Biden Impeachment Inquiry - The Logical Next Step
I'd love to hear your perspective on this current political matter. It's worth noting that the topic doesn't revolve around Trump, but it's intriguing because President Biden is seeking re-election for another four years in office.
"Fox News Digital has confirmed House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., will tell House Republicans today that beginning an impeachment inquiry against President Biden is "the logical next step."
The House GOP conference plans to hold a meeting on Thursday morning for key committee chairs to lay out their latest findings and the status of the investigations into the Biden family. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., are expected to lead Thursday's meeting.
At the meeting, McCarthy is expected to say an impeachment inquiry is the "logical next step" for the Republican majority. An inquiry is the first step of the impeachment process, where evidence is gathered for the articles, or charges, of impeachment against an official.
This special conference meeting on Thursday is in addition to Wednesday morning’s regularly scheduled weekly GOP meeting where leadership typically lays out priorities for the week. Thursday's scheduled meeting was first reported by Punchbowl News.
Sources previously told Fox News Digital that Republicans were planning to launch an impeachment inquiry into Biden this month. Three separate GOP-led committees have investigated allegations that Hunter Biden leveraged his father's official government positions to secure foreign business deals. The open question for Republican lawmakers is whether President Biden ever personally benefited from his son's deals or abused the power of his office to influence them in any way.
McCarthy said last month that an impeachment inquiry would only happen with a formal House vote.
"To open an impeachment inquiry is a serious matter, and House Republicans would not take it lightly or use it for political purposes. The American people deserve to be heard on this matter through their elected representatives," McCarthy told Breitbart News in a statement. "That’s why, if we move forward with an impeachment inquiry, it would occur through a vote on the floor of the People’s House and not through a declaration by one person."
That means 218 lawmakers will need to support an impeachment inquiry against Biden, and it is not at all certain House Republicans have the votes to do it. Several GOP lawmakers including Reps. Ken Buck, R-Colo., and Don Bacon, R-Neb., have voiced skepticism about impeachment. Even some House conservatives who support impeachment have complained about the timing, with Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., telling Fox News Digital last week it appeared McCarthy was "dangling" the issue to avoid a confrontation over spending ahead of the next deadline to fund the government. "I know Ken Buck from Colorado as one of the state's most conservative representatives and if he says that this is all a bunch of hooey......
You are going to need definitive proof of malfeasance on Biden's part, which I have yet to see presented.
With the budget issues coming up over the next few days, many Republican reps might see this as untimely distraction. I doubt that even the GOP can get a party line vote on this matter. The margin that Republicans have in the House over Democrats is paper thin. This proposed move could be a source of embarrassment for the party that could result in eggs in many faces."This proposed move could be a source of embarrassment for the party that could result in eggs in many faces."
Much like the two faux impeachments of Trump, right? Complete failures, without "definitive proof of malfeasance", both were purely political acts designed and intended to remove Trump and keep him from ever running again.
But "eggs in many faces"? Not hardly - the liberal mantra was that it was because Republicans failed to follow along. What makes you think a Biden impeachment, failed or successful, would be any different. From my viewpoint Democrats don't have "egg on their faces"; they are buried in it shoulder deep, but Democrats will not admit the obvious, instead putting blame on Republicans. If the impeachment of Biden goes forth we will see the same thing; a completely partisan political maneuver with the "other" party being to blame when it fails (or succeeds). Our legislators do not have the honesty or ethics to actually do what is right, just what they think will benefit themselves or their party."Much like the two faux impeachments of Trump, right? Complete failures, without "definitive proof of malfeasance", both were purely political acts designed and intended to remove Trump and keep him from ever running again."
I don't agree with that totally. I do understand from a right wing perspective that the impeachments on Trump could be consider partisan.
And if he loses the ability to run again that will be his own fault for breaking the rules.
We will see how it plays out, the loud mouth Republican hard right wing will pressure the House Majority Leader, let's see if he can stand the heat."And if he loses the ability to run again that will be his own fault for breaking the rules."
And he was guilty of breaking the rules by conspiring with Putin, right? Your presumption of guilt is again showing.Wilderness,
The one issue that sticks is his participation in denying Biden his rightful victory, and you will equivocate to no end as you always do.
I don't believe in an endless string of coincidences. Trump was involved in upending our political system of selecting our President. What is it that you don't know?
Fake electors, Pressure on Pence to clearly break the rules, dragging the country over years on some silly idea of election fraud that he could never prove, stirring up a raucous mob of malcontents. His behavior falls far short of what anyone could call Presidential, that is a reason right there not to support him.
If Trump is convicted, what is next for the Right? Accuse the legal system of being weaponized?
This is how and why Republics and Democracies become Tyrannies.
Trump is a former President. He is currently running to be President.
ANY and ALL prosecutions of him ARE political, they ARE a sign we are in a biased and tyrannical government.
The opposition has made its claims against him for 7 years now, they have had more than half a decade to convince Americans that he is a Russian puppet, a Rapist, a Traitor, and a Felon.
LET AMERICANS DECIDE if they want him as President or not.
The Democrats will NOT allow that to happen, they will use the judicial system, they will change the laws of voting and balloting, to ensure there is no chance that he returns to the Presidency.
There is no way they allow the Deplorables to influence who is President or what direction this country goes in ever again.
“You know,” Clinton said to a friendly crowd of wealthy donors, “to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it.”
The 'Elites' as I like to call them, do not believe the half of Americans (or more) that don't agree with them deserve to be heard, considered, or allowed to influence the politics and policies of America... and for a long time now, it has shown."This is how and why Republics and Democracies become Tyrannies."
Is that so, Ken? We have a Constitution that guides us as to how we govern ourselves. Are we not to comply with its provisions?
"Trump is a former President. He is currently running to be President."
Yes, I know, what about it?
"ANY and ALL prosecutions of him ARE political, they ARE a sign we are in a biased and tyrannical government."
That is a matter of opinion. You Trump people acts as if Donald Trump is incapable of violating the law, when that has been has his mantra over his entire lifetime.
"The opposition has made its claims against him for 7 years now, they have had more than half a decade to convince Americans that he is a Russian puppet, a Rapist, a Traitor, and a Felon."
I believe that he was complicit in the attempts to overturn the 2020 election results, an illegal assault against the rule of law. He will have his day in court to establish that he in fact is not a traitor or a felon. The charges against him are serious and will have to addressed. If he is acquitted,then fine, BUT he is going to be tried.
"LET AMERICANS DECIDE if they want him as President or not."
Really? Does the country get to decide that my 25 year old Uber driver can be President? The Constitution has an minimum age requirement of 35 years
The Rightwinger kept bashing Obama over his qualification established by the Constitution that he be born within the United States. Well he was, but if he were not, could he have ran for President?
Well Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has specific guidance regarding qualifications for public office by those involved in rebellion and insurrection against the United States. And they are just as well etched into stone as the other provisions.
I will give Trump the opportunity to defend himself against that violation in a court of law but if he loses, he is not allowed to run.
You want to change all of that, then change the Constitution in the manner prescribed by law.
------
So sorry, Ken, but on this point of yours, my bull$hit detector screams like an air raid siren.
The Republicans are just as determined to deny the ballot to all but "true Americans", basically white countryside type people and they use every trick in the book to stifle their participation to those that they are against. After all, they are against automatic voter registration because it makes it easier for the "undesirables" to vote. So, from where I am standing, I have an entirely different perspective of the issue.Yup, he is going to be tried. By a system that has already found him guilty.
