McCarthy directs House to open formal impeachment inquiry into Biden’s involvement in Hunters Deals

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Hankenhunter said:

Do you think that no one checks out the bona files of the trash you post?

Feel free to link to any source that disproves these reports.  At some point, hopefully, you guys will dare to check out news from sources other than your own.  This information has been building for months, including from whistleblowers at FBI and IRS who personally witnessed Biden's DOJ obstructing an investigation into Hunter's rather obvious crimes.  Spoiler alert - just because you don't believe a thing, that doesn't make it false.  We all know that nothing is going to be done to any of the Bidens but what can be accomplished is that the records Joe is hiding can be compelled from him and that info can then be shared in public.  That's the best that can be done in our current level of DC corruption.  Anyone who has a problem with such evidence being made available to the public, should probably ask themselves when they stopped caring about integrity and morality.  Just sayin'

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Dan Bongino or anybody else can say what they want on media.

Are you seriously denying that all of these things he listed did not happen?  You've seen no reporting on any of them?  Did you not pay attention when the FBI and IRS whistleblowers testified before Congress?  Also, it's easy to stand on the law when the "law" is corrupted by the party you agree with.  We all know that neither Joe, Hunter, nor Joe's brother will even be dragged into court.  As I said, the best we can hope for is that independent media will shine a light on what your corporate media shills work hard to suppress.  Everything on his list, BTW, has been independently reported on multiple sites, going back months.  The official inquiry just gives Congress the legal authority to subpoena and compel the release of the evidence they seek.  Primarily this consists of bank records.  You don't have a problem with a little sunlight on his actions, do you?

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

2 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

You folks think we would protect Biden?  My God do us a favor and take him out then. If we are serious about ending corruption, it has to be the same for both sides.  Put Joe under investigation jus t like Trump has been.

Nice sentiments, Tat, but let us recall, Biden is a democrat. big diff. Just look at what Clinton got away with - possessing an illegal server, lying to the FBI, interference with an investigation, and more.

And I think the same will happen with J.Biden, it will go nowhere, and Hunter won't be roughed up too badly.

[+OverSword]

2 hours ago, Hankenhunter said:

Now you're being disingenuous. Did you start this thread just to rile folks up? Congrats you've succeeded once again. 

   I find it hard to believe that someone as intelligent as you would fall for the Republican false claims. So I'm going to assume you're just getting your jollies pitting one side against the other. Acid head lite like jollies. 

What are you talking about? The democratic side created the fictional Steele dossier and focused on investigating trump for two years over it before it was declared fiction and then failed to find him guilty in impeachment hearings over Ukraine. Plenty more little in between attempts to undermine the running of the country not even worth mentioning. So what’s disingenuous? You have a short memory. 

Edited September 13 by OverSword

[Tatetopa]

58 minutes ago, and-then said:

Are you seriously denying that all of these things he listed did not happen? 

No, not at all.  I have seen the news stories. Those events did happen according to reports.   I like to live in reality.

But my point is, you can say anything you want on the internet, true or false. It can't be dismissed but it needs confirmation.  Testimony from whistleblowers to Congress is more solid.  

Find a charge and indict. Now take that testimony and repeat it in court under oath.   Sort out crimes from what just makes you angry.  Calling Joe the big guy is not a crime, peddling influence may or may not be a crime, even though it happened.  Those things did happen, the bank statements are real, AFAIK .  Find the crime, what state or federal laws were broken? 

Now get an F'n competent investigator and a DOJ prosecutor and tie it to  specific crimes, a statute in the Federal laws. It has to be a crime, and I am sure you can find one or more.  

Now take it to court.  There are a number of Trump appointed judges, there are no secret laws, everybody can read the law, the Democrats have not changed any laws.  Republicans have a majority in the House and near even numbers in the Senate.  You can get Biden investigated and indicted or impeached or whatever if you have the evidence and a crime.

I said it up above, go after Biden.  We can't end corruption unless we get both sides cleaned up.  But we have to use the same standards for everybody. A clean sweep.

Define the crime, present the evidence in court, try the case, let the jury decide.  

What people say on the Internet is not testimony in a trial.  People don't get tried on the Internet, they get tried in court.

 

 

[+joc]

11 hours ago, OverSword said:

Link

I wonder if it will become the new normal to have active investigations and lawsuits on every presidential candidate from now on?  I'm not saying they that all of this shouldn't be happening to both sides but this is getting crazier and crazier IMO.

