Biden impeachment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

[Anonymous]

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.

Scott Perry is projecting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

He really is the epitome of short-term thinking. The stupid deals he made to become speaker led him into the debt ceiling crisis. Then the deal he made with Biden to resolve the debt ceiling pissed off the crazies, which led to the government shutdown threats. And now he is trying to appease them with the impeachment inquiry, but it's just going to lead to yet more disarray and crisis within his own party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

What PP said is what I have gathered elsewhere. Here is a paragraph from the article PP linked to that supports that (Time may not be the most definitive source here);

A formal impeachment inquiry provides Congress with its apex of power, giving the legislative body more discretion to dig into Biden’s family finances. Investigators could, for example, issue subpoenas for the bank records of Biden and his relatives. The mechanism could also put Biden in a bind should he refuse to comply with any of the subpoenas, according to Michael Conway, an attorney who served as counsel for the House Judiciary Committee’s 1974 impeachment into Nixon. If Biden doesn’t comply with the inquiry, that in itself is an impeachable offense. Indeed, one of the three articles of impeachment considered against Nixon was for defying the inquiry, which sought to obtain his infamous White House tape recordings.

[Anonymous]

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.

Archer also said that it was Burisma’s position that they wanted Shokin where he was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

Since you did not read the article, here is the sort that NOW gives congress subpoena powers to request more bank record and other documents. Up until this point, they did not subpoena powers. Did that Help? Maybe read the article.




Here is the highlight.


A formal impeachment inquiry provides Congress with its apex of power, giving the legislative body more discretion to dig into Biden’s family finances. Investigators could, for example, issue subpoenas for the bank records of Biden and his relatives. The mechanism could also put Biden in a bind should he refuse to comply with any of the subpoenas, according to Michael Conway, an attorney who served as counsel for the House Judiciary Committee’s 1974 impeachment into Nixon. If Biden doesn’t comply with the inquiry, that in itself is an impeachable offense. Indeed, one of the three articles of impeachment considered against Nixon was for defying the inquiry, which sought to obtain his infamous White House tape recordings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

What PP said is what I have gathered elsewhere. Here is a paragraph from the article PP linked to that supports that (Time may not be the most definitive source here);

A formal impeachment inquiry provides Congress with its apex of power, giving the legislative body more discretion to dig into Biden’s family finances. Investigators could, for example, issue subpoenas for the bank records of Biden and his relatives. The mechanism could also put Biden in a bind should he refuse to comply with any of the subpoenas, according to Michael Conway, an attorney who served as counsel for the House Judiciary Committee’s 1974 impeachment into Nixon. If Biden doesn’t comply with the inquiry, that in itself is an impeachable offense. Indeed, one of the three articles of impeachment considered against Nixon was for defying the inquiry, which sought to obtain his infamous White House tape recordings.

They already issued subpoenas for their bank records and they got them. And guess what, there was nothing there!

[Anonymous]

Here is a link to a 2019 article that was referencing the Trump investigation. Says the inquiry gives congress more power to investigate. Is not the same this as an Impeachment.

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/what-powers-does-formal-impeachment-inquiry-give-house

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

What PP said is what I have gathered elsewhere. Here is a paragraph from the article PP linked to that supports that (Time may not be the most definitive source here);

A formal impeachment inquiry provides Congress with its apex of power, giving the legislative body more discretion to dig into Biden’s family finances. Investigators could, for example, issue subpoenas for the bank records of Biden and his relatives. The mechanism could also put Biden in a bind should he refuse to comply with any of the subpoenas, according to Michael Conway, an attorney who served as counsel for the House Judiciary Committee’s 1974 impeachment into Nixon. If Biden doesn’t comply with the inquiry, that in itself is an impeachable offense. Indeed, one of the three articles of impeachment considered against Nixon was for defying the inquiry, which sought to obtain his infamous White House tape recordings.

They already issued subpoenas for their bank records and they got them. And guess what, there was nothing there!

Not all of them as many records were never produced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

What PP said is what I have gathered elsewhere. Here is a paragraph from the article PP linked to that supports that (Time may not be the most definitive source here);

A formal impeachment inquiry provides Congress with its apex of power, giving the legislative body more discretion to dig into Biden’s family finances. Investigators could, for example, issue subpoenas for the bank records of Biden and his relatives. The mechanism could also put Biden in a bind should he refuse to comply with any of the subpoenas, according to Michael Conway, an attorney who served as counsel for the House Judiciary Committee’s 1974 impeachment into Nixon. If Biden doesn’t comply with the inquiry, that in itself is an impeachable offense. Indeed, one of the three articles of impeachment considered against Nixon was for defying the inquiry, which sought to obtain his infamous White House tape recordings.

