“Zotz” - wonderfully useful word that I haven’t seen used since 10-year old me tried to figure out why my parent’s Book-of-the-Month club selection had cartoons but didn’t seem funny…
None of that is specific.
I’m guessing Jim Jordan is the back-up quarterback.
What part of “based on nothing” is confusing?
To clarify; when Trump was first impeached it was for abusing his position to extort Ukraine for dirt about Biden.
Now, if that was a rumor and there was no evidence that any of it ever happened, you might not be able to be more specific. Maybe you couldn’t say who he talked to, or when, or what was promised. But you still had something to claim an impeachment for, however baseless or flimsy. That’s what the Republicans are doing now, or at least trying to get an inquiry in to fill in the details.
Of course, the Democrats actually had evidence. They had a recording. They could be specific because they were impeaching based on something that actually happened.
But once again, the Republicans do have an accusation, they’re not trying to impeach without a reason. They just don’t have a legitimate reason.
Some people still seem to think that the GOP needs at least a fig leaf of “substance” to be doing these things.
They need to start understanding that the GOP really, truly, is now acting on the basis of nothing. This whole process, and so much more, is nothing more than a naked exercise of power, for entirely petty and partisan reasons. They’re doing it because they can do it, and no one can stop them.
This is the new normal, but lots of people don’t want to come to terms with that.
I think that is true to an extent, but it’s mostly petty tit-for-tat. Their guy got impeached so theire gonna impeach our guy. It’s been planned since their guy was impeached. Their guy gets indicted, so they’re going after someone on our side to indict (Hunter Biden). The fact that their guy actually broke laws in public for all of us to see and hear makes no difference - they have no platform or strategy for governing any more, so all they have is hitting back at the other guy. They live in the sewer, so they’re gonna drag everyone down there, too.
The banks notified the irs over 170 times of suspicious money laundering. Over 20,000,000 in payout has been identified so far and they have barely scratched the surface. This goes way deeper than Joe Biden or even liberal leaning people in the IRS, DOJ and FBI. I am puzzled as to why any of you would not want this looked at? Critical thinking would demand more answers.
Please quote one person on this board who said that they didn’t support the IRS investigating Hunter Biden’s failure to pay his taxes. Just one.
If you can’t find that then you’ve answered your own silly question.
I am not talking about Hunter Biden. I won’t comment anymore here. I will just wait and see like the rest of us.
What on earth are you talking about? Critical thinking would demand more answers.
None of which went to Joe Biden.
This is not about Hunter Biden, who appears to be a criminal, at least for minor crimes. This is about The President. Note that unlike trump, Joe did not give his son any positions.
Biden crime family. I mean this is the Freedom Caucus were talking about. Feel free to also use communist Biden crime family.
I’m sorry, I thought you were talking about something that we have any evidence or even vague signs of actually happening.
It appears he’s talking about two allegations made by Congressman Comer.
The first one was last fall, before the elections. Comer said in an interview that there had been around 130 bank reports of potentially suspicious transactions. Comer then jumped to an assertion that means the banks are reporting criminal activity, but the FBI did nothing.
This article, however, rebuts that Comer-jump.
So, 150 bank tips out of approximately 3,700,000 per year.
Sure, maybe something may come of it, but odds sound low that there’s much there.
I imagine @DrDeth may be able to comment.
Here’s the WaPo fact-checking article:
The $20 million is more recent. It comes from documents released by the House committee this summer:
So, the GOP members of the committee are alleging that Hunter Biden made money off his father’s name, but no evidence has been released that suggests a crime was committed, or that Joe Biden was involved or earned any money.
Finally, I don’t see anyone here saying Hunter or Joe shouldn’t be investigated if there is any evidence of a crime, contrary to @HoneyBadgerDC ’s comments.
Rather, so far, Comer seems to be over-selling and under-delivering.
All of this stuff has been looked at. All of it.
Yes. They are evidence that the bank thought something was suspicious enough that they wanted to report it- often just to cover their asses. They are not evidence of wrongdoing. They are simply a tool that can (but rarely does) lead to an investigation.
Mind you, they could have been used as part of the Hunter Failure to Pay Tax investigation.
But AFAIK, Joe Biden has not been the subject of a bunch of SARs.
SARs in of themselves are confidential. The Financial institution may not tell the customer that they issued a SAR.
Hunter may well have profited from using his father’s name. Billy did the same with Carter. Maureen Reagan. Bush jr. And of course, trump jr, Ivanka, and Eric-
You’ll just wait because the Republicans haven’t presented a shred of evidence, not a single piece, that suggests Joe Biden was involved in any wrongdoing. Absolutely nothing. Wherever you’re getting your information from is lying to you.
You have nothing. You can’t even plausibly offer up a scandal.
Oh, no! Somebody made millions? And it even came from foreigners!!
Geez, I’m surprised that Joe Biden hasn’t been shot for treason at this point.
(Adding to the absurdity is the fact that once a politician leaves office, especially if they’ve served 8 years as Veep, they can easily earn a legitimate fortune from speeches and book deals. If Biden wanted to bring in millions of dollars, all he had to do was go on a speaking tour. This scandal is like trying to tell me that Michael Jordan had a secret arrangement in the 1990s to get free basketball shoes).
This bullshit reminds me of civil forfeiture cases, when the government finds a person with a large sum of cash in their possession, and seizes it on the theory that it’s probably evidence of some criminality.
I mean, sure, it’s legal to have cash in your possession, but we all really know what carrying cash really means.
Now prove your innocence!