CNN Makes the Case for an Impeachment Inquiry

I recently wrote a column about five facts that justified the start of an impeachment inquiry. While I have stressed that I do not believe that there is currently sufficient evidence for an actual impeachment, I am mystified by the claim that there is not ample evidence to warrant an inquiry into possible impeachable offenses. Notably, CNN just reactivated its fact-checking team for a review of the basis for the inquiry. In so doing, the network made an iron-clad argument in support of the decision by Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

CNN presented this claim:

Claim: Biden family and associates got $20 million through shell companies

“Bank records show that nearly $20 million in payments were directed to the Biden family members and associates through various shell companies,” McCarthy said.

Facts First: This is true about Joe Biden’s family and associates, but there is no public evidence to date that the president personally received any money.

That is a fair fact check but it is also the very reason that Speaker McCarthy initiated the inquiry. We do not know where this money went, why it was sent through this labyrinth of accounts, or what it was intended to buy. That is why this is an impeachment inquiry.

The media and a number of Democrats recently admitted, belatedly, that Hunter Biden was involved in a corrupt influence peddling operation. This was made clear by Hunter associate Devon Archer who said that they were selling the “Biden brand” and that brand was Joe Biden. Clearly, these corrupt foreign figures in China, Ukraine, and Russia (including some who were charged with corruption in their own countries) thought that they were getting something other than Hunter for their money. After all, one of these figures reportedly referred to Hunter as dumber than his dog. However, pundits and politicians now insist that it was merely the “illusion” of access.  In other words, these notoriously corrupt figures were chumps fleeced by Hunter and Biden associates.

However, how do we know it was an “illusion”?  You have a trusted FBI informant relaying the claim of a Ukrainian that he gave Biden a “bribe,” but was told not to pay him directly. As I previously discussed, only a moron would pay Joe Biden directly for such influence or access.

CNN repeatedly returns to this fact in each of the checked claims. Again, that is precisely why we have an inquiry. Bribery is a stated basis for impeachment in the Constitution. Even CNN accepts that, if Biden received such benefits, it would be a serious offense.

It is also worth noting, as I have raised previously, that the requirement of an envelope filled with money or a deposit slip into the checking account of Joe and Jill Biden is a bit ridiculous as a condition. If millions went to Biden children and grandchildren, it is still a benefit for the President.

Joe Biden is currently worth more than $8 million. At his age, he will never spend the wealth that he has. Most people in his position are focused on ways to leave financial legacies for their family and minimize estate and death taxes. It is absurd to suggest that millions going to Joe Biden’s family would not constitute a benefit to him.

Finally, the inquiry is looking into whether some of these funds did make their way into Joe Biden’s accounts.  There are indications that both Hunter and Joe received money out of some of these accounts and used shared credit cards. For example, there are indications that Hunter used his Dad’s credit card to pay for prostitutes.

That again is precisely the point of the impeachment inquiry. The House will now have to demand the personal bank and financial records of both Hunter Biden and Joe Biden. Thus far, the House Committees have been focused on following the money through bank transfers.

That is why the CNN fact check is a full-throated call for an impeachment inquiry. The nexus between this massive amount of money and President Biden is precisely what the House will now try to establish.

187 thoughts on “CNN Makes the Case for an Impeachment Inquiry”

  1. To any historian in the future who may be reading this (or more likely AI bot): I know you are confused. You are wondering how these people are using arguments to go after Biden that they completely reject when it comes to Trump. Trump was reasonably suspected of having Russian contacts during 2016, and after the investigation (that was done with as little public fanfare as possible) that did not turn up evidence that Trump himself coordinated with the Russians, they all cried “Russian Hoax!”. But with Biden, just having suspicion is more then enough for a public impeachment inquiry. You are asking why they think Biden would be unfit for office if he lied, used his status for monetary gain, and (unlikely) committed a crime, but Trump gets an infinite number of free passes when he does worse.

    We are confused also and can’t make sense of it, and we are living in the times. I wish you luck in understanding this better then we do.

    1. Hey Historians

      Make sure that you record that the RussianHoax was proven to be a political ploy by Hillary Clinton, and that it cost the American taxpayers MILLIONS of dollars, ruined lives, cost innocent people millions more in attorneys fees, and severely hampered a presidency, and she has never apologized, nor have her minions like Sammy.

      IF Bidens crimes turn out to be something drummed up by Trump’s campaign, by all means, record the same. If not, make sure you record every willfully ignorant, biased, deceiptful word typed here by the coward crew, the list of which I neglectfully left Sammy off.

