Whether Antony Blinken lied or not to Congress is no longer up for debate.

That’s the headline after a bombshell transcript of testimony given by the Secretary of State shows that he claimed to have never had email correspondence with Hunter Biden. That claim was wrapped in a broader answer in which Blinken attempted to distance himself from Joe Biden’s troubled son.

Here is Antony Blinken’s sworn testimony to Congress that he had “NO” email correspondence with Hunter Biden.

The emails on Hunter’s laptop say that’s a lie. pic.twitter.com/kGSSSS94Oi

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) May 2, 2023

But as I shared in a recent write-up, Blinken had extensive contacts with the younger Biden. Those numerous exchanges culminated in setting up an in-person meeting between the two. Further emails confirm that the meeting did take place. That’s made more significant by the time period, which just so happened to be when Hunter Biden was on the board of Ukrainian gas company Burisma.

To put an even fine point on the probable corruption, Hunter Biden contacted another Burisma board member to announce his meeting with Blinken. Now, why would he do that if Burisma wasn’t the topic of discussion?

“Have a few minutes next week to grab a cup of coffee?” Hunter asked. “I know you are impossibly busy, but would like to get your advice on a couple of things.”

“Absolutely,” Blinken replied. “I’m just about to land in Tokyo en route back DC from Burma. I’ll be in office from Tuesday on. Copying Linda in my office to find a good time. Look forward to seeing you. Tony.”

Hunter then forwarded Blinken’s response to his business partner and fellow Burisma board member, Devon Archer.

There have been several evidenced examples of criminality among Biden’s high-profile appointments, but this is the most direct revelation yet. There is no ambiguity in what Blinken said compared to what the facts are. The emails he exchanged with Hunter Biden definitively exist. Further, they exist within the context of what was obviously a pre-existent relationship, again challenging the characterization Blinken gave to Congress.

That leaves Republicans at a crossroads. As of this writing, it’s May of 2023. In just a few short months, the presidential election season will really kick off, and in contrast to 2020, the GOP has an open primary battle waiting to be waged.

What that means is that time is of the essence. The time to impeach Blinken is not a year from now. Republicans have slam-dunk evidence that he broke the law staring them in the face. If they don’t act on it relatively immediately, they will lose the initiative, and as I mentioned, the GOP presidential primary will overshadow whatever moves they make. The phrase “strike while the iron’s hot” has never been more applicable because attention spans are only so long.

The obvious question is whether Blinken will be convicted. The obvious answer is that, of course, he’s not going to be convicted. There is immense value, though, in carrying out a very public impeachment process, exposing the fact that he did lie to Congress (and by virtue, commit a crime). Make Democrats go on record defending him. Make the press proclaim their own hypocrisy. Make Biden own the corruption within his administration. You don’t need a Senate conviction to accomplish those things.

But if Republicans drag their feet and keep waiting around to formulate the perfect case, they will lose their opportunity to really make something of this. Will there be other information that comes out after an impeachment starts? Sure, but the process itself needs to be started posthaste. Republicans are at a crossroads, and they can’t waste any more time deciding what direction to go.