Unveiling President Biden's First Impeachment Hearing: 5 Shocking Takeaways Revealed by House Oversight Panel

House Republicans commenced their inaugural impeachment inquiry hearing on Thursday by presenting the allegations they intend to investigate regarding President Joe Biden. However, their expert witnesses conceded that Republicans currently lack sufficient evidence to substantiate the accusations they are making.

During the House Oversight Committee hearing on Thursday, witnesses were not called upon to provide firsthand accounts of Hunter Biden's foreign business dealings, which are the focal point of the inquiry. Nevertheless, the hearing provided Republicans with an opportunity to present some of the evidence they have uncovered thus far.

Republicans claimed at the hearing on Thursday that although there is no evidence indicating Joe Biden benefited financially from his sons' business dealings, what they have discovered thus far justifies their decision to initiate an impeachment inquiry. In response, Democrats accused Republicans of carrying out Donald Trump's requests and highlighting his and his family's numerous foreign transactions, along with Trump's endeavors to persuade Ukraine to investigate the same allegations currently under scrutiny in the impeachment inquiry.

Heres takeaways from Thursdays first impeachment inquiry hearing:

Rep.Jamie Raskin and Oversight Chairman James Comer speak on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on Thursday.

Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

GOP witnesses say not enough evidence yet to impeach Biden

Despite the Republicans' allegations of corruption surrounding Joe Biden's son's business transactions, the GOP expert witnesses who testified on Thursday refrained from making such extreme claims.

Bruce Dubinsky, a forensic accountant and one of the GOP witnesses, contradicted the main narrative of the Republicans by stating that he could not conclude the existence of "corruption" by the Bidens due to insufficient evidence.

"I am not implying any corruption, fraud, or misconduct today," clarified Dubinsky. "Additional data must be collected before I can make a comprehensive assessment."

According to him, there are allegations of a deceptive cover-up surrounding Hunter Biden's financial affairs, involving complicated offshore shell companies. These circumstances have raised concerns among fraud experts regarding potential unlawful activities.

Jonathan Turley, a conservative law professor, also stated that the House currently lacks evidence to substantiate impeachment charges against Joe Biden. However, he argued that House Republicans were warranted in commencing an impeachment inquiry.

"I want to stress the purpose of our presence here today. This pertains to the matter of an impeachment inquiry, rather than a vote on articles of impeachment," Turley stated. "In fact, based on the current evidence, I do not believe that there is sufficient support for articles of impeachment. This is something that an inquiry must establish. However, I do believe that the House has reached the threshold for initiating an impeachment inquiry into President Biden's conduct."

Turley asserted that Biden's false statements regarding his knowledge of Hunter Biden's business ventures, along with the unproven allegations suggesting Biden may have benefited from his son's business dealings, serve as justification for the House to proceed with the impeachment inquiry. (CNN has previously reported that Joe Biden's explicit denials of any business-related interaction with his son have been undermined over time, including by evidence uncovered by House Republicans.)

Turley, a professor at George Washington University Law School, has consistently supported Republican positions on significant legal issues in the past few years. This includes his disagreement with the first and second impeachments of Trump.

Rep. Ro Khanna, a Democrat from California, pressed Turley for clarification, questioning whether he would currently vote against impeachment.

"On this evidence, certainly," Turley said. "At the moment, these are allegations. There is some credible evidence there that is the basis of the allegations."

Witnesses are sworn in before the House Oversight Committee on September 28, 2023, on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.

Jacquelyn Martin/AP

Witness testimony frustrates some Republicans

Republicans within the GOP are currently expressing their dissatisfaction to CNN regarding the ongoing House GOPs first impeachment inquiry hearing. The frustration is arising from the fact that Republican witnesses, in real time, are contradicting the GOPs own storyline and confessing to the absence of any evidence that Biden has engaged in impeachable actions.

"The selection of witnesses who challenge the arguments of House Republicans for impeachment is astonishing," said a senior GOP aide to CNN. "It is an utter disaster."

Another GOP lawmaker expressed dissatisfaction with their performance, stating to CNN, "I hope we had witnessed more passionate outbursts."

Republicans acknowledged that they would not present any novel evidence during Thursday's hearing but aimed to articulate the rationale behind their impeachment inquiry. This was particularly important as certain party members continue to harbor doubts. However, a few Republicans are preoccupied with the imminent threat of a government shutdown, a fact that Democrats emphasized during the hearing.

"I havent watched or listened to a moment of it," said another GOP lawmaker. Theres a shutdown looming."

