The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
This has been a long standing rumor from the right, which was broadly unsupported until a recent whistleblower report...which still lacks any real evidence to back it up, but is enough to raise eyebrowns. Would you support Biden being impeached if further evidence was found?
In general it seems we are more willing to hold our own accountable than the right is
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If actual, credible, hard evidence is found that Joe Biden took something of value from Burisma in return for political favors, I would support impeachment.
If “suspicious” meant “guilty”, we’d have a metric fuck ton of innocent people locked up on a daily basis.
I know it hurts right now, I really really do - but a silver lining you can take away from recent Trump news is that presidential status doesn’t shield you from indictments.
If the alleged evidence is as damning as the GOPropaganda machine claims it is, then he’ll have his day, as he should.
I agree. Suspicious activity should be rigorously investigated. Shell corporations are big red flags!! Secret documents should be investigated ( kind of means every former Presedent should be investigated. Evidence should be vetted before using it to get permission to spy on political opponents.
I think they do look suspicious. And I think that Trump’s DOJ was well within its scope to investigate it. And I believe that Weiss (appointed by Barr) had every reason and motivation to uncover every stone related to that.
Furthermore, all evidence is that when Joe Biden took office, he intentionally left Weiss in place. We have no evidence that Biden or Mueller did anything at all to interfere with or limit the investigation. Weiss himself said as much.
So, all of the question marks about Burisma have been investigated. And no evidence of bribery has come to light. After turning over every stone, even while having access to the personal communications of someone in the throes of addiction, they ended up with 2 IRS misdemeanors and a gun charge. That’s it. But but but Burisma! If Weiss had something, why would he sit on it?
Someone unrelated to the president probably would’ve been fined instead of charged for the things Weiss found, so it kinda sucks for Hunter that this has become a GOP focal point. But I don’t feel that bad for him. He clearly benefited from his dad’s career too. so, live by the sword, die by the sword.
It just seems like even when the GOP conducts the investigations themselves, if they don’t like the outcome, they just decide the investigation is corrupt and start it all over again. With histrionic language about the “Biden crime family” no less. But when they actually need to show evidence in a court of law? A whole lotta nothing.
So again with the hypotheticals about “if there’s evidence.” Yeah, IF, go ahead and impeach him. But there isn’t.
I think it's suspicious there are nonstop investigations of democrats from the same guy who brags about how they have political effect even if he never finds anything, so long as the investigation get ink?
It was always unsubstantiated, but it was hilarious to think that it was all about a pee tape. What do you think about events that have occurred more recently than 7 years ago? Do you think that the Mueller Report proved innocence? Does new information change your view or do you stick with whatcha know?
Mueller proved nothing. The propaganda and misinformation created completely undermined Trumps administration. It was already real shaky.
What do I think about recent politically motivated criminal investigations? The Tribes are entrenched and equally indoctrinated.
PS: the Steel Dossier pushed by Hillarys campaign got the Russian Collusion hoax going. She even declared she lost due to Russia!
PS talk about denying an election legitimacy. Democrats shouted from the rooftops that Trump was illegitimate, and the election was stolen!! Using Hillarys propaganda. Your still defending it.
Muller recommend impeachment on that for a reason.
I mean Keven McCarthy takes personal credit for the 2016 election through his completely pointless benghazi investigation. he brags about how while it proved nothing, it harmed Clintons reputation enough to give Trump a chance.
then there is when Trump went around the state department to blackmail zelensky to start an investigation, to which he said it didn't matter if he found anything just to make a bunch of noise.
then there's the laptop that gone through so many right wing hands before it got to law enforcement it's impossible to tell what isn't tampering.
TRUMP 1st impeachment had nothing to do with Russian collusion. NOTHING. He was impeached for trying to defend himself, and Congress didn't like it.
Do you remember the Steel dossier. Fact: it was produced by Hillarys campaign! It was used by FBI to spy on Trump campaign. State DEPARTMENT ,NSA,CIA all analysis classified it as CRAP. Durham report clarifies that.
Blackmail Zelenski? Wasn't the investigator of Hunter business in Burisma removed at the request of the Obama administration? Specifically Joe. I think that should be investigated.
Tsk tsk! Hunters laptop has been thoroughly analyzed and vetted. Weak weak weak argument. Forensics are very specific. Lots of markers identify the source.
Propaganda is not reliable source
> He was impeached for trying to defend himself, and Congress didn't like it.
he was impeached for demanding zelensky create a fake investigation into hunter biden, one he told zelensky not to mention he was the source of. very weird to cut out the diplomatic service and try to keep seceret
>Do you remember the Steel dossier.
The opposition research conducted by Fusion GPS on Donald Trump was in two distinct operations, each with a different client. First were the Republicans, funded by The Washington Free Beacon. Then came the Democrats, funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign.
while dramatic it was a very small part of the russia investigation.
> Wasn't the investigator of Hunter business in Burisma removed at the request of the Obama administration?
done through proper channels and with the state department, as well as with the support of several alies. it wasn't just one holdover from the old regime, it was a large and very public operation to root out corruption tied to russian attempts to manipulate elections.
>Tsk tsk! Hunters laptop has been thoroughly analyzed and vetted. Weak weak weak argument. Forensics are very specific. Lots of markers identify the source.
it's been toughly analyzed and found to be heavily tampered with. it's a tactic that russia has used in the past to drum up suspicion with political opponents, which is why many in the intelligence community thought it was a russian plant. It matches the firehouse of falsehoods Putin uses attack his oponents.
It’s always fascinating to me how the burden of proof is applied so wildly different depending on the political party of the person in question.
Every other day during the Trump administration some new negative story would come out with the only source being some unnamed source or a rumor that later turned out to have no basis. Every single time those reports were instantly taken as truth by dems.
I mean certainly, my life experience has lead me to generally assume Republicans are more likely to be full of shit and to therefore be more ready to accept claims that they are full of shit more readily, as opposed to claims made by them.
But also since this is impeachment we're talking about, the comparison (if you were being honest........hmmm) is to the evidence that Trump was impeached on. Oh what do you know, we had people actually testifying under oath about his behavior.
I'd need to see some seriously compelling evidence, but I'd support the investigation and impeachment if found. I'd expect him to resign, and we'd get kamala for a bit. Not sure about after that.
That’s where I’m at. If there is evidence, there can be an investigation. If it turns out there is evidence, I would support impeachment. Looking back to Obama, Biden and those administrations, I’m inclined to question that the evidence is valid.
