Republicans formalise Biden Impeachment inquiry…

[jakee 1,255]

To, ummm, find out if anything happened? And if something happened, what was it? And then maybe if they have time - who did it, are they connected to the President, and was it illegal?

 

But don’t worry, unlike those very specifically targeted Trump impeachments, this is in no way just a political stunt!

[ryoder 1,384]

Stephen Colbert gave them a thorough skewering last night, complete with Rep Neguse (D) asking point-blank questions that Rep Reschenthaler (R) could only tap-dance around.

 

[wmw999 2,123]

The purpose of an impeachment inquiry apparently is to cast around looking for grounds for impeachment

Wendy P. 

[gowlerk 1,914]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

The purpose of an impeachment inquiry apparently is to cast around looking for grounds for impeachment

Wendy P. 

It's just as well. It will keep them occupied and looking bad at the same time. It will come to nothing except to embarrass them more before the election. At the same time it will keep them busy and less likely to find time to do real harm.

[Phil1111 911]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

It's just as well. It will keep them occupied and looking bad at the same time. It will come to nothing except to embarrass them more before the election. At the same time it will keep them busy and less likely to find time to do real harm.

Oh the GOP is busy. Setting aside the delayed budget measures its got milk for schools on the important list. Furthermore its got to be whole milk and not skim milk.

Sounds like the dairy lobby has handed out some Christmas gifts to republicans. "Republicans received 71 percent of donations from the dairy industry, a slight drop from the 2018 cycle when 74 percent of donations went to the GOP." Just as they do every election cycle.

[winsor 186]

Impeachment is pretty much a waste of time, whenever it is attempted.  Our last President pointed out that he could kill someone in broad daylight on Fifth Avenue and get away with it - turns out he was close to correct.

Is Biden corrupt?  Uh, yeah.

Is there any way trying to impeach him will have the effect that his detractors seek?  Not a chance.

Like the previous occupant of the Oval Office, there are no surprises regarding quite who and what Biden is.  Anyone who has followed either of them for the last few decades has no illusions regarding their failings.

The real problem is the endless wellspring of mediocrity from which either side of the aisle draws their 'talent.'  My amazement is that you have much of anyone who is for much of any of them, or thinks that, just because someone they oppose there is someone they despise on the other side, there isn't someone every bit as despicable on their side of the aisle.

Having said that, Santos rather raises the bar.

 

[gowlerk 1,914]

Just now, winsor said:

Is Biden corrupt?  Uh, yeah.

In what way? 

[winsor 186]

1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

In what way? 

If you have to ask, you haven't been paying attention.

[gowlerk 1,914]

2 minutes ago, winsor said:

If you have to ask, you haven't been paying attention.

I will interpret that as you are admitting you have no real basis to accuse Joe Biden of corruption. You are just another right winger expressing your "feels".

[billvon 2,400]

31 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I will interpret that as you are admitting you have no real basis to accuse Joe Biden of corruption. You are just another right winger expressing your "feels".

Of course he doesn't.  But he will be told what Biden is guilty of Real Soon Now.  I mean, that's the whole point of this inquiry, to find something - anything! - to charge him with.

I predict a picture of Biden throwing a banana peel into a "recycle only" container will soon surface.

[Phil1111 911]

57 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I will interpret that as you are admitting you have no real basis to accuse Joe Biden of corruption. You are just another right winger expressing your "feels".

FOX needs some fodder for its base in 2024. Its an election year and distractions from trump trial after trump trial is necessary. For every disclosure at a trial where a felony is proven. Hunter Biden video will be shown on FOX with a narrative that closely walks the line to avoid more fines in court.

[jakee 1,255]

1 hour ago, winsor said:

If you have to ask, you haven't been paying attention.

Business as usual from one of the least intellectually curious people on this forum. I suppose in some ways it must be comforting to just hide behind 'both sides are the same!' all the time instead of ever having to bother finding anything out about the things being discussed

[ryoder 1,384]

1 hour ago, winsor said:

If you have to ask, you haven't been paying attention.