    2. Sammy,
      How completely ignorant of FACTs are you.

      Trump si “suspected” of Russian contacts ? Which would those be ?
      Would that be likely Russian AGen Danchenko – No he worked for Hillary preparing the Steele Dossier,
      What that be the FBI AGen infestigating Trumpt hat recently plead guilty to being a Russian agent ?

      Or would that be the Russian Pop Star ?

      The biden’s and clintons and democrats are not – without evidence “suspected” of contacts with forieng agencts, government oligarchs.

      They have ACTUAL contacts, and not just contacts – CONTRATS – agreements.
      And thos AGREEMENTS are that VP Biden would deliver official acts – such as the sacking of Shokin in return for millions of dollars.

      It only matters slightly whether these were AGREEMENTS with foreign govenrments or just agreements with CRIMINALS.

      There is no difference between Hunter Getting paid to have VP Daddy get a ukranian prosecutor sacced and Rod Blagoiovitch trying to sell a US senate seat.

      There is no partity here, there is no tit for tat, no equivalance.

      There is just the efforts of those on the left to engage in pi$$ poor whataboutism that does not apply.

      Trump’s non-contact with foreigners as a private citizen with no political power and no access to political power has no equivalence of any kind to the vice president of the united states engaging in the excercise of the executive powers of the united states to accomplish deliverables that his family is being paid for.

    3. You should admit yourself into a rehab institution for CNN Detox treatments, you’ve got stage 4 TDS real bad and it will be fatal if you don’t seek help.
      You put Wile E. Coyote to shame in the persistence department!

  2. I came across this during random scrolling.
    A kind of analogy of the impeachment inquiry discussion.

    Maryland U.S. Attorney Erek Barron told the 11 News I-Team that his office found that 60% of violent criminals are also committing some type of COVID-19 fraud, and because of that, his office investigates every single violent crime target to see whether they’ve committed pandemic fraud.

    Barron told the I-Team that the 20% reduction in homicides and the 10% reduction in nonfatal shootings in Baltimore City can both be explained by his office prosecuting COVID-19 fraud.

    The question about the “Inquiry’ revolves around the lack of proof (not lack of evidence) linking the Presidents connection, of Hunters activities.

    The above documents Prosecutors seeing a correlation between violent crime. That ‘evidence’ led them to “investigate” those suspected of violent crime, for covid 19 aide programs fraud. Surprise!!!! there is a link! to the tune of 60% link!

    Our leftist trolls claim that the mear investigation is baseless and should not be happening….As ALWAYS the leftist are led by their ideology, not the facts.

  3. What is the big deal? My sister went to Ukraine and toured the countryside with 3 officials. The next day her great niece got a Ferrari and a Palace in Spain. My cousin called China and they offered him 10,000,000 in stock options because my father was listening in. Why? Because they said he was so terrific. I dug ditches at the White House for $12.57 an hour and they still haven’t paid me.

    1. What makes you think there is such a thing as Equality?
      Why do you think there is such a thing as Equality?
      When do you think there will be such a thing as Equality?
      Where do you think you will find such a thing as Equality?

      There isn’t such a thing as Equality. Right down to the very atoms that make you whole,
      The Electrons are so very Unequal to the Protons that Inequality is the foundational basis of Life.

      Equality is a Myth – Stop searching for it, and you’ll have a happier Life.

  4. Jonathan: It’s Saturday and an opportunity to share with you and your loyal readers more of my keyboard diarrhea.

    I can’t possibly understand the irony in my use of the word sycophants, because my plagiarized crap requiress zero though whatsoever. I just google it, cut it, and paste it. This was from The Republic.

    Also, I am an idiot who has never held a classification, or been trained on handling classified documents, but I am gonna run my big mouth about something which I have no clue about. I did google it, doesnt that count? Oh, and I did get a TM punch once. And I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express.

    I will now make up unfounded allegations and hope someone here is gullible enough to believe it, while I do exactly what Tom says I do and just move on to the next lie.

    Hang on a sec, i need to adjust, my head was getting a little pinched in my a$$.

    Aren’t I brilliant? Or am I just my own worst enemy?

    There’s definitely a little orange man in my head!!!

