argument for formalizing the impeachment inquiry, and I don't necessarily hate it. It's also true that the Biden administration has refused to hand over documents requested by Republicans since we last covered this in

September, which in some ways challenged them to formalize this inquiry. But this all gives away the game before it starts. Some Republicans are citing Hunter Biden's shady business dealings and the president's involvement in them. Others are citing his mishandling of classified documents. Some point to the IRS whistleblowers that accuse Biden's Justice Department of obstructing the investigation into Hunter. This is, to me, by far the most damning accusation. But there's no single clear narrative about what they have uncovered and what crime they are pursuing. Instead, it feels a lot like a fishing expedition. Or, as Representative Troy Nels, the Republican from Texas, said a little too honestly when asked to explain the impeachment inquiry, quote, all I can say is Donald Trump 2024,

baby. Whether Democrats were thinking about the election when they impeached Trump, another argument, it should really be independent of whether it is okay for Republicans to be doing that now. Obviously, Biden does deserve some blame here, regardless of how this goes. As vice president, he was incapable of reining his son in, and Hunter's work overseas was always a problem in the Obama administration. Now, a lot of those chickens are coming home to roost. A few weeks ago, I went on Bill O'Reilly's show to talk about trust in the media. Before our conversation, he told his viewers what I thought was a truthful, honest, and reasonable conservative perspective on this issue. The investigation is warranted, but we haven't

seen enough evidence to impeach Biden, and Republicans should tread carefully. Personally, if I were in the House GOP, I would not vote for this impeachment inquiry. I'd wait for more evidence or some clarity on what specifically we were actually investigating and on what evidence. But right now, none of those questions seem to matter to the House GOP. We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This is a longer question from Chris in Atlanta, Georgia. Chris said, I see much duplicity in the way platforms like YouTube are jumping all over the risks of AI-generated content versus the way they ignore legitimate concerns about the

influence of gun violence-related content on young men, pornographic and porn-adjacent content on young women, or the simple fact that I can't watch a Mark Rober video with my kids without risking a terrifying horror movie trailer. What are your thoughts on the social contract implications of the proliferation of content, free speech, versus public safety, tension, and the rights of parents? And yes, I know no one is required to use YouTube, although our kids' elementary school, our church, and our local city government use it as a sole form of communication for some content. Okay, so this is a very complicated question, but the problem you're posing is this. I don't want my children subjected to content online that is not appropriate for their age, especially content they aren't seeking out, but is seeking them out. Pornographic banner ads on websites and previews

for violent films as ads to YouTube videos are two big examples. And there are a couple values at tension when you start to think about the response. The right of free speech, the presumption of safety online, parental rights to guardianship online, and the right to privacy or anonymity. Just to try to demonstrate the complexity and show how I think through the issue, here's how some of those things are at tension. and show how I think through the issue, here's how some of those things are at tension. If you want to legislate what companies are allowed to advertise, you get into the free speech issues quickly, involving the government and private businesses and restricting certain kinds of speech. If you let the situation stay as is, you violate parental protections and the ability for kids to feel like they are safe to browse the internet. If you ask everyone to verify

their age and identity, you violate privacy and anonymity. For government action, I don't think there's an easy answer, which to me indicates that this isn't a problem best solved by government action. I could see a couple solutions I'm comfortable with. First, there should probably be a board that quickly reviews and rates advertisements aimed for large audiences on the open web, as we already do with movies. There's no law saying movies have to be reviewed, but it's a de facto standard because so many theaters require movies to be rated, which means producers comply with getting their films reviewed. The second part would be for any online media space that says they want to advertise materials to adults asking the user's age when they create an account. Yes, anyone could easily sidestep that

by lying about their age online, but for the use case you're asking about where a parent wants confirmation that only age-appropriate content will be shown to an account they control, I think that is enough. I don't even think the government is required to enforce any of that. The area where I'd want to be the most careful is requiring identification to participate on the open web and getting government involved anywhere we don't need to. If YouTube just provided that level of validation as a feature, I'm sure the market opportunity alone would make it worthwhile. Alright, that is it for your questions answered, which brings us to our under the radar section. Leaders in cryptocurrency have poured $78 million into super PACs aimed at bolstering the ranks of crypto-friendly lawmakers on Capitol Hill, Axios reports. The fundraising groups have raised the

money in just three months, giving the industry a massive war chest that rivals those of more established industries with a year to go until election day. Crypto leaders are hoping to detoxify crypto's image in the campaign fundraising world and donate to congressional leaders of both parties who are, quote, pro-innovation, pro-responsible regulation, pro-crypto, pro-blockchain technology, according to an operative. Axios has the story, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, next up is our numbers section. The number of U.S. presidents who have faced formal impeachment inquiries is now six. James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson,

Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden. The percentage of Americans who say they are in favor of the House of Representatives impeachment inquiry into President Biden is 49%, according to an NPR-PBS NewsHour Marist University poll released last week. The percentage of Americans who say they disapprove of the House of Representatives impeachment inquiry is 48%. The percentage of voters in congressional districts represented by Republicans but won by President Joe Biden in 2020 who say they would be less likely to vote for a representative who backed the impeachment inquiry into Biden is 44%, according to a new poll from Public Policy Polling. The percentage of voters in those districts who say opening an inquiry would be more of a partisan political stunt rather than an effort to hold Biden accountable is 52%. The net decrease in support for impeachment proceedings against

Biden among Republican voters since September is negative six, according to Morning Consult. The net increase in support for impeachment proceedings against Biden among Democratic voters since September is plus 4%. All right, and last but not least, our have a nice day section. The deepwater feeding megamouth shark is one of the species of sharks that humans know the least about. Since its discovery in 1976, humans have found over 120 individuals total. Now, researchers are learning a whole lot more as a pregnant megamouth shark was found in the Philippines. The finding confirms that megamouths are ovoviviparous. Their eggs develop inside the mother's body and she gives birth to live young. In November,

one pup was found alongside the mother while six more fetuses remained inside her body. Now we know they just have seven pups compared to the whale sharks, which have over 300, or tuna, which have millions, says A.A. Yaptonche of the Marine Wildlife Watch of the Philippines. Yaptonche hopes the new discovery will help researchers understand how best to keep the rarely seen species healthy and non-threatened into the future. New Scientist has the story, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that is it for today's podcast. As always, if you want to support our work, please go to retangle.com and consider becoming a member. We'll be back here same time tomorrow. Hope you guys had a great weekend. See you then. Have a good one.

Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by John Law. The script is edited by our managing editor, Ari Weitzman, Will Kabak, Bailey Saul, and Sean Brady. The logo for our podcast was designed by Magdalena Bokova, who is also our social media manager. Thank you. We'll see you next time. beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported

across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCellVax.ca.