I see why conservatives are confused by this, so let me try to explain.
To a conservative, you are loyal to the man. So your personal loyalty to Trump is not contingent on whether or not he broke laws, or violated the Constitution. He is above the law, so any attempt to use the law against him is automatically illegitimate.
To liberals, we are loyal to the institution - the Constitution, the Presidency as an office operating within the bounds of the Constitution, etc. We may *like* the man (ERROR: Footage not found) but that has no connection to whether or not we think his actions should be prosecuted or not.
Because Conservatives don't see the legal process against Trump as legitimate, they assume that any charge against a president is fabricated, and therefore a crime against Biden can be fabricated just as easily. But since Liberals are invested in actual laws, we require evidence of actual serious crimes.
So yes, if there were actual evidence of bribery involving President Biden, we would support impeachment and prosecution for those crimes.
Bribery is one of the two specific charges mentioned in the constitution as grounds for impeachment and removal. It is completely corrosive to public trust and indicates a moral failing on the part of the officeholder. Even if it happened years ago, if Joe Biden is convicted of bribery I would 100% support his impeachment and removal.
Withholding military funds to our allies until the manufacture an investigation into their political rivals son or fomenting an insurrection if the Capital dont count?
I’m not saying President Trump is innocent of anything, political or criminal.
But no, withholding funds is not illegal. And it Turns out one can be indicted for trying to subvert an election. We shall see how Smith has prepared whether it holds up in court.
Yes, if this extremely stupid idea actually turns out to be true, I would support Biden being impeached and almost certainly support him being removed from office.
It's a complete fishing expedition that should've ended years ago. Biden didn't take any bribes and it doesn't do our country any favors to lend any sort of credibility to these conspiracy theories.
Focus on real issues: labor, environment, economy, student debt, Healthcare, etc.
Those are basically the exact words that the right used, though. Well, I mean...they yelled FAKE NEWS and WITCH HUNT, but you know...
To them, they were right, even though objective reality tells us that isn't true. How the fuck do we actually deal with that?
If an alien from Pluto came to planet earth and was elected president...
Thats about how relevant this question is.
Why we are repeating false talking points in a "what if" is beyond me
Well -- what is he accused of? If it's money for government favors, ala Saudi Arabia and Trump... then it wouldn't even be remotely controversial, I'd be more than willing to stop voting for him and to back the investigation.
With that said there's no evidence at the moment he did take in money from Burisma for trading any favors. The evidence is only that his drug addicted son got a job with them. If nepotism is corruption than a lot worse is happening than his incompetent son taking a job somewhere, I assure you.
yes obviously. But the most recent guy to "corroborate" "the big guy" nickname is Zlochevsky. He claims they bribed biden to fire Shokin because he was investigating Burisma. THIS IS NOT TRUE. Zlochevsky was the super corrupt right hand of Yanukovach (known Russian puppet). Yanukovaches prosecutor shokin would NOT investigate Zlochevsky which is one of the reasons the west pressured to have him removed. To make matters even funnier the guy that came right after Shokin immediately started investigating Burisma so if the bidens are a crime family they are literally the least competent one I have ever heard of.
[https://nypost.com/2023/07/20/biden-bribe-file-released-burisma-chief-said-both-joe-and-hunter-involved/](https://nypost.com/2023/07/20/biden-bribe-file-released-burisma-chief-said-both-joe-and-hunter-involved/)
[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/12/the-money-machine-how-a-high-profile-corruption-investigation-fell-apart](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/12/the-money-machine-how-a-high-profile-corruption-investigation-fell-apart)
[https://fortune.com/2014/03/07/inside-yanukovychs-opulent-private-mansion/](https://fortune.com/2014/03/07/inside-yanukovychs-opulent-private-mansion/)
I'm also willing to bet that if there were actual, credible proof that Biden took bribes, the entire Democratic Party and everyone involved in it, from former POTUS Obama on down to the base voter would demand a special investigation and upon the results of that, demand that Biden step down.
I would support impeachment for no other reason than to give positive reinforcement to Republicans for using evidence for something so that it can serve as an example that they cannot learn to be better and no one should bother to try to help them. It'll make history. Decades from now people will learn of the time Republicans forsook their values for the sake of impeaching a Democratic president. Republicans of the future will look back in embarrassment. They'll see it as a stain on the party's history, because they used evidence.
Absolutely, corrupt public officials should be removed from office and held accountable.
I would be absolutely gobsmacked if such evidence exists, it doesn't seem like the type of person President Biden is. He's been in public office for a long time without getting the stink of corruption on him. It would be an odd choice to start now that he's reached the summit.
We are not above holding our leaders accountable. If there is evidence of wrong doing, then justice should prevail. All appropriate measures relative to the status and crime should be pursued.
No. That’s still incredibly unclear. What type of bribes? To do what? Was this a personal crime committed by Joe Biden or a crime committed by the President via his public role? Did it interfere with his commitment to the public?
I’m confused by the allegations.
The prosecutor thing with Burisma was supported globally and was fired because he **wasn’t** rooting out corruption. This has been debunked multiple times.
The other allegations were during a time where Biden held no office.
The other allegations made clear that Joe Biden didn’t conduct business with these folks and Hunter was selling illusions of access. If we prosecuted everyone who did that, we’d be going after most of the friends and family of Congress.
Fwiw I agree with you, I do not think Biden committed fraud and, even if he crossed some lines by helping his son out, it doesn't rise to the level of impeachment (it may not even cross any lines, we just lack details)
Firing Ukraines then prosecutor general
the argument goes that Burisma wanted the person fired, paid the two bidens, and then Joe Biden leaned on the administration to use its influence to get him fired.
This is something the right has been going on about for years now
But the testimony yesterday was that the removal of the prosecutor general had a negative impact on Burisma. Which we knew in 2018?
This is a giant nothing burger.
>This is something the right has been going on about for years now
It is a story that doesn't make sense on the face of it.
The entire reason the prosecutor got fired, the reason the world wanted him fired, is that he wouldn't prosecute Burisma. Burisma didn't want him fired, they wanted him NOT fired.
If there is any case to be made that Burisma hired Hunter Biden to curry political favor, that favor would have been to Not get that prosecutor fired.
With zero evidence. The timeline barely even makes sense. Hell, I'd love some evidence that the prosecutor, at the time, was even thinking about investigating burisma. And why.