Rep Jim Jordan delivers remarks during the House Oversight Committee hearing on Capitol Hill on September 28, 2023 in Washington, DC.

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

GOP maps out questions they want to answer

At their inaugural impeachment hearing on Thursday, House Republicans made a string of grandiose allegations against the president, seeking to establish a link between him and his sons' allegedly corrupt business activities abroad.

House Oversight Chairman Rep. James Comer alleged that the GOP investigations have uncovered substantial evidence of Joe Biden exploiting his position for personal financial gain. However, he has not provided any concrete evidence to support this significant accusation.

Additionally, two Republican committee chairs reinforced their argument by referencing recently disclosed Internal Revenue Service documents. According to two IRS whistleblowers, these documents reveal that the Justice Department interfered in the investigation of Hunter Biden to shield the Biden family. It is noteworthy, however, that several instances of alleged misconduct that they cited occurred during the Trump administration, prior to Joe Biden assuming office.

Before the hearing, the Republican chairs published a comprehensive framework disclosing the extent of their investigation, affirming that it will encompass the period from Joe Biden's Vice Presidency until the present, encompassing his time outside of political office.

The document delineates distinct areas of examination, such as determining whether Biden was involved in "corruption, bribery, and influence peddling" - although Republicans have yet to substantiate any of these allegations.

The Republicans have outlined four inquiries regarding any potential involvement of President Biden in the payments received by his family, as well as his alleged interference in the investigations concerning Hunter Biden.

House Oversight Committee ranking Democratic member Rep. Jamie Raskin speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on September 28, 2023.

Jim Bourg/Reuters

Democrats attack inquiry for lacking evidence on the president

Democrats repeatedly pointed out that the Republican allegations about foreign payments were tied to money that went mostly Hunter Biden - but not the to the president.

"The majority is left empty-handed, devoid of any evidence of presidential misconduct. No smoking gun, no firearms, no smoke," stated Rep. Jamie Raskin, the leading Democrat on the Oversight committee.

Raskin's team presented the committee with 12,000 pages of bank records obtained thus far, revealing that "not a single page displays any funds directed towards President Joe Biden."

Raskin, alongside an open laptop, presented a countdown clock indicating the imminent government shutdown in just over two days. This further fueled the Democrats' criticism towards Republicans, accusing them of prioritizing impeachment over passing bills to finance the government. In order to emphasize their point, Democrats circulated the laptop among lawmakers, allowing each of them five minutes to question the witnesses. These arguments also provided a glimpse into the Democrats' strategy to support the White House during the ongoing Republican impeachment inquiry.

The Democrats needled Republicans for not holding a vote on an impeachment inquiry - one Democrat asked Turley whether he would recommend a vote, which Turley said he would.

Rep. Jamie Raskin addresses the Democratic party members while the House Oversight Committee initiates an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. The event took place on Thursday, Sept. 28, 2023, at Capitol Hill in Washington.

Democrats push for Rudy to testify

The impeachment of Trump by House Democrats in 2019 was triggered by his efforts to pressure Ukraine into investigating claims related to Biden and his son's involvement with a Ukrainian energy company. Interestingly, these very allegations are currently being investigated by the House GOP.

Democrats on Thursday pushed for testimony from Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's personal lawyer, who attempted to uncover damaging information about Biden in Ukraine in 2019. The Democrats, in a bid to emphasize their argument that Giuliani failed to substantiate the allegations central to the Biden impeachment inquiry, twice compelled the Oversight Committee to vote on their motions to subpoena Giuliani. These votes were seen as theatrical displays.

Rep. Kweisi Mfume of Maryland, one of the Democrats who pushed for the procedural vote, raised the question of Rudy Giuliani's whereabouts. He expressed disappointment that the committee was hesitant to bring him in for questioning and put him on record. This raised the question of its relevance, which Mfume believed was significant.

Apart from Giuliani, Raskin also sought testimony from Lev Parnas, an associate of Giuliani who was indicted in 2019. Parnas later cooperated with the Democratic impeachment inquiry and provided a statement from a high-ranking official at Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian energy company. The statement reiterated that there were no contacts between Burisma and Vice President Biden or his associates.

Several Democrats also accused Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law who served in the White House, of receiving $2 billion from Saudi Arabia through a company he established post his White House tenure. They argued that Kushner's alleged misconduct surpassed that of Hunter Biden, as Kushner was involved in government affairs unlike Biden's son.

CNNs Melanie Zanona and Avery Lotz contributed to this report.