The Impeachment Inquiry of U.S. President Joseph R. Biden - Charges and Developments.

a reply to: Threadbare

Unfortunately for you, an official impeachment inquiry has not been launched as no vote was held. Any subpoena issued right now is worthless as the DOJ will not enforce it.

We'll get there. It took Nancy Pelosi from September 24th to October 31st, 2019 before she took up an official vote for the impeachment inquiry against Trump. Like Nancy, the more evidence the Oversight Committee presents in the meantime, the easier it will be to get that vote. The only reason the House Speakers delay these votes in the first place is to protect House representatives during their re-election bids. They want people to see the evidence so that their constituents won't punish them for their votes in 2024.

a reply to: Deetermined

Every single impeachment has seen the party of the candidate being impeached make gains in the following election.

That said, we'll see how much longer McCarthy keeps up this charade. After the GOP ended up looking like clowns after the first hearing, and now Gaetz moving to oust McCarthy, there's not really any reason for McCarthy to keep moving forward with it when all it's going to do is cost the Republicans seats next year.

a reply to: Threadbare

The only people who looked like clowns during the first hearing were the Democrats doing the same thing they always do...use their 5 minutes to give stump speeches and ALL using the same rehearsed talking points over and over that are totally unrelated to the hearing at hand.

If McCarthy chooses not to move forward on the impeachment, he'll likely see another motion to vacate made if he makes it through tomorrow.

I have no preconceived notions on how the next election will go, as the Democrats have already proven that they'll try every underhanded move necessary to steal it...again. Sorry, but no one in their right mind believes Biden got 81 million votes.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

If you Commit a Crime and Presented Evidence in a Court of Law finds you Guilty , you Serve Time for the Offense . That's Called Justice .

Not when corrupt prosecutors are only providing partial evidence instead of ALL of it or when you find out that the law enforcement offices are using database algorithms to pick the judges and juries they want to get the verdict they want.

What's worse is that we now have agencies like the FBI using their own fabricated "evidence" to put people away for decades such as...

Now There is Evidence the FBI Planned the January 6 Operation and Planted Documents Days Earlier That Were Later Used Against Innocent Americans

www.thegatewaypundit.com...

That IS NOT Justice.

Interesting. First of all, it's not hidden. Politico-J an 6 Committee. Second of all, Samuel Armes is a crypto dude in Florida who shared those ideas with Tarrio's friend. He does not work for the government and if you take a look at his Twitter, he's a DeSantis supporter, who supports "going against the status quo" and causing "chaos for the government".

We see many former government, police, and armed forces people who were radicalized and attacked the police and Capitol Building. We've seen an FBI agent fired for burying an investigation into a suspect who assaulted police on J6 because he supported them.

This isn't the big bombshell you think it is.

a reply to: frogs453

Interesting. First of all, it's not hidden. Politico-J an 6 Committee. Second of all, Samuel Armes is a crypto dude in Florida who shared those ideas with Tarrio's friend. He does not work for the government and if you take a look at his Twitter, he's a DeSantis supporter, who supports "going against the status quo" and causing "chaos for the government".

If you look at Samuel Armes' own testimony, he admits that he was being groomed by the FBI and CIA and had been since college. The FBI used some of the scenarios in the documents he produced for THEM and then the FBI elaborated on them further to concoct the 1776 document as a whole. Plus, according to Tarrio's friend, Samuel Armes WAS the one who told her to share the document with Tarrio. I'm sure Armes has finally realized how he was used and is currently against the government.

a reply to: Deetermined

Yes he previously worked for the government. He does not work for the government. Your famous "whistleblowers" worked for the government. There are many radicalized Trump supporters who worked for the government. Again, you're really reaching here. He's no leftist, that's for sure.

If you read his testimony he shared his ideas with the friend. He did not write the playbook.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Deetermined

Yes he previously worked for the government. He does not work for the government. Your famous "whistleblowers" worked for the government. There are many radicalized Trump supporters who worked for the government. Again, you're really reaching here. He's no leftist, that's for sure.