What is really crazy...is that...I thought the Democrats were still running the house.  I guess I really do live in my own little world...

I don't think this is tit for tat though...Biden is about a corrupt politician as they come.  So...good!  

[Hankenhunter]

57 minutes ago, OverSword said:

What are you talking about? The democratic side created the fictional Steele dossier and focused on investigating trump for two years over it before it was declared fiction and then failed to find him guilty in impeachment hearings over Ukraine. Plenty more little in between attempts to undermine the running of the country not even worth mentioning. So what’s disingenuous? You have a short memory. 

Biden impeachment effort ‘eight months of abject failure’, watchdog report says

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/11/biden-impeachment-inquiry-abject-failure-report?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

[acidhead]

With the moustache he looks like Meathead from All in the Family 

 

 

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Find a charge and indict.

You expect Garland to indict Biden?  You need to stop acting as though the DC bureaucracy is still governed by actual laws.  Biden will not be charged because he's being protected by DC.  If you can't admit that to yourself then there is no further point of trying to discuss it.

[Tatetopa]

5 minutes ago, and-then said:

You expect Garland to indict Biden?  You need to stop acting as though the DC bureaucracy is still governed by actual laws.  Biden will not be charged because he's being protected by DC.  If you can't admit that to yourself then there is no further point of trying to discuss it.

Good point.

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Nice sentiments, Tat, but let us recall, Biden is a democrat. big diff. Just look at what Clinton got away with - possessing an illegal server, lying to the FBI, interference with an investigation, and more.

And I think the same will happen with J.Biden, it will go nowhere, and Hunter won't be roughed up too badly.

From an Australian perspective I sense American politicians are all openly for sale and hide behind their connections and knowledge of the laws and their lawyers. In Biden’s case, delay Hunters trial for as long as possible and a simple presidential pardon for his son when he leaves office. Matter closed. 

[Tatetopa]

11 hours ago, and-then said:

You expect Garland to indict Biden?  You need to stop acting as though the DC bureaucracy is still governed by actual laws.  Biden will not be charged because he's being protected by DC.  If you can't admit that to yourself then there is no further point of trying to discuss it.

I apologize, I was confused.  We have reaffirmed through Mueller and Barr that the DOJ doesn't indict sitting presidents.   Joe can't currently be indicted by the DOJ, if they are inclined to do so. That comes later.

But If there are charges against Joe Biden while he is in office, Congress can impeach him.   You know the drill, we have seen it twice in recent times.  The House presents the case and defense and the Senate is the jury, just as in Trump's two impeachments.  

So, Republicans have to charge with one of these: treason, bribery, other high crimes and misdemeanors.   That is what Congress has opened up.  If impeachment is successful, he can be removed him from office.

After Joe leaves office, he is open to prosecution just like any other citizen, just like Donald Trump.  The DOJ can charge him then

[Myles]

Good for him.

[F3SS]

21 hours ago, OverSword said:

Exactly like the democrats from 2016 to 2020.

This hasn't been nearly the spectacle or use of public resources. Not by a long shot. 

14 hours ago, Unusual Tournament said:

From an Australian perspective I sense American politicians are all openly for sale and hide behind their connections and knowledge of the laws and their lawyers.

I have a hunch that it's par for the course across global politics. Maybe you're still a bit naive down under?

[Portre]

23 hours ago, and-then said:

I just happened across this list of the "no evidence"... enjoy...

 

See if you can spot the difference:

ac·cu·sa·tion
[ˌakyəˈzāSHən]
NOUN
a charge or claim that someone has done something illegal or wrong:
"accusations of bribery"
the action or process of accusing someone:
"there was accusation in Brian's voice"

ev·i·dence
[ˈevəd(ə)ns]
NOUN
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:
"the study finds little evidence of bribery"
 

I ask for the latter; you give me the former.

[Portre]

On 9/12/2023 at 10:33 AM, and-then said:

It may surprise you that multiple independent news sources on the internet have been reporting on many examples of whistleblowers and emails, phone records, etc. that implicate Joe.  For example, we know he lied about not being involved at all in Hunter's businesses.  As for finding a smoking gun sufficient to get his backers to admit his guilt, I agree that this will never happen.  The thing about information wars is that they don't require an honest media to report them.  They have their own life on the internet and cannot be stopped, though Joe's handlers certainly have tried to do so.  Meanwhile, don't you guys have more indictments to drop? 

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy announced Tuesday he is calling on his committees to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, even as they have yet to prove allegations he directly profited off his son’s foreign business deals.

