The American people have a right to know whether or not President Biden or his family personally profited during his time serving as Vice President. Sound reasonable yet no Republican made any noise as trump and his family enriched themselves with their connection during trump presidency. U would have to b gullible if u think the trump brand didn't get richer. Political theatrics
If McCarthy is right about the $20 million and Biden used the powers of his office to bribe or blackmail those entities to paying the $20 million, then we probably have an impeachable offense. But if it's just foreign entities like Burisma paying $20 million for services rendered and they were also just hoping to curry a little favor, there isn't much there. My impression is that it is the latter. They need to find some evidence where Joe promises or threatens to do something. Right now that have a case equivalent to the pings on a Alpha Bank server -- maybe suggestive to someone who desperately wants to believe, but not really proof of anything.
Inquiries were already underway. House Republicans have been investigating Biden for months and have found nothing substantial. This is unlikely to make much of a difference, except for relabeling the investigation. It primarily appears to be McCarthy protecting his seat from a group that he needs, but which also has him in a bind. Once again, it illustrates a weak House leader and a mostly dysfunctional House Republicans, doing what even most Republicans know is simply wasting more time and money on hunches and suspicions. It boosts the MAGA movement at the expense of the overall Republicans, and they are likely to lose politically on this sham investigation for impeachment. P.S. It does tell me who on this board seems somewhat moderate but is really just as easily connected to MAGA thinking, and while it's a bit surprising, it's not that much surprising.
So, it won't change much and won't achieve anything? It is a symptom of a weak Republican House leader and a dysfunctional party? They likely lose more than benefit from the sham investigation? I'm not sure what's not to like about it.
Yes, I think so. Politically, MAGA gains while overall Republicans lose. Nothing to like about it, though. I prefer governing and real investigation. We do, for example, have a shutdown looming.
Probably I'm being facetious. Really, I think this is my motivation. I see democrats get real gung ho about holding Trump accountable, a laudable position, but then become very squirrelly about republicans' efforts at revenge accountability. We knew at the outset that there would be blowback from holding Trump accountable. There would be false equivalencies made and baseless impeachments following some sophomoric 'good for the goose, good for the gander' kind of logic. So democrats rationalize, 'oh our impeachment was sincere and evidence-based and a good use of the nation's time and money, but your impeachment is mercenary and baseless and actually a waste of time and money.' It makes democrats look prejudicial, self-interested, and hypocritical. For the sake of credibility, the revenge impeachment should be indulged and allowed to succeed or fail on its own merits. It needs enough rope to hang itself with.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/impeac...stice-irs-bf13d0c5?mod=hp_opin_pos_4#cxrecs_s Impeaching Joe Biden A proper inquiry is a road back from Nancy Pelosi’s cutting every corner to get Trump. By William McGurn Sept. 11, 2023 at 6:40 pm ET September in Washington, and the Hunter Biden scandal is in the air. The only question now is what happens first: an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden’s role in his son’s influence-peddling—or a Hunter Biden indictment from a grand jury impaneled by special counsel David Weiss. Normally, Republicans might defer to law enforcement. But a politicized Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation have squandered the public’s trust. The elevation of Mr. Weiss to special counsel has persuaded many that the fix is in, given Justice guidelines that say a special counsel should come from the outside. Mr. Weiss’s appointment further gives President Biden the “ongoing investigation” excuse for not answering questions, which could bury the issue. But the ultimate question surrounding Hunter’s overseas millions from places such as China and Ukraine—and whether his father was the quo for the quid his son received—is political. More important