Biden impeachment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/joe-biden/kevin-mccarthy-biden-impeachment-inquiry-natural-step-forward-rcna102050

Is Congress really going to do this?

This would be a gift, frankly. Albeit a pointless, costly, dumb one. But, hey, they want to go down this rabbit hole in the face of shutdown, inflation, and all these supposedly horrible things that they claim are happening . . . the ads pretty much write themselves.

[Anonymous]

If you are equating Trump's impeachments to the grounds talked about for Biden now, you are too stupid to be part of this or any grown up conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don’t get is how Democrats seem to be willing to die on their sword for Biden. Trump is clearly a Svengali but he has some history of really generating sincere interest and excitement. Joe never has ever. He was elected as a replacement for Trump and a placeholder. And he is now clearly too old. So why the passionate defense. Isn’t his potentially shady dealings another reason to push him aside. NO ONE loves Biden. No one ever has except Jill. So why the blind loyalty to a man with clearly questionable abilities (age) and somewhat questionable ethics. Even if he didn’t break the law, he knew what his son was doing and he knew his son was getting rich off trading on the name. That Mah be cool for senators (which I think stinks) but it just isn’t ok for the VP.

It’s about objective reality, not Biden. I’m not even a big fan of Biden. I do believe in objective reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When a sitting member of Congress sounds even dumber that GOP posters in this thread

If there was evidence, they would be talking about it. There is no evidence.

After impeaching trump on totally fictitious Russian collusion based on fake evidence from Hillary, it’s rich for you to claim evidence matters. Tit for tat my friend. You guys started it.

This forum has been taken over by imbeciles, trolls, bots or all three. He was not impeached over Russia. Russia had nothing to do with his impeachment. And definitely not Hillary. You already knew that, that is unless you’re an imbecile.

I suspect some of it is the fools from the AR15 website. Someone posted a link to the thread about NM Governor banning the carry of weapons for 30 days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GOP party as it used to exist went down with Trump. When Trump meets his accountability in the courts, then it will be time for a new Conservative party. GOP, even for name sake, will not exist.

The problem the GOP has is that the country is center left and generaly favors things the democrats support. The GOP needs all three of traditional conservatives, MAGAs and Evangelicals to be viable. How would a new "conservative" party be different?

It will compete with Democratic Party from center right and not from extreme right using wedge issues.

[Anonymous]

This is going to blow up on Republicans. Their divisions will be amplified, the impeachment will fail, and McCarthy will be deposed as Speaker by the end of this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can a president be impeached for crimes committed before taking the office of the president?

Yes. Too bad for Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GOP party as it used to exist went down with Trump. When Trump meets his accountability in the courts, then it will be time for a new Conservative party. GOP, even for name sake, will not exist.

The problem the GOP has is that the country is center left and generaly favors things the democrats support. The GOP needs all three of traditional conservatives, MAGAs and Evangelicals to be viable. How would a new "conservative" party be different?

It will compete with Democratic Party from center right and not from extreme right using wedge issues.

Unless it is pro-choice, pro-safetynet, anti AR-15, pro voter rights, anti-gerrymandering etc, I don't see where it will be viable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing I don’t get is how Democrats seem to be willing to die on their sword for Biden. Trump is clearly a Svengali but he has some history of really generating sincere interest and excitement. Joe never has ever. He was elected as a replacement for Trump and a placeholder. And he is now clearly too old. So why the passionate defense. Isn’t his potentially shady dealings another reason to push him aside. NO ONE loves Biden. No one ever has except Jill. So why the blind loyalty to a man with clearly questionable abilities (age) and somewhat questionable ethics. Even if he didn’t break the law, he knew what his son was doing and he knew his son was getting rich off trading on the name. That Mah be cool for senators (which I think stinks) but it just isn’t ok for the VP.

+100

[Anonymous]

Where does McCarthy think this is going? He obviously doesn't have the votes to impeach. He didn't even have the votes to start an impeachment inquiry. The crazies are not going to be satisfied with an inquiry. They're going to breathing down his neck in two months for an actual impeachment vote, and he's still not going to have the votes to do it because the Biden-district Rs don't want to be associated with the crazy. So he'll either have to hold a failed impeachment vote, or he'll drag the Biden-district Rs along and assure their defeats in 2024.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can a president be impeached for crimes committed before taking the office of the president?

Yes. Too bad for Democrats.

Why would you say this? There isn't any evidence of crimes committed by Biden either while in office or out of office. And if you want to open up that can or worms, then I guess Trump should have been impeached for all of his crimes before he came into office?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where does McCarthy think this is going? He obviously doesn't have the votes to impeach. He didn't even have the votes to start an impeachment inquiry. The crazies are not going to be satisfied with an inquiry. They're going to breathing down his neck in two months for an actual impeachment vote, and he's still not going to have the votes to do it because the Biden-district Rs don't want to be associated with the crazy. So he'll either have to hold a failed impeachment vote, or he'll drag the Biden-district Rs along and assure their defeats in 2024.

He thought he was trading an impeachment proceeding for the far right votes to keep the government open. The far right has reneged on that, and McCarthy is left hanging. He really isn't very good at this, but the country will suffer in the meantime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are really out of it if you there there is no evidence that Joe Biden has acted in corrupt ways. Whether he would be found guilty in a court or not doesn’t mean there is “no evidence.” You can repeat that phrase over and over but it is clearly untrue that there is “no evidence” and you sound stupid. You sound really dumb or really dishonest. Those are the only options. Again, whether there is enough evidence to convict Joe is an true unknown but there is absolutely evidence that he has been up to some shady stuff since he was VP and that he blatantly lied about his entanglements with his son over and over.

Ok, Einstein, where is the evidence? Why didn't Barr prosecute 3 years ago?

Look, there is evidence. Everyone knows it and all of the smart commentators on non-fake news talk about it. Just because none of these press releases point to any evidence, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

What evidence?

SARs reports. First hand information from Biden business partners Bobalinski and Archer, Email, text messages, photographs, meeting attendance notes. There is a lot of evidence and if you have never heard about any of this, you need to change the channel. But all of this is evidence. You don’t get to say it isn’t just because you don’t think it proves guilt. Individual piece of Evidence doesn’t always prove guilt but it helps develop a scheme or corrupt practice.

The “first hand information” from Devon Archer said Joe wasn’t involved in any of the businesses.

That is not accurate.

It absolutely is. Go read the desperate 80+ page thread about it if you don’t want to read the actual transcript ps of Archer’s testimony under oath to the House.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The writing’s on the wall folks.

House Republicans don’t have the votes. They are self-destructing.

McCarthy RAILED against Pelosi for beginning an impeachment without a vote and he’s doing the same thing.

[Anonymous]

I’m gonna post this once, and you guys can keep arguing back and forth.


This is an Impeachment Inquiry!, not an Impeachment!

What is the difference, the Inquiry gives congress more power to investigate the executive branch that it did before. It specifically now allows congress to demand bank records and other sources of information where before, they had no right to ask. If gives congress more power to “Investigate” potential wrongdoings. It does not necessarily mean there will be an Impeachment, but could if bank records or other items are found on Biden. If no crimes were found to be committed, no impeachment would then follow.

Make sense?


https://time.com/6313320/mccarthy-launches-house-impeachment-inquiry-biden/#