It its beyond my concerns or ability to influence whether Trump goes to jail, or becomes the next President, or both.
We cannot take the word of a few other people, regarding what Trump might have done or said, people LIE, entire GROUPS of people lie.
Like 51 Intel Officials Who Lied About the Hunter Biden Laptop Emails.
Mike Hayden, former CIA director, now analyst for CNN
Jim Clapper, former director of national intelligence, now CNN pundit
Leon Panetta, former CIA director and defense secretary
John Brennan, former CIA director, now analyst for NBC and MSNBC
Thomas Fingar, former National Intelligence Council chair, now teaches at Stanford University
Rick Ledgett, former National Security Agency deputy director, now a director at M&T Bank
John McLaughlin, former CIA acting director, now teaches at Johns Hopkins University
Michael Morell, former CIA acting director, now at George Mason University
Mike Vickers, former defense undersecretary for intelligence, now on board of BAE Systems
Doug Wise, former Defense Intelligence Agency deputy director, teaches at University of New Mexico
Nick Rasmussen, former National Counterterrorism Center director, now executive director, Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism
Russ Travers, former National Counterterrorism Center acting director
Andy Liepman, former National Counterterrorism Center deputy director
John Moseman, former CIA chief of staf
Larry Pfeiffer, former CIA chief of staff, now senior advisor to The Chertoff Group
Jeremy Bash, former CIA chief of staff, now analyst for NBC and MSNBC
Rodney Snyder, former CIA chief of staff
Glenn Gerstell, former National Security Agency general counsel
David Priess, former CIA analyst and manager
Pam Purcilly, former CIA deputy director of analysis
Marc Polymeropoulos, former CIA senior operations officer
Chris Savos, former CIA senior operations officer
John Tullius, former CIA senior intelligence officer
David A. Vanell, former CIA senior operations officer
Kristin Wood, former CIA senior intelligence officer, now non-resident fellow, Harvard
David Buckley, former CIA inspector general
Nada Bakos, former CIA analyst and targeting officer, now senior fellow, Foreign Policy Research Institute
Patty Brandmaier, former CIA senior intelligence officer
James B. Bruce, former CIA senior intelligence office
David Cariens, former CIA intelligence analyst
Janice Cariens, former CIA operational support officer
Paul Kolbe, former CIA senior operations officer
Peter Corsell, former CIA analyst
Brett Davis, former CIA senior intelligence officer
Roger Zane George, former national intelligence officer:
Steven L. Hall, former CIA senior intelligence officer
Kent Harrington, former national intelligence officer
Don Hepburn, former national security executive, now president of Boanerges Solutions LLC
Timothy D. Kilbourn, former dean of CIA’s Kent School of Intelligence Analysis
Ron Marks, former CIA officer
Jonna Hiestand Mendez, former CIA technical operations officer, now on board of the International Spy Museum
Emile Nakhleh, former director of CIA’s Political Islam Strategic Analysis Program, now at University of New Mexico
Gerald A. O’Shea, former CIA senior operations officer
Nick Shapiro, former CIA deputy chief of staff and senior adviser to the director
John Sipher, former CIA senior operations officer
Stephen Slick, former National Security Council senior director for intelligence programs
Cynthia Strand, former CIA deputy assistant director for global issues
Greg Tarbell, former CIA deputy executive director
David Terry, former National Intelligence Collection Board chairman
Greg Treverton, former National Intelligence Council chair, now senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies
Winston Wiley, former CIA director of analysis
There is no way, I am going to trust the testimony of anyone, regarding what occurred on Jan 6 and Trump's actions, no... way.
Now, if there is video, irrefutable proof that he deliberately and with intent did things that he knew to be treasonous or wrong, then I can believe it.
As for Classified documents, what they accuse him of is a joke when compared to what Clinton did, Hillary Clinton's campaign made several payments to a company that destroys sensitive data due to an ongoing investigation into her use of e-mail while she was SoS.
Remember how Comey set the election on its head when he informed Congress that his agents had located emails that "appear to be pertinent" to the Clinton investigation on Weiner's laptop?
Then how quickly Comey and the FBI reversed course on that when it got leaked, giving her a pass on everything?
Tale of two systems, two ways for enforcing the law, based on whether you are part of the system or are challenging those who control it.Well, Ken, I have faith in the legal system which basically says that no one is above the law.
Receiving a criminal indictment is more than just hearsay or relying on the words of a few people.
As for Hunter Biden, I am not excusing him for his violations of the law. But, Hunter Biden is not Joe Biden and until there is solid irrefutable proof that the President is involved in the affairs of Hunter, I say "nuts".
Now for this exhaustive list. What is the source and how reliable is it? Why should I give it credibility?
So, in your mind, it is not possible that Trump is guilty of anything, disregarding every and any respected and credible source? Every charge against Trump has been manufactured? Why should I believe that? I believe that all the bread crumbs regarding January 6th and who is responsible will point to Trump. That, again, is my opinion, he may well escape this as the slippery serpent that he is once again, we will see.
I don't have all the details about Clinton and her affair regarding mishandling of classified information. But, I do know that Trump was both stupid and arrogant in not cooperating immediately and fully with authorities when asked to return the documents.You think Clinton, or Biden, is any less stupid or arrogant than Trump?
We know how Trump made his billions, dirty business deals and all, far more legit than how politicians like the Clintons and Bidens became worth so much... exactly what were they selling that got them so much money?
The point I am making is that evidence will be created, statements made, and whether or not he is guilty is now practically impossible to determine, unless there is irrefutable and overwhelming evidence... not testimony, not statements, hard visual and audio proof beyond reproach.
They have already proven themselves and the system to be untrustworthy, like they did with the dossier and the Russian conspiracy charges.
They have already shown they will break the law, create false evidence, I have no reason to think they will not do so again... and plenty of reason to suspect that they will.Ken, most lifetime policians like Clinton and Biden have money, don't they all? But they are not in the same category that Trump is in from economic standpoint, they are not billionaires.
True, they sold their souls to the devil long before they reached the EO.
Trump was an aberration, he did not have to sell his soul to those corporations and power brokers that control DC, he had enough money and support (from other Billionaires and matching Federal funds) to do it without selling out.
Trump is a dislikable person, for many, so you find it easy to believe all the accusations fed to you. His political opponents (most of everyone in DC) despise him for exposing them, their corruption, their illegal activities, and constantly insulting them.
But come on, the 91 charges (or whatever the number is) is so stupid, if they were smart, they would have focused on one or two very solid things they could prove and gone after him for it. Shutting down everything else regardless of its legitimacy.
91 just proves it is a witch hunt, it shows how biased and political it all is.There are still the 4 indictments. I am not being fed anything, his behavior is evident and in plain sight. And you know what? It has been honestly on display in the 30 years that I read about him in the headlines. He is an all around jerk with nothing to redeem him, in my opinion. He has always been a phony populist deceiving the common citizen that this avaricious billionaire gives a rats ass about them. The sheer scale of this delusion is beyond comprehension.
Trump is just as corrupt and dishonest as anyone within the Washington establishment. He certainly is not a solution to problems in Washington.I am willing to acknowledge that, for the sake of moving this to the more important questions.
