US Rep. Greg Steube Files Articles Of Impeachment Against Biden

1. 80

   Sharlee01posted 8 months ago

   
   
   U.S. Rep. Greg Steube Files Articles of Impeachment Against Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., President of the United States, For High Crimes and Misdemeanors
   
   "118th Congress State of the Union Address, President Joe Biden – February 7, 2023
   
   WASHINGTON —  U.S. Representative Greg Steube (R-Fla.) today filed articles of impeachment against Joseph Robinette Biden Jr., President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
   
   “It’s long past time to impeach Joe Biden,” said Rep. Steube. “He has undermined the integrity of his office, brought disrepute on the Presidency, betrayed his trust as President, and acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice at the expense of America’s citizens. The evidence continues to mount by the day – the Biden Crime Family has personally profited off Joe’s government positions through bribery, threats, and fraud. Joe Biden must not be allowed to continue to sit in the White House, selling out our country.”
   
   The articles of impeachment include:
   
   ARTICLE 1: ABUSE OF POWER: BRIBERY, HOBBS ACT EXTORTION, & HONEST SERVICES FRAUD
   Robert Hunter Biden (Hunter Biden) and James Biden sold access to then Vice President Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. (Joe Biden) while he was in office from 2009 to 2017 and sold promised access to a future Biden Presidential Administration while he was out of office from 2017 to 2021. Hunter and James appear to have promised official actions by Joe Biden in return for payments and business opportunities from foreign and domestic business partners. Joe Biden assisted by making appearances, phone calls, meeting with the “business partners,” and knowingly allowing his family members to promise access to him and actions by him in furtherance of these schemes. Hunter Biden threatened business partners that official actions could be taken against them if they did not meet terms or make payments. In at least one instance, Hunter implied that Joe Biden was aware of these threats and willing to assist in enforcing the threats, potentially through official actions. Hunter Biden attempted to enrich himself and the Biden family by threatening official actions from his father, who he claims was willing to assist in the scheme.
   
   These acts are abuses of power as well as the following federal crimes or conspiracy to commit the following federal crimes: Bribery of Public Officials, 18 USC § 201; Hobbs Act Extortion “Under Color of Official Right,” 18 USC § 1951; Honest Services Fraud relating to use of official position, 18 USC § 1346.
   
   ARTICLE 2: OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
   According to testimony from IRS whistleblowers, members of the Biden campaign improperly colluded with Justice Department (DOJ) officials to improperly interfere with investigations into tax crimes alleged to have been committed by Hunter Biden.
   
   These acts constitute an abuse of power as well as Obstruction of Justice, 18 USC §§ 1505, 1510, 1512.
   
   ARTICLE 3: FRAUD
   James Biden recruited “investors” for business ventures that ultimately failed. There is evidence to suggest that these investment opportunities were sold to investors based on false and fraudulent pretenses and promises. Access to Joe Biden and indications that Joe Biden supported these schemes were used to lure investors into the schemes.
   
   These acts constitute fraud or conspiracy to commit fraud in violation of 18 USC §§ 1943, 1949.
   
   ARTICLE 4: FINANCIAL INVOLVEMENT IN DRUG AND PROSTITUTION
   Joe Biden and Hunter Biden have a long history of comingled and intertwined finances. Between 2010 and 2019  thousands of dollars of Biden family money was spent on illegal drug transactions and prostitution.
   
   These acts constitute violations of or conspiracy to violate federal drug laws at 21 USC §§  841, 842, 843, 846 and federal prostitution laws at 18 USC §§  2421, 2421A, 2422."
   https://steube.house.gov/press-releases … demeanors/
   
   Thoughts on the various accusations? 
   
   Will the House bring Steube Articles Of Impeachment to a vote on the Floor?

   replyreport
2. 89

   IslandBitesposted 8 months ago

   Look here, not there.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

      Oh forgot !   Many just can't walk and chew gum. Just tons of news about Biden, I don't discriminate.  And yes media is hard at work trying to keep eyes on directly they want them. 
      
      I mean how does one ignore an Article Of Impeachment?

      replyreport
      1. 87

         Valeantposted 8 months agoin reply to this

         Because it's like the 15th time the idiots in the House have filed articles of impeachment.  With 13 of them being filed for policy disagreements and the other two lacking any evidence of the claims.  Cry wolf enough that people start ignoring you.

         replyreport
         1. 77

            Kathleen Cochranposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            Anybody can bring an article of impeachment. The challenge is to make your case - even when the fix is already in by an opposing party with a majority.

            replyreport
         2. 80

            Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

            I agree, if the House ignores the current articles, I feel pretty much the same.  I am not a big fan of McCarthy.

            replyreport
3. 80

   Sharlee01posted 8 months ago

   House GOP blasts appointment of Hunter Biden special counsel
   
   The Hill ---   "Top House Republicans are accusing the Biden administration of attempting to stymie their investigation into Hunter Biden following the Department of Justice’s appointment of a special counsel.
   
   Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) raised doubts about whether special counsel David Weiss could be trusted and pledged in a statement that House Republicans would continue their investigations into the president’s family.
   
   “This action by Biden’s DOJ cannot be used to obstruct congressional investigations or whitewash the Biden family corruption,” McCarthy said on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. “If Weiss negotiated the sweetheart deal that couldn’t get approved, how can he be trusted as a Special Counsel? House Republicans will continue to pursue the facts for the American people.”
   
   Russell Dye, a spokesperson for House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), also questioned whether they could trust Weiss and said the appointment of the special counsel “is just a new way to whitewash the Biden family’s corruption.”
   
   “Weiss has already signed off on a sweetheart plea deal that was so awful and unfair that a federal judge rejected it. We will continue to pursue facts brought to light by brave whistleblowers as well as Weiss’s inconsistent statements to Congress,” Dye continued.
   
   Meanwhile, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) called the move “part of the Justice Department’s efforts to attempt a Biden family coverup.”
   
   “Let’s be clear what today’s move is really about,” Comer said in a statement. “The Biden Justice Department is trying to stonewall congressional oversight as we have presented evidence to the American people about the Biden family’s corruption.”
   
   Comer and Jordan have led the push to investigate President Biden’s family’s business dealings and have sharply criticized how the Justice Department handled its probe into Hunter Biden.
   
   Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Weiss, the Delaware federal prosecutor who has been leading the Hunter Biden investigation, as a special counsel Friday."
   
   
   IN MY VIEW, this special counsel choice was in three words --- a bad choice.
   I tend to agree with McCarthy.  This is a ploy to try to keep Weiss from going under oath and verify the IRS whistleblower's testimony. Which is very damming against Hunter Biden. Plus, Weiss has been investigating Hunter Biden for 5 years. Could he have uncovered information that could condemn Joe Biden? This special counsel assignment is a nice way to legally shut him up, and drag the investigation past the 2024 election.
   
   An impeachment would allow Congress the latitude they need to bring all the witnesses they need to prove their case against Joe. An impeachment trial will offer them the opportunity to ask the questions that need to be answered. Once and for all reach the truth, while America watches live.
   
   Time for the House to put up or shut up. Do we have a compromised
   president or don't we?  The time has come to find out. 
   
   The Democrats dealt a real blow with this compromised special counsel... Time for Republicans to give back a crunching blow.  Hey, Republicans are not accustomed to getting in the mud, but they need to start slinging mud back.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Willowarborposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      "IN MY VIEW, this special counsel choice was in three words --- a bad choice.
      I tend to agree with McCarthy.  This is a ploy to try to keep Weiss from going under oath and verify the IRS whistleblower's testimony."
      
      We do know that the attorney general, Merrick Garland, said, David Weiss came to him, called him on the phone on Tuesday, and said he had entered a new stage of this investigation, and he believed it was important to appoint him as special counsel. Weiss asked for the appointment. Garland is an attorney general that seems to care more about bending over backwards and twisting himself into a pretzel to appear nonpartisan. 
      Weiss was chosen under the Trump administration in 2018 to begin this investigation. In my opinion, the Biden administration should have canned him when they came in.
      This is actually just another example of the Republican Party consisting of almost solely grievance and whining.
      
      Congressional Republicans have for months repeatedly written to Garland demanding he appoint a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden, the president’s son, over his business dealings. Some even demanded that a specific man be named to lead the inquiry: David C. Weiss.
      But after Garland elevated Weiss to special counsel status, Republicans in Congress reacted publicly not with triumph, but with outrage.
      This is simply opposition for the sake of opposition.  Republicans should settle on a platform instead of their continued strategy of opposing absolutely move Democrats make, even when they previously supported that position. It looks ridiculous. After months of calling for this, now they're upset?  What do they want now? I think that many of us are just sick and tired of the whining, complaining and positions constantly changing.
      