    There’s a red under my bed
    And there’s a little orange man in my head
    And he said, “You’re not going crazy, you’re just a bit sad
    ‘Cause there’s a man in ya, gnawing ya, tearing ya into two”

  5. Jonathan: Here is another tidbit from the news this week. I title this comment “What goes around comes around”:

    Remember Kim Davis? She is the former Rowan County, Kentucky clerk who refused to issue a marriage license for a gay couple. Her decision was hailed by the anti-LGBTQ+ crowd. For her illegal decision Davis landed in jail for 5 days for contempt.

    Now a federal jury has awarded David Ernold and his partner, David Moore, $100,000 in damages. Federal judge David Bunning ruled last year that Davis “cannot use her own constitutional rights as a shield to the constitutional rights of others while performing her duties as an elected official”. Davis lost her re-election bid in 2018. She was replaced by a Democrat. So, finally, there is some justice for the LGBTQ+ community.

    So I have just one Q for the anti-LGBTQ+ crowd on this blog. If you have a gay son and he wanted to get married. Would you think it OK for a county clerk to refuse to issue a marriage license to you son?

    1. Wow, Dennis, Finally!! Leaving your useless analysis at the door. thank you!!!

      I can’t answer for everyone here, because I am not Anti-LGBTQ+. I am Pro LGB. The rest is some made up horse manure that you can stick up your hat rack.

      So yes, of course I agree that the law of the land prevails here. As it should every time. You however, don’t hold that position and are a coward for it.

      1. I bet I know what Dick Heads title would be for it…

        “What goes around with a reach around”

        Bwahahahaha Dennis you poor clown.

      2. As a general rule, I’m against all sex unless personally involved. .. especially the ‘+’ community, they’re so smug.

        When I see a woman, I think of a man .. . ‘then take away reason and accountability’. \../

        *Tbh, I didn’t know I had a sexuality until Krissy May told me, but at least I’m not afraid to wear jewelry.

      3. And let me expound a little, because i think you are just dense enough to misconstrue. There is a huge difference between you and i here. I believe in freedom, and do no harm.

        If some dude wants to stick his penis in the nasty, hairy behind of some other dude, i say, go for it. If two women want to munch one another, i will hold the camera.
        However, i also believe people have a right to their deeply held religious beliefs, or the belief that nature cries out that its unnatural. They may also believe that since there is no purpose in sex between men other than satisfying physical lusts, and that homosexuality is an indication of moral decline. I personally feel that i am free to satisfy my lusts however i choose and anyone who doesnt like it can go you know what. However, i am surprised you have an opinion on marriage, since it is largely a religious construct. As such, again, religious people are going to have am opinion on it. Maybe the gay marriage folks should have come up with a different word for it, and asked for it to be codified as a binding contract in law, similar to marriage. Might have even convinced the hypocrites named Obama, Clinton and Biden to support it sooner. Instead, they waited until it was no longer politically expedient to resist. Similar to Biden and his racism. So long as these beliefs do no harm, i am not opposed. And by harm, of course, i dont mean hurt feelings. Your tactic, and many like you, is to shut down the debate by calling people names in an lame attempt to shame and shut up.

        Now, if your son wants to share a locker room with, and steal an opportunity from my daughter, because he is dysphoric, you can KMA.

        Does that answer your question?

          1. Where you at Dennis? Back on that unicorn with your tail between your legs? I hear Target has some swim trunks you might like.

      4. There are many LGB who do not like being lumped together with the broader alphabet “community.”

        LGB are not recent products of the pharma/progressive alliance, but have been with us since the dawn of history. Unlike T, their existence is not inextricably bound to surgical procedures and/or lifetime doping. Nor have they ever advocated the mutilation of children, or that males compete against females in girls’ and women’s sports.

        The groups actually have very little in common, and in fact research shows that kids who do not transition and then desist, rather than being affirmed in their delusions and transitioning medically, often grow up to be gay. Andrew Sullivan has argued that “affirmative care” can thus be viewed as an attack on nascent gay youth.

        1. Daniel

          Well said, as always. Your reasoned approach to dealing with fascist thinking is admirable.

          I suspect these were not the responses that denny was hoping for. Again, easy to see why he doesnt go off the cuff much.

          If he cant cut and paste it, or just make it up out of thin air, he is lost.

        2. Trans people have also been around since the dawn of history. Bizarre that you believe that being trans is “inextricably bound to surgical procedures.”

    2. In answer to your question – that would depend on the law.

      PResuming – which has not been established that Davis was in violation of the law at the time she refused to issue maraige cirtificates – then it was correct to remove her from office, and she is suject to tort claims for damages.

      Her religious reasons for refusing to perform a duty of PUBLIC OFFICE are irrelevant. If you can not follow the letter of the law, you can not hold office or work for government.

