Elections Biden impeachment hearings mega thread (art dealer questioned)

[cottagecheesefan]

Imagine being such a piece of shit you’d use your sons death frequently to sell your political career?


How many times did he claim Beau died in Iraq?

In addition to both NYT and Washington Post having big op eds on why Biden should skip 2024, CNN had a segment calling out all his routine lies, and basically too many to list <45>

 

[Jack V Savage]

Man. I wish I knew as little as you it must be great to just have no concerns in the world.

It's not a conflict of interest, but I'm wondering the specifics of why the guy thinks it is, as that would give insight into where his misunderstanding starts. But, yeah, childish personal attacks are good too.

 

[jimjamjammer]

We all know that, it's not what we believe, it's what we can prove that really matters. I'm sure Hunter the degenerate has done some shady/illegal shit, but what do you think Joe did (specific criminal/impeachable charge), and is there enough to prove it in court?

Imo Joe was waste deep in all of it. But that doesn't mean shit.
At best money laundering and corruption charges. But I won't hold my breath. R's seem to like be punched rather than doing the punching.

 

[44nutman]

Why haven’t Democrats gone after Jared?

They’re shown they’re not shy about weaponizing the legal system for political gain….

Come on… you can do it… I know it hurts your brain the think ill of Democrats

Because they ALL want (both sides) want their chance to put their hands in the cookie jar.

No one wants to kill the golden goose

They cant bring it to the House because they dont have the votes.
The GOP controls the House, and all they seem to care about is Hunter. I find it funny because they have been trying the Hunter angle since Trump v Biden 2020. It did not work then but they seem to keep going back to it, like it will suddenly work. IT is like watching a guy spamming power doubles in the Octagon, and it gets stuffed over and over again, but for some reason the guy keeps trying it again.
I for one hope they try this, because it will fail miserably. They don't have the votes and it shows to me, that McCarthy is the weakest Speaker of my lifetime.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I hope this isn’t what you guys are pinning your hopes on. An email, that in all this time since being reported by the NY Post, apparently hasn’t even been confirmed as authentic, which alleges a meeting with Joe, that in all the time he’s been under house investigation, hasn’t been confirmed as ever taking place, let alone revealed any record of what might have been said.
It’s been years since that story was printed. This is still all we have? I wouldn’t get my hopes up.

Even if the email is real, it's unclear whether it refers to an expected future meeting or a past one, and if it's a past one, it's unclear if it refers to a casual introduction or a meeting. But a formal meeting would have been scheduled, and many other people would know about it, and it wasn't, and as far as we know, no one does. I think the most likely thing is a quick handshake in a crowded room or Hunter promising something he couldn't deliver. Generally, it looks like Hunter had a pattern of suggesting he had more sway than he actually did (and Archer confirms this), which is a fairly common scam for people on the periphery of power.

 

[BFoe]

Time will tell I suppose.

Well, no; I don’t think the ends justify the means necessarily. In other words, one should find some substantial evidence that’s potentially impeachable and then open the inquiry. One shouldn’t open an impeachment inquiry with flimsy-to-nonexistent evidence, hunt around and search, finally find something substantial and say “Aha! See? We were justified!!” That’s a really reckless precedent to set.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Imo Joe was waste deep in all of it. But that doesn't mean shit.
At best money laundering and corruption charges. But I won't hold my breath. R's seem to like be punched rather than doing the punching.

Okay, so what's the specific evidence for this that they can present at the impeachment hearings?

 

[Scerpi]

They cant bring it to the House because they dont have the votes.
The GOP controls the House, and all they seem to care about is Hunter. I find it funny because they have been trying the Hunter angle since Trump v Biden 2020. It did not work then but they seem to keep going back to it, like it will suddenly work. IT is like watching a guy spamming power doubles in the Octagon, and it gets stuffed over and over again, but for some reason the guy keeps trying it again.
I for one hope they try this, because it will fail miserably. They don't have the votes and it shows to me, that McCarthy is the weakest Speaker of my lifetime.

They had the votes before last session...lol.

Democrats had the President, the House and the Senate for two years.

 

[jimjamjammer]

Okay, so what's the specific evidence for this that they can present at the impeachment hearings?