      As for McCarthy and this statement he made;
      "This action by Biden’s DOJ cannot be used to obstruct congressional investigations or whitewash the Biden family corruption,”
      
      This is purposefully muddying the waters for the already misinformed legion of followers.  The action by the DOJ that he is speaking of was initiated by and requested by Trump appointed attorney Weiss. McCarthy frames it as Garland taking the action on himself when that clearly was not the case.  I've really just had it with these kind of statements. Clearly misleading. McCarthy clearly banking on the fact that most of the followers won't look beyond his statement or Fox for the actual complete story.
      
      "The Democrats dealt a real blow with this compromised special counsel..."
      
      How so? The man ( Weiss) asked for it though? Let me pose this question, what should have Garland done? Deny the man's request? Republicans would have been happy with that? Even after they've been calling for this in written letters for months?  As far as I'm concerned, your team picked this guy 5 years ago and Garland is making sure he stays on your team. He is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't in this situation. Republicans will whine complain regardless.

      replyreport
      1. 80

         Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

         "We do know that the attorney general, Merrick Garland, said, David Weiss came to him, called him on the phone on Tuesday, and said he had entered a new stage of this investigation"
         
         Just my view here --- I have no trust in Garland, at all. I feel he has been weaponized from day one, period.  He is a snake.
         
         I do not agree that  America needs another lengthy investigation. Weiss has been investigating Hunter for 5 years. He was told by an IRS agent Hunter had committed felonies, and did Hunter get charged? No. Actually, many of his felonies become moot due to the statute of limitation.  So, do I trust Weiss --- NO. I am still waiting for him to deny he told the 2 whistleblowers and 6 others in that meeting that he made an attempt to indict Huter in Cal, and DC. So, I am considering the full picture. This special counsel in my view, is a ploy, another case of Garland weaponizing the DOJ to cover for the Biden's.
         
         Again ---  An impeachment would allow Congress the latitude they need to bring all the witnesses they need to prove their case against Joe. An impeachment trial will offer them the opportunity to ask the questions that need to be answered. Once and for all reach the truth, while America watches live.
         
         Time for the House to put up or shut up. Do we have a compromised
         president or don't we?  The time has come to find out.
         
         End of story.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Willowarborposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            "Just my view here --- I have no trust in Garland, at all. I feel he has been weaponized from day one, period.  He is a snake."
            
            I failed to see any tangible evidence of weaponization. In fact just the opposite. He's gone out of his way far too often to give Republicans exactly what they want and to avoid the appearance of partisanship. Weaponization would have been Garland coming in and kicking Weiss off the job and replacing him with his own handpicked prosecutor. Weaponization would have been denying Weiss request to become special counsel.
            A snake? Not in my mind but someone not really having the spine to play politics like all the rest. Sounds like he has a little too much integrity for the job.
            As far as an impeachment, the written article doesn't have a shred of substantial fact. At this point I don't think even half of House Republicans would get behind it. I'm fairly certain that McCarthy, being the consummate politician he is, would know better to embarrass his caucus by bringing such a flimsy article to the floor. But they'll do what they have to do to get the spotlight off Trump.

            replyreport
            1. 80

               Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

               Noted your view, we are on opposite sides of a wide spectrum. I stand with Turley, and Dershowitz on this one. 
               
               Both have expressed on many issues over the past three years that they feel we have a weaponized DOJ.
               
               Just sticking with the pros on this issue.

               replyreport
            2. 77

               Kathleen Cochranposted 8 months agoin reply to this

               Willowarbor: Well said.

               replyreport
4. 80

   Sharlee01posted 8 months ago

   Public trust wanes as AG Merrick Garland misses opportunity for transparency: Jonathan Turley
   AG Merrick Garland on Friday appointed U.S. Attorney David Weiss as special counsel in the Hunter Biden --  Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley breaks down how the appointment of David Weiss to special counsel in the Hunter Biden probe affects public confidence on "The Story."
   
   JONATHAN TURLEY: The problem with this appointment is manifest. You know, Garland had the opportunity to do two things to regain the trust of the public. He could have appointed someone else as special counsel, and he could have expanded the mandate. He could have said, look, there are a lot of concerns about influence peddling crimes associated with the Biden family. We're going to have all of those investigated independently, and the facts will take it where it needs to lead. He didn't do that.
   
   Instead, he kept on referring to the mandate of investigating Hunter Biden, and he appointed the individual who's been criticized for weeks, accused by whistleblowers of being the head of what they suggest was a fixed investigation. Now, that's obviously not going to help the public trust any.
   