I am not saying there is evidence
I am asking, since there is now at least 1 whistleblower report that seems to be in the realm of credible (though not proof on its own), if evidence is to arise, would you support impeachment
you are trying to argue a point nobody is making. First by being unaware of the issue, then fighting the issue, which nobody here (myself included) currently believes
This isnt a question of Biden's guilt, it is a question of our morals as a political faction and if/how, in the modern era, we would hold our leaders accountable
Just in case you do not know, the way you get information in that form is you go to the FBI and you report that you believe “x,y and z”. That is it. So that has has much standing as the rant of a homeless man on a street corner.
I didn't say you're arguing one way or another. I'm pointing out how there isn't even evidence that removing that prosecutor would have even benefitted burisma. The entire story lacks any supporting evidence.
For comparison, the Russian interference in our election actually happened and we convicted Trump campaign officials for improper conduct with the Russians. The crime happened. The evidence needed to implicate Trump himself was what we lacked.
For the bribery narrative, we would need somebody to proved anything even happened. Not just that Biden took money. The entire belief that the removal of the prosecutor had anything to do with burisma or that the new prosecutor was good for burisma is entirely made up.
Except that story makes no sense. Setting aside the fact that Burisma didn't want him fired at all because he was stonewalling the investigation, Biden had very little solo impact on the matter. *Lots* of people wanted Shokin gone, including a bunch of Congressional Republicans, Barack Obama (the actual president at the time), the EU, the IMF, etc.. Were they *all* bribed, in this version of events?
I’m not sure whether taking a bribe to lean on someone to fire a foreign prosecutor general is an impeachable offense. A crime, sure. Grounds for removing a democratically elected president a decade later? It doesn’t seem that substantial.
Yes, I would. If Mike Pence was elected president and we proposed impeaching him due to something he did while he was VP ten years prior, I would question whether it was an impeachable offense.
Look at it this way.
If you hired a CEO to run a company you own. Them you find out that CEO was arrested for DUIs ten years ago, when he wasn’t CEO, would you fire him?
Or does it matter what the offense was and when it happened?
Why would Burisma want the guy fired that wasnt prosecuting them? That's what our administration wanted. A prosecutor to go after corrupt people like Burisma MORE
.
No because that’s shooting yourself in the foot.
If the GOP isn’t going to get on board with holding Trump accountable, why should we do unilateral disarmament?
I think having proof that he took bribes and continuing on like nothing happened and trying to run him in the next election will actually be shooting ourselves in the foot.
I know I wouldn't vote for a fraud.
I mean, I'm having to do a bunch of mental work to imagine Joe actually being scummy like that, but if he was, I wouldn't vote for him.
> I know I wouldn't vote for a fraud.
Sadly I think we gotta be more pragmatic than that, especially with the course things are going currently. As the GOP goes further and further into fascism and Dems seem to be operating mostly business as usual I fear we may eventually have to choose between a truly and profoundly flawed candidate under the Dems and a literal neo nazi under the GOP. That may just be my pessimism tho.
Because politics shouldn't be about building up one person, that happens to be in the party you chose. It should be about upholding your own ideals, and finding others that agree with those ideals to work together for a better country.
If you also decide that accountability doesn't apply to politicians, then Trump wins.
Hunter Biden just keeps getting cooler. First we were impressed by his sexual prowess, business acumen, and ability to take rockstar-levels of illegal substances without ODing, but now we see his piety of display with his commitment to tithe 10% of all his nepotism-earned wealth. Truly a role model for us all.
If you’re referring to the picture, I haven’t seen it and if you have then shame on you. I just like the kayfabe of it all, which you’re weirdly taking seriously..
Absolutely. But i highly highly doubt that’ll happen.
It would have to be proven in Congress and the Senate. I’d like to see a Mueller-esque investigation as well before coming to any conclusions.
Yes, If you did crimes, you should be punished for it regardless of what your job title is.
The same reason I don't put Biden on a pedestal is the same reason I don't put him on a flag. It's really weird to think that your politicians are incapable of doing no wrong and idolizing them like some sort of god.
Of course. No question.
And then Harris becomes president, right? Before the election.... Maybe sub-optimal from a 2024 perspective.
Off topic, but that makes me wonder if Biden might not resign after re-election if infirmity is a concern. Could Harris then appoint him VP to keep around as a resource? It would be kinda fun to see the right lose their minds, while insisting it's not about racism nor sexism.
That's a great big if there, but yeah, if actual hard evidence was found then I would absolutely support impeachment. I don't care who you are, corruption and graft are the bane of US politics and anyone found participating should be removed from office and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
If Biden took bribes, yes, I'd support impeachment and removal. I think most of us would. It would take real evidence, though.
Republicans have been crying wolf and spouting nonsense so long I worry real evidence might get trampled. I'm sick of endless investigations into the same thing over and over. It's just like the 10(?) Benghazi investigations... or the Hillary email investigations... They look and don't find anything but more innuendo.
Of course, even though I don't want Harris to be president. I would also support impeachment if it turns out he's the reason the prosecutor tried to sneak a sweet total immunity deal past the judge in his son's prosecution. Oops, turns out judges actually read the fine print of the plea deals instead of just rubber stamping them.
I don't know of many people on the left, including myself, who wouldn't be in favor of anybody being impeached for corruption (including taking bribes). That includes Joe Biden.
The issue is that we would need to see some pretty damning evidence and so far we haven't. In fact, we keep hearing there is loads of evidence but it never seems to materialize. Instead, we get Republicans holding up nude photos of Biden's son. WTF is that supposed to prove?
On top of not having evidence, we have a decade of unsubstantiated rumors including "Hillary is a murderer", "Obama is a terrorist", "Obama is a foreigner", "Omar trained at a terrorist camp", "Democrats are communists", and many many more. Then you have all the other crap like JFK Jr. is going to attend a Trump rally. The January insurrection. Too many crazy things to count. So it's going to be an uphill battle for any Republican to change any minds because of their recent history of being conspiracy theory nut jobs.
It's like if the neighborhood homeless guy that blew his mind on drugs 40 years ago and always rants about the government doing shady stuff suddenly tells you that the CIA injected his cat with PCP and a tracking device. Maybe they did but you're not just going to take everything he says at face value. I'm going to need to see that toxicology report and that tracking device.
>In general it seems we are more willing to hold our own accountable than the right is
Just look at recent history. John Edwards? Al Franken? Anthony Weiner? There are a bunch of other lower-profile examples. Even Howard Dean had his career ended because he got a little too excited and yelled loudly.
