House votes for impeachment inquiry into Biden. Here’s how KS and MO lawmakers voted

Rep. Mark Alford wasn’t in Congress either of the times the House voted to impeach former President Donald Trump.

But as the Missouri Republican lends his full-throated support for an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, who will likely face Trump in a 2024 presidential rematch, Alford insists the inquiry into the Democratic president is different.

“There’s no comparison, I think,” Alford said. “This is not tit for tat. This is the truth for America.”

The House on Wednesday voted 221-212 to formalize an ongoing impeachment inquiry led by three committees: Oversight, Judiciary and Ways and Means. The investigation focuses on how Biden’s son and brother conducted business with foreign companies, and seeks to tie the president to those business deals.

House Republicans said the step was necessary because the Biden administration has refused to turn over certain documents, citing the lack of an official House vote authorizing the inquiry, which began in September.

It came the same day Hunter Biden, the president’s son, was slated to testify in a closed door hearing with the committees. The younger Biden showed up at the Capitol but refused to testify behind closed doors, holding a press conference where he said he was willing to have a public hearing.

“There is no fairness or decency in what these Republicans are doing,” Biden told reporters. “They have lied over and over about every aspect of my personal and professional life, so much so that their lies have become the false facts believed by too many people.”

Republicans said they plan to hold him in contempt of Congress.

Wednesday’s vote split among party lines. Democrats have been quick to denounce the inquiry, saying it has produced plenty of information about Hunter Biden but has found little to show that President Biden has done anything wrong.

“This is revenge,” said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Kansas City Democrat, who voted twice to impeach Trump. “I don’t think we ought to be wasting our time, if you look at all the issues that we put off to January. I think the American public hired us to do their business and this is not their business and it’s going to hurt.”

Trump was first impeached over allegations that he withheld federal funds from Ukraine unless the president launched an investigation into Biden. Trump’s second impeachment came after his supporters stormed the Capitol and disrupted the certification of the 2020 presidential election.

Tuesday’s vote marked the third impeachment inquiry in the past five years. Since former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment inquiry in 1998, three of the five presidents have faced impeachment investigations.

Casey Burgat, a professor at George Washington University who focuses on legislative affairs, said there has been a shift in how Congress has treated impeachment, where it has become a campaign promise rather than something that occurs after wrongdoing.

“It’s become the latest political cudgel to strike your political opponent with and that’s obviously damaging to the institution,” Burgat said. “But for voters, it’s kind of just seen as a normal way of doing business now. And, again, that’s just not what it was meant to be used for.”

So far the inquiry has found evidence that Hunter Biden relied on his family’s last name to boost business with companies in countries, such as China, Ukraine and Romania. It found a vast network of businesses where Biden could receive money and has called into question two checks from James Biden, the president’s brother, to the president, which the White House has said were loans when Biden was not in office.

Rep. Jason Smith, a Missouri Republican, is the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, one of the three committees investigating Biden. He has focused on two whistleblowers from the IRS who claimed the Department of Justice shielded President Joe Biden from the investigation.

The special counsel who brought charges against Hunter Biden, David Weiss, defended the integrity of his investigation in a closed door hearing with the House, as did an FBI agent who worked on the case, according to the New York Times.

Republicans from Kansas and Missouri compared the inquiry to the discovery phase of a criminal investigation, saying it’s needed to determine whether the president committed any crimes.

“I’m surprised by some members who are on our side of the aisle that would vote against it,” said Rep. Eric Burlison, a Missouri Republican who sits on the Oversight Committee. “Their logic defies logic. Because if you’re saying that you need more evidence, well, this is your chance to get more evidence. This vote is not saying we’re going to impeach the president.”

Alford said he believes the evidence will amount to high crimes and misdemeanors, the standard needed for impeachment, but said “we don’t have the facts yet.”

“Where there’s smoke, there’s fire, and there is more smoke here then the last Boy Scout camp that I went to,” Alford said. “There’s a lot of smoke here. It’s up to us to find out if there’s indeed a fire, because our national security is at stake.”

Cleaver was dismissive of the Republican claims. While he acknowledged that Hunter Biden made mistakes, he said the president shouldn’t be blamed for the actions of his adult son.

“We can find smoke any and everywhere, it doesn’t mean anything,” Cleaver said. “Smoke usually turns out to be smoke.”

How they voted

A yes vote means the lawmaker voted in support of the impeachment inquiry

Kansas

Rep. Sharice Davids (D) — No

Rep. Ron Estes (R) — Yes

Rep. Jake LaTurner (R) — Yes

Rep. Tracey Mann (R) — Yes

Missouri

Rep. Mark Alford (R) — Yes

Rep. Eric Burlison (R) — Yes

Rep. Cori Bush (D) — No

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D) — No

Rep. Sam Graves (R) — Yes

Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R) — Yes

Rep. Jason Smith (R) — Yes

Rep. Ann Wagner (R) — Yes