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

Raskin is a POS also....boohoo....they cannot defend Biden so instead they simply read a pre-made speech.

a reply to: matafuchs

Once again, Bobulinsky's testimony is contradicted by other people that were there. What makes Bobulinsky's testimony more valuable than other witnesses?

a reply to: Threadbarer

What makes other witnesses testimony more valuable than Bobulinsky's ? You follow court cases. We just had the same thing in GA. Conflicting statements.

Once they are all collected, then a jury or a group would make a decision.

You are simply saying his testimony is garbage with no evidence that it is not except what someone else says.

Instead of grandstanding against Trump the left should be explaining how Biden is not connected. They cannot so they will continue their current line of attacks.

a reply to: matafuchs

Instead of grandstanding against Trump the left should be explaining how Biden is not connected. They cannot so they will continue their current line of attacks.

Instead of grandstanding against Biden the right should be presenting an actual case how Biden is connected. They cannot. We're at the point where Right wing politicians and media are saying Cover has nothing. Fox and Newsmax stopped airing today's hearing when it was clear this was going to be more nothing.

A case isn't made on one person's testimony. It is a collection of multiple sources of evidence. Until there is enough evidence to prove someone is guilty they are presumed innocent.

a reply to: Threadbarer

You are not watching this. Why did Hunter and his best bud not show up today? That would be an easy way to say it did not happen.

It is not one person either and you know it.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: matafuchs

Instead of grandstanding against Trump the left should be explaining how Biden is not connected. They cannot so they will continue their current line of attacks.

Instead of grandstanding against Biden the right should be presenting an actual case how Biden is connected. They cannot. We're at the point where Right wing politicians and media are saying Cover has nothing. Fox and Newsmax stopped airing today's hearing when it was clear this was going to be more nothing.

A case isn't made on one person's testimony. It is a collection of multiple sources of evidence. Until there is enough evidence to prove someone is guilty they are presumed innocent.

there could be pictures of Joe Biden meeting with Hunters Business partners and you would deny it. I can't think of any evidence you would accept as proof Joe Biden was involved in what Hunter was selling. You aren't honest. Gaslighting rather than discussing. purely for comedic effect at this stage.

a reply to: matafuchs

They had their depositions. Why would they need to show up again?

a reply to: network dude

If Comer had any actual evidence I'd be willing to look at it.

Are you willing to look at the evidence that purpryedly shows Bobulinski secretly meeting with Meadows?

Are you willing to look at Parnas's evidence that shows Trump and Rudy, along with Barr and multiple members of Congress, coordinating with Russian intelligence to spread disinformation in an attempt to undermine an election?

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: network dude


Are you willing to look at Parnas's evidence that shows Trump and Rudy, along with Barr and multiple members of Congress, coordinating with Russian intelligence to spread disinformation in an attempt to undermine an election?

If it’s in the proper thread if you want to start it.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: network dude

If Comer had any actual evidence I'd be willing to look at it.

Are you willing to look at the evidence that purpryedly shows Bobulinski secretly meeting with Meadows?

Are you willing to look at Parnas's evidence that shows Trump and Rudy, along with Barr and multiple members of Congress, coordinating with Russian intelligence to spread disinformation in an attempt to undermine an election?

any evidence that's real should be looked at. If you had something showing Trump did horrible things, I'd be willing to look at it. But trying to bankrupt him with victimless events that aren't even crimes isn't that.

It's really sad how much spin you are willing to use to deny reality. The Bidens were selling Joe's favors. Even if Trump is the most horrible person on the planet, that is still the case.

But it does make me smile to see the left licking the toes of Parness when ya'll were busting his balls not long ago.

eta:
Can you answer why the Trump stuff matters in the context of Joe Biden selling influence? Unless he sold it to Trump, it's not at all relevant to anything discussed here. We can go back to the impeachments of Trump to rehash all those things.

a reply to: Threadbarer

Are you willing to look at the evidence that purpryedly shows Bobulinski secretly meeting with Meadows? Are you willing to look at Parnas's evidence that shows Trump and Rudy, along with Barr and multiple members of Congress, coordinating with Russian intelligence to spread disinformation in an attempt to undermine an election?

Sure. Not sure why it would be secret that Meadows had a meeting. Is that the media spin? Also, sure, let's see the evidence of Russian Intelligence. Want to know why I know there is none? If there was real evidence there would already be another Trump indictment.

Oh. Because the meeting info came from discredited Cassidy Hutchinson. It was in her book right?

"In the shadows of the bleachers, I observed Mark and Tony Bobulinski's interaction through a gap in the vehicles. When they said their goodbyes, I saw Mark hand Tony what appeared to be a folded sheet of paper or a small envelope," Hutchinson wrote in the book.

Was this in the same chapter of Trump trying to overpower Secret Service to storm the Capital and hang Mike Pence?

and Parnas, did he drop the bombshell on the Maddow show almost 4 years ago? Is that what you refer to?

Sad sad sad...

a reply to: network dude

It's really sad how much spin you are willing to use to deny reality. The Bidens were selling Joe's favors. Even if Trump is the most horrible person on the planet, that is still the case.

Where's the evidence, let alone proof, that Biden was receiving money from Hunter's businesses while working for the government?

originally posted by: matafuchs
Raskin is a POS also....boohoo....they cannot defend Biden so instead they simply read a pre-made speech.

Raskin and Schiff would rip the Pope to shreds if he said something negative about a Democrat. Particularly if its a man, because they both are gay.

a reply to: matafuchs

A special judicial system will need to be set up just to try all the lying scumbags like Cassidy Hutchinson, Liz Cheney, Andrew Weissman, etc., etc., etc..

a reply to: Lazy88

This is the correct thread. Parnas talked about this at today's hearing.

a reply to: Threadbarer

You try to word it well but it falls flat. Is it about money being received or using a place of power to generate money? Because we know both happened. Joe got his taste and they never thought it would be an issue but HRC did not get elected. Before he became VP he should have been vetted better because he was in possession of TS and CLassified info as a Senator. Thats a fact.

Can you imagine the monies that would be in the Clinton Foundation right now if she won?

a reply to: matafuchs

So Joe received no money and Joe provided no services for money? It seems to me there's no crime.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: Lazy88

This is the correct thread. Parnas talked about this at today's hearing.

Ok. Then state the evidence. Make your case.

Well as convinced as some people are that crimes were committed, Comer apparently is not convinced. Moskowitz called to vote on impeachment today. Comer would not second it. If they had the evidence of the crime, why would you not bring it to a vote? Comer stated weeks ago that a vote would not be likely anytime soon. So, this circus will run through to the election. It's about optics,obviously not any actual crime. Otherwise he'd be impeached with all this great "evidence".

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: network dude

It's really sad how much spin you are willing to use to deny reality. The Bidens were selling Joe's favors. Even if Trump is the most horrible person on the planet, that is still the case.

Where's the evidence, let alone proof, that Biden was receiving money from Hunter's businesses while working for the government?

so the entire family gets paid, all but Joey. And joey has wonderful beach homes and junk, but as long as there isn't a picture of him being passed a gold bar from Bob Menendez, then there is not chance at all that Biden is selling out the nation? See, this is what I'm talking about. It's just funny at this stage. Your red nose is coming loose.