What are you most concerned about, and where do these two stand on those issues?
That is all that should matter at the end of the day.
Lets resign ourselves to the fact that they have both done some shady things, arrogant things, even racist and sexist things.
For myself, it comes down to what is MOST important at this time, at this stage, in 2024 and beyond.
#1 for me is Ukraine - Russia and ENDING not ESCALATING the war.
Who is going to escalate it into WWIII and who is going to end it and normalize relations with Russia.
This is a NEW priority for me, as before, my #2 was always my #1.
#2 The Economy - if it tanks, we all suffer, if it does well, almost all of us benefit. I am not going to belabor the importance of a healthy economy, other than to say you can fix NONE of the social issues attributed to discrimination if we, collectively, are unable to feed ourselves or pay our bills.
#3 Protecting Children - Another new one for me, until the Biden Administration I never had the idea that I had to protect innocent children from our government, unfortunately, that has changed.
You have to prioritize the issues for yourself... and then live with the good or evil those choices bring unto the world because of that support."Lets resign ourselves to the fact that they have both done some shady things, arrogant things, even racist and sexist things. "
It comes down to a matter of extent and degree, it has been in my experience rare to find whites completely free of this attitude within a society structured as this one is. From Biden's initiatives, are his policies helping or hurting our interests?
Well, WWIiI seems to be on hold as this Ukraine invasion is a year and one half old.
Domestic concerns seem to dominate my thinking now.
Yes a healthy economy is important, that is why I prefer Democrats at the helm.
Your so called Freedom Caucus proposes cuts that will affect children and nutrition, you don't think that I believe that Republicans really care about the welfare of anyone outside of their rich donor class?
I have prioritized and I will take my chances with Biden and the Democrats over any Republican at this time.I have come to realize over the years the concrete soundness of your priorities, and how they act as blinders to other issues.
There is good and bad in that. The ability to ignore the severity of where we stand with Russia right now does not fall in the good category.
So rather than belabor my concerns, I will just link to another forum thread where many of them were discussed before:
https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/358 … ine?page=2
Hundreds of thousands have already died because we have the wrong leadership at the helm of our Nation, I hope it doesn't become tens of millions, or worse.Note that the MAGA gov't shutdown is just hours away WILL hurt this nation in big ways, including our children and our national security.
"There are still the 4 indictments. I am not being fed anything, his behavior is evident and in plain sight. And you know what? It has been honestly on display in the 30 years that I read about him in the headlines."
I think one might consider, this form of transparency may just be better than a president that hides, lies, and is being told what to say and do.
Is he as corrupt? One might consider and face much of the weaponization that has occurred under Biden. You can deny it, but I can't. As you used these words in describing Trump --- Biden pulls off his ineptness and non-caringness, his lies, and more, it is evident all in plain sight.
I ask, do you feel that over half the country is blind, brainwashed, blindly following Trump for nothing? No really, consider what you may be believing... Do you not see the absurdity of that?
Is Trump the solution or do we just see this country totally destroyed? Do you truely think Biden can govern? The fact is, he makes problem after problem due to not thinking of the consequences. Actually, his problems are like dominos one creates another.
And you continue to say, The Demacrats share your ideologies... Do they, do they at this point?Well, Sharlee
"I think one might consider, this form of transparency may just be better than a president that hides, lies, and is being told what to say and do."
Yes, it is right up there with Hitler's "Mein Kamph". Who said that Biden is being told what to say and do? As a Democrat, he is doing what I sent him there to do, to the best of his ability. I don't think that he is hiding, that is a matter of opinion.
As for weaponization, I tend to think that is just more fables from the rightwing echo chamber. After all this time, when has Biden been proven to be as complicit in crimes and corruption on the scale of Trump? So I have to deny it, even though you can't. Trump is unhinged in every way. While I could not support any GOP candidate, I reserve a special abhorrence for Trump.
"I ask, do you feel that over half the country is blind, brainwashed, blindly following Trump for nothing? No really, consider what you may be believing... Do you not see the absurdity of that?"
I have to ask you, what about the other half who voted Biden in as President a majority over Trump, are their wishes to be ignored? I can't say why so many people swoon over this man like a smitten school girl, he screams from the rooftops as to how antidemocratic, coarse and fundamentally dishonest he is.
Yes, I think that Biden can govern, and I have deathly fear as to a Trump reelection, will he subject his former Gen. Miley to an execution? When Trump speaks of retribution, what does that mean? Retribution against whom?
I don't trust Republicans, their candidates, their ideology, no more than you could support any Democrat. And with their doubling down on the worse of their tendencies, I have not changed my perspective,New and old studies shed light on why some people (granted "some" is a very big number) " swoon over this man like a smitten school girl". They literally have let their neural networks in their brain get reprogrammed to the point they are incapable of critically thinking about Trump. Simply put, Trump has become a bad habit that is worse than smoking and drug addiction.
Noted, and just no reply. Our views are so different... But I did take the time to read your thoughts.
Thanks for carrying on the good fight, Credence. I have once again had to stop reading Ken's fantasies for the sake of my sanity.
Both of those comments, his and your reply, were hysterical.
kudos.
You're welcome, we are on the same team...
How do you consider the two necessary impeachments of Trump resulted in one of them being just three cowardly Republican votes shy of meeting the threshold to convict. 57 Senators saw something you seem to be closing your eyes to.
Since they had TONS of evidence against Trump and they have NO evidence against Biden, you tell me which one is just a partisan witchhunt.
One could argue that focusing on potential legal issues involving the President during a period of budget discussions is a justified and necessary endeavor. While budgetary matters are undoubtedly very important ---
In my view, it's essential to emphasize that the principles of democracy and the rule of law should always take precedence. Addressing any allegations of wrongdoing by the President is not merely a distraction but rather a demonstration of the commitment to accountability and transparency in government affairs.
Furthermore, Congress has a constitutional duty to oversee and investigate potential misconduct, regardless of the ongoing budget discussions. Neglecting this responsibility could set a dangerous precedent and undermine the system of checks and balances.
While achieving a party-line vote may be challenging, it's worth noting that bipartisanship in such investigations can enhance their credibility and demonstrate a commitment to impartiality. A thorough and transparent examination of the allegations, even in the face of a narrow majority, can signal a dedication to the rule of law above political considerations.
Final thought, failing to address the multiple allegations could erode public trust in the political process and lead to more accusations of favoritism or cover-ups.All that is fine Sharlee, as long as you have a case and evidence to support it.
Before any Democrat considers such a thing there has to evidence that President Biden shares guilt with his son.
I still think that there a sufficient schism within the Republican House that would even make a strict party line vote on this matter questionable.I believe the Republican House will demand substantial firsthand evidence and legitimate documents regarding the money trail linked to Joe Biden. I've examined available documentation and have yet to find any direct money trail leading to Joe. However, it's evident that money appears to have been funneled to family members through numerous LLCs, with about 20 of them formed after Joe became VP. The situation raises questions, and while Joe may not be directly netted... his family's involvement is concerning, and they may take the fall. I think we may see a very complicated web of corruption untangled.
You forgot about the hundreds of "business associates" that money went to. Have they said how much went to the Bidens and how much went to these associates. Have they said (rather implied) what the money was for or what law was broken?
I seem to remember one of the recent revelations that the some of the money Hunter received from people in China that MAGA was so happy to learn about was just a loan and had nothing to do with any business. (It didn't say whether Hunter paid it back yet or not.)