      Further a refusal to provide GOVERNMENT services that are mandated by law, would be a tort, and in some instances actually a crime – regardless of your reasons.

      Though in this instance it is a tiny tort – as the damages are miniscule – and 100K is far to high an award for a delay in getting a marraige certificate.

      I would note NONE of the aqbove cares WHY Davis failed to do her lawful duty.

      That is an independent question of law. As I recall this was a mess – and the federal courts were meddling where they did not belong.

      If the state law barred issuing marraige certificats to gay couples – then you must change the state law. Otherwise Davius and otehr clerks are required to follow it.

      While I firmly beleive that gay people should have the same rights to get married as straight couples, that was INARGUABLY a deviation from the law and constitution as drafted and ratified. When laws regarding marrage licenses were passed there was no expectation they applied to gay couples.

      When you are gtoing to change the law and constitution based on our alleged modern enlightenment on such issues you are obligated to ACTUALLY change the law and constitution.

      We create chaos when the meaning of the law and constitution is determined by the subjective beleifs of some judges – even where I think those beleifs are correct.

      Fight to change the law and constitution when you beleive it is wrong – change the actual TEXT – not the interpretation of judges who are supposed to be bound to the meaning of the text at the time it was ratified, because anything else is anarchy – the rule of man not law.

      Further I addressed this before – but the damages in this case are negiligable. ‘

      Finally – the reality is that marraige is just another civil contract. There should be no need for govenrment to give its impramatur, to issue licenses, or certificates.

      Draft up your marraige contract with lawyers and get it notarized – and you are married according to whatever the terms of that contract.
      For the myriads who can not afford a lawyer – you can download a standard marraige contract over the web.

      Like many many many other things – government has no business in marraige EXCEPT enforcing the terms of the contract, and resolving disputes when it is breached or one party seeks to disolve it.
      it is just a contract

  6. Jonathan: It’s Saturday and an opportunity to share with you and your loyal sycophants some other news. I title this comment “You are Your Own Worst Enemy”.

    DJT was interviewed this week by sympathetic host Megan Kelly. When she asked DJT about the Mar-a-Lago criminal case this what he said: “I’m allowed to have these documents. I’m allowed to take these documents, classified or not classified. And, frankly, when I have them, they become unclassified. People think you have to go through a ritual. You don’t, at least in my opinion”

    So do you or anyone on this blog think that one thing DJT said is true? I think DJT is the only one who thinks what he said was true. No one at NARA believes DJT had the right to right to take top secret and other classified material back to Mar-a-Lago. The PRA makes it plain that ALL presidential records belong to the government–and in turn to the American people.

    A reasonable person would ask these Qs. If DJT thought he had a right to the documents why did he try to hide them from government investigators? When he held up the one classified doc to people at Bedminster he acknowledged it was classified and he shouldn’t be showing it to them. Why would he say this if he thought he had declassified it?

    Why do DJT’s above quoted remarks matter? Because Jack Smith will use them in his trial before Judge Cannon in south Florida as further proof of DJT’s criminal intent. Most legal scholars and former prosecutors believe the case is a “slam dunk”. Why? Because DJT keeps making admissions that sink any case he might have by way of defenses. That’s why I say DJT is “his own worst enemy”.

      1. That’s why I say Dennis is “his own worst enemy”.

        He contradicts himself repeatedly in his own posts. See below for 4+4+1+5+10=8

    1. And, frankly, when I have them, they become unclassified. People think you have to go through a ritual. You don’t, at least in my opinion”

      I dare anyone to prove this false

      1. Trump’s the one who has to prove it true. The judge has made it clear that unless Trump provides evidence of having declassified documents, the ones marked as classified will be treated as classified (e.g., Trump will have to discuss them with his lawyers in a SCIF).

            1. Interim orders are appeallable when the case is concluded, if an appeal is taken. This judge’s opinion of how documents are declassified will not be binding on the appellate court or Supreme Court.

    2. Dennis – you are confusing Presidential Records with Classified Documents. You are also ignoring Personal Records. NARA has a claim to Presidential Records, but there is no obvious means of separating Presidential records from Personal records. Justice Jackson, when a circuit court judge, held that the President ultimately decides which are which. Of course, she probably would change her position when the President is a Republican, rather than a Democrat. Nevertheless, there is still no established mechanism for separating these. Classified Documents are determined by some responsible agency that put a marking on them. But a President, as Trump was and will be again, has a right to possess any and all of them. After he/she is President, they are generally allowed to hold on to classified Documents, as Obama did. Even if allowed to hold on to them, they must keep them secure. Trump did hold them secure. Biden did not hold his classified documents (which he probably never had a right to hold in the first place) secure. So, if anyone should on trial for improperly possessing and holding documents, it should be Biden.

