FACT CHECK: Did A Witness Say That There Is ‘No Evidence’ to Support The Biden Impeachment Inquiry?

Following Thursday’s opening hearing in the impeachment inquiry into President Biden, several media outlets and high-profile Democrats have attempted to spin a line from legal scholar Jonathan Turley to claim that the inquiry lacks any evidence. The line cited was lifted from a longer quote in which Turley made a completely different point.

Turley — a constitutional expert and professor at George Washington Law School — joined former Assistant Attorney General Eileen O’Connor and forensic accounting specialist Bruce Dubinsky as a witness for Thursday’s hearing, which was titled “The Basis For An Impeachment Inquiry of President Joseph R. Biden Jr.” According to House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY), the hearing was designed to examine the value of an impeachment inquiry and review evidence uncovered by House Republicans surrounding the Biden family’s business dealings with foreign nationals.

The hearing featured a number of contentious exchanges between Republicans and Democrats while a number of text messages, emails, and financial records pertaining to the Biden family’s business dealings were reviewed. Comer concluded the hearing by announcing that he would be seeking subpoenas targeting key members of the Biden family.

Instead of reviewing evidence laid out during Thursday’s proceedings, Democrats and corporate media outlets in on a line from Turley in which he stated that he did not believe that the evidence currently meets the standard of a high crime and misdemeanor needed for an article of impeachment.”

The seven-second clip was shared by the official X account for House Judiciary Democrats, as well as the Biden campaign, while outlets such as Rolling Stone, Forbes, ABC and several others claimed that Turley said the inquiry lacks evidence.

WATCH:

In reality, the line from Turley is merely a small snippet from a longer quote. “It is important to emphasize what this hearing is not. It is not a hearing on articles of impeachment. The House has launched an impeachment inquiry, and I am appearing to discuss the history and purpose of such inquiries,” Turley said, according to his pre-written testimony.

“I have previously stated that, while I believe that an impeachment inquiry is warranted, I do not believe that the evidence currently meets the standard of a high crime and misdemeanor needed for an article of impeachment,” he continued. “The purpose of my testimony today is to discuss how past inquiries pursued evidence of potentially impeachable conduct.”

While Turley did state that evidence presented does not meet the threshold required to impeach President Biden at this time, he does support the impeachment inquiry, which is designed to review evidence and come to a conclusion on whether to formally file articles of impeachment.

“[T]he House has passed the threshold for an inquiry into whether President Joe Biden was directly involved or benefited from the corrupt practices of his son, Hunter, and others,” Turley told lawmakers.