Please share your insight with Rep Reschenthaler, so he doesn't look so stupid next time Rep Neguse asks him some simple questions. (See Post #2)

[wmw999 2,123]

4 hours ago, winsor said:

If you have to ask, you haven't been paying attention.

I’m also interested in what I haven’t been paying attention to. As well as what exactly Hillary Clinton was so massively guilty of. A similar digging committee (well, actually more than one) failed to find anything that resulted in anything legal more serious than Fox headlines.

Which to me sounds kind of like a “beatings will continue until morale has improved” approach

Wendy P. 

[winsor 186]

5 hours ago, gowlerk said:

I will interpret that as you are admitting you have no real basis to accuse Joe Biden of corruption. You are just another right winger expressing your "feels".

Actually it's more along the lines of not wasting the time to detail any of Trump's failings.  If you think either of those guys are admirable, I doubt if evidence to the contrary would elicit anything beyond vitriol.

[gowlerk 1,914]

Just now, winsor said:

I doubt if evidence to the contrary would elicit anything beyond vitriol.

In Biden's case there IS NO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY. NONE. I have no idea why you brought the Dotard into here. The two of them do not compare. Not at all.

[funjumper101 15]

A complete waste of time and resources the do nothing party strikes again nothing that will help the average American citizen nothing to help the economy jus payin their respects to the orange Jesus  they could investigate Jared lushness and find out how easily he was bought by the saudis he makes bank for arranging the Donald’s trip to visit Saudi Arabia and party in the deasert and receive a cool sword that he probably took to his racketeering headquarters in Florida  where he mishandled classifi d material  far worse than Hilary Clinton was accused of doing the republicans never holler lock him up at his rally because they are all America hating traitors

[jakee 1,255]

2 hours ago, winsor said:

Actually it's more along the lines of not wasting the time to detail any of Trump's failings.  If you think either of those guys are admirable, I doubt if evidence to the contrary would elicit anything beyond vitriol.

Lol, so again you're asked specificaly what your allegations against Biden are, and your answer is "everyone knows how bad Trump is, and they're all the same!"

[wolfriverjoe 1,341]

9 hours ago, gowlerk said:

In Biden's case there IS NO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY. NONE. I have no idea why you brought the Dotard into here. The two of them do not compare. Not at all.

So far, EVERY person called to testify in front of the committee has said (under oath) that Biden has done nothing that merits impeachment.

I'm reminded of the old joke where a witness is being sworn in for testimony during a trial.
Upon being asked to tell 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth', the witness points at both the prosecutor and defense attorney and replies "I will if they will".

[winsor 186]

11 hours ago, gowlerk said:

In Biden's case there IS NO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY. NONE. I have no idea why you brought the Dotard into here. The two of them do not compare. Not at all.

Again, paying attention would help.

I'm pretty sure my initial point was that impeachment is largely a waste of time.

I do not think either of these clowns are interchangeable.  If that's what you got out of what I said, your reading comprehension is weak.

I do think they both suck out loud, for very different reasons, and question the sanity of anyone who supports either outright.  Anyone unaware of the long standing failings of either of them is a lost cause.

[gowlerk 1,914]

17 hours ago, winsor said:

Is Biden corrupt?  Uh, yeah.

These are the words you used and I responded to.

[normiss 622]

4 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

These are the words you used and I responded to.

That's all they are too, words.

Absofuckinlutely no evidence of it.

[Bigfalls 110]

If todays political climate existed in the past, how many past presidents would have been impeached.

[billvon 2,400]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

These are the words you used and I responded to.

But it's not what he MEANT.

[billvon 2,400]

8 minutes ago, Bigfalls said:

If todays political climate existed in the past, how many past presidents would have been impeached.

Pretty much all of them.  Lincoln would have been impeached a dozen times before the Civil War even started - and all loyal conservatives would have claimed that he started the war* because his feelings were hurt, and his crime family wanted to steal money from the South and give it to China in order to destroy America.

And they would even more evidence against Lincoln than conservatives have against Biden today.

(* - I know, I know, the war started after the South seceded, and Confederates fired the first shot.  But don't forget these are conservative talking points; they don't have to conform to reality.)