      1. a) You’re confusing Judge Amy Berman Jackson with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
        b) A district court ruling has no precedential effect.
        c) Many of the documents in question are governed by the Federal Records Act, not the Presidential Records Act.
        d) Former Presidents can only view classified documents if permitted to do so by the current President. Biden did not afford that to Trump.
        e) Trump did not keep the documents in a SCIF, as required. He’s admitted that he no longer has a SCIF at M-a-L.
        f) Biden cooperated as soon as he became aware that there were classified documents in his possession. Trump not only disobeyed a subpoena to return many of the documents in his possession, he seems to have moved documents in and out of storage to mislead his lawyers about them (hence the crime-fraud exception testimony before the grand jury).

        1. a) perhaps you are correct that I have confused the judges. I will accept your correction.
          b) A district court ruling is still persuasive authority in the absence of other law. It does not need to be binding to be followed.
          c) It is not clear how you believe that the Federal Records Act affects this situation. The Federal Records Act of 1950 seems to be a system for federal agencies to maintain records. It does not affect the distinction between Presidential and personal records.
          Nor does it appear to modify laws regarding the handling of classified documents.
          d) When Trump left the White House, he had authority to possess all classified documents. When his security clearance was revoked, he no longer held a blanket authority to hold the records. That fact does not affect the question of whether he declassified the documents in his possession by taking them from the White House. It also does not affect the question of whether classfiied documents can become personal records. It does not change the question of what procedures govern how the responsible agencies should demand the return of the documents. Finally, it does not resolve the question of the penalty that ensues for mere retention of the documents by the past President. No President before this one has ever been prosecuted for retention of classified documents.
          e) The documents were kept in a secure facility guarded by the secret service. They were safer in Trump’s hands than they were in the hands of the DOJ, which immediately began leaking their contents.
          f) “Biden cooperated as soon as he became aware that there were classified documents in his possession.” You are joking, I assume. He always knew he had classified documents in his possession. He moved them from place to place and left some of them in plain view in his garage. Trump contested a subpoena. He had that right. Subpoenas are challenged in court every day in this country.

          1. Sandy Berger stole classified documents for Bill Clinton and bill has made over $100,000,000 giving speeches, writing books and lying about 1 million Rwandans who were massacred because he broke the law.

            “Fifty-eight year old Sandy Berger, the former National Security Adviser under the Clinton Administration, illegally took classified documents from the National Archives on more than one occasion.”
            Hire That Man!

          2. c) The Presidential Records Act states that “The term “Presidential records” … does not include any documentary materials that are (i) official records of an agency (as defined in section 552(e) of title 5, United States Code …” As explicitly noted there, agency records are not presidential records. Most of the records that Trump has been charged with withholding are agency records, not presidential records. Those agency records are governed by the Federal Records Act.
            d) No former President before this one has ever refused to return classified documents when subpoenaed. Again, we are primarily talking about agency records (such as a DoD document), not presidential records.
            e) The Secret Service is clear that the protect people, not documents, and MaL is not secure when it comes to documents. The DOJ hasn’t leaked any classified documents in this case.
            f) Trump did not challenge the subpoena in court. He just refused to obey the court order, and he obstructed his lawyers’ attempt to obey.

            1. This will be my last entry in this chain.
              (c) Trump is charged with violation of the Espionage Act for withholding National Defense Information records after surrender thereof were demanded. The fact that records are considered property of a federal agency hardly means that they trigger the Espionage Act. Nor are they necessarily classified at any kevel. Presumably the respective agency already has originals of the records that were in Trump’s possession. Unless they have NDI aspects to them, why even bother to demand their return? This is “making a mountain out of molehill.” This kind of property argument is being made solely as a pretext to get Trump.
              d) What other President was ever subpoened? Eisenhower, Truman, Johnson and Obama, and probably others, took classified documents with them without any comment or objections by even the political opposition. No one suggested that they would reveal these documents to enemies if the United States. Uniquely, Trump needs to prove that he is not a traitor or spy. It is Russiagate reborn.
              e). Regardless of the avowed function of the Secret Service, the fact is that it limits access to M-A-L. How do you think Russian spies would get past them? As to DOJ leaking, you seem to have forgotten the leak, false it now seems, that “nuclear secrets” were contained within the Trump documents.
              f). There is no question that Trump had the right to challenge the characterization of the records which were, after all, in his possession. He considered himself to be in negotiation with NARA, just as Clinton had been in negotiation with NARA. Instead of invading Trump’s residence and seizing his property, the DOJ should have filed a contempt action to enforce their subpoena, or just continued negotiations. That is the way adults would have handled it.

