Biden Impeachment Inquiry: The Walls Be Closing.

[ChiGoose]

1 hour ago, Wacka said:

You finally admit that Dems were pro slavery. Will you admit they still are?

…are you high?

[Wacka]

High on life. After having a stroke in 2014 every day has been bonus time.😁

[John from Riverside]

15 hours ago, Doc said:

 

You whiny children had your utterly pathetic impeachment years ago.  And you're continuing with the utterly pathetic tantrums.  But it's only helping Trump in the polls.

That paid for by Trump poll means very little this far out

 

So far this impeachment inquiry has been an absolute ***** show for the Republicans. Their own witnesses are saying that there are not a impeachable offenses.

 

The pubs won’t bring it to a vote because they know it won’t pass

[Doc]

15 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

That paid for by Trump poll means very little this far out

 

So far this impeachment inquiry has been an absolute ***** show for the Republicans. Their own witnesses are saying that there are not a impeachable offenses.

 

The pubs won’t bring it to a vote because they know it won’t pass

 

Trump pays for the WaPo and ABC News polls? 

 

And if they need to bring it to a vote, they will impeach him.  I still remain unconvinced that Joke will be running in 2024 and he's waiting until the last possible second because he doesn't want to be viewed as a lame(r) duck.

Edited September 30, 2023 by Doc

[Unforgiven]

     I don't believe for a minute this is serious. This a play to gaslight Americans and make this go away. 

If they actually found Biden guilty the whole corrupt system would be exposed.

If they prove he did all they say he did, then automatically the  last election is fraud,

the media, the investigating agencies who covered it up, the whole kitten kaboodle.

No one wants it.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

14 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

I think he meant that these impeachment proceedings are not constitutionally bona fide.  I agree in the case of the current one.  But Turley's a far right ideologue so it resonates.

I’m not sure where you got that impression, that’s not what he said.  He offered support for the impeachment inquiry, listed 10 areas of concern specifically related to the behavior of Biden and the Biden family, and suggested there were others as well.  He rightly suggested that Biden may have explanations for the behavior, and that inferences, assumptions and bias often come into play on both sides of the aisle.  
 

He also provided a brief historical review of impeachment proceedings, the impact of politics, power and the evolution to the Biden inquiry, and the erosion of trust in government that these types of proceedings tend to produce.  
 

You asked me (several posts ago) what I thought about his “guardrails”, pulling one word from 36 pages of testimony.   I admire his desire to find common ground, to restore trust in the institution, and his appeal to politicians to do better than before.   I’d support reasonable “guardrails” so long as all participants followed the same rule. 
 

Sadly, I think that’s a pipe dream, and we have to deal with the here and now.   The Rs should push forward in the world we live in now, play the game the way it is played, and continue to hammer Biden on these issues irrespective of the call for guardrails. 
 

[John from Riverside]

42 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Trump pays for the WaPo and ABC News polls? 

 

And if they need to bring it to a vote, they will impeach him.  I still remain unconvinced that Joke will be running in 2024 and he's waiting until the last possible second because he doesn't want to be viewed as a lame(r) duck.

Doc, you are clearly not paying attention

 

They clearly do not have the votes. If they had the votes they would’ve done it already.

41 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

     I don't believe for a minute this is serious. This a play to gaslight Americans and make this go away. 

If they actually found Biden guilty the whole corrupt system would be exposed.

If they prove he did all they say he did, then automatically the  last election is fraud,

the media, the investigating agencies who covered it up, the whole kitten kaboodle.

No one wants it.

Conspiracies are fun

[All_Pro_Bills]

56 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

     I don't believe for a minute this is serious. This a play to gaslight Americans and make this go away. 

If they actually found Biden guilty the whole corrupt system would be exposed.

If they prove he did all they say he did, then automatically the  last election is fraud,

the media, the investigating agencies who covered it up, the whole kitten kaboodle.

No one wants it.

