House votes to formally open an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden

Pommer said:

What will the American people learn when it is exposed that Joe Biden loaned his own brother MONEY and then his own brother paid him back?

He looks like a stand-up guy that supports family, a family that pays internal debts.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess most Americans would interpret it that way.

Pommer said:

What will the American people learn when it is exposed that Joe Biden loaned his own brother MONEY and then his own brother paid him back?

He looks like a stand-up guy that supports family, a family that pays internal debts.

It’s amateur night. years in the GOP

Click to expand...

This whole makes more sense if you see it in the context of Republicans seeing debt repayment as something bad. That would explain why they think Biden is crooked and why they love Trump so much.

iluvatar5150 said:

This whole makes more sense if you see it in the context of Republicans seeing debt repayment as something bad. That would explain why they think Biden is crooked and why they love Trump so much.

Click to expand...

Your brother is a former two-term vice-president and he can’t even give you a crummy $200K, he makes you borrow it, like some common bum!? Of course you’re going to pay him back! You don’t want his crappy $200K handouts, you’re in it for the LONG SCORE!

This will be the narrative in 12 days.

I guess the Democrats should start drawing up Trump's 3rd Impeachment now since he is the one who will win according to all the polls.

ThatRobGuy said:

I hate to say it, but this is what happens when concepts/language/ideas/etc... get watered down and things that should be reserved for the most egregious scenarios gets tossed around willy-nilly for political expediency.

I can't be the only one who's noticed that various types of hearings/investigations/efforts have become embarrassingly more common over the past few decades, right?

I always have to preface this with saying that I'm not a Trump supporter (because anything less than 100% anti-Trump vitriol gets you labelled as a Trump sympathizer these days), but I think the double impeachment efforts against Trump didn't do our country any favors.

The first Trump impeachment attempt was weak sauce and came across more like "sucking sour grapes" than anything substantive...which ended up cheapening the 2nd attempt ironically (which should've been the one Democrats waited for in order to "make their move")

As soon as something like impeachment becomes "just some regular thing you do when you side doesn't win", that sets us off on a bad trajectory. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the next 3 presidents (regardless of party) end up getting impeached by people who are upset that their guy didn't win.

The Clinton impeachment efforts are really what cheapened this whole process.

The fact that it's only happened 4 times in the history of the country...yet 3 of those were in my (in perspective, short) lifetime tells me one of two things

1) either the quality of our candidates has gotten progressively worse over time
2) people have cheapened the process for purposes of one-upmanship

Click to expand...

It's not either/or...both of those things can be happening. 1. Yes, and I'd say their administrators are no better. It's something of a funny story, but the research that killed Affirmative Action was ultimately only written because of Affirmative Action. For all Marxists complain about Capitalism, they don't often find themselves in economics classes as economics majors. It was an economics paper that researched why so many black men dropped out of economics majors in the first year...a bit of research to get the DEI nut jobs off the back of an economist. 50% of black men were dropping economics as a major within 2 years compared to 7% of white men. Ironically, DEI moralizers would claim this was because economics was racist or white supremacist of something...but those people don't want to do anything with economics lol. The author looked at the grade school records of all students researched and found that the black men were entering with well below average math abilities. Why? Affirmative Action. What sorts of majors did they tend to switch to? Humanities....where regurgitating ethnic studies rhetoric comes with an average A grade and diploma. That's why the administration isn't so great...all talent, merit, ability, or whatever is snatched up by businesses that make money. The government is left with Humanities and Liberal Arts majors who aren't that great at identifying problems....terrible at solving them.

As for the politicians...4 years isn't much time to get things done. Especially when you're campaigning for 1 of them. On top of that, add the fact that you'll be out of a job at any time, and businesses are going to throw money at you to just get elected, and you have a recipe for corruption. Why try to do anything? You'll get blamed when it's less than perfect and if you just do what the wealthy people tell you...you'll be set for life.

2. Appearances are most of what they do. The legislative branch doesn't really write many bills, nor do they read them. The executive branch often doesn't enforce laws...or enforces them poorly. Do you think Biden's administration really didn't know it wasn't allowed to deny debt relief to white farmers and hand it out to black ones? Do you think they didn't realize they can't hand out small business loans according to skin color? They knew this. I don't know if it's genuine lack of understanding that those cases were certain to come...or if they actually believed they had written the policies and laws so well they would hold up in court. Regardless, the administration lost. Why? Because if there's something judges in the US know...it's discrimination law. Just as you can be sure historians here know ancient Rome, WW2, or the Civil War-Revolutionary War.....lawyers and judges know racial discrimination law. They know the precedents, the outcome based nature of those laws, the attempts to get around them, etc.

