A forensic accountant who was the first witness called by House Republicans on Thursday on the first day of hearings into an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden called out Democrats for their “misleading” behavior, telling Newsmax that “they didn’t want to face the facts.”

   Bruce Dubinsky appeared on “Rob Schmitt Tonight” to discuss what he heard, what evidence he needs to see moving forward — something he said Democrats should be doing as well. Instead, Democrats decried the lack of evidence as fuel to dismiss the entirety of the hearings — designed to collect evidence, he said.

   “I think that was misleading,” Dubinsky told Schmitt. “I think again, they didn’t want to face the facts that were presented today. And I think those facts will lead to potentially other facts. And then the question is, was there, does this lead to wrongdoing on the part of … the-then Vice President Biden.

   “So, I think those are the questions that need to be asked and get to the bottom of, what was this money being paid for, what was done for it, if anything. And if there was substance to those transactions, then the Bidens should come forward with that information and put it forth and put an end to this.”

   Schmitt praised Dubinsky, a forensic accountant of 40 years, for playing it straight in the hearing. He asked Dubinsky what he needs to see moving forward.

   “I think we need to see more bank statements, more information from those bank statements. Where did the money go? And also, what was the money being paid for? I mean, that’s the critical question,” Dubinsky said.

   To that end, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., announced in his closing statements Thursday that he will immediately issue subpoenas for the bank records of Hunter Biden and James Biden, the son and brother of President Joe Biden, respectively. Comer called it the “next step of this investigation.”

   Dubinsky agreed.

   “But why, for instance, was $3.5 million sent to a company and then the Bidens got part of that money. What was that money for? Was that a success fee for something? That doesn’t seem to me to be a fee for consulting,” Dubinsky said.

   “So we really need to get to the bottom of what the different money was being paid for. What was the substance if anything? Or was it a pay-to-play scheme?”

   Republicans have accused the Bidens of exactly that — Hunter Biden selling the access and influence of his father in his overseas business ventures and the windfall that came from that. Republicans believe but need to prove that Joe Biden benefited from it, too.

   Schmitt asked Dubinsky specifically about monies Biden received after leaving the Obama White House from CEFC China Energy.

   “I have seen that before, and it’s basically a deferred payment,” Dubinsky said. “So the question is, what was done for that payment? And now it’s being deferred till after he leaves office. Was it their intent to structure it that way? And if it’s proven that there was intent to structure it that way, that’s a problem certainly.”

   Finally, Dubinsky said he didn’t know if the hearings will yield a clear answer that Biden committed a treasonous violation.

   “Like any investigation, you walk down the hallway, you start opening doors and looking behind it to see what’s behind there,” Dubinsky said. “You may come up empty on Door No. 1, but Door No. 3 yields a treasure trove of information.

   “So no one will know till the investigation is advanced to the level of getting answers. And you make a good point. That investigation has to be unimpeded and if there is an attempt to impede that investigation, we certainly won’t get the answers.”

Share This