If you read his testimony he shared his ideas with the friend. He did not write the playbook.

You're misunderstanding the point I'm trying to make, which ultimately is that the FBI USED HIM to frame the Proud Boys with a concocted document, in which some of the ideas in the document came from documents that Armes provided to the FBI as a "war game strategy" that they wanted him to produce for them. I'm not saying that Armes is a leftist, but HE was the one who asked that the FBI's version of the document be shared with Tarrio through Tarrio's friend, and most likely out of prompting from the FBI. Armes was just ignorant to the whole scheme, which is probably why he's against the government now.

a reply to: Deetermined


Show me in his testimony that the feds asked him. He stated he shared ideas that he had worked on when he was in his government position. That he is no longer in. I'm not sure why you're making up that the feds asked him to do so and that he just willingly did, even though he no longer works for them, and that he somehow wanted to set them up. And I've said this over and over again, how is any adult letting someone convince them to commit a crime? Are they that stupid?

And geez he was partners with criminal and sex trafficker and Matt Gaetz best friend Joel Greenberg. He also goes to the same church as Roger Stone the famous friend of the Oath Keepers.

a reply to: frogs453

And I've said this over and over again, how is any adult letting someone convince them to commit a crime? Are they that stupid?

Is English your first language? I never said that Armes KNOWINGLY committed a crime. The FBI USED him to commit a crime. You don't really think the FBI would tell Armes WHY they wanted him to have their document shared with Tarrio, do you? Armes never realized he too was being set up until after the fact.

a reply to: Deetermined

You have issues believing a well liked VP got the most votes in history but not that one of the most disliked Presidents in history for the second most?

When the Dems win next year it's will not be down to foul play. It will be due to accomplishing nothing since the last election while also championing unpopular platforms.

Since Roe v. Wade was repealed, Dems have been overperforming by, on average, 12 points. If that trend holds until next November, it's going to be very hard the GOP to overcome.

a reply to: Threadbare

You have issues believing a well liked VP got the most votes in history but not that one of the most disliked Presidents in history for the second most?

I don't know how old you are, but Joe Biden has NEVER been popular, especially as V.P.. He was continually mocked throughout his entire tenure as V.P. for his stupidity and gaffes. If you want to go back further to where Biden had to drop out of a previous presidential run due to his "lack of integrity and ethics", go research it.

Since Roe v. Wade was repealed, Dems have been overperforming by, on average, 12 points. If that trend holds until next November, it's going to be very hard the GOP to overcome.

Dems might be over "polling" in the area of abortion, but they're under polling in the areas based on illegal immigration, their transgender policies, their Climate Change policies, their past push for vaccine mandates, their student loan bailout lies and failure, Biden's failed Afghanistan pull out, his recent negotiations with Iran, their continued support of Ukraine over American citizens facing emergencies, and their policies leading to inflation in general...and that's not all of them.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: frogs453

And I've said this over and over again, how is any adult letting someone convince them to commit a crime? Are they that stupid?

Is English your first language? I never said that Armes KNOWINGLY committed a crime. The FBI USED him to commit a crime. You don't really think the FBI would tell Armes WHY they wanted him to have their document shared with Tarrio, do you? Armes never realized he too was being set up until after the fact.

I'm still looking for testimony that the feds asked him to share his ideas. I've not found that anywhere. Perhaps you can link to the testimony of that?

He actually was in contact with the friend due to their whole crypto thing as she is also large in that community or whatever you call it. She pled the 5th when asked about certain things and the Playbook.

a reply to: frogs453

I don't expect Armes to admit to being duped out of fear of his own possible prosecution or retaliation from the FBI. There's always the possibility that the crypto friend might be the one duped by the FBI, but either way, one of them was working with the FBI in order for that document to make it's way into Tarrio's case that got him prosecuted. What we do know is that the Proud Boys are NOT the ones who came up with it.

a reply to: Deetermined

They're not overpolling. They're overperforming. As in actual elections. There's been over 30 special elections this year and the Dems are finishing, on average, 12 points higher than they did in 2020 in these same districts.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Deetermined

They're not overpolling. They're overperforming. As in actual elections. There's been over 30 special elections this year and the Dems are finishing, on average, 12 points higher than they did in 2020 in these same districts.

