The White House dismissed House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer's (R-KY) comments on an FBI briefing concerning a tip into alleged wrongdoing by President Joe Biden as "yet another fact-free stunt."

On Monday, Comer spoke to the press after the briefing, during which he claimed that the briefing proved that the committee's investigation into alleged wrongdoing by the Bidens was on to something and must be pursued further. Ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-MD), who attended the same briefing, claimed the opposite, saying the briefing showed no factual basis for the alleged wrongdoing. The White House issued a response to Comer, denouncing his statement as without basis, echoing Raskin's comments.

NASA TARGETING MONDAY LAUNCH FOR ISS RESUPPLY MISSION

"This is yet another fact-free stunt staged by Chairman Comer not to conduct legitimate oversight, but to spread thin innuendo to try to damage the President politically and get himself media attention," Ian Sams, the White House spokesman for oversight and investigations, said in a statement.

"As Sen. Grassley admitted, they aren’t ‘interested in whether or not the accusations are accurate,’ which rings even truer now that it’s been publicly reported that the Trump administration’s Justice Department looked into this claim three years ago and found nothing credible," he added.

Comer said the FBI briefing suggested that the Biden family was involved in money laundering.

“The claims made in the document are consistent with what we found and disclosed to you all in Romania,” Comer said, referring to information he revealed last month suggesting several Biden family members had engaged in criminal activity.

“It suggests a pattern of bribery where payments would be made through shell accounts and multiple banks. There’s a term for that: It’s called money laundering,” he continued.

Raskin backed up the White House's response, saying there was no factual basis for the allegations against Biden, so the FBI had chosen not to pursue an investigation.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

“What we’re talking about here is a confidential human source reporting a conversation with someone else. So what we’re talking about is secondhand hearsay. And they did whatever investigative due diligence was called for in that assessment period, and they found no reason to escalate it from an assessment to a so-called preliminary investigation,” Raskin said.

The Washington Examiner reached out to Comer for comment.