Impeachement report lays out President Biden’s alleged offenses

“The Biden family, with the help and knowledge of the president, used the Biden family name around the world to rake in nearly $30 million from overseas entities in Ukraine, China, Romania and elsewhere in secretive influence deals.”

President Joe Biden committed impeachable offenses in his role in his family’s alleged overseas business dealings, a newly released report from the U.S. House Ways and Committee alleges.

“As described in this report, the Committees have accumulated evidence demonstrating that President Biden has engaged in impeachable conduct,” the report said.

The 291-page report lays out in detail what have at times been murky allegations against the president.

House Oversight Chair Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., helped spearhead the investigation, uncovering and laying out evidence. He and Republicans on the impeachment committee argue that the Biden family, with the help and knowledge of the president, used the Biden family name around the world to rake in nearly $30 million from overseas entities in Ukraine, China, Romania and elsewhere in secretive influence deals.

“In order to obscure the source of these funds, the Biden family and their associates set up shell companies to conceal these payments from scrutiny,” the report said. “The Biden family used proceeds from these business activities to provide hundreds of thousands of dollars to Joe Biden—including thousands of dollars that are directly traceable to China.”

Biden has brushed off questions about his involvement in a scheme being highlighted in the Republicans’ report. The administration has yet to release a formal response in reaction to the report.

A key question in the investigation has been, even if Hunter Biden and others monetized the “Biden brand,” how much did the president really know or participate?

“Witnesses acknowledged that Hunter Biden involved Vice President Biden in many of his business dealings with Russian, Romanian, Chinese, Kazakhstani, and Ukrainian individuals and companies,” the report said. “Then-Vice President Biden met or spoke with nearly every one of the Biden family’s foreign business associates, including those from Ukraine, China, Russia, and Kazakhstan. As a result, the Biden family has received millions of dollars from these foreign entities.”

The president has repeatedly brushed off these allegations, and so far Republicans have not gotten the needed votes to make impeachment a serious threat.

From the report:

First and foremost, overwhelming evidence demonstrates that President Biden participated in a conspiracy to monetize his office of public trust to enrich his family. Among other aspects of this conspiracy, the Biden family and their business associates received tens of millions of dollars from foreign interests by leading those interests to believe that such payments would provide them access to and influence with President Biden. As Vice President, President Biden actively participated in this conspiracy by, among other things, attending dinners with his family’s foreign business partners and speaking to them by phone, often when being placed on speakerphone by Hunter Biden. For example, in 2014, Vice President Biden attended a dinner for Hunter Biden with Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina.4 Following the dinner, Baturina wired $3.5 million to Rosemont Seneca Thornton, a firm associated with Hunter Biden. Then, months later, as Hunter Biden and his business associates continued to solicit more money from Baturina, Vice President Biden participated in a phone call with Baturina and Hunter Biden where Vice President Biden told Baturina, “you be good to my boy.” Moreover, President Biden knowingly participated in this conspiracy. Based on the totality of the evidence, it is inconceivable that President Biden did not understand that he was taking part in an effort to enrich his family by abusing his office of public trust.

“The Biden-Harris Administration has lied to the American people time and again to cover up and obstruct the investigation into tax crimes committed by a Biden family business enterprise that capitalized on political power,” Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, said in a statement. “The American people have been shocked to learn the magnitude of the scheme going back to the President’s time as Vice President, when Biden family members were allowed to use Air Force Two as their own private business jet.

“None of this would have come to light had it not been for the two IRS whistleblowers who were tired of watching their investigation into the President’s son become obstructed, delayed, and denied the ability to move forward as the pursuit of truth demanded,” he added.

The whistleblowers in question are Supervisory Special Agent Gary Shapley and Criminal Investigator Joseph Ziegler, two IRS employees with nearly three decades of combined federal experience.

Those whistleblowers came forward and testified before Congress about Hunter Biden’s alleged tax crimes, saying that this case was unlike any other. One whistleblower testified that the Biden administration interfered in the investigation to protect Hunter and prevent a raid at the president’s Delaware home.

Earlier this year, Hunter, who still faces tax charges Biden was found guilty on federal gun charges.

President Biden has said he will not pardon his son.

Whether Biden falling out of favor with his own party in the presidential election will change that trajectory remains to be seen.

“Americans now know Joe Biden was ‘the brand’ the Bidens sold around the world to enrich the Biden family, and Joe Biden knew of, benefitted from, and participated in his family’s influence peddling schemes,” Comer said in a statement. “The entire Biden influence peddling model relied on Joe Biden’s presence—at meetings, on the phone, or at dinners—to demonstrate his family members’ influence over him, and he repeatedly provided it.”

