Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
IF, IF, IF!
I get your point. But in this case, all the ifs (combined with the lack of evidence against Biden) sure feels like evidence that we're not going to see anything more convincing any time soon.
True. But they may find that smoking gun yet, I wouldn't bet anyone's life that they won't. But so far, nothing and they did to stop crying wolf until there is one. But...if they did that they wouldn't have anything to muddy the Trump indictment waters.
You are confusing evidence with conviction. There's plenty of evidence against Joe, it's a matter of if the weight of the evidence proves the charges.
I don't know why you think you have more knowledge about the evidence available than the three witnesses at the hearing, one being Prof. Turley who is a Trump advocate on Fox all the time. All three disagree with you.
Weird how none of the GOP's star witnesses are willing to testify to such. Wonder if a fear of being prosecuted for lying under oath is driving them to tell the truth rather than repeat GOP fan fiction?
This is what Joe Biden actually said, "My son has not made money in terms of this thing about, what are you talking about, China. …"
Joe made multiple statements, and then the White House changed the story just before the witness was to testify.
A substantial amount of evidence has been published by the media, this is an inquiry to follow the leads and to gather more evidence. Maybe Hunter was lying when he complained about Joe getting half. Maybe the witness lied when he said Joe took a 5 million dollar bribe. The 170 suspicious financial records are real. So a careful examination of all of the financial records should sort most of it out. The committee will gather and analyze the evidence and present it, I expect some time next year. Then there were be a vote on whether an impeachment trial will be held. Due process is important and Joe and the rest of the Bidens have rights, formally accusing someone of as many crimes as possible and hoping one will stick is not due process.
I've read Joe's statements. The Whitehouse trying to clear up a misrepresentation of what Joe said wouldn't qualify as "changing his story". To call it changing the story would just be another misrepresentation.
There is no witness saying anything about Joe taking a 5 million dollar bribe. You have a informant providing a someone said that someone said, and no one can find that "someone who said" to verify the claim. In fact that someone has already said ( in person ) that Joes isn't evolve in anything to paraphrase. You also have Lev Parnas (another person one can find and talk to, but the GOP refuse to talk to him) in a transcribed interview said there is nothing to this. That is not evidence, and it's why nothing became of it after Bill Barr turned it over to be investigated.
Evidence has been summarized, as is appropriate for an inquiry, and some witnesses have already testified previously, like the IRS guys with the financial records. There is indeed sufficient evidence to proceed.
Weird the people the GOP put under oath said the opposite. Which do we trust, random internet posts or testimony where there are legal penalties for making things up?
That was a summary. Trump was mentioned irrelevantly sprinkled through the entire process. This one is about Biden's vast apparent corruption.
I'm not doing all the work of laying out the evidence for you. Please feel free to read on the hearings if you have no knowledge of what was stated. The "Oversight Committee has uncovered how the Bidens and their associates created over 20 shell companies, raked in over $24 million dollars from China and other foreign countries, identified nine members of the Biden family who have participated or benefited from the business schemes, and confirmed that Joe Biden interacted with his family’s business associates at least two dozen times."
The IRS guys have Hunter's records. The IRS guys have no evidence of Joe taking bribes. What we do have is Hunter's business partner providing testimony that Hunter and Joe didn't talk about business. How is that sufficient evidence to assert that Joe took bribes?
Prof. Turley said that there wasn't enough evidence to impeach but that there was enough for an investigation. At least that's what I heard him say.
So let's recap. There is no sworn statement that Joe took a 5M dollar bribe. The individual, the someone said that someone said he said Joe took bribes, said Joe has nothing to do with anything. There is sworn testimonial statements that Joe had nothing to do with Hunter's businesses. Of course, when that testimony was asked to be put on record in the first oversight hearing, the GOP refused.
