Using their subpoena power, Republicans have obtained more than 36,000 pages of bank records; 2,000 pages of suspicious activity reports from the Treasury Department; and dozens of hours of testimony from two of Hunter Biden’s business partners, a senior official from the National Archives and Records Administration, seven federal agents and three U.S. attorneys.
That's what in other contexts might be called a "mountain of evidence," but the NYT chooses to quote the characterization of Representative Dan Goldman, Democrat of New York: "Republicans’ yearlong fishing expedition has uncovered no evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden."
In the end, it's not about the number of pages, of course, but how they are interpreted, what inferences and connections can be made. We saw what was done in the Trump impeachments, and now the tables are turned.
Posts
84 comments:
If they're able to get ALL the bank records, it shouldn't be difficult.
But that's a big ask with a corrupt left-wing deep state.
I'm pretty sure most of them will go mysteriously missing or wiped during a routine backup procedure...
Say, I wonder how many 'suspicious activity' reports the Democrats got in as evidence against Trump? None, you say? Couldn't find anything, even when the bank records and tax returns were 'leaked', ha ha?
He won't be convicted because they don't have the Sentate, but I bet he's impeached. And I bet it takes a full year of drip-drip-drip. I'm sure the Democrats won't complain about having their tactics used against them.
""House Set to Approve Biden Impeachment Inquiry as It Hunts for an Offense."
The NYT reports (with distaste)."
Well, there's a ton of evidence, but be that as it may, isn't an "inquiry" something you do when you're "hunting" for something?
The voters already know that Joe is a crook, and don't care. He's only stolen millions, and handed out hundreds of billions. The stolen millions are a rounding error.
Nobody cares.
That firing of Shotkin, the Ukrainian prosecutor, is sufficient enough to impeach and remove Biden from office. Won't happen, but it should happen.
"Hunts for an offense" the way Hunter hunts for drugs?
There once was a Hunter named Biden
But animals aren’t what he likes fightin'
Sleeping with hoes
Snorting coke up his nose
And smoking crack with good psilocybin
"now the tables are turned."
Yes, indeed, and richly deserved. But we will all live to regret what the Dems started and the Reps are repaying in kind.
I know SARs are filed all the time, but "2,000 pages of suspicious activity reports from the Treasury Department" is kind of burying the lede here.
I believe a SAR is just a three page document...unless the bank believes they need to add additional details.
I trust Dan Goldman's word as much as I do George Santos'.
I recall reading the first impeachment documents for Trump and essentially the Democrats held hearings that came to the conclusion that they could impeach a President for political reasons and a crime of a certain level want necessary. After all, what was the crime committed for Trump's first impeachment? The funds to Ukraine were delivered per law. The demands that Zelensky answer to potential issues of corruption is appropriate of any President.
In Joe Biden's situation, it appears his son was acting as a representative agent of a foreign entity or government. The bigger issue to Joe was that Hunter was meeting with Joe while being the representative. The evidence of that has been mounting for some time now. The notion that Republicans must prove this before investigating it is absurd rhetoric. Democrats never proved any of the crimes Trump supposedly committed and the first investigation of Trump's campaign began on manufactured and faulty evidence.
It's outrageous, yet sadly unsurprising, to read the Democrats and various liberals complaining about Republicans debasing the impeachment process.
Craven or dumb? You decide.
Ann said:
"In the end, it's not about the number of pages, of course, but how they are interpreted, what inferences and connections can be made. We saw what was done in the Trump impeachments, and now the tables are turned."
I admire Ann's ability to write clear, concise and scrupulously truthful summaries.
The statement above is a perfectly targeted two sentence kill shot.
The democrats would be better off with someone other than Biden running for president. Yet, the press continues their 4-alarm defense of his corruption. I don't think they can help themselves.
"No Evidence" = clear evidence liberals will not accept as evidence. There is NOTHING they will accept as evidence of Biden corruption. Too many others are also lining their pockets.
Do we really believe Obama didn't know was Sleepy Joe and his crackhead hooker loving son were doing?