As proof of that, notice that after promising to hold an inquiry vote, McCarthy read the tea leaves and simply ordered it to happen.
Of course he will lose an impeachment vote absent even a shred of evidence; there are enough Republicans (especially ones in swing districts) that occasionally break free of the MAGA cult and use their heads.
Well, it seems MAGA cleared the deck for an unimpeded faux-impeachment inquiry. They will shut down the gov't in 15 hours from when I write this.
Your title alone speaks to me because we currently have a President who doesn't know where he is on any given day nor why he is there.
I take no pleasure in saying this; dementia is a horrible thing and he is in a bad place right now!
I know that this is an aside, but it should be grounds in this case/in his case.
Biden doesn't need to be considering another run, he needs to step down immediately.AB
I've believed for a long time that Biden's cognitive issues, likely due to senile dementia, are evident. His confusion, fabricated stories, speech difficulties, and carefully scripted actions are concerning signs. These symptoms strongly indicate dementia. His stiff gait and hand movements also hint at neurological problems. I agree that his cognitive state warrants consideration for impeachment. In my opinion, Biden hasn't been mentally or physically fit for the presidency. The news of the impeachment inquiry was welcome, and I hope it succeeds in removing him from the White House.Not to mention that which goes without saying....enemies of this country primed to strike while the iron is hot.
And Trump didn't know who the president was that started the Iraq war! - So what is your point, that Trump has dementia and should drop out of the race? (I bet not.)
Oh, there was the time he wanted to shine a light inside your body to kill Covid. I about fell off my chair when I watched him say that.
Yeah, they are getting pretty bad.
Not nearly as bad as CNN or MSNBC, but close enough.
"Mr McCarthy, a California lawmaker, also alleged that the president's family has received special treatment from Biden administration officials investigating allegations of misconduct.
This inquiry will give congressional investigators greater legal authority to investigate the president, including by issuing subpoenas for documents and testimony that can be more easily enforced in court." BBC
Video source McCarthy announcing impeachment inquiry. Very informative.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?530391-1/ … conferenceWell Biden looks to have a literal Trump card to play against the impeachment inquiry:
In 2020, Trump’s DOJ issued a binding legal opinion that impeachment inquiries are invalid without an official vote of the House.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/1 … e-00115393
Republicans, how can you listen to the likes of McCarthy, Comer and Jordan without feeling your intelligence is being insulted?
McCarthy comes out to state that he has launched an impeachment inquiry that will hopefully – fingers crossed! – will find a reason to impeach Biden, who is definitely guilty of a number of extremely corrupt things he can't quite identify. Evidence that justifies an impeachment inquiry? That list does not currently exist outside of the minds of the party’s far-right chaos caucus.
So McCarthy and gang hope we will remain patient as they continue to investigate Biden for something they're sure is extremely bad while patriotically ignoring actual constituent concerns about the economy, immigration and gun violence.
It is clear that they feel they were sent to Washington to do a job.
What is that job? To figure out what Biden has for-sure done that is way worse than the 91 state and federal felony charges that Trump is, in their mind, unfairly facing in the meritless witch hunts launched by the Democrats, who have weaponized the justice system and hate America. Who buys this stuff?
You know what I'd like to hear from McCarthy? I would like like to hear about the important work House Republicans are doing to make lives better, outside of impeachment, performative culture-war legislation and yelling things into cameras.
Comer and his Maga crew have failed to find a single shred of evidence linking Biden to any of their accusations. In fact, Republicans have been forced to walk back claim after claim. With intellectual lightweights such as Comer and Jordan at the helm of this, I predict nothing but humiliation and substantial loss at the polls. Raskin is going to eviscerate them.
As another humiliating aside..The rebellion of the angry children's caucus is on. Gaetz statement:
"On this very floor in January, the whole world witnessed a historic contest for House Speaker. I rise today to serve notice. Mr. Speaker, you are out of compliance with the agreement that allowed you to assume this role. The path forward for the House of Representatives is to either bring you into immediate total compliance or remove you, pursuant to a motion to vacate the chair."
WOW. Humiliation. The ransom note has come due.Deja Vu. The past repeats itself all over again.
I seem to remember a House Speaker refusing to impeach Trump...until her party forced her to, whereupon it was "laughed out of court" so to speak. The she did it again a couple of years later, and with the same results.
Now the tables have turned and we have the same thing happening...and the same questions from the opposing party. Will we never learn? That building on the hill is nothing more than a children's sandbox, full of squabbling children that fight over their power base instead of tending to the needs of the country, and it's becoming the same throughout the country as people sink more solidly into their own partisanship, demanding that "their" party and ONLY their party has any answers.She refused to impeach Trump until the evidence got to overwhelming and she, in good conscience, couldn't not hold an impeachment inquiry.
It is all in the evidence and there was a TON against Trump and NONE against Biden.
House GOP’s impeachment witnesses say there's no evidence yet that Biden committed a crime
WASHINGTON — The House Oversight Committee on Thursday convened its first hearing in the GOP's impeachment inquiry, presenting a panel of Republican-picked witnesses who said while there is no evidence of a crime by President Joe Biden, more bank records are needed from him and his son Hunter Biden to determine if there might be.
Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., said the hearing would focus on whether the president "engaged in impeachable offenses under the U.S. Constitution," and earlier this week said House Republicans would present evidence they say they've uncovered about "Biden’s knowledge of and role in his family’s domestic and international business practices."
Comer seemed to acknowledge at the end of the six-hour-plus hearing that Republicans have not yet done so but said that's because "investigators have been shut down when attempting to explore avenues that to the president," which is why an impeachment inquiry is necessary, "wherever that evidence leads." He said the panel would be subpoenaing bank records from Hunter Biden and the president's brother James "and their affiliated companies."
None of the witnesses were "fact witnesses," meaning none were involved in the investigation or the alleged activities the hearing was discussing. Instead, all three were introduced as experts in their respective fields.
One of the panel's expert witnesses, law professor Jonathan Turley, acknowledged that the evidence Republicans had gathered so far, however, doesn't prove their case.
"I do not believe that the current evidence would support articles of impeachment,” he said, but noted that he does believe it warrants an inquiry.
Some Republicans were also unhappy about how the hearing went. A senior GOP aide said that Comer's strategy of feeding Fox News impeachment stories is not working and that "we are losing the media narrative game to the White House right now."
"Calling witnesses that say the opposite of your narrative on impeachment is equally a bad strategy," the aide said.
Another Republican aide who works for a lawmaker who supports the impeachment inquiry described what he saw of the hearing as “boring” with “no bombshells.”
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congre … rcna117657I was going to say that, lol. In addition to No Evidence, the Fact Checkers found the three chairs LIED A LOT in their opening remarks.
You make a great point about this Republican majority who wants to sit on their hands to give them time to "get Biden".
It seems like the "important" work they are doing is figuring out ways to limit your freedoms - such as to choose. How about to continue to pollute the environment by trying to roll back the electric car initiative. Maybe it is keeping us protected by defunding DOJ and the FBI. There have been bills put forth to do all of those.
Are those the things you had in mind, lol?
** Hot off the Press **
Mark your calendar for Sept 28th.
"The Republican-held House will hold its first impeachment inquiry hearing into President Joe Biden on Thursday, Sept. 28, the Daily Caller News Foundation confirmed Tuesday."