than seeing anyone packed off to prison is learning whether Joe Biden, as vice president, willfully enabled his son’s schemes and twisted U.S. policy in the process. It may turn out that Joe Biden committed no crime. But even if he never received a nickel from his son’s businesses, his cooperation in Hunter’s selling of the Biden brand was corrupt. Ditto for President Biden’s Justice Department, which repeatedly sabotaged the federal investigation into Hunter. The party line is that there’s no evidence that Joe Biden profited from his son’s dealings. But the administration has stonewalled any effort to get at the truth, and the White House is now building a war room of lawyers and communications staffers to fight the investigations. It’s disingenuous to argue there’s no evidence while you are working overtime to thwart any attempt to find evidence. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says impeachments should be rare, because normalizing impeachment isn’t good for the country. He’s right. But House Speaker Kevin McCarthy is calling for an impeachment inquiry, which he says is a “natural step forward” based on evidence that has been uncovered by the House committees investigating—Oversight, Judiciary, and Ways and Means. This includes learning that Joe Biden lied during the 2020 debates when he categorically denied Hunter was paid millions from China and said the laptop was Russian disinformation. And that the then-vice president had dinners with his son’s business partners, and spoke to them on speakerphone when Hunter called. And that, as two Internal Revenue Service agents have testified, the Justice Department sandbagged an IRS investigation. And that a Biden staffer emailed Hunter business associate Eric Schwerin confirming that the vice president had signed off on talking points Mr. Schwerin had supplied about Burisma. All this from a man who claims he knew nothing about his son’s business? With three House committees already investigating, an impeachment inquiry might appear superfluous. But there are practical advantages. To name one, it would enhance the power of House subpoenas. Congressional oversight must be tethered to a legislative purpose, and that includes the subpoenas for information such as the tax and bank records House investigators are asking for. By contrast, when a subpoena is part of an impeachment inquiry, Congress is acting at the apex of its power in its ability to compel witness testimony and demand documents. An impeachment inquiry doesn’t require a legislative purpose, which gives its subpoenas more force in the courts. It also gives the House more negotiating leverage with, say, Justice and the IRS. If done judiciously, an impeachment inquiry would be a road back from the way Nancy Pelosi stacked every procedural deck and cut every congressional corner to get Mr. Trump. Mrs. Pelosi announced the first Trump impeachment inquiry all by herself, holding a vote after it was already under way, and then proceeded with closed-door testimony and limits on defense witnesses. In the second impeachment, she rushed a vote on impeachment without hearings or an opportunity for the president to present a defense. Speaker McCarthy has signaled that things will be different this time around. For one thing, the House will begin with a formal inquiry. An actual impeachment will then depend on persuading the full House that the evidence supports it. Given Mr. McCarthy’s slim majority, that might be a hard sell to nervous GOP moderates—especially those in districts Mr. Biden carried in 2020. For another, Mr. McCarthy has declared the inquiry won’t be launched without a vote of the full House. The risk is that he won’t get the votes—which would carry its own political costs for him. Probably many members on each side secretly prefer that Mr. McCarthy just declare an impeachment inquiry as Mrs. Pelosi did and spare them the choice. But forcing members to weigh the evidence and the risks, and then go on the record, is vital for accountability. Fifty years ago at press conference in Orlando, Fla., Richard Nixon told a television audience the American people have to know whether or not their president is a crook. In Mr. Biden’s case, they also deserve to know whether the Justice Department has been compromised. By month’s end, Republicans will decide whether an impeachment inquiry is the only way they’ll get these answers. Appeared in the September 12, 2023, print edition as 'Impeaching Joe Biden'.