Even when it comes to things like COVID and the Wuhan Lab. Liberals still want to believe bats migrated 1000 miles to Wuhan and somehow organically released COVID on the world in a Wet Market only a short distance away from a lab doing gain of function research.
Willful ignorance. Arrogant dishonesty.
To claim "no evidence" is preposterous. I think what they mean is, there's no smoking gun proof that the president received money from a foreign power that he knew was in exchange for the promise of a specific, official action on his part. Of course, a smoking gun isn't actually needed. Even in criminal cases, people are convicted all that time on the basis of circumstantial evidence and inferences. The dems/msm know this but are again hastily trying to move the goalposts to make it appear to low-information voters that there's literally no factual basis to support an impeachment inquiry.
Blogger Limited blogger said...
Nobody cares.
Actually I care a great deal. This one actually committed real crimes and I’d like to see who chooses to recognize it and who chooses to defend him on the record…like with a vote, or even a no vote of ‘present’…
It’s a thimble of accountability I’d like to see happen and hopefully snowball
Althouse said...
...That's what in other contexts might be called a "mountain of evidence..."
Evidence of what, Althouse? What is the alleged offense? What is the alleged high crime or misdemeanor?
To paraphrase Deep Throat (Mark Felt): "The truth is, these aren't very bright guys, and things got out of hand." This was in reference to the Nixon White House, of course.
Comer and company appear to have since cornered the market on not-very-bright guys doing not-very-bright things.
Not an impeachment, but an inquiry. At this rate it will require decades to learn if this action matches or exceeds Democrat corruption, or is justified by the diverse evidence presented.
Evidence of what, Althouse? What is the alleged offense? What is the alleged high crime or misdemeanor?
Really?
Selling American foreign policy. In other words, accepting bribes, in exchange for acting in a foreign nation's interests rather than in the interests of the United States.
And because the precedent is clear that the crime doesn't have to be a crime-crime, so to speak, in order to warrant impeachment, Biden didn't even have to follow through on his promises, real or implied - though in the case of Shotkin it sure looks as if he did. And the inexplicable (at least, until recently) wealth of his close family members certainly yells pretty loudly.
Apparently you're part of the "show me a cancelled check made out to Joe Biden personally with 'bribe' on the memo line" camp, but don't be ridiculous.
Selling out the USA to the ChiComs, eliminating our oil and gas drilling, opening our border to the world, and taking millions in cash bribes for the work is Benedict Arnold redux. What a horrible media we put up with.
Chuck, with Trump it was the seriousness of the accusations that was paramount in impeaching him, not their validity. So if I just offer up any serious accusation against Biden will you be satisfied? Here ya go: Biden shot a guy to death on Fifth Avenue at high noon. What? You say you don't care about that accusation, as it is not valid? How droll!
I think a lot of journalists and politicians became attached to the "no evidence" formulation under Trump, but don't really know or care what "evidence" is. I think what they would say, if they were speaking honestly, is that the evidence is "unpersuasive" or "insufficient to support [X] conclusion," or "not dispositive," all of which one could argue. But as soon as you have testimony, affidavits, documents, recordings, etc. from which inferences can be drawn, even if they aren't the proverbial smoking gun, it's absolutely false to characterise the situation as "no evidence." It was pretty much always false when people said it of Trump, and it's false here.
"What is the alleged offense?"
As Vice President, Joe Biden took a bribe (collected by his son and obfuscated through a network of shell companies) from a Ukrainian oil company in exchange for coercing the government of Ukraine, by threatening to withhold US aid, to fire the auditor who was investigating that oil company.
"Ann, you may simply blogging an article from the NYT about Biden and impeachment but I DEMAND that YOU explain evidence, offenses and high crimes/misdemeanors!" As if Ann knows anymore than the rest of us. I remember a kid in 4th grade who would always have his hand up and try and be recognized first to a question from the teacher. If he was called first he would look around with a smug look on his face making sure the other kids knew he was always first, a favorite of the teacher and the smartest kid in class. Of course we all knew he was a little dick. My thought was always - did he know he was a little dick? Was he at all self-aware?
