Column By Mike Bibb
With growing suspicion of President’s Biden’s bewildering conduct in office, and mounting evidence of his involvement in a new “Document Gate” scandal, is it time the House of Representatives consider the pros and cons of instituting impeachment proceedings?
Yes, I’m fully aware Vice President Kamala Harris is next in line to the presidency should Joe be removed. A chilling thought, considering she’s less competent than Biden and seems to have difficulties maintaining an office staff.
However, there’s always the possibility she would recognize her managerial limitations and decline the offer, leaving newly elected Speaker of the House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy, sitting in the catbird seat.
Then, there’s the reality the Senate would probably not vote to sustain the impeachment, leaving Joe in office — at least until the next election.
Keep in mind, a Congressional impeachment conviction only removes an offending individual from public office. It is not a criminal trial that can result in incarceration. That part of the procedure would come later, should the Department of Justice deem the offences so egregious a Grand Jury indictment would be necessary to continue the legal process.
No impeached U.S. president (there’s only been three) has been convicted by the Senate and removed from office, or sent to prison for felonious conduct while in office.
Placing those thoughts aside for the moment, consider Joe’s puzzling border, energy, economic and Ukranian policies. Not to mention his disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal.
On top of these head scratchers, come recent revelations of his possible involvement in unlawfully removing classified secret reports from government facilities when he was vice president. An act, if true, unequivocally demonstrated his total disregard for the sworn responsibilities of the office.
Even more amazing, he hasn’t denied it. Maybe, he figured the “statute of limitations” expired, or a Democrat run Department of Justice will be lenient with a Hillary-type judgement, or a sympathetic news media won’t push the topic too hard.
Who knows what is circulating within Joe’s brain at any given time?
When questioned by reporters how classified papers ended up at his home in Delaware, he calmly replied he didn’t know but they were safe because they were stored and locked next to his prized classic Corvette, inside the garage.
Suggesting, I suppose, his garage is an impenetrable structure.
Incidentally, Joe couldn’t explain how his lawyers — not FBI agents — were suddenly inspired to reveal the documents. Offering the excuse he must have mistakenly taken them home by accident.
On at least three different occasions?!!
“Come on, Jack. That ain’t fact” as Joe frequently reminds reporters, and inquisitive citizens doubting his truthfulness on whatever the subject of the moment may be.
Maybe, not exactly a word-for-word response, but reasonably close, considering his numerous recorded misstatements over the past three or four decades.
For example, his White House Press Secretary explained Joe “was surprised” as everyone else. Insinuating he had no idea how the documents showed-up at his home.
After six years, this is the best excuse Joe’s crew could come up with?
Similar papers have also been discovered in a University of Pennsylvania office Biden maintained. Allegedly, Joe was hired to teach a class after he left the White House at the end of the Obama Administration. However, it appears he never actually taught at the university, even though his “office” was listed as being occupied.
Apparently, Joe was collecting a wage, but not teaching any subjects. Perhaps, a clue something was beginning to smell a little fishy.
In reality, is it feasible he’s qualified to lecture college students about anything? Given his natural inclination of confusion and forgetfulness, it would seem the university was more interested in accessing Biden’s influences as the former vice president — and various “official connections” that go with it — than any skills he may have in a classroom.
Coincidentally, during this period UPenn reported receiving millions of dollars in donations from Chinese contributors, and others, funneled through Biden’s office.
All of these assumptions haven’t been proven — yet. However, they imply a pattern of behavior strongly suggesting the disappearance of classified documents from the White House, and several years later resurfacing in Joe’s personal offices and residential garage, is a valid indicator he may be culpable in some way.
A good starting point for the newly formed DOJ “special council” looking into this quagmire would be to ask a few basic questions: 1. What was contained in the papers? 2. Who removed the documents? 3. When were they removed? 4. Where were they kept after being removed? 5. Who would benefit the most from the documents? 6. When did they arrive at Joe’s garage and his UPenn office? 7. Was Joe directly/indirectly involved at any time during this clandestine operation?
One thing is certain, someone knows how, and when, the documents migrated from point A to points B and C. They didn’t magically drive themselves from the White House to Joe’s UPenn office and his home near Wilmington, Delaware.
Equally important, how many people have seen and read these classified papers? Probably hundreds of friends and guests have visited the Biden’s residence the past six years.
The longer these foolish antics are permitted to continue reinforces the belief we are being governed by a two-tier system of justice: One for elitist Democrats, and one for everyone else.
The entire four years of the Trump presidency was a continual parade of Democrat investigations, impeachments (without convictions), and assorted allegations.
Still, these theatrics weren’t enough to appease Democrats. After he left office, the harassment continued with the Jan. 6th hearings, accusations, and armed FBI raids on his home.
Searching for, if you can believe it, “classified documents.”
On the flip side, where were the dozen black SUVs, full of federal agents, swarming Joe’s two homes in Delaware?
Why were Joe’s attorneys permitted to obtain and review the classified material, but Trump’s were not?
Additional indications that what Dems accuse Repubs of doing, they’ve actually been doing themselves for a far longer period of time.
If impeachment proceedings are good for a Republican goose, it should also be good for a Democratic gander.
After all, “Equal justice under the law” is supposed to apply to every goose in the yard. Regardless of importance, wealth, social standing or political associations.
Historically, failure of governments to abide by these basic rules of civility has often resulted in very unpleasant upheavals.
The opinions in this editorial are those of the author.
