Joe Biden should be impeached under a legal theory laid out by Alan Dershowitz, President Trump’s legal team argued at the end of the questioning phase of the Senate impeachment trial on Thursday.

A group of Republican senators asked whether unsupported allegations around Biden and a Ukrainian gas company called Burisma could amount to a successful case for impeachment.

There is no evidence to support the allegations, which suggest that Biden used his position as vice president to have a Ukrainian prosecutor fired for investigating Burisma, on whose board his son sat.

In fact, there is no evidence to support the notion that the prosecutor in question was investigating Burisma, or anything at all. Biden pushed for his firing, along with everyone observing Ukraine at the time with neurons firing, because of the prosecutor’s failure to fight corruption.

But that was no obstacle to Patrick Philbin, an attorney for the President.

“One could put together fairly easily from those known facts the suggestion that there was a family financial benefit coming from the end of that investigation,” Philbin said, “because it protected the position of the younger Biden on the board.”

So, Biden could be impeached because his son drew a salary for his position on the board of Burisma.

Philbin described it as “purely private pecuniary financial gain,” motive that, if driving an act undertaken by a President, “would be the problematic category.”

There is no evidence to suggest that Hunter Biden’s position at Burisma – regardless of how untoward it may have been – affected the elder Biden’s official work with regard to Ukraine.