Ignore the Democrat NYTimes and impeach the crook.
Bribery, Chuck. But, of course, you know that already you cock sucking pile of dog shit.
Media breathlessly and obediently shout in collective unison.. "What Evidence!"
Dedicated progressive leftists obediently repeat the big lie that there isn't any evidence.
There's tons of evidence Biden, his brother and son are shady crooks... during his stint at VP.
Chuck said...
Evidence of what, Althouse? What is the alleged offense? What is the alleged high crime or misdemeanor?
12/13/23, 11:57 AM
Back at you, what was Trump's actual crime(s) for ANY of his impeachments? Hurt feelings and mean tweets DON'T count.
Members of the mafia have been convicted on less evidence than we have against Biden. There are numerous transfers of money directly to Biden from family members with little or no explanation. And don't give me the stupid "loan repayment" unless you can show loans papers or a previous transfer of money from Biden to them.
Manhattan Contrarian has been doing a series of posts "The Bidens: "Stone Cold Crooked" " that lay out time lines and details of the Biden family mafia operations. Read it and weep for the democrats, our press, and country when they ignore the obvious. If he can get away with this there is no level of corruption that a democrat in good graces with the party will be held accountable for.
https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2023-12-8-the-bidens-stone-cold-crooked-11-still-waiting-for-the-bribery-charges
In case anyone has forgotten, Chuck is, of course, a lifelong Republican. I saw Rich praising Chuck this morning. It put me in mind of Pierre Delecto.
Everything the House R's do has to be slowwalked and run through a hundred hurdles before they FINALLY do something. Every T must be crossed and every i dotted.
The D's under Pelosi just snapped their fingers and did it.
The House R's are STILL slow-rolling the release of J6 video. After promising 11 months ago to release it all.
Mittens was on TV, and despite voting 2 to convict Trump and remove him from office, said he opposed even an Impeachment inquiry on Biden, because "I don't see the evidence". He's a complete fake, and Democrat plant. Good thing we found him out in 2023 and not 2013.
Chuck you're being obtuse, again.
If this were Trump being impeached, the documents would be referred to as "a mountain of evidence". But because it's Biden, the evidence is only listed.
Hunt?
The bribery is in plain sight.
Chuck, I think the offense is basically being a paid agent of China and Iran, two countries that might be thought of as something less than friendly to the United States.
That being said, I would not impeach him as it is DOA in the senate and thus just grandstanding.
To resuscitate what was said by a democratic senator when the Clinton impeachment was sent to the Senate, "I don't care if you have evidence that Clinton shot and killed a woman, he's not going to be convicted."
Now if they were to do this in August and the polls are running even worse than they are now, the Democrats might vote to convict so they could substitute a more palatable candidate.
Memo to Limited Blogger and Chuckles; the world has moved on and we are now dealing with the Pelosi-Schiff-Lt. Col Doughboy Standard for Impeachment.
And just what is that "Standard"? Well it's, "We don't need no steenkin evidence for impeachment."
Is impeaching Biden political? Yer dang tootin'! Impeachment is a political act. Get over it. This particular dotard king sitting in the White House has sold his name and position to a number of countries around the world. His cocaine and sex addled son was simply the bagman.
LLR-democratical and Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist Chuck?: "Evidence of what, Althouse? What is the alleged offense? What is the alleged high crime or misdemeanor?"
LOL
Too perfect.
Up next:
LLR-democratical Rich: LLR Chuck is right!
LLR-democratical lonejustice: LLR Rich is right about LLR Chuck being right!
Gadfly: Guys, can I join in?
LLR-democraticals Chuck/Rich/lonejustice in unison: No!
....gadfly hangs his head, puts his hands in his pockets, kicks at the ground and wanders off down the street....
Chuck suddenly wants to know what the underlying offense is.
Comedy gold.