[F3SS]

40 minutes ago, Portre said:

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy announced Tuesday he is calling on his committees to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, even as they have yet to prove allegations he directly profited off his son’s foreign business deals.

You act as if this is shocking. A precedent was set during the last administration. The democrats opened this can of worms. Vengeance politics will ensue at least until Trump and Biden are officially non-factors in Washington. 

As for your other post above, evidence has always been secondary to the accusation with the left. The entire Russia ordeal was an enormous investigation of the accusations in search of a crime rather than an investigation of evidence linked to a crime. You should stop being so sure of yourself at this moment. You have no idea how things will play out. As it stands, the accusations against Biden and family appear to have real weight behind them. With Trump, the multitude of accusations are backed almost entirely by desire for them to be true. I won't bet either way in either case.

[Gromdor]

13 hours ago, F3SS said:

You act as if this is shocking. A precedent was set during the last administration. The democrats opened this can of worms. Vengeance politics will ensue at least until Trump and Biden are officially non-factors in Washington. 

As for your other post above, evidence has always been secondary to the accusation with the left. The entire Russia ordeal was an enormous investigation of the accusations in search of a crime rather than an investigation of evidence linked to a crime. You should stop being so sure of yourself at this moment. You have no idea how things will play out. As it stands, the accusations against Biden and family appear to have real weight behind them. With Trump, the multitude of accusations are backed almost entirely by desire for them to be true. I won't bet either way in either case.

Let me see if I can paraphrase this.  Bascially you are saying:

This is for vengeance and not an actual attempt at justice.

There is no evidence, but that is secondary to the accusation.  But it is pretty heavy accusations and who knows it might be true.

[Portre]

On 9/12/2023 at 7:05 PM, and-then said:

Did you not pay attention when the FBI and IRS whistleblowers testified before Congress?

Did you bother to read the transcripts? They don't actually say what you claim.

[itsnotoutthere]

No media interference there then :-

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/12/media/white-house-letter-news-executives/index.html

[itsnotoutthere]

 

[itsnotoutthere]

On 9/12/2023 at 6:11 PM, Portre said:

House GOP have been investigating for two years. No evidence. The POS POTUS appointed a prosecutor five years ago. No evidence. In six months, there will still be no evidence.

[Portre]

36 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Accusations are not evidence. Repeating accusations do not make them evidence. That's not how it works. You need actual evidence.

See if you can spot the difference:

ac·cu·sa·tion
[ˌakyəˈzāSHən]
NOUN
a charge or claim that someone has done something illegal or wrong:
"accusations of bribery"
the action or process of accusing someone:
"there was accusation in Brian's voice"

ev·i·dence
[ˈevəd(ə)ns]
NOUN
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:
"the investigation finds no evidence of bribery"
 

I ask for the latter; you give me the former.

[itsnotoutthere]

3 minutes ago, Portre said:

Accusations are not evidence. Repeating accusations do not make them evidence. That's not how it works. You need actual evidence.

See if you can spot the difference:

ac·cu·sa·tion
[ˌakyəˈzāSHən]
NOUN
a charge or claim that someone has done something illegal or wrong:
"accusations of bribery"
the action or process of accusing someone:
"there was accusation in Brian's voice"

ev·i·dence
[ˈevəd(ə)ns]
NOUN
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:
"the investigation finds no evidence of bribery"
 

I ask for the latter; you give me the former.

Now repeat that thought process for Trump.

[DieChecker]

As we've come to understand, the "high crimes, and misdemeanors" can include just about anything. Lying to the American people certainly will qualify.

Let them investigate, I say. It's obvious Hunter is a international money grubbing scum bag. That Joe was a complete idiot regarding Hunters affairs, I find very unlikely.  Like Hillary being unaware a personal email server for a FedGov Cabinet member is a no no.

People say... Well it's been two years plus. But really how long have the Rs been in charge of the House? 9 months? How receptive were the various agencies they've asked for documents from? Needed direct threats of Contempt of Congress??? No kidding? 

So, we have agencies in the background digging in their heels, or otherwise covering up, and a President saying there no "there" there. 

The arsonist is standing in front of a burning building saying he doesn't know how the fire started... And I simply don't believe him.

Seems those on the left don't want any of it to be true, as they don't want their guy to be a POS like the last guy. Politics make otherwise rational people react with stupid excusses, and blinding emotion.

Mr Biden should step aside for the 2024 election.