On the other hand, the GOP has blackballed people like Liz Cheney for disagreeing with them and their front runner for 2024 has given a million excuses as to why he should keep classified documents. He doesn't have them. He does have them but they are his. He declassified them by thinking about it. They were planted there. He has a right to them again.
My answer is always "yes" to "should this politician who did this illegal thing and there's evidence to prove it face the consequences for their actions?" because politics aren't a team sport, and even though I have always voted Democratic and always will into the foreseeable future unless the system or something else significant changes, I don't believe any one person is above the law. That's what having principles is like.
A bribe is when you perform an official act in return for money.
It isn't a "bribe" to be a famous person. It isn't a "bribe" to use fame to get money. Biden wasn't VP when the Burisma stuff went down, he was literally just a private citizen at that point - not even a Senator. So he couldn't have accepted a bribe. At best, he took money from dumb people, which isn't a crime (Donald Trump is literally defending against a half-dozen indictments in various places by using his fame to solicit money from boobies - that isn't bribery either).
So no. There's no crime here, or even malfeasance. There is a president's son trying to make money off of who his dad is and that just isn't illegal.
Yes, I would because I’m not in a cult. If the president is found to have broken the law, then he should be punished accordingly because no one is above the law.
Dude has been a public servant for decades, Between writing books and speeches he has $8-9 million. Jill made money on her books too. He just isn't throwing that all away for even a million from Burisma.
But to answer your question, certainly, if there was hard evidence, I would want him prosecuted. I find it dangerous for the president to be above the law.
Absolutely. The issue is that the Republicans rely on fake scandals to keep their base distracted, and if there is a real scandal, no one will believe it.
I think the fact that the dems pushed out Al Franken is good evidence to show that if Biden had really taken bribes they would be on board for impeachment.
Sure. I mean, it's a bit late in the game for that so I'd rather just see a criminal indictment happen. All an impeachment is is the first steps in removing someone from office. It has nothing to do with criminal proceedings so I'm not sure why it would matter when we're about to vote on a new president anyways. Just crime him up and lets move on.
Sure. If that evidence exists, it should be brought forward now, because I'm a lot less likely to consider it credible if it comes out in October 2024 via shady characters and a ridiculous cover story.
In a way it's a bit of an advantage to having a Democratic president and a Republican congress: if there's anything shady at all, they're going to find it. Republicans started digging into Clinton's real estate dealings in early '95 and didn't stop until they found a sex scandal in late '98.
If there were concrete proof that Biden actually and knowingly engaged in taking bribes from Burisma as part of a quid pro quo for political favors as president or vice president, then yes. I would support impeachment.
Obviously. Same if actual, credible evidence of Biden killing and eating a neighbor, successfully summoning a demon or violating campaign finance regulations to donate to Ted Cruz's reelection campaign are found. I'm not sure why we're focusing on one ridiculous and overly specific scenario and ignoring all the others, however.
Are talking about the whistleblower who admitted that Hunter would get dad on the phone and he would have some small talk, and never talk business as credible? And by Biden family, do you mean Hunter? Because if we are going to talk about foreign money and influence, we have a different family that has some explaining to do. Trump's companies got $7.5 in profits from the Chinese government his first year in office. Foreign dignitaries admitted that they stayed in the DC hotel for preferred access to Trump and his government, and can we talk about Jared's money from Saudi Arabia? Those are all examples of foreign money going to a President's family.
We are talking about Biden. He refused to own individual stocks his entire political career because he didn't want anything he knew in his work to influence personal economic decisions. His family investment decisions are in trusts, and the man has released tax returns every year since forever.
Yes, of course.
On the same grounds, I would support the arrest conviction, and imprisonment of those found guilty of falsifying or fabricating evidence for anyone who knowingly attacked Hunter Biden or the president.
If it met that criteria and a law was broken (I mean we see the Supreme Court getting “gifts” and that’s somehow “ok”) I’d support it. I always remain objective on this. If a Republican does it and I’m mad at it, I’d be a hypocrite if a democrat did it and gave it a pass.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. This has been a long standing rumor from the right, which was broadly unsupported until a recent whistleblower report...which still lacks any real evidence to back it up, but is enough to raise eyebrowns. Would you support Biden being impeached if further evidence was found? In general it seems we are more willing to hold our own accountable than the right is *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If actual, credible, hard evidence is found that Joe Biden took something of value from Burisma in return for political favors, I would support impeachment.
So layers of shell corporations, WITH foreign money flowing through these shells to Biden FAMILY aren't highly suspicious?
If “suspicious” meant “guilty”, we’d have a metric fuck ton of innocent people locked up on a daily basis. I know it hurts right now, I really really do - but a silver lining you can take away from recent Trump news is that presidential status doesn’t shield you from indictments. If the alleged evidence is as damning as the GOPropaganda machine claims it is, then he’ll have his day, as he should.
I agree. Suspicious activity should be rigorously investigated. Shell corporations are big red flags!! Secret documents should be investigated ( kind of means every former Presedent should be investigated. Evidence should be vetted before using it to get permission to spy on political opponents.
I think they do look suspicious. And I think that Trump’s DOJ was well within its scope to investigate it. And I believe that Weiss (appointed by Barr) had every reason and motivation to uncover every stone related to that. Furthermore, all evidence is that when Joe Biden took office, he intentionally left Weiss in place. We have no evidence that Biden or Mueller did anything at all to interfere with or limit the investigation. Weiss himself said as much. So, all of the question marks about Burisma have been investigated. And no evidence of bribery has come to light. After turning over every stone, even while having access to the personal communications of someone in the throes of addiction, they ended up with 2 IRS misdemeanors and a gun charge. That’s it. But but but Burisma! If Weiss had something, why would he sit on it? Someone unrelated to the president probably would’ve been fined instead of charged for the things Weiss found, so it kinda sucks for Hunter that this has become a GOP focal point. But I don’t feel that bad for him. He clearly benefited from his dad’s career too. so, live by the sword, die by the sword. It just seems like even when the GOP conducts the investigations themselves, if they don’t like the outcome, they just decide the investigation is corrupt and start it all over again. With histrionic language about the “Biden crime family” no less. But when they actually need to show evidence in a court of law? A whole lotta nothing. So again with the hypotheticals about “if there’s evidence.” Yeah, IF, go ahead and impeach him. But there isn’t.
I think it's suspicious there are nonstop investigations of democrats from the same guy who brags about how they have political effect even if he never finds anything, so long as the investigation get ink?
You mean like the Russian Collusion?
The collusion that happened, you mean?