The NYT thinks Biden receiving influence payments to Hunter to be on Burisma's board of directors is just . Joe pressuring the government to fire the state prosecutor is also just good government. Never mind that Hunter and Bursima benefited from the firing. Not a bribe at all. Hunter was not acting as a foreign agent!
Mark Zuckerbot's $400+Million in bribes to election offices was also just a concerned citizen seeing that said election offices had the necessary resources to count the votes. Count them the Mark Zuckerbot's way, that is.
The impeachment hearings against Biden will be for the benefit of the media, which has ignored Biden's corruption. The media will have to report on the evidence. The hearings are not about removing Biden, or even impeaching him.
Chuck,
The term you are looking for is Bribery.
Don’t believe Democrats’ myths: There’s clear evidence for investigating President Biden
Jonathan Turley
Remember - lying liars who lie will buy lies, eat lies, sell lies, defend lies, ignore lies, lie some more, and shoot lies out of their anus like a sickened wuhan lab monkey.
Seriously, who among us doesn't have at least a few pages of SARs from Treasury?
Chuck said...
What is the alleged offense? What is the alleged high crime or misdemeanor?
I'm really glad Chuck is here. He speaks the mind of all clueless liberals with one, simple, childish voice.
The high crime is VP Joe Biden selling US policy influence for in return for bribes. Basically in the form of Hunter business deals with the Chinese and unqualified overpaid employment on the board of Burisma in Ukraine. Likely US foreign aid ended up laundered into the pockets of the Biden crime family and other US politicians and bureaucrats.
Obama had to know all of this was going on. I'm sure many in Washington benefited from the same. That's why they are all dug in, and why they impeached Trump for asking about it.
The crime against humanity is pushing Ukraine not to accept a Russian peace deal and go to war instead. The war is part of the cover up, just like Trumps first impeachment and the 2020 COVID induced absentee voter fraud.
Liberals should familiarize themselves with "The Teapot Dome" scandal during President Warren G Harding's administration. Pay for play and bribery are not new to the United States gov't.
From Wikipedia:
"The Teapot Dome scandal was a bribery scandal involving the administration of United States President Warren G. Harding from 1921 to 1923. Secretary of the Interior Albert Bacon Fall had leased Navy petroleum reserves at Teapot Dome in Wyoming, as well as two locations in California, to private oil companies at low rates without competitive bidding.[1] The leases were the subject of an investigation by Senator Thomas J. Walsh. Convicted of accepting bribes from the oil companies, Fall became the first presidential cabinet member to go to prison, but no one was convicted of paying the bribes."
The GOPe will write a sternly worded letter that will be ignored. Nothing will happen.
You don’t suppose that this headline is coordinated with Democrats?
I'm no Republican and I hold no brief for President Trump. But what was done to him by dastardly dirty Dem tricks done dirt cheap have returned in full karma assault mode as payback. Sleazy bastards the lot of them. There is not enough popcorn.
I'm no Republican and I hold no brief for President Trump. But what was done to him by dastardly dirty Dem tricks done dirt cheap have returned in full karma assault mode as payback. Sleazy bastards the lot of them. There is not enough popcorn.
It isn't even necessary for Joe to have personally received payments, though apparently he did. You can not hide payments by having them go to family members. For obvious reasons, I know this from my days filling out Conflict of Interest reporting forms at UW. The first question on the form is, 'Did you, OR MEMBERS OF YOUR FAMILY, receive blah, blah, blah.'
A never ending supply of scandal porn to keep the punters jacked. I'm happy for you.
Is there anything that could make you stop getting political news from the lying NYT?
Just today for example:
NYT: “Let me state as clearly as I can: My father was not involved in my business.”
The real quote:
Hunter: “Let me state as clearly as I can: My father was not *financially* involved in my business.”
Imagine the NYT is a mental restaurant. How many times do you get food poisoning before you avoid the place?
Note that when you read or hear a dedicated left-o-crat (obedient*deluxe) regurgitate the talking point that "there is no evidence!" - (note they have no evidence that there is no evidence) it sounds oddly and preciously identical to democrat loyalists in the NYT, WaPo, NBC and NBC's affiliates, NPR, the leftwing glossies, and PBS "news"... et al..