Casey Harper

D.C. Bureau Reporter

Related Topics:#CaseyHarper #TheCenterSquare JoeBidenImpeachmentReport

Up Next

Federal government’s capital gains tax hike is worse than you think

Don't Miss

RFK Jr’s powerful speech to America explaining his dramatic political journey

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Common Vaccines Linked to 38-50% Increased Risk of Dementia and Alzheimer’s

Opinion / 59 mins ago

The day the ‘King of rock ‘n’ roll saved the Arizona memorial

Censorship Industrial Complex / 7 hours ago

US Condemns EU Censorship Pressure, Defends X

Focal Points

Common Vaccines Linked to 38-50% Increased Risk of Dementia and Alzheimer’s

Published on December 7, 2025

Todayville

By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

The single largest vaccine–dementia study ever conducted (n=13.3 million) finds risk intensifies with more doses, remains elevated for a full decade, and is strongest after flu and pneumococcal shots.

The single largest and most rigorous study ever conducted on vaccines and dementia — spanning 13.3 million UK adults — has uncovered a deeply troubling pattern: those who received common adult vaccines faced a significantly higher risk of both dementia and Alzheimer’s disease.

The risk intensifies with more doses, remains elevated for a full decade, and is strongest after influenza and pneumococcal vaccination. With each layer of statistical adjustment, the signal doesn’t fade — it becomes sharper, more consistent, and increasingly difficult to explain away.

And critically, these associations persisted even after adjusting for an unusually wide range of potential confounders, including age, sex, socioeconomic status, BMI, smoking, alcohol-related disorders, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, coronary artery disease, stroke/TIA, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes, chronic kidney and liver disease, depression, epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease, cancer, traumatic brain injury, hypothyroidism, osteoporosis, and dozens of medications ranging from NSAIDs and opioids to statins, antiplatelets, immunosuppressants, and antidepressants.

Even after controlling for this extensive list, the elevated risks remained strong and remarkably stable.

Vaccinated Adults Had a 38% Higher Risk of Dementia

The primary adjusted model showed that adults receiving common adult vaccines (influenza, pneumococcal, shingles, tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis) had a:

38% increased risk of developing dementia (OR 1.38)

This alone dismantles the narrative of “vaccines protect the brain,” but the deeper findings are far worse.

Alzheimer’s Disease Risk Is Even Higher — 50% Increased Risk

Buried in the supplemental tables is a more shocking result: when the authors restricted analyses to Alzheimer’s disease specifically, the association grew even stronger.

50% increased risk of Alzheimer’s (Adjusted OR 1.50)

This indicates the effect is not random. The association intensifies for the most devastating subtype of dementia.

Clear Dose–Response Pattern: More Vaccines = Higher Risk

The authors ran multiple dose–response models, and every one of them shows the same pattern:

Dementia (all types)

From eTable 2:

1 vaccine dose → Adjusted OR 1.26 (26% higher risk)
2–3 doses → Adjusted OR 1.32 (32% higher risk)
4–7 doses → Adjusted OR 1.42 (42% higher risk)
8–12 doses → Adjusted OR 1.50 (50% higher risk)
≥13 doses → Adjusted OR 1.55 (55% higher risk)

Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) Shows the Same—and Even Stronger—Trend

From eTable 7:

1 dose → Adjusted OR 1.32 (32% higher risk)
2–3 doses → Adjusted OR 1.41 (41% higher risk)
≥4 doses → Adjusted OR 1.61 (61% higher risk)

This is one of the most powerful and unmistakable signals in epidemiology.

Time–Response Curve: Risk Peaks Soon After Vaccination and Remains Elevated for Years

Another signal strongly inconsistent with mere bias: a time-response relationship.

The highest dementia risk occurs 2–4.9 years after vaccination (Adjusted OR 1.56). The risk then slowly attenuates but never returns to baseline, remaining elevated across all time windows.

After 12.5 years, the risk is still meaningfully elevated (Adjusted OR 1.28) — a persistence incompatible with short-term “detection bias” and suggestive of a long-lasting biological impact.

This pattern is what you expect from a biological trigger with long-latency neuroinflammatory or neurodegenerative consequences.