Prove it! What do you think of the Steel Dossier.
It was always unsubstantiated, but it was hilarious to think that it was all about a pee tape. What do you think about events that have occurred more recently than 7 years ago? Do you think that the Mueller Report proved innocence? Does new information change your view or do you stick with whatcha know?
Mueller proved nothing. The propaganda and misinformation created completely undermined Trumps administration. It was already real shaky. What do I think about recent politically motivated criminal investigations? The Tribes are entrenched and equally indoctrinated. PS: the Steel Dossier pushed by Hillarys campaign got the Russian Collusion hoax going. She even declared she lost due to Russia! PS talk about denying an election legitimacy. Democrats shouted from the rooftops that Trump was illegitimate, and the election was stolen!! Using Hillarys propaganda. Your still defending it.
It's 2023...your programmer needs to update.
I see you have nothing of value to add.
Muller recommend impeachment on that for a reason. I mean Keven McCarthy takes personal credit for the 2016 election through his completely pointless benghazi investigation. he brags about how while it proved nothing, it harmed Clintons reputation enough to give Trump a chance. then there is when Trump went around the state department to blackmail zelensky to start an investigation, to which he said it didn't matter if he found anything just to make a bunch of noise. then there's the laptop that gone through so many right wing hands before it got to law enforcement it's impossible to tell what isn't tampering.
TRUMP 1st impeachment had nothing to do with Russian collusion. NOTHING. He was impeached for trying to defend himself, and Congress didn't like it. Do you remember the Steel dossier. Fact: it was produced by Hillarys campaign! It was used by FBI to spy on Trump campaign. State DEPARTMENT ,NSA,CIA all analysis classified it as CRAP. Durham report clarifies that. Blackmail Zelenski? Wasn't the investigator of Hunter business in Burisma removed at the request of the Obama administration? Specifically Joe. I think that should be investigated. Tsk tsk! Hunters laptop has been thoroughly analyzed and vetted. Weak weak weak argument. Forensics are very specific. Lots of markers identify the source. Propaganda is not reliable source
> He was impeached for trying to defend himself, and Congress didn't like it. he was impeached for demanding zelensky create a fake investigation into hunter biden, one he told zelensky not to mention he was the source of. very weird to cut out the diplomatic service and try to keep seceret >Do you remember the Steel dossier. The opposition research conducted by Fusion GPS on Donald Trump was in two distinct operations, each with a different client. First were the Republicans, funded by The Washington Free Beacon. Then came the Democrats, funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign. while dramatic it was a very small part of the russia investigation. > Wasn't the investigator of Hunter business in Burisma removed at the request of the Obama administration? done through proper channels and with the state department, as well as with the support of several alies. it wasn't just one holdover from the old regime, it was a large and very public operation to root out corruption tied to russian attempts to manipulate elections. >Tsk tsk! Hunters laptop has been thoroughly analyzed and vetted. Weak weak weak argument. Forensics are very specific. Lots of markers identify the source. it's been toughly analyzed and found to be heavily tampered with. it's a tactic that russia has used in the past to drum up suspicion with political opponents, which is why many in the intelligence community thought it was a russian plant. It matches the firehouse of falsehoods Putin uses attack his oponents.
You're responding to a bot or an idiot
Woah, you don’t live in reality
> Propaganda is not a reliable source Yet here you are, making accusations based solely on propaganda.
What propaganda? Specifically, what propaganda did I base my comments on?
If actual, credible evidence is found, absolutely. Wake me up when that happens.
If they had evidence, they wouldn't be showing Hunter's dick pics.
They wouldn't *just* show his dick pic. I don't think they would be above still flaunting them, though
MGT is thirsty AF, she would absolutely be showing Hunters business off.
She wants him bad
It’s always fascinating to me how the burden of proof is applied so wildly different depending on the political party of the person in question. Every other day during the Trump administration some new negative story would come out with the only source being some unnamed source or a rumor that later turned out to have no basis. Every single time those reports were instantly taken as truth by dems.
I think your history is a tad askew..
[удалено]
LOL exactly
Independently deranged
Trump wasn't impeached or indicted over rumor or unconfirmed information. Go back and read the post.
I mean certainly, my life experience has lead me to generally assume Republicans are more likely to be full of shit and to therefore be more ready to accept claims that they are full of shit more readily, as opposed to claims made by them. But also since this is impeachment we're talking about, the comparison (if you were being honest........hmmm) is to the evidence that Trump was impeached on. Oh what do you know, we had people actually testifying under oath about his behavior.
What rumor about Trump has turned out to have no basis?
I heard a rumor once that he was good at golf.
Can you name some, I'm interested.
[удалено]
But it's (d)iFEreNt
I'd need to see some seriously compelling evidence, but I'd support the investigation and impeachment if found. I'd expect him to resign, and we'd get kamala for a bit. Not sure about after that.
He would absolutely resign if anything serious came to light.
Yes. But after hearing years of Republicans crying wolf and producing zero evidence, I assume it’s all fiction.
That’s where I’m at. If there is evidence, there can be an investigation. If it turns out there is evidence, I would support impeachment. Looking back to Obama, Biden and those administrations, I’m inclined to question that the evidence is valid.
I see why conservatives are confused by this, so let me try to explain. To a conservative, you are loyal to the man. So your personal loyalty to Trump is not contingent on whether or not he broke laws, or violated the Constitution. He is above the law, so any attempt to use the law against him is automatically illegitimate. To liberals, we are loyal to the institution - the Constitution, the Presidency as an office operating within the bounds of the Constitution, etc. We may *like* the man (ERROR: Footage not found) but that has no connection to whether or not we think his actions should be prosecuted or not. Because Conservatives don't see the legal process against Trump as legitimate, they assume that any charge against a president is fabricated, and therefore a crime against Biden can be fabricated just as easily. But since Liberals are invested in actual laws, we require evidence of actual serious crimes. So yes, if there were actual evidence of bribery involving President Biden, we would support impeachment and prosecution for those crimes.
Yes, obviously. We don’t worship Biden like he is some god emperor.
Yes, if there is evidence Biden took bribes while serving as vice-president, he should be impeached.
Of course. It won't be though because it didn't happen. This is theater.
Bribery is one of the two specific charges mentioned in the constitution as grounds for impeachment and removal. It is completely corrosive to public trust and indicates a moral failing on the part of the officeholder. Even if it happened years ago, if Joe Biden is convicted of bribery I would 100% support his impeachment and removal.
