Biden impeachment inquiry (1 Viewer)

[zztop]

Speaker McCarthy directs the House to open an impeachment inquiry into President Biden

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy says he's directing the House to open an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.

apnews.com

and looks like he assembled the A team!

"The inquiry will be led by Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, in coordination with Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and Ways & Means Chairman Jason Smith. "

 

[Lapaz]

The Democrats break protocol and then cry when Republicans do the same thing. It's the Pelosi precedent.

What protocol did Democrats break? If you're referring to starting an inquiry without a House vote, that has nothing to do with what people are complaining about. There was obvious evidence of Trump's crimes. There is no evidence of Biden committing crimes. All there is some circumstantial evidence that a crime may have occurred. If that were the standard, Trump could've been impeached for emoluments, misappropriation of funds, some crime related to Ivanka's trademark policy changes, revealing ally's secrets and endangering assets even if he is authorized to do so, etc.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

This is hilarious

Yes or no, do you understand that McCarthy said all of these things as reasons for opening an impeachment inquiry and the fact check is adding context that no evidence has been presented in any way to tie this to the target of the impeachment inquiry?

 

[MT15]

Democrats Say It’ll Take A Lot More Than Eyewitness Testimony, Bank Records, Audio, Video, Complete Confessions For Them To Believe Biden Did Anything Wrong

WASHINGTON, D.C. — As evidence of bribery and corruption by the Biden family continues to mount, Democrat lawmakers in the nation's capital have expressed heavy skepticism, saying they will need a lot more than just eyewitnesses, financial records, audio and video recordings, and admissions of...

babylonbee.com

That is satire, bad satire, but satire none the less. You should try to read and understand what you post before you post it. It’s really tiresome having to read and interpret your posts for you. You are so bad at this.

 

[MT15]

No, that's Hunter clearly saying "Hey, when I was a teenager, and I got my first job, Dad made me pay half of my paycheck as 'rent' to live in the house. That's one of those things that some parents do to try and teach their children some responsibility."

What a clown show this is. And SFL is the biggest participant in the show. Did he actually try to say that his snippet of a text was referring to anything that happened to Hunter as an adult? He is probably the most gullible person I have ever seen.

 

[MT15]

What protocol did Democrats break? If you're referring to starting an inquiry without a House vote, that has nothing to do with what people are complaining about. There was obvious evidence of Trump's crimes. There is no evidence of Biden committing crimes. All there is some circumstantial evidence that a crime may have occurred. If that were the standard, Trump could've been impeached for emoluments, misappropriation of funds, some crime related to Ivanka's trademark policy changes, revealing ally's secrets and endangering assets even if he is authorized to do so, etc.

I thought the Dems did take a vote to start the impeachment inquiry. McCarthy threw a fit about it, and I thought that Pelosi then had a vote. Maybe I’m mis-remembering?

 

[Optimus Prime]

If one tried to articulate the principle on which the Republican push to impeach President Biden is based, it would have to go something like this: Public officials shouldn’t be permitted to profit from their positions, and anyone who does should be removed from office. Like any principle, this one should apply to every public official regardless of party or ideology.


But if any Republican said that out loud, the proper response would be to burst out laughing.


This isn’t just because Republicans have found no evidence that Biden is guilty of wrongdoing, despite the tireless efforts of multiple House committees.

Nor is it because they have defended the relentless quest of the Trump family to profit from former president Donald Trump’s time in the White House.

Hypocrisy might be the tribute vice pays to virtue, but Republicans stopped paying any tribute to virtue long ago. They sped right past hypocrisy to arrive at something entirely different.

Republicans are not characterizing their impeachment push against Biden as an attempt to bring strict ethical standards back to government. There’s no high-minded talk of integrity, moral rectitude or the solemn obligations of public service. That’s because they are in the midst of a years-long crusade to convince the public to not care about corruption.


That crusade is only partly about defending Trump, perhaps the most shamelessly corrupt president in U.S. history.

He installed his laughably unqualified family members in White House positions.

He spent a good amount of time in office at his various resorts, charging the Secret Service as much as $1,185 a night per room to stay there to protect him.

His Washington hotel became a destination for anyone who wanted to put some money directly in his pocket; foreign governments spent millions of dollars there, as did a fleet of Republican candidates and party flunkies.

Foreign governments also eagerly gave special favors to Trump’s businesses. His relentless advocacy for the government of Saudi Arabia while in office was followed by the Saudis giving son-in-law Jared Kushner $2 billion for his start-up private equity firm, even though the Saudis’ own investment advisers found Kushner’s operation “unsatisfactory in all aspects.”…….

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/09/18/biden-impeachment-republicans-corruption/

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I thought the Dems did take a vote to start the impeachment inquiry. McCarthy threw a fit about it, and I thought that Pelosi then had a vote. Maybe I’m mis-remembering?

The floor vote came after she called for the inquiry.

 

[FullMonte]

He spent a good amount of time in office at his various resorts, charging the Secret Service as much as $1,185 a night per room to stay there to protect him.

My personal favorite was the time, while Trump was president, when Eric attended an event and stayed at a Trump hotel. Staff and secret service were charged 5 times the government rate to stay at the hotel to protect Eric.

The hotel was the Trump hotel in Washington, DC. Surely, they could have found somewhere for Eric to stay in Washington that wouldn’t have cost so much…

 

[SaintForLife]

No, that's Hunter clearly saying "Hey, when I was a teenager, and I got my first job, Dad made me pay half of my paycheck as 'rent' to live in the house. That's one of those things that some parents do to try and teach their children some responsibility."

