Hunter Biden Demands Action Against Marjorie Taylor Greene for Violating House Ethics Rules and Defaming Him

On Monday Hunter Biden requested the Office of Congressional Ethics to initiate a review of Marjorie Taylor Greene’s suspected violations of House Ethics rules and standards of official conduct.

Hunter Biden accused Greene of violating the ethical conduct codes by continuously launching verbal attacks, publishing defamatory statements, releasing personal photos and data, and promoting conspiracy theories about him and others.

In a letter addressed to the Chairman and Co-Chairman of the Office of Congressional Ethics, Hunter Biden’s attorney, Abbe David Lowell, requested the Office to review and take appropriate action against the Congresswoman.

Lowell’s letter accuses Greene of violating House Rule XXIII (Code of Official Conduct), Clause 1, which specifies that all members of the House must conduct themselves at all times “in a manner that reflects creditably on the House.” The rule requires members to adhere to the spirit and letter of the Rules of the House.

Lowell argues that Greene’s attacks on Hunter Biden and his family members are not part of any legitimate legislative activity, and therefore do not reflect creditably on the House. He cites a precedent set by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct of the 90th Congress, which included the Code to deal with flagrant violations of the law that reflect on Congress as a whole.

Hunter is upset over my statements.

Well Hunter, the entire country is pissed off about your obvious influence peddling with your Daddy’s political power.

Come chat with us Republicans on the Oversight Committee.

We have a lot of questions.https://t.co/QDTkFJiLlF

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) April 24, 2023

Lowell further argues that Greene’s online statements and public appearances attacking Hunter Biden and his family members are school-yard insults and fail to uphold the integrity and dignity expected of members of the House of Representatives.

“Her online statements and public appearances are neither legislative drafting, nor oversight, nor real congressional business—they are a spray of shotgun pellets of personal vitriol that are the definition of conduct that does not reflect ‘creditably on the House.'”

He cited a video clip released by Representative Greene on her Twitter account, in which she accused Hunter Biden of paying non-resident women who were nationals of Russia or other Eastern European countries, and who appear to be linked to an Eastern European prostitution or human trafficking ring.

Lowell called on the Office of Congressional Ethics to initiate a review of Representative Greene’s conduct to determine the extent of her violations, which would then result in referring her conduct to the House Committee on Ethics.

Full media blackout on this story.

First, they censored and hid the Hunter, Biden laptop story in 2020.

And now they refuse to tell the story about the Biden crime enterprise, and what Republicans read about at Treasury this week.

But but but Trump! https://t.co/4lSgBjQ9kL

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) April 19, 2023

Hunter Biden’s request for a review of Marjorie Taylor Greene’s conduct comes amid a growing controversy over the Congresswoman’s actions. Greene has been accused by the Left of promoting conspiracy theories and spreading “misinformation,” including claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from former President Donald Trump.

The FBI, DOJ, Treasury, and the entire government knows and has proof Hunter Biden was involved in human sex trafficking and they have done absolutely nothing about it.

But just imagine if Hunter’s last name was Trump.

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) April 24, 2023

The Office of Congressional Ethics has yet to respond to Hunter Biden’s request for a review of Representative Greene’s conduct. If the Office of Congressional Ethics finds evidence of ethical lapses or misconduct, it could refer the matter to the House Committee on Ethics for further investigation and potential disciplinary action.