As the House begins its formal impeachment inquiry of President Joe Biden on Thursday, Republican lawmakers say they already have “overwhelming” proof that he abused his office for his family’s financial gain.

The White House vehemently disagrees. The Biden impeachment is “based on lies,” many of which have been “actively disproven,” according to a memo emailed to news organizations earlier this month.

Two years of GOP investigations have indeed produced clear evidence that Hunter Biden, the president’s son, used his famous last name as leverage in trying to land foreign business deals.

But so far, the publicly released documents do not show that President Biden personally profited from those deals, or that he used his powers as an elected official to bend policy to the benefit of his son’s employers.

The inquiry reminds some observers of the investigation into the 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya. That probe spiraled in a different direction after investigators discovered then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had used an unsecured server to handle sensitive government emails.

Republicans may be hoping that with the Biden impeachment inquiry, like Benghazi, “somewhere along the way something will pop up,” says Frank O. Bowman, an emeritus professor of law at the University of Missouri.

As House Republicans begin their formal impeachment inquiry of President Joe Biden on Thursday, Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer says they already have “overwhelming” proof that he abused his office for his family’s financial gain.

The White House vehemently disagrees. The Biden impeachment is “based on lies,” many of which have been “actively disproven,” according to a memo emailed to news organizations earlier this month.

What two years of GOP investigations have indeed produced is clear documentation that Hunter Biden, the president’s son, used his famous last name as leverage in trying to land foreign business deals, according to publicly released House committee interview transcripts and documents.

What the probes have not yet turned up is any solid proof that President Biden personally profited from those deals, or that he used his powers as an elected official to bend policy to the benefit of his son’s employers, despite some circumstantial hints to the contrary.

That sets the GOP inquiry apart from previous presidential impeachments, which began with more credible evidence of wrongdoing, say some experts. This process may look less like the Nixon, Clinton, or Trump impeachments and more like the Republican House investigations into the 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya, when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, says Frank O. Bowman, an emeritus professor of law at the University of Missouri.

The Benghazi probes spiraled in a different direction after investigators discovered that Secretary Clinton had been using an unsecured home server to handle government emails, some containing classified information. FBI investigations of Mrs. Clinton’s emails likely damaged her 2016 presidential campaign.

Republican leaders may be hoping that with the Biden impeachment inquiry, like Benghazi, “somewhere along the way something will pop up,” says Professor Bowman, author of  “High Crimes and Misdemeanors: A History of Impeachment for the Age of Trump.”