"In the end, it's not about the number of pages, of course, …"
Quantity has a quality all its own. Or so I've heard said.
I seem to recall there were 170 Suspicious Activity Reports filed. Yet, there is "no" evidence.
One GOP Rep claimed that the Biden family received over $ 50 million from influence peddling schemes. Another estimated that the figure was as high as $ 100 million.
Joe Biden and his family are 100% guilty of bribery. Few presidents are saints, but this is extreme.
My favorite vignette so far is the internal bank email questioning whether it was wise to be doing business with this guy.
As Nancy Pelosi demonstrated the most important legislative skill is the ability to count.
"Convicted of accepting bribes from the oil companies, Fall became the first presidential cabinet member to go to prison, but no one was convicted of paying the bribes."
Is that where the term "Fall guy" comes from?
Unless I misunderstand it, the House can impeach a President for any reason or no reason. It's strictly political, no?
OldManRick said... 12/13/23, 12:56 PM
Francis Menton, blogging at The Manhattan Contrarian, is one of my frequent stops on the 'net. His series on climate change is also outstanding.....
It's good to know that others have found his most excellent blog. I encourage folks here who may not be familiary with his blog, to visit and explore his work.
This article explains the purpose for authorizing an "inquiry."
*********************
Excerpt:
House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana argued earlier this week that formalizing the inquiry was a necessary step because of "stonewalling" from the White House.
"They're refusing to turn over key witnesses to allow them to testify as they've been subpoenaed," Johnson said. "They're refusing to turn over thousands of documents for the National Archives."
He said it was "not a political decision," but a "legal decision."
**********************
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-impeachment-inquiry-house-republicans-resolution/
Republicans could just follow the Nancy Pelosi method of impeachments: "We don't need no stinking first-hand evidence. We don't need any stinkin' impeachment inquiry! Evidence Schemividence! Off with his head! No, I mean impeach his ass. "
Get the popcorn ready. The House has voted to start an impeachment inquiry.
Howard: "A never ending supply of scandal porn to keep the punters jacked. I'm happy for you."
Yes, the above comment was written by one of the biggest Althouse blog Trump Hoax fanatics that pushed each and every transparent hoax for years, even after clear debunking.
This person is now attempting to project his evidence-free conspiracy/hoax pushing onto those who sit on a mountain of actual evidence.
Thats our Howard!
Difference between the R's and D's:
Pelosi - That racist, sexist, bigoted homophobe Trump is am immoral, Goddamn Republican. We'll be starting our Impeachment inquiry next week and charge him the week after. We'll begin once we think up the crime he committed.
Johnson - Oh,Gosh gee whiz. We respect Joe Biden, our Commander-in-Chief, but he's stonewalled us for over a year and refused to answer questions and provide witnesses.
We'll move with deliberate speed to START an inquiry and we'll have a vote on whether to start and when to start, when we get back from vacation and have some time. The last thing we want is a "rush to judgment". THis is a legal matter and we hope we dont have to write anymore letters or work too hard.
They're refusing to turn over key witnesses to allow them to testify as they've been subpoenaed," Johnson said. "They're refusing to turn over thousands of documents for the National Archives."
Biden-gat... garage.
If the President did nothing wrong then he has nothing to fear from an inquiry.
Biden and Pelosi went up to Capitol Hill to perform a cover-up. Biden fell down and spilled his Joe, and Nancy came tumbling after. Obama sells dreams by the coast, the climate changed, constructed a wall, deported illegal aliens, and dreamed of his father. Will no one rid me of these meddlesome deplorables? Democrata Spring with bennies for human rites.
"It's good to know that others have found his most excellent blog. I encourage folks here who may not be familiary with his blog, to visit and explore his work."
He comments regularly on "green energy" nonsense. His posts are detailed but not overly technical- you don't need to be an EE to follow along.
"as it [the House] hunts for a reason" to impeach Biden.