For me, the most interesting aspect of the Biden family influence peddling operation isn't the operation itself.  It's the web of support and protection provided by elected and career officials in various agencies and departments. Violating every duty and oath of their office.  Calling off IRS agents investigating suspicious transactions, tax evasion, various shell companies and a plethora of accounts and banks involved in money laundering.  DOJ officials blocking and obstructing investigations, making secret blanket immunity deals.  FBI officials burying the laptop for a couple years.  Former IC officials making a statement the Hunter laptop was a Russian disinformation operation, out of fear the truth would cost Joe Biden the 2020 election, when they knew the truth, which was the machine was authentic and their statement was a lie. 

 

What's in it for these people?  Are they getting piece of the action under the table?  Are they raging ideologues?  Do they or some family members have some stake in the operation or some other shady operation through nepotism or direct involvement?  One conclusion is they are well compensated to look the other way and act with impunity because they are above the law and know the system will never charge and prosecute them for anything they do. 

Edited September 30, 2023 by All_Pro_Bills

[Tommy Callahan]

55 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

     I don't believe for a minute this is serious. This a play to gaslight Americans and make this go away. 

If they actually found Biden guilty the whole corrupt system would be exposed.

If they prove he did all they say he did, then automatically the  last election is fraud,

the media, the investigating agencies who covered it up, the whole kitten kaboodle.

No one wants it.

Why so many establishment gop are against it.

[Kemp]

Even their own supporters know Comer has zero.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

5 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

For me, the most interesting aspect of the Biden family influence peddling operation isn't the operation itself.  It's the web of support and protection provided by elected and career officials in various agencies and departments. Violating every duty and oath of their office.  Calling off IRS agents investigating suspicious transactions, tax evasion, various shell companies and a plethora of accounts and banks involved in money laundering.  DOJ officials blocking and obstructing investigations, making secret blanket immunity deals.  FBI officials burying the laptop for a couple years.  Former IC officials making a statement the Hunter laptop was a Russian disinformation operation, out of fear the truth would cost Joe Biden the 2020 election, when they knew the truth, which was the machine was authentic and their statement was a lie. 

 

What's in it for these people?  Are they getting piece of the action under the table?  Are they raging ideologues?  Do they or some family members have some stake in the operation or some other shady operation through nepotism or direct involvement?  One conclusion is they are well compensated to look the other way and act with impunity because they are above the law and know the system will never charge and prosecute them for anything they do. 

https://nypost.com/2023/09/30/hunter-bidens-daughter-represented-peru-while-living-in-the-white-house/

 

There’s a lot of money to spread around.  

[All_Pro_Bills]

8 minutes ago, Kemp said:

Even their own supporters know Comer has zero.

The conclusion there is no evidence is preposterous.  declaring there's no evidence at this point in the process is like a jury deciding to vote a defendant not guilty after hearing the prosecutors opening statement before hearing any evidence witnesses or examining any exhibits or articles of evidence.

[Kemp]

6 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

https://nypost.com/2023/09/30/hunter-bidens-daughter-represented-peru-while-living-in-the-white-house/

 

There’s a lot of money to spread around.  

 

It's odd to post something that's supposedly an indictment of Joe Biden, using a family member's success as evidence,  considering the wealth poured into Donald's family while he was President. 

 

It's gotta be tough for you guys that at the opening of the impeachment hearing, absolutely no evidence was presented.

 

Why do they refuse to produce the evidence?

[Doc]

35 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Doc, you are clearly not paying attention

 

They clearly do not have the votes. If they had the votes they would’ve done it already.

 

Why would they need to do it now?  What they're already doing is obviously working.  And again, if he doesn't run...

Edited September 30, 2023 by Doc

[Joe Ferguson forever]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

You asked me (several posts ago) what I thought about his “guardrails”, pulling one word from 36 pages of testimony.   I admire his desire to find common ground, to restore trust in the institution, and his appeal to politicians to do better than before.   I’d support reasonable “guardrails” so long as all participants followed the same rule. 

back to the verbosity.  u knew what guardrails meant.  why be opaque and, dare I say, obfuscating.  you could have said this in reply to my original inquiry.  Just be transparent and open.  What are you trying to hide?