You know who doesn't know this stuff? Political fringe ideologues. The center is reasonable and pragmatic...focused on problems and solutions....even if they aren't so good at solving them.

The Barbarian said:

It looks more and more grim for republicans.

Republican Rep. Ken Buck:
“This is not the way to run a Congress. This is not the way to run a House. We should not be engaging in retribution politics, in retribution impeachments.”

Click to expand...

I'll agree with Ken Buck. It's not a good situation. Unfortunately, what choice do they have? The Democrats have engaged in the worst examples of political persecution in US history...violating the rights of countless citizens.

The Barbarian said:

The key numbers:

• Support for this impeachment inquiry continues to come up shy of the support both of Donald Trump’s had. Majorities generally supported Trump’s early on, with support sometimes in the high 50s and outpacing opposition by double digits. A Marist College poll released Tuesday showed Americans were split on the Biden inquiry. And a late-October AP-NORC poll showed Americans disapproved, 39 percent to 33 percent.
• Comparatively few Americans believe Biden broke the law. In the AP-NORC poll, 35 percent of Americans said he broke the law, while 40 percent said so in an October Fox News poll. Trump was generally in the mid-40s on this measure during his impeachments, and he has been around 50 percent when it comes to his recent indictments.
• CNN’s October poll showed that 57 percent said Biden shouldn’t be impeached and removed from office — which is between 10 and 14 points higher than in CNN polls of Trump’s impeachments.

Click to expand...

Lol the key numbers? No no no....



Those are your key numbers. Biden is a sinking ship in swing states so far.

The Barbarian said:

• Perhaps most inauspiciously for Republicans, those who say they’ve actually consumed news about the inquiry were significantly more opposed to it. The AP-NORC poll showed that among the approximately half of voters who had read or heard something about impeachment, they disapproved of the inquiry 49 percent to 31 percent.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/13/gops-impeachment-inquiry-starts-shaky-political-ground/

Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) told reporters “probably not” when asked Tuesday morning whether President Biden had committed high crimes and misdemeanors.

Click to expand...

Well let's see how Don Bacon feels about it...


Bacon acknowledged that he had not been in favor of an impeachment inquiry just a few months ago, but said that was because Biden was at the time providing information sought by lawmakers.

That cooperation changed, Bacon said, when lawmakers inquired about two payments Biden received that he claimed were loan repayments from his son Hunter and brother James. Biden declined to share more information when asked what the loans were used for, and Bacon said he wants to learn more.
“I feel like he’s pushed our hand,” Bacon said.

So I guess it would he accurate to say Bacon was against the inquiry when Biden was still cooperating months ago....but he supports it now that Biden refuses to answer anything about anything.

Loan repayments lol. Hey Joe, you and your family appear to be shuffling around millions of dollars from fake offshore businesses.

Joe- "Loan repayments"

Everyone- "what were the loans for?"

Joe- "I have to go now"

The Barbarian said:

Republican Main Street Caucus chair Dusty Johnson (R-SD) told reporters Tuesday, “there’s not evidence to impeach” and that “we have had enough political impeachments in this country.”

Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-WA) also told reporters, “I don’t think that’s a foregone conclusion,” emphasizing that opening an impeachment inquiry doesn’t mean the House will actually impeach. Rep. Ken Buck, (R-CO) who has spoken out against impeachment from the start, made similar remarks on CNN.

“I’m struggling now, I have to tell you,” he told CNN Monday night.
As They Admit There’s No Evidence, House Republicans Will Still Greenlight Impeachment Inquiry

Remarkably, these republicans, at the same time they were admitting there was no evidence of Biden wrongdoing, voted for an impeachment inquiry.

Click to expand...

Remarkably, people are changing their minds now that Biden has stopped cooperating because he's guilty of corruption....on top of the crimes his administration has perpetrated against public.

The Barbarian said:

They're talking out of both sides of their mouths, because they have to pacify Beloved Orange Leader, but also keep the voters back home from remembering what they did, next election.

Click to expand...

What they did is their job....holding the president accountable.

Pommer said:

What will the American people learn when it is exposed that Joe Biden loaned his own brother MONEY and then his own brother paid him back?

He looks like a stand-up guy that supports family, a family that pays internal debts.

It’s amateur night. years in the GOP

Click to expand...

Do you think the reason they don't want closed door depositions is because they know these aren't loan repayments and loans....and if they have to give reasons accounting for why all this money was shuffled around through shell companies....they'll give different reasons?