              1. Re: point (f): The approaches you suggest–negotiating or filing a contempt action–would have been appropriate if Trump had “challenged the characterization of the records.” But Trump didn’t do that, presumably because he knew he wasn’t entitled to retain the records. Instead, when he received the subpoena, he turned over some documents and claimed, falsely, that he had turned over all of them.

                To file a contempt action to enforce their subpoena, the DOJ would need proof that Trump was lying. They got that proof when they searched Mara Lago, but at that point they had the documents, so there was no need to file a contempt action.

  7. Now we have a pretty good idea why nancy went right after impeachment in the Ukraine call. The Impeach was just as phony as this war in Ukraine is now. Few hundred thousand dead and wounded millions fleeing. It is hard to imagine the destruction to America and the world the D’s and Rhino’s and war mongers from both parties have laid out in plain sight. You can include big Pharma, Big Tech and the rest of the clown show.

  8. CNN presented this claim:
    Claim: Biden family and associates got $20 million through shell companies
    “Bank records show that nearly $20 million in payments were directed to the Biden family members and associates through various shell companies,” McCarthy said.
    Facts First: This is true about Joe Biden’s family and associates, but there is no public evidence ‘TO DATE’ [emphasis added] that the president personally received any money.
    That is a fair fact check but it is also the very reason that Speaker McCarthy initiated the impeachment inquiry. We do not know where this money went, why it was sent through this labyrinth of accounts, or what it was intended to buy. That is why as the ‘Duty Of Congress’ this has become an impeachment inquiry.

    The use of the phrase “to date” highlights the need for ongoing investigations and the duty of Congress to pursue the truth comprehensively and impartially.

  9. Clown NEWS NETWORK knows they have to cut their losses. They know dying on the clown car biden hill will hurt in the message to assassinate Trump. They will need to take Joe out before the inquiry starts as each day it goes on they will go from no credibility to -0 credibility. Even koolaid drinkers might have to shut them down if each everyday more tales are told by iwtnesses and actual evidence. Then to top it off the public will find out the ukraine call by trump was 100% legit and then the ultimate slam will folks realizing they are paying 90% of the cost for a phony war.

  10. Jonathan: Sorry, but I can cite CNN but you can’t. In fact, I reserve the right to mis-cite CNN as well as all my other “sources” to try and refute your claims. Blah Blah Blah Rudy Rudy Rudy (insert usless drivel meant to distract, here).

    And where did Joe Biden hide all his money? In offshore accounts you say?? You have no proof (stamps feet and screams). He is worth only about $8 million–not much to show if he received millions in brides from his son and his business associates. Forbes reports that Joe and the First Lady own 2 Delaware homes worth about $4 million combined. They have investments worth an additional $4 million and a federal pension worth another $1 million. The majority of Biden’s other wealth comes from book deals and speaking fees.
    So all that adds up to way more than $8 million and I am a 3rd grader stuck on stupid.

    Last year Biden released his tax returns showing adjusted gross income of $579,614–primarily from Biden’s $400,000 as president Jill’s pay of $82,335 as an educator, and didn’t claim the money that went to his minor grandchildren. No one did. When Biden was trying to hide the “bribes” from his son you think by now the IRS would be conducting a full audit. But alas, as the whistleblowers testified, they werent allowed to look anywhere that the trail led.

    Blah Blah Blah more whataboutism KevinMcCarthy Blah Blah Blah. They all got rich, so what is your problem with Joe?

    DJT Blah blah blah more whataboutism ‘cuz its all i got blah blah blah. And you know I can’t spill any keyboard diarrhea without mentioning the orange man in my head.

    Any interest in where DJT got his money? I guess not. I must be the only dumba$$ on the planet who doesn’t know the answer to that.

    So I renew my stupid Q. Where is the meat? And don’t make me look like an idiot and say it’s at Arby’s, please.

    You have it from Smeagol, the ATS. “You gotta have incontrovertible proof”!!