[Pokebball]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I’m not sure where you got that impression, that’s not what he said.  He offered support for the impeachment inquiry, listed 10 areas of concern specifically related to the behavior of Biden and the Biden family, and suggested there were others as well.  He rightly suggested that Biden may have explanations for the behavior, and that inferences, assumptions and bias often come into play on both sides of the aisle.  
 

He also provided a brief historical review of impeachment proceedings, the impact of politics, power and the evolution to the Biden inquiry, and the erosion of trust in government that these types of proceedings tend to produce.  
 

You asked me (several posts ago) what I thought about his “guardrails”, pulling one word from 36 pages of testimony.   I admire his desire to find common ground, to restore trust in the institution, and his appeal to politicians to do better than before.   I’d support reasonable “guardrails” so long as all participants followed the same rule. 
 

Sadly, I think that’s a pipe dream, and we have to deal with the here and now.   The Rs should push forward in the world we live in now, play the game the way it is played, and continue to hammer Biden on these issues irrespective of the call for guardrails. 
 

It's hard to be reasonable with activist extremists

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

6 hours ago, Kemp said:

 

It's odd to post something that's supposedly an indictment of Joe Biden, using a family member's success as evidence,  considering the wealth poured into Donald's family while he was President. 

 

It's gotta be tough for you guys that at the opening of the impeachment hearing, absolutely no evidence was presented.

 

Why do they refuse to produce the evidence?

It’s not tough for me in the least Kempy.  The world keeps turning, but thank you for your concern.  
 

As for the impeachment inquiry, settle in and sit tight. There’s plenty of time for dialogue, testimony and evidence.  Worst case scenario is it’s all a big misunderstanding.   

Edited September 30, 2023 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[aristocrat]

4 hours ago, Kemp said:

 

It's odd to post something that's supposedly an indictment of Joe Biden, using a family member's success as evidence,  considering the wealth poured into Donald's family while he was President. 

 

It's gotta be tough for you guys that at the opening of the impeachment hearing, absolutely no evidence was presented.

 

Why do they refuse to produce the evidence?

 But look at Donald isn’t a great argument for your cause lol. Thanks for the laugh 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

5 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

back to the verbosity.  u knew what guardrails meant.  why be opaque and, dare I say, obfuscating.  you could have said this in reply to my original inquiry.  Just be transparent and open.  What are you trying to hide?

 I had no idea what Turley said about guardrails or anything else.  When you brought it up as if you did, I asked what he said.  
 

The really interesting part is that you apparently had no idea, either, since you misunderstood (on a

massive scale) or misrepresented what Turley actually said. 
 

I’ll give you credit here because while you screwed up this point, you did so spectacularly.  
 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

21 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 I had no idea what Turley said about guardrails or anything else.  When you brought it up as if you did, I asked what he said.  
 

The really interesting part is that you apparently had no idea, either, since you misunderstood (on a

massive scale) or misrepresented what Turley actually said. 
 

I’ll give you credit here because while you screwed up this point, you did so spectacularly.  
 

 

I guess you're not very curious in the classic sense.  In the psych sense, indeed you are.  I had to go all the way to page 4 in Turley's written testimony to find this.  I listened to it so had to confirm it.  took all of 5 minutes.  Seems pretty succinct and self evident unlike your ramblings...

 

In this testimony, I seek to offer a view of the “guardrails” for impeachment

inquiries in seeking to establish whether impeachable conduct has been committed by a

president. These guardrails are tighter than what past impeachments have allowed but

reflect a more constrained view to limit this extraordinary power to the most compelling

cases. I have previously expressed concern over the recent departures from the historical practices used in impeachment inquiries. Regardless of the outcome of this inquiry, I am

hopeful that the House can restore important procedural and due process protections to

these inquiries. It will demand something that is never easy for a majority, namely,

voluntarily accepting limits on their own ability to impeach. However, the committees

carrying out this inquiry could repair what I view as an erosion of best practices in the

investigation of presidents. Most importantly, this process can assure the public that....

Edited September 30, 2023 by Joe Ferguson forever