How many loans do you think a multimillionaire family like the Bidens needs lol?

Joe is worth over 20 million...why would he need a 200k loan from Hunter's crooked business?

Why would Joe's brother need 200k from Joe? He had the money 6 weeks later apparently....what was that loan for?

These people are clearly guilty of money laundering and taking bribes.

Ana the Ist said:

Do you think the reason they don't want closed door depositions is because they know these aren't loan repayments and loans....and if they have to give reasons accounting for why all this money was shuffled around through shell companies....they'll give different reasons?

How many loans do you think a multimillionaire family like the Bidens needs lol?

Joe is worth over 20 million...why would he need a 200k loan from Hunter's crooked business?

Why would Joe's brother need 200k from Joe? He had the money 6 weeks later apparently....what was that loan for?

These people are clearly guilty of money laundering and taking bribes.

Click to expand...

How would a legitimately run business “look” if placed under the scrutiny of a Congressional investigation?
I’d say oddly similar to what we’re witnessing now.

Joe didn’t get a loan from Hunter Biden, he loaned money to his brother, who paid him back in a clever way.
None of these transactions are “illegal” so are none of our (or Congress’) business.

stevil said:

So, do you think Biden in the lead up to the 2024 presidential election, should send his personal lawyer to Ukraine or Israel in an attempt to get them to publicly state on USA tv that Donald Trump is under investigation, and that he will veto any USA or NATO aide until they do that?

Do you think that is acceptable behaviour?
Do you think it should become common place for the party in power to do that stuff before the next presidential election?

Click to expand...

There's lots of things I don't see as acceptable behavior, but if you're going to make it a case for impeachment, it has to be a strong one, and it can't have the tinge of "we just gotta get him on something...just so long as we get him". It has to at least appear unbiased and objective.

Which is why I noted that it came across looking more like sour grapes than anything substantive. There were already groups clamoring for it as soon as he took office:

(the WaPo article is from January of 2017)
The effort to impeach President Donald John 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.



So it really did come across as "let's just keep throwing things at the wall until something sticks starting day 1" instead of actually waiting for a time when it's called for, it cheapens the process. Not to mention, it galvanizes his support base in the process.

stevil said:

I'm not a Biden supporter. I've never voted for him, I've never voted Democrat, I've never donated money to him or to Democrats, I've never promoted anyone to vote Joe Biden or Democrat, I've never bought Biden or Democrat merchandise.

Click to expand...

I'll consider spreading his propaganda online as "support".

I mean...you asked for evidence, then didn't even look at it.

stevil said:

You haven't provided any evidence, you just repeat the nonsense of Comer.

Click to expand...

I did provide evidence. If you looked, you would have seen forms setting up a withdrawal of 100,000$ from Hunter's "business" aka shell company that was to be directly deposited into Joe's personal bank account every two weeks.

You didn't look.

Instead, you seem to think this has something to do with the 200,000$ check written to his brother James.

It's not.

That's why I'm calling you a Biden supporter. You're so desperate to make excuses for a clearly corrupt president you literally won't look at the evidence against him nor address it.

stevil said:

LOL. If you say so. I don't know what cheques have to do with anything. Cheques are redundant, I don't think anyone in NZ uses cheques.

Click to expand...

Why did a business in Hunter's name (not James Biden...we're talking about a business owned by Hunter) set up a direct deposit into Joe Biden's account for 100,000$ every two weeks?

All we know about the business is that it took money from corrupt Chinese bankers. That's all it did on paper.

What's your explanation for that?

Go ahead and look for one online....

It's not as if Joe has an explanation. He just says he wasn't financially involved in his son's business. He's taking money from his son's business though...a lot of money.....every two weeks.

stevil said:

Accepting piles of cash, lol.
A $200,000 repayment, 6 weeks after giving $200,000 as a loan. You are fooling no one.

Click to expand...

Sure sure sure....what's that loan for again?

Ana the Ist said:

I'll agree with Ken Buck. It's not a good situation. Unfortunately, what choice do they have?

Click to expand...

Yep. If they do the honest thing, Trump will write mean tweets about them and they'll get primaried.

Ana the Ist said:

The Democrats have engaged in the worst examples of political persecution in US history...violating the rights of countless citizens.

Click to expand...

Until Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act. Then they all became republicans where they remain today.

(Numbers show that support for impeachement are dropping even among republicans)

Ana the Ist said:

Lol the key numbers? No no no....

Click to expand...

Yep...
Perhaps most inauspiciously for Republicans, those who say they’ve actually consumed news about the inquiry were significantly more opposed to it. The AP-NORC poll showed that among the approximately half of voters who had read or heard something about impeachment, they disapproved of the inquiry 49 percent to 31 percent.