House Schedules First Biden Impeachment Inquiry Hearing by the Daily Caller (9/19/23)
https://dailycaller.com/2023/09/19/kevi … 2Hp0bTzfaEI am pleased to see them not dragging their feet. Let's get to it, lay it all out for the public, and then move on to what may need to be done. I think it's time to put up or shut up. Sick of the drip drip drip...
I checked C-Span and they only go to the 25th for coming broadcasts. I don't know if it is a closed hearing or not. Do you?
C-Span will broadcast the hearing live.
WHAT: Hearing titled “The Basis for an Impeachment Inquiry of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
DATE: Thursday, September 28, 2023
TIME: 10:00AM ET
LOCATION: 2154 Rayburn House Office Building
WITNESSES:
Mr. Bruce Dubinsky
Founder, Dubinsky Consulting
A forensic accountant, Mr. Dubinsky has accumulated over 40 years of financial investigative and dispute consulting experience and has served as an expert witness over 100 times and has testified in over 80 trials, including trials involving criminal and civil financial fraud.
Ms. Eileen O’Connor
Former Assistant Attorney General, United States Department of Justice Tax Division (DOJ-Tax)
As former Assistant Attorney General for DOJ-Tax for six years, Ms. O’Connor supervised DOJ litigation of civil, criminal, trial, and appellate tax cases.
Professor Jonathan Turley
Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law
George Washington University Law School
Professor Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has published work in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory.
The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be live-streamed online at https://oversight.house.gov/. Media must be congressionally credentialed and RSVP by Wednesday, September 27 at 5:00 PM ET.
I have been saying that about Trump over the last 2 years....
BOY, was that hearing a flop. You would think they would have put better witnesses up that would agree Biden needs impeaching.
No, instead they get one to say that they reached the "threshold" to start an inquiry but nowhere near enough to impeach (which is because they have NO evidence) The other said he sees no evidence of wrongdoing in the material so far presented to him.
Great way to start, lol.
House Republicans announce first Biden impeachment inquiry hearing to be held this week
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., announced the meeting will be held Sep. 28 at 10:00 AM ET
FIRST ON FOX: House Republicans announced Monday that the first impeachment inquiry hearing into President Biden will be held on Thursday at 10:00 a.m. ET.
According to the office of House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., the hearing "will examine the value of an impeachment inquiry," and will present all evidence to date uncovered by the committee in its investigation into the Biden family finances.
"Since January, House Committees on Oversight and Accountability, Judiciary, and Ways and Means have uncovered an overwhelming amount of evidence showing President Joe Biden abused his public office for his family’s financial gain," Comer said in a statement.
"Thousands of pages of financial records, emails, texts, testimony from credible IRS whistleblowers, and a transcribed interview with Biden family business associate Devon Archer all reveal that Joe Biden allowed his family to sell him as ‘the brand’ around the world to enrich the Biden family," he said.
Comer's statement said that Congress had a duty to open the impeachment inquiry into Biden's alleged corruption and that Americans "demand and deserve answers, transparency, and accountability for this abuse of public office."
"This week, the House Oversight Committee will present evidence uncovered to date and hear from legal and financial experts about crimes the Bidens may have committed as they brought in millions at the expense of U.S. interests," he added.HUNTER BIDEN Jan 30th, 2024 Update Very interesting...
Eric Schwerin 'not aware' of Joe Biden role in Hunter's biz; ex-associate blasts 'carefully worded' testimony
House Republicans describe Schwerin as 'the architect of the Biden family’s shell companies'
Hunter Biden’s business partner Eric Schwerin told congressional investigators Tuesday that he did not have insight into foreign payments the Biden family received, and said he is "not aware" of any role President Biden had in Hunter Biden’s business activities, sources familiar told Fox News Digital.
Schwerin appeared behind closed doors for a transcribed interview before the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees Tuesday as part of the House impeachment inquiry against President Biden.
In his opening statement, obtained by Fox News Digital, Schwerin told the committee that he "performed a number of administrative and bookkeeping tasks for then-Vice President Joe Biden related to his household finances" between 2009 and 2017. Schwerin testified he also helped Biden’s accountants in their preparation of his taxes and his annual financial disclosure statements.
One of Schwerin's former business associates told Fox News Digital that Schwerin's opening statement sounded "coordinated," adding that emails and transactions could contradict Schwerin's "carefully worded" statement when pressed by House Oversight investigators.
Schwerin’s interview before the committees Tuesday was his first formal testimony. He met with staff of the House Oversight Committee last March.
Schwerin said he met Hunter Biden while working in the Clinton administration at the Commerce Department, and after government service, joined the first son at a law and lobbying firm.
Schwerin co-founded Rosemont Seneca Partners along with Hunter Biden and other colleagues – a firm he described as a "consulting and investment firm that offered development and public policy advisory services to a wide range of clients."
"In the course of performing these duties, I had the ability to view transactions both into and out of Vice President Biden’s bank accounts while he was vice president," Schwerin said in his opening statement. "Based on that insight, I am not aware of any financial transactions or compensation that Vice President Biden received related to business conducted by any of his family members or their associates nor any involvement by him in their businesses. None."
Schwerin also said he "cannot recall any requests for Vice President Biden to take any official action on behalf of any of Hunter’s clients or his business deals – foreign or domestic."
"In fact, I am not aware of any role that Vice President Biden, as a public official or a private citizen, had in any of Hunter’s business activities. None," he said.
Schwerin testified that regarding his interactions with Biden, he "never asked him to take any official actions for the benefit of Hunter’s clients or any other client."
"Furthermore, I have no recollection of any promises or suggestions made by Hunter or myself to any clients or business associates that his father would take any official actions on their behalf. None," he said. "In my discussions with the Vice President concerning his personal finances, he was always crystal clear that he wanted to take the most transparent and ethical approach consistent with both the spirit and the letter of the law." Please read more
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/eric-s … -testimony"One of Schwerin's former business associates told Fox News Digital that Schwerin's opening statement sounded "coordinated," adding that emails and transactions could contradict Schwerin's "carefully worded""
Sounded "coordinated"? Lol. This is the spin? This is where we are? Let's look at one of his actual statements.
"I am not aware of any financial transactions or compensation that Vice President Biden received related to business conducted by any of his family members or their associates nor any involvement by him in their businesses. None," Schwerin told the committee, according to his statement.
"I cannot recall any requests for Vice President Biden to take any official action on behalf of any of Hunter's clients or his business deals, foreign or domestic," Schwerin said. "In fact, I am not aware of any role that Vice President Biden, as a public official or a private citizen, had in any of Hunter's business activities. None."
Another goose egg. When is this evidence-free committee going to wrap up already?
Uh oh...
"Special counsel David Weiss has indicted an FBI confidential source who provided derogatory information about President Biden and his son Hunter on felony false statement and obstruction charges.
Weiss indicted Alexander Smirnov, 43, on one count of making a false statement and one count of creating a false and fictitious record related to statements he made to the FBI on a document known as an FBI Form 1023.
Smirnov is the same person that Republicans have called "a highly credible FBI source" and have used to claim Joe Biden is corrupt".
Not surprising when you have Comer and Jordan running the show.