Even After a 10-Year Lag, the Increased Risk Does Not Disappear

When the authors apply a long 10-year lag — meant to eliminate early detection bias — the elevated risk persists:

Dementia: OR 1.20
Alzheimer’s: OR 1.26

If this were simply “people who see doctors more often get diagnosed earlier,” the association should disappear under long lag correction.

Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccines Drive the Signal

Two vaccines show particularly strong associations:

Influenza vaccine

Dementia: OR 1.39 → 39% higher risk
Alzheimer’s: OR 1.49 → 49% higher risk

Pneumococcal vaccine

Dementia: OR 1.12 → 12% higher risk
Alzheimer’s: OR 1.15 → 15% higher risk

And again, both exhibit dose–response escalation — the hallmark pattern of a genuine exposure–outcome relationship.

Taken together, the findings across primary, supplemental, dose–response, time–response, stratified, and sensitivity analyses paint the same picture:

• A consistent association between cumulative vaccination and increased dementia risk

• A stronger association for Alzheimer’s than for general dementia

• A dose–response effect — more vaccines, higher risk

• A time–response effect — risk peaks after exposure and persists long-term

• Influenza and pneumococcal vaccines strongly drive the signal

• The association remains after 10-year lag correction and active comparator controls

This is what a robust epidemiologic signal looks like.

In the largest single study ever conducted on vaccines and dementia, common adult vaccinations were associated with a 38% higher risk of dementia and a 50% higher risk of Alzheimer’s disease. The risk increases with more doses, persists for a decade, and is strongest for influenza and pneumococcal vaccines.

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

Support our mission: mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.

FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse) is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe to Focal Points

Censorship Industrial Complex

US Condemns EU Censorship Pressure, Defends X

Published on December 7, 2025

Todayville

By Cindy Harper

JD Vance’s warning lands as lawmakers on both sides of the Atlantic want to trade liberty for the illusion of digital order.

Stand against censorship and surveillance, join Reclaim The Net.

US Vice President JD Vance criticized the European Union this week after rumors reportedly surfaced that Brussels may seek to punish X for refusing to remove certain online speech.

In a post on X, Vance wrote, “Rumors swirling that the EU commission will fine X hundreds of millions of dollars for not engaging in censorship. The EU should be supporting free speech not attacking American companies over garbage.”

His remarks reflect growing tension between the United States and the EU over the future of online speech and the expanding role of governments in dictating what can be said on global digital platforms.

Vance was likely referring to rumors that Brussels intends to impose massive penalties under the bloc’s Digital Services Act (DSA), a censorship framework that requires major platforms to delete what regulators define as “illegal” or “harmful” speech, with violations punishable by fines up to six percent of global annual revenue.

For Vance, this development fits a pattern he’s been warning about since the spring.

In a May 2025 interview, he cautioned that “The kind of social media censorship that we’ve seen in Western Europe, it will and in some ways, it already has, made its way to the United States. That was the story of the Biden administration silencing people on social media.”

He added, “We’re going to be very protective of American interests when it comes to things like social media regulation. We want to promote free speech. We don’t want our European friends telling social media companies that they have to silence Christians or silence conservatives.”

Yet while the Vice President points to Europe as the source of the problem, a similar agenda is also advancing in Washington under the banner of “protecting children online.”

This week’s congressional hearing on that subject opened in the usual way: familiar talking points, bipartisan outrage, and the recurring claim that online censorship is necessary for safety.

The House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade convened to promote a bundle of bills collectively branded as the “Kids Online Safety Package.”

The session, titled “Legislative Solutions to Protect Children and Teens Online,” quickly turned into a competition over who could endorse broader surveillance and moderation powers with the most moral conviction.

Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) opened the hearing by pledging that the bills were “mindful of the Constitution’s protections for free speech,” before conceding that “laws with good intentions have been struck down for violating the First Amendment.”

Despite that admission, lawmakers from both parties pressed ahead with proposals requiring digital ID age verification systems, platform-level content filters, and expanded government authority to police online spaces; all similar to the EU’s DSA censorship law.

Vance has cautioned that these measures, however well-intentioned, mark a deeper ideological divide. “It’s not that we are not friends,” he said earlier this year, “but there’re gonna have some disagreements you didn’t see 10 years ago.”

That divide is now visible on both sides of the Atlantic: a shared willingness among policymakers to restrict speech for perceived social benefit, and a shrinking space for those who argue that freedom itself is the safeguard worth protecting.

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, join Reclaim The Net.

Fight censorship and surveillance. Reclaim your digital freedom.

Get news updates, features, and alternative tech explorations to defend your digital rights.