It's pretty bad news when your own people turn on you if they get the facts.

When more of them learn about the loans, it's going to be another bad day for Trump.

Pommer said:

How would a legitimately run business “look” if placed under the scrutiny of a Congressional investigation?
I’d say oddly similar to what we’re witnessing now.

Click to expand...

I don't think it would make it to a Congressional investigation. It's really simple actually. You put James in one room, have him explain what all these loans are for....then you put Joe in another room and have him explain the same thing.

When they give the same answers....you know they're telling the truth.

When they give different answers (and they will...that's why they don't want to give closed room depositions) then you know they're lying.

Make sense?

Pommer said:

Joe didn’t get a loan from Hunter Biden,

Click to expand...

Yes he did lol.

You didn't even look at the evidence I provided. Joe took money directly from Hunter's business in recurring bi-weekly direct deposits of 100,000$ (or 200k$ a month).

This is how ignorant the American public is btw. The people doing the investigation are literally laying out the evidence on a website they set up....and the American public not only doesn't look at the evidence, but they proudly declare their ignorance and claim no evidence exists.

Pommer said:

he loaned money to his brother, who paid him back in a clever way.
None of these transactions are “illegal” so are none of our (or Congress’) business.

Click to expand...

Well it's definitely our business if there's evidence that the president is taking money from foreign entities and completely corrupt.

Why do you think Biden won't drop his support for the Ukraine anyway? Do you think they might have evidence of his corruption and he knows they'll hand it over to the GOP if he drops support?

Ukraine is doing so badly that most of the battles they win are won by drones. They don't have enough men left to win this war....period. They are going to lose. Why is the president insisting upon continuing to fund them? You're aware that Zelensky and his cabinet are stealing a lot of that money we're sending, right?



They're pocketing money that was sent so they can feed what troops they still have. You would think that the billions in aid we've sent...not to mention billions in weapons we've sent...would be enough. For some reason though, despite the continued support of the war being unpopular.



Americans wisely don't want to continue funding the war. Only 52% of Democrats and 17% of Republicans do. Yet, for some reason, we're gridlocked on the issue in the Senate. Republicans will grant funding if the President will enforce immigration laws he hasn't been enforcing and agree to fix our broken asylum system. Seems pretty reasonable.

You would think a President this unpopular...with his approval ratings....would agree to fix the border to get the funding for the Ukraine. He isn't. You would think that he would drop the funding for the Ukraine if it meant passing a budget without any attempt to fix the border he clearly doesn't want to fix. He won't.


Only a quarter of voters believe Democrats handle the border crisis better....25%.

This presidency is the first to show the public overwhelmingly agrees with Republicans...and that's in spite of a administration long attempt to ignore the issue entirely.

Despite it being extremely popular with voters to fix the border and end funding....Joe won't stop funding the Ukraine nor will he fix the border....and his approval ratings just keep sinking.

Ever wonder why that is? Is it possible forces within his party will expose him if he fixes the border (because they know he's guilty) and the Ukraine is sitting on evidence of his corruption in case he quits funding them (because they know he's guilty)?

The Barbarian said:

Yep. If they do the honest thing, Trump will write mean tweets about them and they'll get primaried.

Click to expand...

You think they're scared of a guy facing enough prison time to die in jail?

The Barbarian said:

Until Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act. Then they all became republicans where they remain today.

Click to expand...

We all know about the southern strategy and the flip in positions between the Democrats and Republicans....

Only some of us though, seem to realize that a similar flip has happened over the past 10 years and now the Democratslic Party is filled with racists and bigots again....but that's topic of another thread.

The Barbarian said:

(Numbers show that support for impeachement are dropping even among republicans)

Click to expand...

No offense, but you can find a poll showing anything you want as long as you're willing to use bad polls.

Give me a Pew, Rasmussen, or Gallup poll.

I'm not saying AP-NORC is necessarily a bad polling institute. I'm saying that just like 99% of the polls you post...I've never heard of the people doing them.

stevil said:

So, do you think Biden in the lead up to the 2024 presidential election, should send his personal lawyer to Ukraine or Israel in an attempt to get them to publicly state on USA tv that Donald Trump is under investigation, and that he will veto any USA or NATO aide until they do that?

Do you think that is acceptable behaviour?
Do you think it should become common place for the party in power to do that stuff before the next presidential election?

Click to expand...

Why would he have to send his lawyer to the Ukraine? He's doing it here.

He's literally investigating and smearing his political opponent.

