Whistleblower accuses Biden of criminal conduct

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Popcorn time

Will Merrick Garland bring charges? Of course not.

The Demokraut party, protecting their own since 1619

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Popcorn time

Will Merrick Garland bring charges? Of course not.

The Demokraut party, protecting their own since 1619

I think that may be the most ignorant comment I have ever read.

[Anonymous]

Chuck Grassley (age 89, BTW) just said the quiet part out loud.

"We're not interested in whether the allegations against Biden are accurate or not."

You can listen to a clip of his interview on Fox News embedded in the article linked below.

https://newrepublic.com/post/173162/grassley-admits-republicans-dont-care-accusations-joe-biden-accurate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chuck Grassley (age 89, BTW) just said the quiet part out loud.

"We're not interested in whether the allegations against Biden are accurate or not."

You can listen to a clip of his interview on Fox News embedded in the article linked below.

https://newrepublic.com/post/173162/grassley-admits-republicans-dont-care-accusations-joe-biden-accurate

What he was saying is that it is NOT the role of Congress to determine guilt or innocence. That is the job of the Justice Dept. and the courts.
The job of the oversight committee is to ensure the FBI is doing THEIR job. He stated as much in the full interview here.
Unlike members of Congress like Adam Schiff, Grassley is not making a judgment on guilt or innocence based on an accusation.
I can understand why you might not understand that, given that too many liberals don't seem to believe in due process.

[Anonymous]

I hear that NYT and WaPo are preparing a deep investigative series to get to the bottom of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump made up to $640 million on the side WHILE WORKING in the Trump White House.

It really gives the game away if you want investigations into presidents' families but are totally ok with that.

Ok, assume that’s true, so? If a neighbor drove drunk and didn’t get caught, I can drive drunk then right?

In a free society, one can do whatever they want. If its illegal or unethical (aka pay for play in Biden World) there are consequences.

This was both illegal AND unethical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chuck Grassley (age 89, BTW) just said the quiet part out loud.

"We're not interested in whether the allegations against Biden are accurate or not."

You can listen to a clip of his interview on Fox News embedded in the article linked below.

https://newrepublic.com/post/173162/grassley-admits-republicans-dont-care-accusations-joe-biden-accurate

What he was saying is that it is NOT the role of Congress to determine guilt or innocence. That is the job of the Justice Dept. and the courts.
The job of the oversight committee is to ensure the FBI is doing THEIR job. He stated as much in the full interview here.
Unlike members of Congress like Adam Schiff, Grassley is not making a judgment on guilt or innocence based on an accusation.
I can understand why you might not understand that, given that too many liberals don't seem to believe in due process.

Huh? He was an impeachment manager making a case that the majority of the senate bought. Just not enough to remove Trump from office because...well who knows why they thought Trump remaining in office instead of Pence was a good idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chuck Grassley (age 89, BTW) just said the quiet part out loud.

"We're not interested in whether the allegations against Biden are accurate or not."

You can listen to a clip of his interview on Fox News embedded in the article linked below.

https://newrepublic.com/post/173162/grassley-admits-republicans-dont-care-accusations-joe-biden-accurate

What he was saying is that it is NOT the role of Congress to determine guilt or innocence. That is the job of the Justice Dept. and the courts.
The job of the oversight committee is to ensure the FBI is doing THEIR job. He stated as much in the full interview here.
Unlike members of Congress like Adam Schiff, Grassley is not making a judgment on guilt or innocence based on an accusation.
I can understand why you might not understand that, given that too many liberals don't seem to believe in due process.

That’s bullshit though. If Republicans are going to call the accuser a “whistleblower”, they need to stay out of the whistleblower process, which is a sealed investigation of the evidence submitted by the whistleblower. If the agency finds evidence is lacking then the whistleblower could take the evidence to court or Congress or OIG or the media or Wikileaks or Twitter or any other way to publicize it. It isn’t public because Republicans know exactly what the “whistleblower” has and they know it is nothing, so they are alleging a cover up because they all they want is a political smear in the media.

[Anonymous]

Who is this FBI mole called 'One-Eye' who is advising the President's son on this investigation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chuck Grassley (age 89, BTW) just said the quiet part out loud.

"We're not interested in whether the allegations against Biden are accurate or not."

You can listen to a clip of his interview on Fox News embedded in the article linked below.

https://newrepublic.com/post/173162/grassley-admits-republicans-dont-care-accusations-joe-biden-accurate

What he was saying is that it is NOT the role of Congress to determine guilt or innocence. That is the job of the Justice Dept. and the courts.
The job of the oversight committee is to ensure the FBI is doing THEIR job. He stated as much in the full interview here.
Unlike members of Congress like Adam Schiff, Grassley is not making a judgment on guilt or innocence based on an accusation.
I can understand why you might not understand that, given that too many liberals don't seem to believe in due process.

That’s bullshit though. If Republicans are going to call the accuser a “whistleblower”, they need to stay out of the whistleblower process, which is a sealed investigation of the evidence submitted by the whistleblower. If the agency finds evidence is lacking then the whistleblower could take the evidence to court or Congress or OIG or the media or Wikileaks or Twitter or any other way to publicize it. It isn’t public because Republicans know exactly what the “whistleblower” has and they know it is nothing, so they are alleging a cover up because they all they want is a political smear in the media.

Congress has OVERSIGHT of the FBI. This is the OVERSIGHT committee. And, the whistleblower has gone through the proper channels to claim whistleblower status.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who is this FBI mole called 'One-Eye' who is advising the President's son on this investigation?

I cannot believe anyone believes that Cartoon Network.

[Anonymous]

Adding a little butter to my popcorn after Comer met with the FBI, who clearly is slow rolling this investigation. The CHS has been working with the FBI for over a decade on this matter and been paid 6 figures for his information...

[Anonymous]

Time will tell if there's anything to the allegations. That won't stop the Rethuglicans from spreading rumors and innuendo in the meanwhile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Time will tell if there's anything to the allegations. That won't stop the Rethuglicans from spreading rumors and innuendo in the meanwhile.

The truth eventually comes out, yet the Demokrauts continue to provide cover...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Time will tell if there's anything to the allegations. That won't stop the Rethuglicans from spreading rumors and innuendo in the meanwhile.

Comer knows what the allegation is. He’s seems the document. He could just investigate if he wanted to. But likely he knows the allegation is BS so he’s trying to create a bunch of smoke. The usual RWNJs will lap it up.