House releases overview of evidence against Biden

[The Barbarian]

Criminal masterminds would have hidden “the evidence” really good, yes.

Today's winner. The true believers can't decide if Biden is dumb or if he's fiendishly clever. Mostly they seem to believe both at once.

 

[Pommer]

Today's winner.

I like how they tout the firing of Shokin (which happened in broad-daylight) as evidence for Biden’s corruption then use that to probe his non-governmental years while he largely remained ignorant of his surviving son’s business dealings.

This isn’t even strong enough to be a house-of-cards.

 

[BPPLEE]

This is the most unintentionally ironic thing I've read all month. We literally have photos of document boxes Donald was hiding in a MAL bathroom. We literally have fake electors who are willing to testify to the scheme. Meanwhile, Comer and Jordan keep promising the moon and then getting pantsed when their star witness contradicts their narrative.

This is yet another example how right-leaning folks have been trained to parrot fetishized phrases. What's hilarious is those same folks don't understand what was actually meant in most cases. Speaker Pelosi was talking about the reconciliation process that would happen AFTER the ACA was passed by the House. The bill passed by the Senate and the one that was to be voted on by the House had different provisions and we wouldn't know what was to be in the final, reconciled bill until after the House passed their version.

This is some very entertaining fan fiction, but we have seen the evidence. We have read the indictments. The venues were not chosen, but are due to the fact they were where the crime took place.

This particular fan fiction is hilariously ironic because that's exactly what Republican dirty tricksters did with Secretary Clinton and the 2016 FBI investigation. And Benghazi. And Durham.

Gosh, I remember a certain candidate leading his audience in chants of "Lock her up!". Strange.

More fan fiction.

The lack of self-awareness in this comment is astounding.

The old Nancy Pelosi line about how we must pursue an investigation because of the seriousness of the charges.

@USincognito said “This is yet another example how right-leaning folks have been trained to parrot fetishized phrases. What's hilarious is those same folks don't understand what was actually meant in most cases. Speaker Pelosi was talking about the reconciliation process that would happen AFTER the ACA was passed by the House. The bill passed by the Senate and the one that was to be voted on by the House had different provisions and we wouldn't know what was to be in the final, reconciled bill until after the House passed their version.“

What’s hilarious is that your reply has nothing to do with the post. You’ve confused Pelosi’s line about the seriousness of the charges with her infamous “We have to pass the bill to see what’s in it” line.
“

 

[USincognito]

]What’s hilarious is that your reply has nothing to do with the post. You’ve confused Pelosi’s line about the seriousness of the charges with her infamous “We have to pass the bill to see what’s in it” line.

I can't find a source for that line. In fact a search for it only come up with this thread. Can you provide a citation?

 

[Pommer]

Like it or not, the considerable amount of evidence implicating Joe forced an impeachment inquiry.

Such as…?

 

[BPPLEE]

I can't find a source for that line. In fact a search for it only come up with this thread. Can you provide a citation?

You can’t find a link so you just used one that was unrelated?

 

[The Barbarian]

What’s hilarious is that your reply has nothing to do with the post. You’ve confused Pelosi’s line about the seriousness of the charges with her infamous “We have to pass the bill to see what’s in it” line.

That, too was misrepresented as other than it was.

Did Nancy Pelosi Say Obamacare Must be Passed to 'Find Out What Is in It'?

A partisan web site quotes the House Minority Leader selectively in order to create a false equivalence with the 2017 Republican health care plan.

www.snopes.com

 

[Valletta]

That, too was misrepresented as other than it was.

Did Nancy Pelosi Say Obamacare Must be Passed to 'Find Out What Is in It'?

A partisan web site quotes the House Minority Leader selectively in order to create a false equivalence with the 2017 Republican health care plan.

www.snopes.com

Pelosi did a poor job trying to explain herself out of that one. As I've shown before with McCain, Snopes has been as wrong as can be.

 

[NxNW]

Like it or not, the considerable amount of evidence implicating Joe forced an impeachment inquiry.

So far, there is no evidence. Even the Republicans say so.

Republican Admits GOP Doesn't Have Evidence Joe Biden Was Bribed

 

[USincognito]

You can’t find a link so you just used one that was unrelated?

What the heck are you talking about. I'm saying that supposed Nancy Pelosi is a fabrication, not an actual quote. In my opinion, @Valetta was paraphrasing her comment about the ACA bill.

If you want to prove me wrong, just cite a source with her saying that sentence.

 

[USincognito]

Pelosi did a poor job trying to explain herself out of that one.

No, she didn't. Her reference to "see what's in it" is concerned the reconciled bill after the House passed their version and the reconciliation committee worked out the final bill.

As I've shown before with McCain, Snopes has been as wrong as can be.

That MIGHT be, but in this case, they're not.

 

[USincognito]

Pelosi did a poor job trying to explain herself out of that one. As I've shown before with McCain, Snopes has been as wrong as can be.

I'm still wondering about the source of this supposed quote from Nancy Pelosi.
>> The old Nancy Pelosi line about how we must pursue an investigation because of the seriousness of the charges. <<

 

[Valletta]

No, she didn't. Her reference to "see what's in it" is concerned the reconciled bill after the House passed their version and the reconciliation committee worked out the final bill.