Thats hilarious. That's about as plausible as this idiotic excuse

 

[SaintForLife]

What protocol did Democrats break? If you're referring to starting an inquiry without a House vote, that has nothing to do with what people are complaining about. There was obvious evidence of Trump's crimes.

Yes

There is no evidence of Biden committing crimes. All there is some circumstantial evidence that a crime may have occurred.

You can keep repeating that White House proganda as much as you like, but anyone who's not a left wing partisan knows that's complete BS.

If that were the standard, Trump could've been impeached for emoluments, misappropriation of funds, some crime related to Ivanka's trademark policy changes, revealing ally's secrets and endangering assets even if he is authorized to do so, etc.

Oh okay

 

[SaintForLife]

Fact checking is not a "made-up profession". I don't know that any university offers any sort of degree that enables someone to be better than others when discerning what's true and what's a lie, but law enforcement agencies, especially the federal agencies, have extensive training courses in interrogation techniques. There is a link below that you may find interesting about that.

And fact checking is not rocket science... say I tell you I have a beach house in Arizona. Do you take my word for it? No, you know Arizona is land-locked, right? You know right away I am misinforming you. Now, if I told you I have a beach house in Alajuela, Costa Rica, you could take my word for it, or you can look up many maps of Costa Rica from multiple sites, and you'll find out that Alajuela is land locked as well. Guess what? You just fact checked me and found out I was misinforming you/lying to you.

I was talking about political fact checking. Political fact checking as well as a misinformation expert are made up professions.

How often do you see the Washington Post or CNN fact checking if someone could have a beach house in Arizona?

 

[SaintForLife]

Marjorie Taylor Greene has admitted that the Joe Biden impeachment inquiry is a nakedly political scheme to ensure Democrats “lose big” at the next presidential election.

The Georgia firebrand, who first filed articles of impeachment against the president the day after his inauguration, boasted that Republicans were planning to draw out the inquiry to smear their opponents…..

The Biden impeachment is not the first time Republicans have admitted using the formal levers of power to go after their political opponents.

A House committee probe into the 2012 Benghazi attack that attempted to blame then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stretched on for two years and four months, longer than inquiries into 9/11 and the JFK assassination.

In 2015, Mr McCarthy admitted the investigation was part of a strategy to bring down Ms Clinton’s popularity ahead of the 2016 election.……

Marjorie Taylor Greene admits Biden impeachment is to ensure Democrats ‘lose big’

Republicans launched an impeachment inquiry despite a dearth of evidence against Joe Biden

www.the-independent.com

January 20th, 2017. The day Trump took office:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/01/20/the-campaign-to-impeach-president-trump-has-begun/

 

[SaintForLife]

That is satire, bad satire, but satire none the less. You should try to read and understand what you post before you post it. It’s really tiresome having to read and interpret your posts for you. You are so bad at this.

That's so sweet that you called me a clown. I thought you were the message board hall monitor that called out even the slightest hint of an insult. What happened?

 

[SystemShock]

I was talking about political fact checking.

Fact checking is fact checking, regardless of the subject.

Political fact checking as well as a misinformation expert are made up professions.

Every profession is made up. No professions grow in nature.

Profession is defined as an occupation or a career. If you are getting paid for checking facts, whether the subject is politics, economics, medicine, crime investigation, etc... your profession is fact checking.

How often do you see the Washington Post or CNN fact checking if someone could have a beach house in Arizona?

Come on, man, be serious. It was a simple example to make a point.

Why are you so against fact checking? You can't handle the truth?

 

[fooferdoggie]

January 20th, 2017. The day Trump took office:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/01/20/the-campaign-to-impeach-president-trump-has-begun/

the only problem with this is it was not elected officials doing it.
The effort to impeach President Donald Trump is already underway.

At the moment, the new commander in chief was sworn in, a campaign to build public support for his impeachment went live at ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow.org, spearheaded by two liberal advocacy groups aiming to lay the groundwork for his eventual ejection from the White House.

The organizers behind the campaign, Free Speech for People, and RootsAction, are hinging their case on Trump’s insistence on maintaining ownership of his luxury hotel and golf course business while in office. Ethics experts have warned that his financial holdings could potentially lead to constitutional violations and undermine public faith in his decision-making.

Their effort is early, strategists admit. But they insist it is not premature — even if it triggers an angry backlash from those who will argue that they are not giving the new president a chance.

 

[MT15]

That's so sweet that you called me a clown. I thought you were the message board hall monitor that called out even the slightest hint of an insult. What happened?

You keep stooping lower and lower. Posting lies and untruths. Accusing everyone else of what you are doing out in the open. Never engaging in good faith. Getting more and more desperate to prove your non-existent points. Your posts are clownish. If the clown shoes fit, wear them.

 

[MT15]

Thats hilarious. That's about as plausible as this idiotic excuse

So post the entire conversation so we can see the actual context. You haven’t done that, and this is the second time you’ve been asked. I’m guessing you haven’t read it.

Just like you never read the transcript of Biden’s associate’s testimony before Congress, did you?

 

[SaintForLife]

So post the entire conversation so we can see the actual context. You haven’t done that, and this is the second time you’ve been asked. I’m guessing you haven’t read it.

Just like you never read the transcript of Biden’s associate’s testimony before Congress, did you?

Another post asking for "context"? Do you not realize how transparent your attempts are to try to refute or defuse something you don't like by asking for context or making vague statements that don't even comment on the subject at hand?

Classic partisan message board tactics that anyone can see that you use as a crutch when you don't want to or can't refute something.

As for the entire conversation, look it up yourself.