I guess Democrats suddenly have no problem with that.

ThatRobGuy said:

There's lots of things I don't see as acceptable behavior, but if you're going to make it a case for impeachment, it has to be a strong one, and it can't have the tinge of "we just gotta get him on something...just so long as we get him". It has to at least appear unbiased and objective.

Which is why I noted that it came across looking more like sour grapes than anything substantive. There were already groups clamoring for it as soon as he took office:

Cities join call for impeachment

A growing number of local governments are clamoring for Congress to act against Donald Trump.

www.politico.com

U.S. Rep. Al Green push for Trump's impeachment dies in lopsided 364-58 vote

Hours after U.S. Rep. Al Green introduced articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, the U.S. House voted 364-58 on a "motion to table" the resolution, effectively killing it.

www.texastribune.org

Congressman Sherman Introduces Article of Impeachment: Obstruction of Justice

Washington, D.C. – Today, Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA), joined by Congressman Al Green (D-TX), introduced an Article of Impeachment (H. Res. 438) against President Donald J. Trump for High Crimes and Misdemeanors. The Article is based on Article 1, dealing with "Obstruction of Justice," which...

sherman.house.gov

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

(the WaPo article is from January of 2017)
The effort to impeach President Donald John 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.



So it really did come across as "let's just keep throwing things at the wall until something sticks starting day 1" instead of actually waiting for a time when it's called for, it cheapens the process. Not to mention, it galvanizes his support base in the process.

Click to expand...

I don't know if you remember them...but I can recall ads playing on TV requesting the electoral college not vote Trump into office...and put Hillary there instead. They weren't on TV long....but did play for awhile before the college elected Trump.

Correction....they didn't ask them to vote for Hillary Clinton.

stevil said:

Sorry, I'm more interested in getting an answer to the question I actually asked.
Do you think it is acceptable for the incumbent president to trump up charges based on no evidence on their political opponent with an upcoming presidential election?

Click to expand...

No

stevil said:

As a proxy, do you think it is acceptable for the incumbent president to extort foriegn allies to trump up charges or simply announce on USA tv and investigation into the president's political opponent?

Click to expand...

No

stevil said:

Or to put it more succinctly, do you value fair and free elections?

Click to expand...

Yes


So, I'm also interested in getting an answer to my question.

Do you think that things like calls for impeachment for a bunch of other random things (that literally started an hour after he was inaugurated) cheapened the process or created a bit of a "cried wolf" perception? As noted, there was a group that had already filed the trademarks for "ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow", had the websites ready to go, and was already working with a handful of congressmen, in anticipation of him getting elected, so that they could spin up the website and start throwing money at it literally the hour he took office?

I think it made people take it less seriously when there were impeachment calls over more serious things, because many people dismissed it for reasons of "yeah, but they've been calling for impeachments twice a month since he got elected".

Ana the Ist said:

You think they're scared of a guy facing enough prison time to die in jail?

Click to expand...

Yeah, cults are scary. And that's what he's created.

Ana the Ist said:

We all know about the southern strategy and the flip in positions between the Democrats and Republicans....

Click to expand...

And Trump doubled down on it. Hence republican politicians forcing changes in educational policy claiming that black people benefited from slavery by "learning useful skills."

DeSantis says Black people benefited from slavery by learning skills like 'being a blacksmith'​

As you see, republicans have become far more racist than Nixon and his converted democrats.

(Numbers show that support for impeachment are dropping even among republicans)

Ana the Ist said:

No offense, but you can find a poll showing anything you want

Click to expand...

Yes, the final troll defense: "They are lying! All of them are lying!"




Your guys are a bit less credible. But not much less.

(offended by idea that republican witch hunt might backfire on them)

I’m reminded of an episode of “The West Wing” that aired in 2001.

In the fictional story, there’s a burgeoning controversy surrounding the Democratic president, and White House press secretary C.J. Cregg concludes that there would be a political upside to a partisan crusade launched by rabid attack dogs.

In comments to White House chief of staff Leo McGarry, Cregg says: “Leo, we need to be investigated by someone who wants to kill us just to watch us die. We need someone perceived by the American people to be irresponsible, untrustworthy, partisan, ambitious, and thirsty for the limelight. Am I crazy, or is this not a job for the U. S. House of Representatives?”

Early evidence suggests GOP impeachment push might help Biden

If Republicans haven’t considered the possibility of a backlash to their anti-Biden impeachment crusade, they haven’t thought this through.

www.msnbc.com

Ana the Ist said:

Give me a Pew, Rasmussen, or Gallup poll.

Click to expand...

See above.