I think that is what we are waiting to see. You would hope they have more than we know about and according to them they do i.e. bank records.

 

[jimjamjammer]

Well, no; I don’t think the ends justify the means necessarily. In other words, one should find some substantial evidence that’s potentially impeachable and then open the inquiry. One shouldn’t open an impeachment inquiry with flimsy-to-nonexistent evidence, hunt around and search, finally find something substantial and say “Aha! See? We were justified!!” That’s a really reckless precedent to set.

True, but that isn't up to us now is it.

 

[andnowweknow]

Does anyone on the right wanna be honest about the fact this impeachment inquiry is more about tit-for-tat regarding Trump being impeached than actual evidence of Biden wrongdoing? That might allow for more reasonable discussions regarding what Biden may or may not have done that COULD warrant impeachment. As it is, the innuendo about Biden wrongdoing just seems like bad faith arguing.

 

[Terry Noonan]

Does anyone on the right wanna be honest about the fact this impeachment inquiry is more about tit-for-tat regarding Trump being impeached than actual evidence of Biden wrongdoing? That might allow for more reasonable discussions regarding what Biden may or may not have done that COULD warrant impeachment. As it is, the innuendo about Biden wrongdoing just seems like bad faith arguing.

it isn’t tit for tat. If Biden didn’t do what he did he wouldn’t be facing this.

 

[andnowweknow]

it isn’t tit for tat. If Biden didn’t do what he did he wouldn’t be facing this.

Innuendo is not evidence. Where is the evidence? This "inquiry" is basically telling the future, "evidence means nothing". If you really don't believe this is political tit for tat at its core, not sure what to say...

Here's some great tits...since we're on the topic.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

In addition to both NYT and Washington Post having big op eds on why Biden should skip 2024, CNN had a segment calling out all his routine lies, and basically too many to list <45>

All 80 year olds make up stories, normally there's just no one there to fact check them. Which is probably why electing an 80 year old with dementia to own the chuds was probably a bad idea.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Does anyone on the right wanna be honest about the fact this impeachment inquiry is more about tit-for-tat regarding Trump being impeached than actual evidence of Biden wrongdoing? That might allow for more reasonable discussions regarding what Biden may or may not have done that COULD warrant impeachment. As it is, the innuendo about Biden wrongdoing just seems like bad faith arguing.

Do you want to admit indicting Trump is just about trying to stop him from running in 2024?

 

[andnowweknow]

Do you want to admit indicting Trump is just about trying to stop him from running in 2024?

Isn't motivation kind of irrelevant if there are MOUNTAINS of ACTUAL EVIDENCE of Trump wrongdoing? I mean, you can talk all you want about political motives, but the indictments against Trump are not based on Innuendo, they are based on evidence, laid out in officially submitted court documents.

You're comparing two things that are completely different.

 

[Terry Noonan]

Innuendo is not evidence. Where is the evidence? This "inquiry" is basically telling the future, "evidence means nothing". If you really don't believe this is political tit for tat at its core, not sure what to say...

Here's some great tits...since we're on the topic.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

I think that is what we are waiting to see. You would hope they have more than we know about and according to them they do i.e. bank records.

If the GOP did have something substantial like that, I think they would have said it already and gone into a full impeachment. I don't think they have much, they just need some sort of scandal against Joe in the public view to counter the indictments against Trump. If I'm proven wrong so be it, impeach and arrest the geriatric fucker, but from how the GOP are behaving now, I really doubt that's going to happen.

 

[Jack V Savage]

it isn’t tit for tat. If Biden didn’t do what he did he wouldn’t be facing this.

Republicans don't even know what he's supposed to have done. They're just looking for evidence of something, anything, they can use. Your accusations are already known to be false.

But it's not tit for tat. The crazy, extreme authoritarian right has been doing this kind of thing for decades.

 

[WklySportsMemes]

"His son died LOL"

Such a quality person, you are. I leave it to others to imagine what quality.

Now CNN, NYT, & W.Post are credible enough sources for him to use as proof that Biden lies....
Do you think he will now go back & apologize for all the articles against his demigod that he dismissed simply because they were from the CNN, NYT, & W.Post?????

Politics aside just the worst, illogical,nonsensical people around. Chaos clown logic.