That MIGHT be, but in this case, they're not.

They verified what I said, but they also tried to prop up Nancy. It became an embarrassment.

 

[The Barbarian]

1) In July 2023, former Biden business associate Devon Archer described how Joe Biden was “The Brand” and was used to send “signals” of power, access, and influence to enrich the Biden family from foreign sources2) Devon Archer alone was aware of at least 20 times in which then-Vice President Biden spoke on speakerphone with Hunter Biden’s foreign business associates.

WASHINGTON − A former business partner of Hunter Biden told the House Oversight Committee this week that Joe Biden never talked business when his son put the then-vice president on the phone with Hunter and other associates, according to a transcript of the testimony released Thursday.

The testimony of Devon Archer, a fellow board member of Hunter Biden at the Ukrainian energy firm Bursima, undercut the build-up from the committee's chairman, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., who said this week Archer's testimony made Republicans' bribery allegations against Joe Biden "more credible."

'How's the fishing?' Devon Archer testifies Joe Biden never talked business when put on phone

Devon Archer testified having no knowledge President Joe Biden ever altered policy to benefit Hunter Biden's business, according to his transcript.

www.usatoday.com

Ooops. Another one down.

New testimony from a number of FBI and Internal Revenue Service officials casts doubt on key claims from an IRS whistleblower who alleges there was political interference in the federal criminal investigation of Hunter Biden’s taxes.

According to transcripts provided to CNN, several FBI and IRS officials brought in for closed-door testimony by House Republicans in recent days said they don’t remember US Attorney David Weiss saying that he lacked the authority to decide whether to bring charges against the president’s son, or that Weiss said he had been denied a request for special counsel status.

Those twin claims, made by IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley, form the basis of Republican accusations that the Justice Department’s investigation into Biden’s taxes was tainted by political influence and that Weiss and Attorney General Merrick Garland tried to protect Hunter Biden in the investigation.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/19/politics/witness-testimony-disputes-irs-whistleblower-hunter-biden/index.html

And another one. One problem with schemes like that, is there's just no way to keep the truth from coming out eventually.

 

[Always in His Presence]

WASHINGTON − A former business partner of Hunter Biden told the House Oversight Committee this week that Joe Biden never talked business when his son put the then-vice president on the phone with Hunter and other associates, according to a transcript of the testimony released Thursday.

The testimony of Devon Archer, a fellow board member of Hunter Biden at the Ukrainian energy firm Bursima, undercut the build-up from the committee's chairman, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., who said this week Archer's testimony made Republicans' bribery allegations against Joe Biden "more credible."

'How's the fishing?' Devon Archer testifies Joe Biden never talked business when put on phone

Devon Archer testified having no knowledge President Joe Biden ever altered policy to benefit Hunter Biden's business, according to his transcript.

www.usatoday.com

Ooops. Another one down.

New testimony from a number of FBI and Internal Revenue Service officials casts doubt on key claims from an IRS whistleblower who alleges there was political interference in the federal criminal investigation of Hunter Biden’s taxes.

According to transcripts provided to CNN, several FBI and IRS officials brought in for closed-door testimony by House Republicans in recent days said they don’t remember US Attorney David Weiss saying that he lacked the authority to decide whether to bring charges against the president’s son, or that Weiss said he had been denied a request for special counsel status.

Those twin claims, made by IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley, form the basis of Republican accusations that the Justice Department’s investigation into Biden’s taxes was tainted by political influence and that Weiss and Attorney General Merrick Garland tried to protect Hunter Biden in the investigation.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/19/politics/witness-testimony-disputes-irs-whistleblower-hunter-biden/index.html

And another one. One problem with schemes like that, is there's just no way to keep the truth from coming out eventually.

Oh, is it so overwhelming that the Inquiry has ended?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Oh, is it so overwhelming that the Inquiry has ended?

Since the inquiry is purely political to save Kevin McCarthy's position as Speaker, the overwhelming evidence of nothingburgeriness doesn't matter.

 

[The Barbarian]

Since the inquiry is purely political to save Kevin McCarthy's position as Speaker, the overwhelming evidence of nothingburgeriness doesn't matter.

McCarthy is in a tough spot. If he doesn't appease the craziest members of his party, they'll pull him down. So he goes on, even knowing what it's doing to him personally.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Since the inquiry is purely political to save Kevin McCarthy's position as Speaker, the overwhelming evidence of nothingburgeriness doesn't matter.

Well cool - then you don't have to worry about it!

Others, many others, view it differently.

 

[Always in His Presence]

MSN

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans plan to hold their first hearing next week in their impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.

The hearing — scheduled for Sept. 28 — is expected to focus on “constitutional and legal questions” that surround the allegations of Biden's involvement in his son Hunter's overseas businesses, according to a spokesperson for the House Oversight Committee.

 

[Always in His Presence]

For example, finding stolen classified documents in his residence after he told the FBI and the National Archives that he had returned all the stolen material.

As Barr says, if that's true "he's toast."

When was he found guilty?