One example suffices. Failure to faithfully execute the laws on immigration.
As Nancy Pelosi demonstrated the most important legislative skill is the ability to count
I’d like to count the votes against it…and who casts them. Out loud. In the chamber. No button pushing…
These ganders have such short memories about what happened to the goose. I’m sure they won’t mind while we rummage through the 20 shell companies and 1700 Robin Ware emails and all the wire transfers to various Biden fronts from commie spies in China and Putin cronies in Moscow and various Ukrainian and Bulgarian thugs. Just to verify if there is “nothing there” like you amnesiac democrats say. Who DOESN’T have a pile of SARs next to their illegally obtained presidential documents anyway!
Oh yeah, Trump doesn’t. That’s who. You know the guy impeached for asking if Ukraine had investigated the shady Biden activities.
Here's House Speaker Mike Johnson, in 2019, speaking out against the first Trump impeachment and declaring that "the Founding Fathers warned against single party impeachments."
Delicious hypocrisy.
East Palestine?
Lahaina?
anyone?
Chuck said...
Here's House Speaker Mike Johnson, in 2019, speaking out against the first Trump impeachment and declaring that "the Founding Fathers warned against single party impeachments."
No Chuck, this is an example of turnabout being fair play. The Democrats made the new rules, now they can live by them. They were warned that changing the rules would be a mistake.
You're a bit stupid aren't you? Or perhaps just dishonest.
Chuck - Trump was impeached for asking about Biden's corruption in Ukraine.
Biden is a total corrupt crook. Mobster totalitarian on the take. He and his family should all pay a price. People like you are just useful idiots.
You're just another cookie cutter loyalist. blind to the corruption.
Don’t believe Democrats’ myths: There’s clear evidence for investigating President Biden
Tut tut, too bad.
Why would a Life Long Republican come to the defense of an obviously corrupt democrat President? Why, it's almost as if he's not a Republican at all. In fact, it's exactly like that.
“Delicious hypocrisy.”
No, that’s the turd you’re chewing, Chuck.
Chuck, he warned against it and the other side did it. Hence, no prohibition now.
The case against Joe Biden should be laser focused on Burisma.
Because there is documentary evidence and maybe recordings of corrupt activity.
The son gets a board seat that pays incredibly well, brings in Democrat PR firms and other Dem lawyers to help...a ukrainian gas company?
Blue Star Strategies...hmmm, what do you think Blue Star is referring to? High ranking Democratic elected officials, no shit.
but Burisma isn't happy just associating themselves with two Dems, a GOP guy, and a Polish guy for EU cover.
They want DELIVERABLES and write a letter specifying them. Go read the letter. Its to Hunter and team. It mentioned the prosecutor general of Ukraine TWICE.
That's Shokin.
Guess who gets fired? Shokin.
The Dems claim well, we wanted to fire him anyways. But there is evidence line employees of state were shocked by his sudden dismissal.
AND JOE BIDEN, ON TAPE, ADMITTED HE PRESSURED THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT TO FIRE SHOKIN.
Shokin was in fact good friends with Poroshenko, so it was a painful ask.
But they removed Shokin.
And Burisma eventually got some minor charges and escaped serious prosecution.
Note: that is not USA foreign policy goal, nor Ukraine's legal system's goal.
THAT WAS BURISMA CEO ZLOVCHESKY'S GOAL as outline in the DELIVERABLES email, and confirmed by Joe as what he did in a video taped commentary bragging about it.
So, yeah, its pretty cut and dried. Joe may have some weak defenses, but its a pretty strong case.
ITS SO STRONG THAT THE DOJ AVOIDED RESEARCHING ANY ANGLES THAT WOULD HIT VP JOE BIDEN, AND THEN THEY SLOW WALKED THE CASE UNTIL THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS RAN DRY.
Gee, that sounds like a serious case if you're willing to brazenly do that.
OH WELL, ITS JUST OUR INSTITUTIONS ROTTING AWAY....goodbye rule of law.
Post a Comment