   The most immediate impact of this appointment will be to insulate the department itself. Weiss was supposed to testify in Congress. That's highly unlikely, if he does, it's unlikely he's going to give any real information. But there is another road here. You know, by not expanding the mandate, Garland may have fueled calls for the impeachment inquiry. You know, impeachment is sort of constitutional kryptonite. You know, no court that I know of would say that Congress does not have a duty to investigate allegations of corruption by President Biden and his family. This does not appear to be within the mandate laid out by the attorney general.
   
   And I want to note something else. Why wouldn't you answer that question? Why wouldn't you, you would just give great specificity as to the mandate with regard to Hunter Biden, why wouldn't the Justice Department answer clearly whether the president is within that mandate? And it speaks quite loudly to the rank and file. It suggests that we're not on board with investigating the president.
   
   And you have to keep in mind that this was the attorney general that said that Weiss had sweeping authority to investigate just Hunter Biden and yet this investigation was accused of being fixed and obstructed.

   replyreport
5. 80

   Sharlee01posted 8 months ago

   The appearance of justice is not satisfied by Garland, Weiss: Alan Dershowitz | The Record    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asmQh0y-Ut0

   replyreport
6. 84

   tsmogposted 8 months ago

   Question: Aren't there already three House Committees investigating Hunter and his dad? What would an impeachment inquiry do that those committees aren't already doing? Won't those three committees unearth the needed facts? As an amateur, in governing, it looks to me to be redundant with showmanship.
   
   And, Just for fun while learning if I can post an image from HP Photos to a forum post, yet is relevant is this:
   
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

      "What would an impeachment inquiry do that those committees aren't already doing?"
      
      I would hope they would speed up the process. Weiss has investigated Hunter for 5 years, and we do not know if his investigation includes
      his Dad. 
      
      An impeachment would bring about a trial where Congress could call witnesses, such as firsthand whistleblowers that have offered damming information, that has at this point not been corroborated by Weiss.
      
      All documentation, that has been collected, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop information, could be presented, the fact that the FBI labeled Hunter's laptop Russian disinformation, and knew it was not.
      
      Questions in regard to Joe Biden's meeting with Hunter's business associates could be explained, as well as the many phone calls Biden had with his son while in the presence of business associates. And it would be possible to see why Hunter accumulated over 21 million dollars from foreign nations, as well as why money was filtered to other family members, and did any of these funds reach Joe Biden.
      
      So many questions... A trial would present witnesses that could possibly answer these many questions. Funny how most won't lie while under oath.
      
      This Biden scandal warrants an impeachment. We could have a very compromised man in the White House.  So, yes, your point is well taken, but at this point, too much smoke has accumulated to just continue to look for more of the same.
      
      Biden is running for a second term --- This all needs sorting out before 2024.  And an impeachment will bring at best all the information into the light. Or perhaps we should kick it under the rug, as the FBI did in 2020 with the laptop.   In my view, we need whatever Congress has learned outed.

      replyreport
   2. 77

      Kathleen Cochranposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      Heinlein - what a great writer!

      replyreport
   3. 77

      Kathleen Cochranposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      tsmog: "What would an impeachment inquiry do that those committees aren't already doing?"
      
      Grab headlines during campaign season with Trump is facing four indictments.

      replyreport
7. 59

   Willowarborposted 8 months ago

   Weiss was appointed by Attorney General Barr to conduct the investigation of Hunter Biden. Looking back, that appointment had full Republican support. Garland left him on the job even when he shouldn't have. Even more recently, Republicans were requesting Weiss elevation to special counsel status. But now that it looks likely that Weiss may not produce the outcome they hoped for, they want him replaced after 5 years?!  Just start over new? Would they like to handpick this person also?  Sounding an awful lot like weaponization to me. Looks a lot like sour grapes. I think the American people have had enough after 5 years already.  The Republican team wanted the guy, they got the guy and now you're going to be made to stick with the guy.  It's sort of like a very simple lesson we teach children. Take the consequences of your decisions rather than crying for a do-over.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

      I think as I said I will stick with Turley, and Dershowitz on this one.  I feel they both offered their legal experience to this issue. Both feel Weiss is clearly compromised.

      replyreport
   2. 89

      IslandBitesposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      They only want to stretch it, they need their talking point. Some of them have admitted it, they're doing it for the public opinion, a political strategy. They couldn't care less if Hunter really broke the law or not.
      
      The appointment of Weiss is an inconvenience for their strategy. Their Committees investigations are not enough now. Especially with another Trump indictment looming. They needed something bigger. "Look here, not there."

      replyreport