Rather than indulging wrongdoing for the sake of consistency, we should focus on doing the right thing based on facts and evidence. The impeachment inquiries against Trump were initiated due to tangible allegations and evidence of potential misconduct, such as tapes, literally tapes. In contrast, the impeachment inquiries against Biden are officially starting after months of unsuccessful searches for wrongdoing, and are motivated by partisan suspicions rather than facts. While "allowing" the Biden impeachment process to unfold fully may look consistent, it actually lends credence to an inquiry based on bad faith partisan motivations rather than substantive evidence. Just because the Democrats' impeachment of Trump was justified by real concerns, it does not mean they are obligated to entertain an impeachment of Biden that is not founded in reality. Rather than indulging the appearance of consistency and false equivalencies, we are better served standing firm against partisan abuses of power. There is no credibility left when you indulge wrongdoing just for the sake of superficial consistency. We should stay focused on making decisions based on facts and principles, not political tit-for-tat. TLDR - just do the right thing and stop indulging
I agree, we knew this was coming so I am not shocked. They have been searching for the ANYTHING to hang on him and little k caved to the freedom caucus. I am fine with this, but I am also fully aware that they will play the soundbite game if they can't find real evidence.......I`ve already seen comer do this time and time again, he puts a "theory" out there and states it as facts and then when pressed about evidence he comes up short but that doesn't stop the other mouth pieces from going on other shows and spouting the same BS. Now I keep hearing "we have the bank records to show that he had 20 shell companies and there funneling it to the big guy", if they had one sliver of ACTUAL TRUTH they would shout ot from the rooftops. I was watching James Carville and he actually wants a trial so the public can actually see the gop has no real proof, just conjecture and innuendo from some pretty suspect folks..................but hey, I guess this is the new thing. I hope Joe has nothing to hide, even if they find something small the gop will treat it as the GOTCHA moment, what's funny to me is they don't care about trump having 91 counts across 4 cases, caught cold for rape and will end up paying 10 million dollars or all the other scandals.....they are laser focus on hunter and his problems (the dude seems like he has had major issues in his life) so the bar is so low I cant even see it. I don't think a trial will move the needle one bit for the maga folks, they already assume he is guilty because trump and his surrogates have already told them that and they believe it lock stock and barrel I am truly mystified why Joe or trump would want to do this all over again next year................power must be one hell of a drug
I think it would be hard to find any politician whose children don't fit this line: I demand Jenna Bush step down from the Today show and that we end affirmative action for politicians' kids. They should all be forced to change their last names so that the Ivy League, Fortune 500 companies, etc. don't know who they're evaluating.
If it can be proven that Biden accepted money in exchange for altering US foreign policy then, sure, impeach him. So far I don't see evidence of that and watching members of Congress pretend that they don't accept money from lobbyists or use their influence to get stuff for their kids is funny. Just like I've said all along about Trump, I don't care about the man in power if that person is unfit for the job. The policy outcomes I care about would still be achieved in the short-term with a President Harris. But, so far, I've yet to see any "there" there.
I get the sense you don't understand the distinction between an impeachment inquiry and an impeachment.
Still disagree. The Trump investigations were legitimate according to whom? The Biden investigations are illegitimate according to whom? I don't disagree with the assessment, but this is a government for all the people. Including the dumb asses. If an investigation lets a significant number of the people sleep better because supposedly justice is being pursued, why shouldn't they get it? You can follow that idea down to a ridiculous logical end and ask how many people does it take to be significant. A million? a thousand? a hundred? I don't know, but we probably have millions or tens of millions who think there's something worth investigating, so that's significant. And again, it's just an inquiry. Maybe Joe has to show some bank records. Maybe do a deposition, though I'm sure he'd refuse. Otherwise its mostly staffers and lawyers for the committee members doing all the grunt work. There isn't any real consequence until they draft articles and find a majority in the House to impeach. Which I bet we'll never see. So what it the "right thing" here that we're supposed to do? Prejudge the inquiry for its partisan motivations and block it from ever being conducted? Undermine the confidence of millions of voters in the ability of Congress to effectively police the Executive? Erect a high bar for investigating a president that more or less requires you to have proof of corruption before you can even start? Doesn't feel right to me.
Why is anyone surprised? Did anyone not expect the Republicans to find any reason to impeach Biden after the two half-ass attempts on Trump? The fringe voting base needs to stop electing crappy ass candidates into office.
Amen, I wish maga heads would stop doing that, they keep losing. The majority of America voted Biden in............and that's a fact jack. I have said I am not surprised, retrumplicans were going to do this after trump was impeached not once but twice for serious crimes...........we`ll see what evidence they have on Biden, they've been looking for years and have produced zilch......kind of like the 60 court cases they lost for finding evidence the election was stolen.