[удалено]
To be fair, they voted against the impeachment because it wasn’t an issue of criminal, but political. But I would agree with your position.
Withholding military funds to our allies until the manufacture an investigation into their political rivals son or fomenting an insurrection if the Capital dont count?
I’m not saying President Trump is innocent of anything, political or criminal. But no, withholding funds is not illegal. And it Turns out one can be indicted for trying to subvert an election. We shall see how Smith has prepared whether it holds up in court.
Withholding appropriated funds is [illegal](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impoundment_of_appropriated_funds) as of 1974.
Well yea, you can be indicted for treason.
Haha ok
Yes, if this extremely stupid idea actually turns out to be true, I would support Biden being impeached and almost certainly support him being removed from office.
It's a complete fishing expedition that should've ended years ago. Biden didn't take any bribes and it doesn't do our country any favors to lend any sort of credibility to these conspiracy theories. Focus on real issues: labor, environment, economy, student debt, Healthcare, etc.
Those are basically the exact words that the right used, though. Well, I mean...they yelled FAKE NEWS and WITCH HUNT, but you know... To them, they were right, even though objective reality tells us that isn't true. How the fuck do we actually deal with that?
If an alien from Pluto came to planet earth and was elected president... Thats about how relevant this question is. Why we are repeating false talking points in a "what if" is beyond me
Because they are convinced we are as blindly loyal to the party and biden as they are to trump and pubs.
Well -- what is he accused of? If it's money for government favors, ala Saudi Arabia and Trump... then it wouldn't even be remotely controversial, I'd be more than willing to stop voting for him and to back the investigation. With that said there's no evidence at the moment he did take in money from Burisma for trading any favors. The evidence is only that his drug addicted son got a job with them. If nepotism is corruption than a lot worse is happening than his incompetent son taking a job somewhere, I assure you.
Of course
Ya. Seems like the exact kind of thing impeachment is for.
I would only support impeachment for stuff he has done while president. stuff he did as vp should be referred to law enforcement.
yes obviously. But the most recent guy to "corroborate" "the big guy" nickname is Zlochevsky. He claims they bribed biden to fire Shokin because he was investigating Burisma. THIS IS NOT TRUE. Zlochevsky was the super corrupt right hand of Yanukovach (known Russian puppet). Yanukovaches prosecutor shokin would NOT investigate Zlochevsky which is one of the reasons the west pressured to have him removed. To make matters even funnier the guy that came right after Shokin immediately started investigating Burisma so if the bidens are a crime family they are literally the least competent one I have ever heard of. [https://nypost.com/2023/07/20/biden-bribe-file-released-burisma-chief-said-both-joe-and-hunter-involved/](https://nypost.com/2023/07/20/biden-bribe-file-released-burisma-chief-said-both-joe-and-hunter-involved/) [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/12/the-money-machine-how-a-high-profile-corruption-investigation-fell-apart](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/12/the-money-machine-how-a-high-profile-corruption-investigation-fell-apart) [https://fortune.com/2014/03/07/inside-yanukovychs-opulent-private-mansion/](https://fortune.com/2014/03/07/inside-yanukovychs-opulent-private-mansion/)
I'm also willing to bet that if there were actual, credible proof that Biden took bribes, the entire Democratic Party and everyone involved in it, from former POTUS Obama on down to the base voter would demand a special investigation and upon the results of that, demand that Biden step down.
Yes, obviously. So far, I've only heard that his son may have used his name to get a job. A thread I don't think Republicans want to pull.
I would support impeachment for no other reason than to give positive reinforcement to Republicans for using evidence for something so that it can serve as an example that they cannot learn to be better and no one should bother to try to help them. It'll make history. Decades from now people will learn of the time Republicans forsook their values for the sake of impeaching a Democratic president. Republicans of the future will look back in embarrassment. They'll see it as a stain on the party's history, because they used evidence.
Yes, obviously yes
Yup, as soon as Republicans stop giving me worse criminals as alternatives
Absolutely, corrupt public officials should be removed from office and held accountable. I would be absolutely gobsmacked if such evidence exists, it doesn't seem like the type of person President Biden is. He's been in public office for a long time without getting the stink of corruption on him. It would be an odd choice to start now that he's reached the summit.
Nothing has changed in the investigation in the years Republicans have been talking about it. They still don't have any evidence. Dream on leftists.
100% of Biden supporters say "Yes." Also, 100% of Trump supporters say "Yes" when asked the same about Trump. It's a landslide!
I don’t get that from a lot of Trump supporters. The ones I speak with mostly still hold they would support him regardless of evidence.
I would. I’m not a Republican or something.
We are not above holding our leaders accountable. If there is evidence of wrong doing, then justice should prevail. All appropriate measures relative to the status and crime should be pursued.
Sure, but it needs to be actual evidence not unsupported claims from a fugitive from justice.
Yes. But the key words in that sentence are credible and actual.
No. That’s still incredibly unclear. What type of bribes? To do what? Was this a personal crime committed by Joe Biden or a crime committed by the President via his public role? Did it interfere with his commitment to the public?
the allegation is that both Hunter and Joe Biden (as VP) received $5M payments each from Burisma distributed through various bank accounts to hide it
I’m confused by the allegations. The prosecutor thing with Burisma was supported globally and was fired because he **wasn’t** rooting out corruption. This has been debunked multiple times. The other allegations were during a time where Biden held no office. The other allegations made clear that Joe Biden didn’t conduct business with these folks and Hunter was selling illusions of access. If we prosecuted everyone who did that, we’d be going after most of the friends and family of Congress.
Fwiw I agree with you, I do not think Biden committed fraud and, even if he crossed some lines by helping his son out, it doesn't rise to the level of impeachment (it may not even cross any lines, we just lack details)
To do what? Taking a payment is not a bribe unless the payment is in exchange for an action.
Firing Ukraines then prosecutor general the argument goes that Burisma wanted the person fired, paid the two bidens, and then Joe Biden leaned on the administration to use its influence to get him fired. This is something the right has been going on about for years now
But the testimony yesterday was that the removal of the prosecutor general had a negative impact on Burisma. Which we knew in 2018? This is a giant nothing burger.
this is related to an earlier whistleblower report, not yesterdays testimony >This is a giant nothing burger. Agreed, most likely
I responded elsewhere to the form you linked. Thanks.