Do you have a link for that? I'm not convinced that all of those elections weren't tampered with either, but it would be nice to see exactly where these special elections took place. If we're talking about swing states, I wouldn't put any faith in accurate election outcomes.

a reply to: Deetermined

I was off by two points. It's an average of 10 points overperformance.

Democrats are overperforming in 2023's special elections. Is it a clue for Biden vs. Trump?

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Deetermined

I was off by two points. It's an average of 10 points overperformance.

Democrats are overperforming in 2023's special elections. Is it a clue for Biden vs. Trump?

Like, I said, this is a problem...

Conversations with eight Democratic and Republican operatives in swing states...

The states they mention are all questionable, not to mention that it's wrapped around data provided by "Five Thirty Eight".

ETA: Overall, the entire article is still kind of wrapped up in the first paragraph...

Looking ahead to 2024, Democrats concede some cause for concern -- including President Joe Biden's anemic approval rating and early polls forecasting a repeat race against former President Donald Trump in which Biden either ties or trails, due in part to a notable chunk of undecided voters and apprehension over Biden's age and acuity, which he has repeatedly dismissed.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: frogs453

I don't expect Armes to admit to being duped out of fear of his own possible prosecution or retaliation from the FBI. There's always the possibility that the crypto friend might be the one duped by the FBI, but either way, one of them was working with the FBI in order for that document to make it's way into Tarrio's case that got him prosecuted. What we do know is that the Proud Boys are NOT the ones who came up with it.

Again, Armes testimony was not that he created the playbook while working for the government, nor that he gave it to the friend. His testimony was he shared ideas he had worked with during his time at the government. There is no proof he was ever asked to create and share a playbook by the Feds. And once again, if he ever did, why did they circulate it amongst the PB and why did the PB decide it was a good idea to attempt to stop the electoral process? I'm always stumped how the whole J6 thing is everyone else's fault that they committed crimes. No one can make me go rob a store or beat up a cop.

a reply to: Deetermined

It's not data provided by FiveThirtyEight. It's data analyzed by then but the results of these elections are all publicly available. From there, it's not hard to compare how current candidates are doing compared to how these districts voted in 2020.

We've gotten to a point where pollsters need to modernize their methods. A big reason Dems are overperforming in these races is because young voters are showing it in large numbers. As long as pollsters continue to primarily rely on phone based surveys, this is going to be a demographic that is drastically underrepresented in any poll as most Millennials and Zoomers don't answer the phone when it's even a number they know.

a reply to: frogs453

Again, Armes testimony was not that he created the playbook while working for the government, nor that he gave it to the friend. His testimony was he shared ideas he had worked with during his time at the government. There is no proof he was ever asked to create and share a playbook by the Feds.

What?! Armes' testimony said that he created a "war game strategy" for the FBI at their request, and while it may have been unrelated to anything at the time, the government expanded on it and used portions of it later to create the 1776 document.

The only question left at this point, is WHO was the one instructed by the FBI to share it with Tarrio. It had to be either Armes or the mutual friend, but the document ORIGINATED OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE FBI to pass down to someone. So, stop repeating yourself and address THIS issue by itself.

And once again, if he ever did, why did they circulate it amongst the PB and why did the PB decide it was a good idea to attempt to stop the electoral process? I'm always stumped how the whole J6 thing is everyone else's fault that they committed crimes. No one can make me go rob a store or beat up a cop.

The FBI had it circulated to the Proud Boys hoping that the Proud Boys would carry out the plan, which they did not. Don't forget, Tarrio WAS NOT even at the J6 protest.