  11. In other news: “With Impeachment Looming, Afghanistan Offers Asylum and Refugee Status to Joe Biden and Family”
    A Taliban spokesman announced through the Chinese Ambassador that his nation would welcome the Biden family should they need to flee the United States on corruption charges, promising 2% of the country’s GDP as welfare payment.

    He continued, “We owe a great debt to Joe Biden for bringing us to victory, returning our females to the kitchen, and supplying our military with world class arms and equipment free of charge. 2% of our GDP should be sufficient to meet his needs.”

    1. Jill would never agree to covering her face, head down to her toes, knowing her husband’s pullout from Afghanistan has set human rights back for women centuries and the Taliban would not recognize her plagiarized “dokturate in eggjuhkayshun”. On the other hand, she also knows the Taliban would severely punish an old demented American if he sniffed the hair and touched their young virgins. She likely could get used to riding camels and living like a princess as long as it means never seeing Kamelah ever again

  12. Nothing CNN or what republicans cite as “evidence” is illegal or corruption

    20 shell companies churning money in and out, is evidence ……not claiming it’s a crime. It is evidence. Enough evidence to expand an investigation.

    Your pedantry is transparent.

    1. The world would still stink if the lefties could at least admit there was a valid issue here. But they are so incredibly dishonest to keep pretending like nothing’s really wrong. It’s like we now live in a world where words have no meaning any more. That’s the most annoying part.

    2. “Your pedantry is transparent.”

      Yep, he is right there with Gigi and ATS. They think an act has to be a crime to be evidence of a crime. You can’t fix stupid.

  13. The power of being in power AND corrupt. Now that there is an impeachment inquiry we will get the House using subpoena power to demand documents from the WH, State, the DOJ and banks but due to being in power and corrupt they will all be denied and when the House holds them in contempt the AG, Garland, will take no action and they will tell the House to go pound sand.

    As Stalin said, “how many divisions does the Pope have” and if you have no power you cannot make anyone do anything. Eric Holder was in Contempt of Congress…how many years did he serve in prison? Lois Lehrner??

  14. His biggest flaw is that president Biden didn’t make these deals, didn’t set up the shell companies, and didn’t receive the money

    Typical crime boss. The worst thing Al Capone did was not pay some taxes….Right? No bootlegging, no gambling, no numbers running, no bookmaking, no prostitution. Just a tax snafu.

  15. If President Biden is guilty or not, the stench is reaching a smell so potent it will knock over his administration either indirectly or through impeachment. The tides are rising and there are signs of an infectious whirlwind headed directly to the Democratic Party. The party should be cautious of their continued support of all the nefarious actions fostered by the administration and their minions. Lemmings that follow the leader off the cliff surely suffer.

      1. Dick Head: it appears Dennis missed the IRS testimony, that they weren’t allowed to look at where the money went, despite it being distributed to NINE family members.

    1. I’m hoping they will all follow…unelected retreads from previous administrations smitten with power of having a puppet for a boss who can’t even choose his own jello for lunch, but will sign anything they put in front of him even if it contradicts his previous stated positions, his (supposed faith) and his campaign promises. Flush them all.

  16. Jonathan: Sorry, but citing CNN doesn’t add to your argument. In fact, the CNN report directly refutes your claim when it states there is “no public evidence to date that the president personally received any money”. The whole claim that Joe Biden received bribes out of the alleged $20 million Hunter and his business associates made is like Rudy Giuliani’s claims over the 2020 election. He went from state to state telling election officials there was “massive election fraud”. When asked to produce any evidence Rudy could only say: “We have lots of theories but no actual evidence”. That’s where we are in the MAGA House impeachment inquiry. Jim Comer admitted this week that the impeachment inquiry is only based on “suspicious activity” by Joe Biden. Comer also said the gun and tax charges against Hunter are not related to Joe Biden. So where is the evidence to justify a legitimate impeachment inquiry?

    And where did Joe Biden all his money? He is worth only about $8 million–not much to show if he received millions in brides from his son and his business associates. Forbes reports that Joe and the First Lady own 2 Delaware homes worth about $4 million combined. They have investments worth an additional $4 million and a federal pension worth another $1 million. The majority of Biden’s other wealth comes from book deals and speaking fees.

    Last year Biden released his tax returns showing adjusted gross income of $579,614–primarily from Biden’s $400,000 as president Jill’s pay of $82,335 as an educator. If Biden was trying to hide the alleged “bribes” from his son you think by now the IRS would be conducting a full audit. In contrast to Biden his VP, Kamala Harris, is estimated to be worth up to over $15 million. Kevin McCarthy’s net worth is about $30 million–making him one of richest members of Congress. No interest in where McCarthy got his wealth? And DJT NEVER released his tax returns while president. He has been under audit for years. Any interest in where DJT got his money? I guess not.

