Ken Buck, a Republican, represents Colorado’s 4th Congressional District in the House.
The GOP’s charge against Biden is that he personally benefited from his son’s deplorable business exploits around the globe. Without doubt, Hunter Biden’s shady business deals undermined America’s image and our anti-corruption goals, and his conduct was thoroughly reprehensible. What’s missing, despite years of investigation, is the smoking gun that connects Joe Biden to his ne’er-do-well son’s corruption.
My fellow Republicans leading the House inquiry believe the connection comes through the 2016 firing of Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin, which then-Vice President Biden helped facilitate.
The dominant narrative in right-wing media is that Shokin was an anti-corruption zealot with an active investigation into Burisma, the company where Hunter Biden held a seat on the board of directors, and from which he reportedly received large monthly payments.
The truth about Shokin is much more complicated and runs counter to the GOP’s “gotcha” narrative. In reality, Shokin was deeply enmeshed in Ukraine’s culture of corruption and, far from being a beacon of transparency, was viewed by many in the West — including some conservative Republican senators — as an obstacle to anti-corruption reforms. There is, in fact, no evidence that Shokin was engaged in an investigation of Burisma, or that Joe Biden’s role in his firing was in any way connected to Burisma.
Much attention has been focused on a speech Biden delivered in December 2015 before Ukraine’s parliament, in which he explicitly called for change at the prosecutor general’s office. Far from being out of line with U.S. policy, Biden’s remarks were entirely within the U.S. government’s paradigm of helping Ukraine break free from its lawless Soviet past. Other senior officials, including U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, made the case during the same period for firing Shokin.
The European Union, which necessarily pays a great deal of attention to the politics and policies of neighboring Ukraine, was also of the opinion that Shokin should be sacked. Shokin had been the biggest barrier to the E.U.’s years-long efforts to encourage rule-of-law reforms in Ukraine.
These facts — like all facts — are stubborn things.
Republicans in the House who are itching for an impeachment are relying on an imagined history. Their inquiry, formally announced by Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Tuesday, rests heavily on a fictitious version of Shokin’s career, with the alleged investigation of Burisma at the center. It’s a neat story, and one that performs well in certain media circles. But impeachment is a serious matter and should have a foundation of rock-solid facts.
Does this flimsy excuse for an impeachment sound familiar? It should.
In 2019, the Democratic-controlled House, led by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), pursued an impeachment of President Donald Trump on the loose allegation of a quid pro quo — again involving Ukraine and Shokin. The Democrats alleged that Trump called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to pressure him into examining the theoretical connection between Hunter Biden’s payments from Burisma and Shokin’s firing. Trump ultimately did withhold aid from Ukraine, consistent with the U.S. government’s long-standing policy of tying aid to anti-corruption reforms. But the Democrats were off and running.
I joined my Republican colleagues then in denouncing that impeachment. It was, as we argued at the time, an inversion of our own rule-of-law system. The Democrats had their man and found a pretext to impeach him.
Trump’s impeachment in 2019 was a disgrace to the Constitution and a disservice to Americans. The GOP’s reprise in 2023 is no better.