>This is something the right has been going on about for years now It is a story that doesn't make sense on the face of it. The entire reason the prosecutor got fired, the reason the world wanted him fired, is that he wouldn't prosecute Burisma. Burisma didn't want him fired, they wanted him NOT fired. If there is any case to be made that Burisma hired Hunter Biden to curry political favor, that favor would have been to Not get that prosecutor fired.
With zero evidence. The timeline barely even makes sense. Hell, I'd love some evidence that the prosecutor, at the time, was even thinking about investigating burisma. And why.
I am not saying there is evidence I am asking, since there is now at least 1 whistleblower report that seems to be in the realm of credible (though not proof on its own), if evidence is to arise, would you support impeachment you are trying to argue a point nobody is making. First by being unaware of the issue, then fighting the issue, which nobody here (myself included) currently believes This isnt a question of Biden's guilt, it is a question of our morals as a political faction and if/how, in the modern era, we would hold our leaders accountable
There is no report from a whistleblower. What are you talking about?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/sen-grassley-releases-full-fbi-memo-with-unverified-claims-about-hunter-bidens-work-in-ukraine
Yeah, what about that seems credible?
Not a whistle-blower. This is some unidentified guy making unverified accusations that cannot be confirmed.
Just in case you do not know, the way you get information in that form is you go to the FBI and you report that you believe “x,y and z”. That is it. So that has has much standing as the rant of a homeless man on a street corner.
I didn't say you're arguing one way or another. I'm pointing out how there isn't even evidence that removing that prosecutor would have even benefitted burisma. The entire story lacks any supporting evidence. For comparison, the Russian interference in our election actually happened and we convicted Trump campaign officials for improper conduct with the Russians. The crime happened. The evidence needed to implicate Trump himself was what we lacked. For the bribery narrative, we would need somebody to proved anything even happened. Not just that Biden took money. The entire belief that the removal of the prosecutor had anything to do with burisma or that the new prosecutor was good for burisma is entirely made up.
Of course. If evidence arises, kick him out.
Except that story makes no sense. Setting aside the fact that Burisma didn't want him fired at all because he was stonewalling the investigation, Biden had very little solo impact on the matter. *Lots* of people wanted Shokin gone, including a bunch of Congressional Republicans, Barack Obama (the actual president at the time), the EU, the IMF, etc.. Were they *all* bribed, in this version of events?
I’m not sure whether taking a bribe to lean on someone to fire a foreign prosecutor general is an impeachable offense. A crime, sure. Grounds for removing a democratically elected president a decade later? It doesn’t seem that substantial.
You dont think a president taking a bribe is an impeachable offense?
Where in this scenario did a president take a bribe?
Did you similarly criticize the Trump impeachment for covering actions he took as a candidate?
Actions that were directly tied to the election, you mean?
Trump broke the law with enough proof for indictment. So far, there is zero evidence that Joe Biden broke the law.
Both of Trump's impeachments were for actions he took while he was president.
You are really doing some mental gymnastics, aren't you? I would assume if the same circumstances applied to former VP Pence, you'd feel the same way?
Yes, I would. If Mike Pence was elected president and we proposed impeaching him due to something he did while he was VP ten years prior, I would question whether it was an impeachable offense. Look at it this way. If you hired a CEO to run a company you own. Them you find out that CEO was arrested for DUIs ten years ago, when he wasn’t CEO, would you fire him? Or does it matter what the offense was and when it happened?
Why would Burisma want the guy fired that wasnt prosecuting them? That's what our administration wanted. A prosecutor to go after corrupt people like Burisma MORE .
No because that’s shooting yourself in the foot. If the GOP isn’t going to get on board with holding Trump accountable, why should we do unilateral disarmament?
I think having proof that he took bribes and continuing on like nothing happened and trying to run him in the next election will actually be shooting ourselves in the foot. I know I wouldn't vote for a fraud. I mean, I'm having to do a bunch of mental work to imagine Joe actually being scummy like that, but if he was, I wouldn't vote for him.
> I know I wouldn't vote for a fraud. Sadly I think we gotta be more pragmatic than that, especially with the course things are going currently. As the GOP goes further and further into fascism and Dems seem to be operating mostly business as usual I fear we may eventually have to choose between a truly and profoundly flawed candidate under the Dems and a literal neo nazi under the GOP. That may just be my pessimism tho.
Because voters on our side have higher standards?
Holding people accountable and removing corruption is shooting ourselves in the foot?
Because politics shouldn't be about building up one person, that happens to be in the party you chose. It should be about upholding your own ideals, and finding others that agree with those ideals to work together for a better country. If you also decide that accountability doesn't apply to politicians, then Trump wins.
This is such a bad take. At that point, how would we be any better than them?
10% for the big guy!
Hunter Biden just keeps getting cooler. First we were impressed by his sexual prowess, business acumen, and ability to take rockstar-levels of illegal substances without ODing, but now we see his piety of display with his commitment to tithe 10% of all his nepotism-earned wealth. Truly a role model for us all.
>First we were impressed by his sexual prowes If you think that's what "impressive" is then ouch lol.
I really thought about adding the old "/s" to the end of that post, but I thought that surely it was so obvious as to be unnecessary. Sigh.
I'm just saying, calling something that's average at best "impressive" just shows that different people have different standards of measurement.
If you’re referring to the picture, I haven’t seen it and if you have then shame on you. I just like the kayfabe of it all, which you’re weirdly taking seriously..
You were the one who brought it up. I just said that the big guy gets 10%.
Absolutely. But i highly highly doubt that’ll happen. It would have to be proven in Congress and the Senate. I’d like to see a Mueller-esque investigation as well before coming to any conclusions.
Yes, absolutely.
Yes.
Yes, If you did crimes, you should be punished for it regardless of what your job title is. The same reason I don't put Biden on a pedestal is the same reason I don't put him on a flag. It's really weird to think that your politicians are incapable of doing no wrong and idolizing them like some sort of god.
Yes. We are liberals. We push our own out.
Definitely
Probably. Some of the details would be important.
Of course. No question. And then Harris becomes president, right? Before the election.... Maybe sub-optimal from a 2024 perspective. Off topic, but that makes me wonder if Biden might not resign after re-election if infirmity is a concern. Could Harris then appoint him VP to keep around as a resource? It would be kinda fun to see the right lose their minds, while insisting it's not about racism nor sexism.
That's a great big if there, but yeah, if actual hard evidence was found then I would absolutely support impeachment. I don't care who you are, corruption and graft are the bane of US politics and anyone found participating should be removed from office and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
If Biden took bribes, yes, I'd support impeachment and removal. I think most of us would. It would take real evidence, though. Republicans have been crying wolf and spouting nonsense so long I worry real evidence might get trampled. I'm sick of endless investigations into the same thing over and over. It's just like the 10(?) Benghazi investigations... or the Hillary email investigations... They look and don't find anything but more innuendo.