Comer has shown time and again that he’s a dope. Jordan, for all his seething self-righteousness and bluster knows nothing about the Constitution. These two are irretrievably incompetent and this impeachment is circling the drain.Yup, what a shock, arresting the whistle blower who informed on Biden.
Biden DOJ ARRESTS Whistleblower Who EXPOSED Biden Corruption, WITNESS TAMPERING
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DBLbytdFiI
Good Ol' Joe ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rejpzjsVb_0A federal grand jury brought the indictment.
Was this not only one of the witnesses, one piece of the puzzle that Comer was constructing? Has he dropped his investigation?
I think he is pushing on though many are telling him and Jordan to fold it up. I believe this is the second so-called whistleblower to face indictment. That's sort of astonishing. They are sort of running short on time though. If Biden wins re-election should he let them continue?
Several months back, I mentioned that Comer should either speak with substance or remain silent. This investigation should be wrapped up soon one way or another. Enough time has elapsed. I find it wasteful to witness taxpayer funds being squandered on fruitless witch hunts. History has shown these endeavors to be costly and often leave those involved appearing rather foolish in the end.
If this investigation lasts past a few more months, without clear evidence to impeach, in my view, it should be dropped.
MTG, Boebert, Gaetz, Comer, and Jordan should all be given literacy tests and government civics exams to qualify for something as important as the House of Representatives.
They are power hungry millionaires who have bought their way into government. They don't know what the hell they are doing or saying and are destroying any hopes of bipartisan governance. I blame Trump because he is their role model. They are all trying to kiss his ring and are screwing up the tra-la-las.
FBI informant who lied about the Bidens’ ties to Ukrainian energy company had high-level Russian contacts: DOJ
In court filings, prosecutors said Alexander Smirnov admitted during an interview before his arrest last week that "officials associated with Russian intelligence were involved in passing a story" about the president’s son, Hunter Biden. They said Smirnov's contacts with Russian officials were recent and extensive, and said Smirnov had planned to meet with one official during an upcoming overseas trip.
They said Smirnov has had numerous contacts with a person he described as the "son of a former high-ranking government official" and "someone with ties to a particular Russian intelligence service." They said there is a serious risk that Smirnov could flee overseas to avoid facing trial.
Before his arrest, Smirnov had been scheduled to leave the U.S. for a months-long, multi-country trip that – by his own admission – involved meetings with officials of foreign intelligence agencies and governments, prosecutors said.
Smirnov's claims have been central to the Republican effort in Congress to investigate the president and his family, and helped spark what is now a House impeachment inquiry into Biden.
The Burisma allegations became a flashpoint in Congress as Republicans pursuing investigations of President Biden and his family demanded the FBI release the unredacted form documenting the allegations. They acknowledged they couldn't confirm if the allegations were true.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-in … ntacts-dojEven in this instance, FOX is a discredited source. But even a broken clock is right twice a day. Thanks for the update IslandBites.
Yeah, I agree. I only used it so there was no excuse about a "left-bias source" from the MAGAs here.
Not even FOX could hide those facts.
"According to Tuesday's Justice Department filing, Smirnov had "extensive and extremely recent" contact with "officials affiliated with Russian intelligence" which formed part of an effort to "spread misinformation about a candidate of one of the two major parties in the United States," in an apparent reference to Biden. "
Putin has developed a direct line into our country right through our Congress. I don't think there is any question that we have a Putin wing of the Republican Party..MAGA.
I agree with House Democrat Daniel Goldman said: "Wittingly or unwittingly, House Republicans have been acting as an agent or asset of Russian intelligence for Vladimir Putin."
Comer and Jordan need to resign from their committes u til their role in this debacle is determined.
In my view, they either knowingly disseminated lies or they were too incompetent to vet this man. Either way, these two have proven themselves stooges time and time again. Easy dupes for Russian spies. I hope their constituents are paying attention.
They've betrayed the American people by spreading the lies of Smirnov. By claim continually claiming Burisma had paid Biden and his son Hunter "$5 million each" in exchange for political favors.
Americans need to know whether Jordan, Comer and also Chuck Grassley were either deceived by Russian intelligence or involved in a conspiracy to oust
Biden.Are you implying, without evidence, that Comer, Jordan, and Grassley were aware of Smirnov's deception? Considering his extensive tenure as an FBI informant, what basis do you have for suggesting that these Congressmen knew about Smirnov's lies? It appears they trusted him based on his longstanding collaboration with the FBI. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 … or%202016.
Actually, Prosecutors say Smirnov falsely reported TO THE FBI in June 2020 that executives associated with the Ukrainian energy company Burisma paid Hunter and Joe Biden $5m each in 2015 or 2016.
So, it seems that both the Congressmen and the FBI were deceived and initially believed the false information. It took Grassley, and Comer a lengthy process to obtain the information from the FBI, indicating a thorough vetting process was likely necessary before sharing the accusation with Congress. They relied heavily on the FBI's FD-1023, which documents conversations with informants. The blame seems to lie with the FBI in this situation. It's evident that the FBI failed to properly vet the informant's report. This lack of diligence isn't surprising given the FBI's declining reputation, which seems to worsen over time.So the special counsel could uncover all of this but Comer & company couldn't?
"Considering his extensive tenure as an FBI informant"
You can bet all those cases are going to be reopened now. I don't think that having been an informant previously means all claims should go unvetted. I've never heard of such a thing that allegations aren't substantiated beyond One source. I do not believe this is the way investigations work. He may have been honest in the past, who knows. But this time he is charged with lying. Prosecutors now say his lies were motivated by his animosity toward Biden. He didn't like Biden so he chose to lie.
I don't know why Comer was spreading information he had no factual basis for. Comer and Jordan overhyped Smirnov’s testimony so many times, you would think that they would have had corroboration.
Like I said, for me it's either extreme incompetence (which is believable considering Comer and Jordan) or they knew the informant wasn't credible and said nothing. Either way, I think they have a lot of questions to answer and it should certainly be investigated.
Why would anyone continue to believe that they're running a credible inquiry? I mean just look at the history of the committee.
But really, why was Weiss able to figure this out but not Comer? An informant who was at the very heart of their case and they just assumed everything he was saying and providing was legitimate?
They've gone in front of every camera smearing Biden and his son based on lies. This is not just an "oh well"
As far as the FBI never investigating this in 2020. That claim is another falsehood. We can look back to Bill Barr...
"This whole investigation into Burisma goes back five years. In early 2020, Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s lawyer who was trying to dig up dirt on Hunter’s father, handed documents over to Trump administration Attorney General Bill Barr. According to reporting, Barr told reporters at the time, “‘We can’t take anything we receive from Ukraine at face value.’ Former Pittsburgh US Attorney Scott Brady oversaw the FBI investigation of the Giuliani claims. The 1023 document [memorializing Smirnov’s interview] demanded by Comer is among the products of that investigation. … The FBI and prosecutors who reviewed the information couldn’t corroborate the claims.”
So if the FBI couldn't corroborate the claims in 2020 why did Comer and clan pick up on it?
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4108 … legations/"So the special counsel could uncover all of this but Comer & company couldn't? "
This link gives a good timeline of how Grassley went about obtaining the document with the FBI informant's information. I am unsure why the FBI or Grassley did not vet the information. It would seem the special counsel came up with his charge very quickly. https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/ne … ery-scheme
I would think any cases where this informant was used will be reopened.So the really mind-boggling stupid thing is that Christopher Wray warned Comer, Jordan and Grassley that their source was under investigation but what did they do? Threaten Wray with contempt. LOL. I may be able to let Grassley off the hook because he's like a hundred years old and doesn't seem to know what's going on in any given point in time but Comer and Jordan have NO excuse other than their own stupidity.
