In a closed-door House interview on Tuesday, a former business associate of the Biden family, Tony Bobulinski, once again levied critical but unproven allegations against President Joe Biden. Bobulinski has been sharing his story since 2020, even engaging with the Trump campaign. However, his claims that Joe Biden was deeply involved in his son's overseas business dealings remain uncorroborated and have been disputed by other witnesses.

During the interview with House Oversight Committee investigators, Bobulinski stated that Joe Biden was not only a participant and beneficiary of his family's business but also an enabler, despite attempts to maintain plausible deniability. He asserted that Joe Biden's high office was instrumental in securing multi-million-dollar business deals for his son and brother. Bobulinski specifically mentioned Joe Biden's alleged involvement in a lucrative proposed deal with a Chinese energy conglomerate.

It is important to note that CNN has not independently verified the evidence presented by Bobulinski to support his claims. Furthermore, the Wall Street Journal, to which he previously peddled his material, reported that the China deal never closed and corporate records showed no role for Joe Biden.

Bobulinski claimed in his opening statement that he had multiple meetings with Joe Biden in May 2017 to discuss their business dealings. However, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Jamie Raskin, criticized Bobulinski's credibility, describing his encounters with Joe Biden as casual and lacking any substantive business discussions.

Raskin further emphasized that Bobulinski's testimony did not provide any evidence of criminal activity by President Biden or his involvement in Hunter Biden's businesses. Federal stakeholders such as the Justice Department, FBI, and IRS have not contacted Bobulinski for his testimony despite him approaching the FBI in October 2020. The special counsel currently prosecuting Hunter Biden has also not followed up with him.

Rob Walker, another business associate of Bobulinski and Hunter Biden, expressed doubts about Bobulinski's credibility in a separate interview with committee investigators. Walker referred to Bobulinski's allegations as "dumbfounded" and "nonsensical," speculating that his motivation was political. Walker recalled a conversation in October 2020 where Bobulinski discussed Hunter Biden's laptop without disclosing that the conversation was being recorded or would be shared with Fox News.

Contrary to Bobulinski's claims, there is a growing list of other Biden family business associates who have stated that Joe Biden, both as a private citizen and as vice president, was never involved in their family's foreign business dealings.

House Republicans, eager to implicate President Biden in his family's foreign business dealings, have seized on an email exchange from May 2017 involving Bobulinski, Hunter Biden, and other business partners. The email discusses an equity arrangement for a future deal related to Chinese energy interests and mentions a potential 10% equity stake held by Hunter Biden for his father, referred to as the "big guy." However, Hunter Biden's lawyers countered that the proposed equity breakdown was never included in any agreement and was actually suggested by Bobulinski without any response from Hunter Biden.

Bobulinski's claims and the ongoing debate surrounding them serve as ammunition for Republicans in their attempt to portray the president as central to an alleged criminal operation. Democrats, on the other hand, have criticized the use of Bobulinski's unverified allegations and questioned his credibility. The special counsel's final report, which suggested a forgetful commander in chief, has also come into play regarding ongoing debates about President Biden's ability to serve.

While Bobulinski's claims continue to circulate, it is crucial to emphasize that no concrete evidence has emerged supporting the allegations. As the story unfolds, further investigations and scrutiny are needed to determine the veracity of these claims and their potential impact on the Biden administration.