That was an article against Trump too and the Rs in the Senate voted to acquit anyway. So the precedent has been set that refusing to cooperate with an impeachment inquiry is not impeachable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

What PP said is what I have gathered elsewhere. Here is a paragraph from the article PP linked to that supports that (Time may not be the most definitive source here);

A formal impeachment inquiry provides Congress with its apex of power, giving the legislative body more discretion to dig into Biden’s family finances. Investigators could, for example, issue subpoenas for the bank records of Biden and his relatives. The mechanism could also put Biden in a bind should he refuse to comply with any of the subpoenas, according to Michael Conway, an attorney who served as counsel for the House Judiciary Committee’s 1974 impeachment into Nixon. If Biden doesn’t comply with the inquiry, that in itself is an impeachable offense. Indeed, one of the three articles of impeachment considered against Nixon was for defying the inquiry, which sought to obtain his infamous White House tape recordings.

They already issued subpoenas for their bank records and they got them. And guess what, there was nothing there!

Not all of them as many records were never produced.

What specific records weren't subpoenaed and not produced? Why hasn't the House gone to court to enforce the subpoena then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

What PP said is what I have gathered elsewhere. Here is a paragraph from the article PP linked to that supports that (Time may not be the most definitive source here);

A formal impeachment inquiry provides Congress with its apex of power, giving the legislative body more discretion to dig into Biden’s family finances. Investigators could, for example, issue subpoenas for the bank records of Biden and his relatives. The mechanism could also put Biden in a bind should he refuse to comply with any of the subpoenas, according to Michael Conway, an attorney who served as counsel for the House Judiciary Committee’s 1974 impeachment into Nixon. If Biden doesn’t comply with the inquiry, that in itself is an impeachable offense. Indeed, one of the three articles of impeachment considered against Nixon was for defying the inquiry, which sought to obtain his infamous White House tape recordings.

They already issued subpoenas for their bank records and they got them. And guess what, there was nothing there!

Not all of them as many records were never produced.

What specific records weren't subpoenaed and not produced? Why hasn't the House gone to court to enforce the subpoena then?

Emails under NARA control. Emails with the pseudonyms

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

Since you did not read the article, here is the sort that NOW gives congress subpoena powers to request more bank record and other documents. Up until this point, they did not subpoena powers. Did that Help? Maybe read the article.




Here is the highlight.


A formal impeachment inquiry provides Congress with its apex of power, giving the legislative body more discretion to dig into Biden’s family finances. Investigators could, for example, issue subpoenas for the bank records of Biden and his relatives. The mechanism could also put Biden in a bind should he refuse to comply with any of the subpoenas, according to Michael Conway, an attorney who served as counsel for the House Judiciary Committee’s 1974 impeachment into Nixon. If Biden doesn’t comply with the inquiry, that in itself is an impeachable offense. Indeed, one of the three articles of impeachment considered against Nixon was for defying the inquiry, which sought to obtain his infamous White House tape recordings.

They already have all of the bank records and other records, and tax forms. There is nothing else to subpoena.

[Anonymous]

Oh, Kevin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/#

No, it doesn’t make sense. There’s no special impeachment inquiry subpoena that is more powerful than a congressional subpoena. And the House already has all of the bank records they sought.

What PP said is what I have gathered elsewhere. Here is a paragraph from the article PP linked to that supports that (Time may not be the most definitive source here);

A formal impeachment inquiry provides Congress with its apex of power, giving the legislative body more discretion to dig into Biden’s family finances. Investigators could, for example, issue subpoenas for the bank records of Biden and his relatives. The mechanism could also put Biden in a bind should he refuse to comply with any of the subpoenas, according to Michael Conway, an attorney who served as counsel for the House Judiciary Committee’s 1974 impeachment into Nixon. If Biden doesn’t comply with the inquiry, that in itself is an impeachable offense. Indeed, one of the three articles of impeachment considered against Nixon was for defying the inquiry, which sought to obtain his infamous White House tape recordings.

They already issued subpoenas for their bank records and they got them. And guess what, there was nothing there!

Not all of them as many records were never produced.

What specific records weren't subpoenaed and not produced? Why hasn't the House gone to court to enforce the subpoena then?

Emails under NARA control. Emails with the pseudonyms

Those aren’t bank records.