And the fact that this all came from Russia... How much of this is coming across on Fox News these days?"Christopher Wray warned Comer, Jordan and Grassley that their source was under investigation" Not able to find a source to confirm that statement. Where did you find this info?
Republicans were warned after the 1023 document was handed over to them by the FBI.
Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) revealed Wednesday that his Republican colleagues were previously warned that the former FBI informant’s claims at the center of the Hunter Biden probe could not be corroborated.
“We were warned at the time that we received the document outlining this witness’s testimony. … We were warned that the credibility of this statement was not known,” Buck said on CNN’s “The Source.”
Buck added that it “appears” that Comer and Jordan went public with the information even though they knew it was uncorroborated.
His appearance is here
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … tm-vpx.cnn
Also the FBI explained...
"An FD-1023 form is used by FBI agents “to record raw, unverified reporting from confidential human sources (CHSs),” the FBI explained in a message to colleagues in response to the subpoena. “FD-1023s merely document that information; they do not reflect the conclusions of investigators based on a fuller context or understanding. Recording this information does not validate it, establish its credibility, or weigh it against other information known or developed by the FBI in our investigations.”
Comer and crew clearly did nothing to validate anything in the 1023..luckily Weiss did.
https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/indic … ment-case/SHARLEE01 WROTE:
"Christopher Wray warned Comer, Jordan and Grassley that their source was under investigation" Not able to find a source to confirm that statement. Where did you find this info?
"Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) revealed Wednesday that his Republican colleagues were previously warned that the former FBI informant’s claims at the center of the Hunter Biden probe could not be corroborated."
I acknowledge the statement you referred to, along with the other points you raised. However, I haven't come across any statement from Wray or anyone in the FBI indicating that the FBI informant was under investigation. As I've mentioned before, I'm aware that the informant's statement wasn't vetted by the FBI or Grassley. I'm simply curious about the source that led you to believe that Wray asserted the informant was under investigation.
"Christopher Wray warned Comer, Jordan, and Grassley that their source was under investigation"
(perhaps you meant to share information and not collaborate. I have not found any quotes that Wray claimed the informant was under FBI investigation)
I agree with much of your view, if this man informant was under investigation, every investigation he was involved with including the Biden gas company bribery needs to be reevaluated. It would seem Weiss did his job and I assume has evidence that this informant lied to the FBI. As far as Grassley, and Comer, it appears very clear they were told the information was not vetted. Which makes them look very foolish at this point.
I've expressed my opinion that Comer should either present his case or abandon it altogether. This situation closely resembles the numerous witch hunts that, in my view, have emerged from Washington in recent years.I am referring to the "letter to colleagues"that the FBI sent. This was The Manor in which they were all informed. I did read a report specifically citing Christopher Wray. I can't immediately relocate it but I am absolutely certain I will. But it is obvious that they were all notified.
No problem, I have not run across Wray stating that this informant was under an FBI investigation. That certainly would shine a light on this issue. If Grassley was told the informant was being investigated. I was aware Comer, and Grassley were told the info was not vetted. But, if the informant was under investigation, this certainly changes the picture.
Using FOX as a "no excuse about left-bias source" is the only time to use it. Good point.
"Biden Impeachment Inquiry - The Logical Next Step" ?
Move on.Actually, I think it is imperative that we know whether and when Grassley, Comer or Jordan knew that Smirnov was spreading Russian disinformation. I would hope that the special counsel rounds up all of their communications with Smirnov. There are lots of unanswered questions around these 3.
Regardless of the FBI’s warnings about the “raw, unverified reporting” in the FD-1023, Republicans claimed to have a smoking gun.
Either they knew the man was lying or they just didn't care enough to properly investigate the claims. An investigation built on Russian propaganda.
Have we reached the bottom yet?
Jessica Tarlov from Fox reassures us... "Republicans have a high threshold for humiliation"
Republican: Colleagues were warned informant’s Biden claims were not corroborated
Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) on Wednesday criticized his Republican colleagues for using a former FBI informant’s claims in their impeachment inquiry even though the statements hadn’t been verified.
“We were warned at the time that we received the document outlining this witness’s testimony. … We were warned that the credibility of this statement was not known,” Buck said on CNN’s “The Source.”
“And yet, people, my colleagues went out and talk to the public about how this was credible and how it was damning and how it proved President Biden’s — at the time Vice President Biden’s — complicity in receiving bribes,” he added.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4482 … roborated/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hK9-Mp5hCas&t=572s
*Edit: We posted the same thing.
A link to the transcript of the Hunter Biden deposition, read it for yourself, don't get your spin from Hannity:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/29/politics … index.htmlYes because CNN never spins......
Curious if there will be any mention of the identity of "the big guy"?Can not wait untill they hold the public hearing. Or will they? This transcript was so embarrassing for them but they've shown that they have a very high threshold. Where was The smoking gun?
I don't think they will, it will way too embarrassing for MAGA.
It is a Transcript for god's sake. You don't spin a transcript (although I imagine Lying Fox News is trying to figure out a way.)
It's a pdf document that is contained in the link. Hard to spin an officially released document. Geesh. But keep seeing ghosts wherever you look, that's what MAGA really stands for these days.
Actually, there was some discussion about who was getting the 10%. But, of course, you didn't read the official transcript to see who that was.
I am up to page 77 and Hunter is making fools out of the MAGA.
1. Thanks for the transcript, it is fascinating.
2. I would bet Lying Fox News didn't publish it
3. I just to page 28, but it CLEARLY shows MAGA's attempts to prove guilt by innuendo. If it weren't so dangerous to our democracy, it would be ROFL funny.Here is a beautiful example of how unethical, deceitful and underhanded the MAGA are:
MAGA Q Your father went, while he was running for President, and said his family never received any money from China. Your father --
Biden: Yes.
MAGA: -- has also said --
Biden: You're right.
MAGA: -- he's never received -- he's never interacted with any of your business associates. Is that correct?
Biden: Yes.
MAGA: .. associates. Is that correct?
Biden: Yes.
MAGA: But if you introduced him to Ye Jianming, that would be untrue.
Biden: No, that is not untrue. I'm telling you this. The question being asked, that you're stating, is that my father said that I never received any money from China, the Government of China. Unlike Jared Kushner, I've never received money from a foreign government. He --
MAGA: He didn't say Government of China, by the way. He said China.
Biden: From China. Well --
MAGA: Did you receive money from China or not?
Biden: I received money from a Chinese company.
WHY does MAGA insist on using open-ended works such as "CHINA" rather than being specific by saying "the government of China" or "Chinese company"? Why be deceitful? To normal people, "China" means "the government of China". Only to MAGA does it mean something else and they are using this deceit to trick Biden and the public up.
Another example is using the word "interact" when referring to he father shaking hands with Ye on a rope line for god's sake. They want to falsely conflate "interact" with "meet". If they meant "meet", why didn't they say so? Because they have no ethics.Here is another excerpt that sort of blew my mind and laid to rest another MAGA lie.
Page 79
MAGA: Is it fair to say, though, that Burisma wanted you on your their board because your dad was the Vice President?