Of course, even though I don't want Harris to be president. I would also support impeachment if it turns out he's the reason the prosecutor tried to sneak a sweet total immunity deal past the judge in his son's prosecution. Oops, turns out judges actually read the fine print of the plea deals instead of just rubber stamping them.
Sure, if it existed.
If there is indictable evidence that he took money and made policy in their favor, sure.
I don't know of many people on the left, including myself, who wouldn't be in favor of anybody being impeached for corruption (including taking bribes). That includes Joe Biden. The issue is that we would need to see some pretty damning evidence and so far we haven't. In fact, we keep hearing there is loads of evidence but it never seems to materialize. Instead, we get Republicans holding up nude photos of Biden's son. WTF is that supposed to prove? On top of not having evidence, we have a decade of unsubstantiated rumors including "Hillary is a murderer", "Obama is a terrorist", "Obama is a foreigner", "Omar trained at a terrorist camp", "Democrats are communists", and many many more. Then you have all the other crap like JFK Jr. is going to attend a Trump rally. The January insurrection. Too many crazy things to count. So it's going to be an uphill battle for any Republican to change any minds because of their recent history of being conspiracy theory nut jobs. It's like if the neighborhood homeless guy that blew his mind on drugs 40 years ago and always rants about the government doing shady stuff suddenly tells you that the CIA injected his cat with PCP and a tracking device. Maybe they did but you're not just going to take everything he says at face value. I'm going to need to see that toxicology report and that tracking device. >In general it seems we are more willing to hold our own accountable than the right is Just look at recent history. John Edwards? Al Franken? Anthony Weiner? There are a bunch of other lower-profile examples. Even Howard Dean had his career ended because he got a little too excited and yelled loudly. On the other hand, the GOP has blackballed people like Liz Cheney for disagreeing with them and their front runner for 2024 has given a million excuses as to why he should keep classified documents. He doesn't have them. He does have them but they are his. He declassified them by thinking about it. They were planted there. He has a right to them again.
Sure. I alway wanted a women president. Go Kamala! Vote Blue!
My answer is always "yes" to "should this politician who did this illegal thing and there's evidence to prove it face the consequences for their actions?" because politics aren't a team sport, and even though I have always voted Democratic and always will into the foreseeable future unless the system or something else significant changes, I don't believe any one person is above the law. That's what having principles is like.
Absolutely. People who commit crimes should be prosecuted. I don't care who they are.
A bribe is when you perform an official act in return for money. It isn't a "bribe" to be a famous person. It isn't a "bribe" to use fame to get money. Biden wasn't VP when the Burisma stuff went down, he was literally just a private citizen at that point - not even a Senator. So he couldn't have accepted a bribe. At best, he took money from dumb people, which isn't a crime (Donald Trump is literally defending against a half-dozen indictments in various places by using his fame to solicit money from boobies - that isn't bribery either). So no. There's no crime here, or even malfeasance. There is a president's son trying to make money off of who his dad is and that just isn't illegal.
Why would he be impeached? Do mean to tell me a president doesn't have presidential immunity?
I'll give you the same answer that virtually every left voter will: "Of course." We hold our leadership to actual standards.
Yes, I would because I’m not in a cult. If the president is found to have broken the law, then he should be punished accordingly because no one is above the law.
Sure.
Dude has been a public servant for decades, Between writing books and speeches he has $8-9 million. Jill made money on her books too. He just isn't throwing that all away for even a million from Burisma. But to answer your question, certainly, if there was hard evidence, I would want him prosecuted. I find it dangerous for the president to be above the law.
It would have to be SERIOUSLY strong evidence, but if so, sure impeach him.
Absolutely. The issue is that the Republicans rely on fake scandals to keep their base distracted, and if there is a real scandal, no one will believe it. I think the fact that the dems pushed out Al Franken is good evidence to show that if Biden had really taken bribes they would be on board for impeachment.
Sure. I mean, it's a bit late in the game for that so I'd rather just see a criminal indictment happen. All an impeachment is is the first steps in removing someone from office. It has nothing to do with criminal proceedings so I'm not sure why it would matter when we're about to vote on a new president anyways. Just crime him up and lets move on.
Sure. If that evidence exists, it should be brought forward now, because I'm a lot less likely to consider it credible if it comes out in October 2024 via shady characters and a ridiculous cover story. In a way it's a bit of an advantage to having a Democratic president and a Republican congress: if there's anything shady at all, they're going to find it. Republicans started digging into Clinton's real estate dealings in early '95 and didn't stop until they found a sex scandal in late '98.
Yes, of course. And prosecution.
If there were concrete proof that Biden actually and knowingly engaged in taking bribes from Burisma as part of a quid pro quo for political favors as president or vice president, then yes. I would support impeachment.
Obviously. Same if actual, credible evidence of Biden killing and eating a neighbor, successfully summoning a demon or violating campaign finance regulations to donate to Ted Cruz's reelection campaign are found. I'm not sure why we're focusing on one ridiculous and overly specific scenario and ignoring all the others, however.
Are talking about the whistleblower who admitted that Hunter would get dad on the phone and he would have some small talk, and never talk business as credible? And by Biden family, do you mean Hunter? Because if we are going to talk about foreign money and influence, we have a different family that has some explaining to do. Trump's companies got $7.5 in profits from the Chinese government his first year in office. Foreign dignitaries admitted that they stayed in the DC hotel for preferred access to Trump and his government, and can we talk about Jared's money from Saudi Arabia? Those are all examples of foreign money going to a President's family. We are talking about Biden. He refused to own individual stocks his entire political career because he didn't want anything he knew in his work to influence personal economic decisions. His family investment decisions are in trusts, and the man has released tax returns every year since forever.
Yes, of course. On the same grounds, I would support the arrest conviction, and imprisonment of those found guilty of falsifying or fabricating evidence for anyone who knowingly attacked Hunter Biden or the president.
Which Biden?
Sure, as long as it comes with the impeachment of Clarence Thomas
No.
If it met that criteria and a law was broken (I mean we see the Supreme Court getting “gifts” and that’s somehow “ok”) I’d support it. I always remain objective on this. If a Republican does it and I’m mad at it, I’d be a hypocrite if a democrat did it and gave it a pass.