Bad is bad and worth mentioning. Sure, it’s not worth derailing a thread for, but it’s okay to throw out the comment.
The reflex to stamp out mentions of bad behavior by your own team - if you look at how that’s been working for the Republican party - doesn’t really take you anywhere good. It’s better to make the note, move on, and try to remember it on voting day when you’re picking which D’s to back. They ain’t all natural born angels.
So where is Thomas’s impeachment?
That’s the important difference. You don’t impeach someone if you’re “just asking questions” unless you’re nothing more than an evil clown in a fancy suit.
Yeah, still no closer. No worries, and no need to continue on my account.
I wasn’t aware that Hunter Biden was a federal judge, or that he ever held any position of influence in any federal or state government.
ISTM you could put together an effective ad contrasting the amount of GOP congressperson-hours spent on this absurd inquiry with the hours spent on things non-MAGAt Americans actually care about – border issues, inflation, infrastructure, etc.
It’s being ignored by the partisans on his side.
Is that a good or a bad thing for the country? Is that a good or bad thing for the average Republican voter? Should they be doing that? Do they serve their own interests for the best, by doing that? Would they do better to make note and flunk out the politicians who are overlooking it?
You’re still not seeing the disconnect between the two cases. Republicans, and everyone, should care about Thomas’s misconduct because he holds a very high and influential office and wields a great deal of power in how our nation is run. Democrats, and everyone, shouldn’t care much about Hunter Biden’s misconduct, because he’s a nobody of no consequence. Sure, he should be investigated by the appropriate law enforcement agencies: They’re supposed to care about anyone who might have committed a crime. That’s why they (and I suppose, any judges and juries who eventually hear his case) should care. But why should we care about Hunter Biden?
In this thread specifically, we’re ignoring what Hunter Biden did, because this thread isn’t about Hunter. It’s about Joe. If there’s any evidence that Joe Biden did anything wrong, that’s absolutely relevant to this thread, and shouldn’t be ignored by anyone in this country, because, like Clarence Thomas, he’s very powerful and influential in this country. So… Is there any such evidence?
If that’s what I said and what we were talking about, then sure.
There’s a lot of deciding that I’m talking about different things than what I can actually be quoted saying, going about, recently.
Or we can look at the sentence right before that:
You were, in fact, talking about Hunter in a thread about Joe. Why?
Besides the criticism that this doesn’t tie to Joe, the use of “recovering addict” as a slur is really misplaced. A “recovering addict” can be, and oftentimes is, a very healthy and functional person. Not only are they not using drugs, but they’ve likely spent a lot of time on self-improvement, so they may arguably be even more high functioning than a typical person.
And calling this guy unemployed is also weak, in my opinion. Hunter Biden was a highly educated and very well connected businessman. He ran in elite circles. It’s not really credible to categorize him as somebody who couldn’t get a job.
I don’t know the details of any loan that Hunter received, but it deserves the context of his pedigree.
It’s good to not impeach without evidence, yes. Impeachment should have more than a suspicion. A suspicion should lead to an investigation if there seems to be probable cause for it. The result of that investigation could then lead to an impeachment if there seems to be a justification based on evidence.
You don’t impeach based solely on allegations. The Republicans don’t care because they have no real desire for justice. It’s purely a stunt to try to harm Biden’s election chances and is a clear abuse of the impeachment system.
Trying to draw some kind of equivalence between the two is at best wrong.
This is the thread about Joe Biden. The thread about Hunter is elsewhere. Until Hunter is an elected or appointed official worthy of impeaching, I don’t know why you are bringing up Hunter.
Joe and Clarence Thomas are elected or appointed govt officials. Hunter is not. Full stop.
Again, not the business of Congress.
Because the House GOP keep bringing up Hunter in the context of impeaching his father.
Fair point, but the recent back-and-forth was specifically questioning SageRat’s assertion that certain Hunter questions by the GOP seemed appropriate to ask.
Seems like this is a weird thread for that discussion.
Quite true, and to add to this: the GOP attempts at impeaching both Biden and DHS Secretary Mayorkas are also intended to cheapen the concept of impeachment–in order to save Trump’s pride and help his image.
The goal is to make impeachment ‘just something that happens to most politicians’ instead of what it is: the rare and historic means by which Congress tried to hold Donald Trump accountable for his actions.
I hadn’t considered that but you’re correct. If everyone gets impeached over frivolous reasons then they can say that being impeached is not big deal, impeachments are tossed around left and right for little to no reason. So Trump being impeached twice is no big deal.
Exactly, and those striving to help turn impeachment into a ‘happens to everyone’ thing, no doubt, expect to be mightily rewarded by Donald, should he obtain the Presidency.
(Another good reason to work actively to oppose such an outcome; the world will NOT be better off if such pathetic sycophants gain power.)
…
CNN goes through a brief tick-tock of the twists and turns in Comer’s sad fail-show, then explains Republicans’ dumbstruck confusion about what to do now with their investigation, which was over before it began, and which uncovered no crimes or impeachable offenses. Some of them say “criminal referrals!” as Comer has been saying for a while now. But for what ?Ha ha, they do not know.
It ends with this quote from the Raskin/Comer fight we started with above:
Raskin posited, “You have not identified a single crime. What is the crime that you want to impeach Joe Biden for and keep this nonsense going?”
“You’re about to find out very soon,” Comer replied.
In two weeks??