BIDEN: No, I don't think that it's fair. Again, , I really don't. I really don't think that it's fair to say that -- for that to be the entire sentence. I can say to you this: I know why President Kwasniewski of Poland wanted me to be on the board. He is the one who convinced me, ultimately, to be on the board.
He's one of the first democratically elected Presidents of Poland. He called me up and he told me this. He said, if people in the West do not stand up against Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Putin's aggression and they allow for companies like Burisma -- whatever you think about Burisma, it was a bulwark against Russian aggression in a moment in time when the single purpose of Vladimir Putin, in his taking Crimea and his incursions into Donetsk and to Donbas, was to take over the natural-gas fields, was to take over their energy supply. And that still remains the single biggest goal. Ukraine is not necessarily for the people; it's for their natural resources. It's for a pipeline to the West. It's to be able to choke off Europe. That's what it's for. And there was two gas companies inside of Ukraine at that time. One of them was the state-owned, which was highly corrupt and connected to people like Firtash, which was directly going into Vladimir Putin's pocket. The only independent company was Burisma. And Burisma was supplying 60 percent of all natural gas to power the entire industry in Ukraine, including 78 percent of all steel mills. And so they needed to survive. And President Kwasniewski said to me, if that is -- ends up being the result, if it shows that me, President Kwasniewski, who is literally the symbol of democracy in Eastern Europe, and you, Hunter Biden, whose name is also a symbol of freedom and democracy and standing up for the Ukrainians' desire for a democratic state against Vladimir Putin, then I was comfortable with that. I was completely comfortable with that.
First, let me say that I didn't believe Hunter about his claim the ex-president called him up so I quickly googled it and lo and behold, that actually happened as you will see in the linked AP story. I am guessing the reference to Hunter being a symbol of democracy stems from his work with the U.N. Food organization and similar things.
It also shows, once again, how MAGA likes to take the side of Russia and Putin (not a very American thing to do, yet they do it and call it patriotism.)
Now, as to the story itself. I was never aware of that connection, I don't recall it being presented on Lying Fox News. But, it does make sense now as to why Hunter was on the Burisma board with the ex-President of Poland.
https://apnews.com/article/37424b8a0a99 … 31643a84e3
No wonder MAGA doesn't want Hunter Biden to have a public hearing.Page 109. Now Hunter is showing what idiots those two IRS agents were, that their report conflated two entirely different messages together to paint a false picture.
Page 118 is where Hunter lays to rest the "big guy" reference. In a letter from one partner to another wanna be partner, a potential break down of profits are 20% to each of five partners EXCEPT Hunter who only got 10% and the other 10% to "the big guy", presumably ex-Vice President Biden, who is out of office and not considering a run for the Presidency. At least two partners thought it would be a great idea if they could get the ex-Vice President as a business partner.
The kicker - Hunter though that was a terrible idea plus, his father would have nothing to with it. The final contract had 20% to each partner and Joe Biden was not involved.
While not a fabrication by MAGA, it is close. A letter did exist that suggested the Joe Biden, as a private citizen, get a share IF he joined them. And that, along with Lying Smirnoff, is the so-called smoking gun they claim they had.
Also in this section, Hunter gets MAGA to admit they think one form of FBI note taking is believable, the 1023, while another form is not, the 302. They are certainly despicable, don't you think?AB will be so happy that they got to the bottom of this. Now that the facts have come out, I'm sure MAGA will move on to their next distortion of the truth.
Here is a statement from Hunter about a Tony Bobulinski who is the originator of the "big guy" reference.
A Because I lost complete faith in Mr. Bobulinski. I did not find him to be credible. I did not find him to be competent. I found him to be arrogant. I found him to often not tell the full truth or the truth at all. And, therefore, I had no faith to have him as a partner in any business.
Now substitute for Bobulinski, the leaders of this inquisition or witch-hunt or whatever this hearing is, Comer and Jordan. Can't America say the same thing about them. I see no light between this Bobulinski and Comer/Jordan.Comer and Jordan either knew their witnesses were not credible and pedaled disinformation anyway thinking the base would never know or they were too stupid to know. I would like to know which it was.
Considering the amount of information distortion that comes from the GOP, probably the first.
I used to put Hunter in the same category as Lying Trump's older son's, somewhat of a dunce.
Boy, did he prove me wrong! I kind of admire and certainly respect the man now after reading half the transcript. He certainly is smarter than those leading the witch-hunt/inquisition.page 176
Ms. Hageman. Okay.
Biden. No, no, no, no, no, no. Not "okay." I never worked for a country. I am not Jared Kushner. I never got money from a country. Not one foreign government ever gave me money, guys -- none, zero, not one.
Go get 'em tiger. ROFL.just finished. A couple of things are very clear; Hunter Biden handed is inquizators their lunch and Matt Gaetz is a scumbag of the worst sort. I can't believe he wasn't charged with having sex with a minor by the DOJ. Maybe the ethics committee will get him for it.
This is imperative.
"Now, some House Democrats tell USA TODAY that the DOJ needs to investigate what leading Republican impeachment advocates like Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan and Rep. James Comer of Kentucky knew about Smirnov’s false claims – and when they knew it – to determine whether they have been implicated in an ongoing Kremlin propaganda campaign."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol … 852627007/Sounds like a good plan. Maybe this time next year, the House will be investigating these two miscreants.
Related Discussions
- 67
House votes to approve impeachment inquiry into President Biden
by Castlepaloma 13 months ago
1 day ago — House approves impeachment inquiry into President Biden as Republicans rally behind investigation.Sounds too good to be true. Considering Three presidents have been impeached, although none were convicted: Andrew Johnson was in 1868, Bill Clinton was in 1998, and Donald Trump twice, in...
- 41
Is Congress Obligated To Impeach Joe For All His Lies?
by Sharlee 17 months ago
"Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley argued Friday it is Congress' obligation to launch an impeachment inquiry against President Biden after he "clearly lied" to Americans about his involvement in his son Hunter's business deals. The GWU law professor told "The Faulkner...
- 17
Burisma audio tapes could be 'cataclysmic event' for President Biden
by Readmikenow 20 months ago
I think this is the major motivation for the indictment of President Donald Trump. The left wants people to ignore this story.Sen. Chuck Grassley claims Burisma exec has 17 recordings of calls with Bidens as 'insurance policy'Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, made a stunning claim Monday that a Burisma...
- 41
Did Trump and his Team Set a Trap for the Democrats and Deep State?
by The Minstrel 5 years ago
I don't know about you, but the wagon wheels on this impeachment iniative are starting to come off. The recent challenge by Trump for Pelosi to bring the impeachment inquiry to a house vote is a win-win move. If it comes to a vote and they decide not to impeach, then we go back to waiting for the...
- 491
The 118th Republican House
by Scott Belford 10 months ago
After several days, for the first time in over 100 years, the Republicans chose a speaker. But only after proving once again they don't know how to govern. In the process, the speakership was neutered, rendered essentially powerless. McCarthy gave away the farm in order to...
- 175
What Democrats Have Taught Me About Losing an Election
by Readmikenow 3 years ago
I have been confused as to exactly how to handle a Biden presidency. I consider him a babbling old fool who got rich selling out the United States and his vice president as a female who is a socialist/communist and had to sleep her way into a career. My opinion of both is extremely...