    So I renew my Q. Where is the meat?

    1. He is worth only about $8 million–not much to show if he received millions in brides from his son and his business associates. Forbes reports that Joe and the First Lady own 2 Delaware homes worth about $4 million combined. They have investments worth an additional $4 million and a federal pension worth another $1 million. The majority of Biden’s other wealth comes from book deals and speaking fees.

      Might wanna do that math again, after you’ve had your meds, Denny.

      What a dufus…

      1. Here let me help you

        2 homes…4
        other wealth…???
        offshore accounts?

        Already well over 8 million, numbskull.

        Another lie from Dennis, our local mathematician.

        Twist Denny, twist…this is sooooomuch more fun than I thought it would be

        1. And right on cue, the tard who “never tucks tail and runs” is nowhere to be found.

          McIntyre means “tuck tail and run” in Gaelic.

    2. “his son you think by now the IRS would be conducting a full audit.”

      Yea, you’d think those whistleblowers would have been allowed to look…they weren’t.

      Put down the shovel Denny.

        1. Surprised that you’re makin’ sh!t up???…hardly.

          Just like “incontravertible proof” is the standard…makin’ sh!t up.

      1. “Not much to show if he received millions in brides from his son and his business associates”

        And Denny…this is the second time the words “millions in brides” has appeared in your posts. As the letters “d” and “b” are nowhere near each other on the keyboard, do we asssume
        a) you are cutting and pasting your own useless drivel, ala the CIA or FBI, who leak talking points, then cite the press as evidence that what they leaked is true??? OR
        b) that you are dictating this garbage using voice to text. Becaus if thats so, Dick Head needs a new term besides “keyboard diarrhea” LMAO. It might not get past the word filters bwahahahahaha!!!

    3. If Biden was trying to hide the alleged “bribes” from his son you think by now the IRS would be conducting a full audit. ting

      The evidence of IRS whistle blowers proves the IRS was prevented from investigating the Biden’s or anything that got within 1 degree of separation.
      We also now have evidence connecting the 20 shell companies to foriegn bank accounts. Again investigations of the Foriegn bank accounts were stopped by the Biden White House.

      McIntyer’s IQ below the retard level prevents him from simple logic

      1. iowan2: McIntyer joins a host of other morons who have no idea what logic means, or ethics for that matter. Apparently not courses they teach in night school.

    4. Forbes reports that Joe and the First Lady own 2 Delaware homes worth about $4 million combined.

      This is the kind of “truth” over facts the Leftist lying Democrats use to fool their loyal voters like McIntyer.
      Todays value is meaningless to this discussion. What was the purchase price? Today’s media can’t be bothered to spend 20minutes looking up the purchase price. AND todays journalist with todays college degrees just aren’t smart enough to ask the right question, or know how to get the answer.

    5. As almost everyone has said, the money does need to reach Biden personally in order to perfect the crime. If Biden intentionally brings about the payment of money to anyone, in exchange for a favor, it is a bribe.

        1. As I related yesterday, it’s a good thing they weren’t in the military. Guys like them on a submarine, ended up taped head to toe in what we called EB Green tape. Its a cloth impregnated tape, that is extremely tacky and strong. It has been said to hold submarines together before. When removed, their naked bodies would have not one hair left on them. If that attitude correction wasn’t sufficient, they would be taken to the aft workbench in the engineroom, their thumbs placed in a vice, a handful of grease applied, and an 18″ breaker bar shoved halfway up the orifice where their heads currently reside.

          You see, we fought for their freedom to act like embeciles, but in the Navy, you didn’t have that freedom.

          Dennis, on the other hand, because he is too cowardly to stand up for himself, would not have gotten this treatment. We had another one for the galactically stupid. He would have been given a wet willy and sent to the torpedo room to ask for a TM punch.

          (TM= Torpedoeman’s Mate)

          And trust me, he would have gotten it.

          1. Oh, and guys would have been standing in line to get Dennis’ coffee for him.

            Does anyone know what “rimming a cup” is?

        2. “Evidence” is what happens in courts or other judicial proceedings. What we have now are facts which show $20m being paid to the BCF. We also have facts showing that Biden used his official powers to intimidate Ukraine into firing one of their justice officials after such a request was seemingly communicated by phone by his son, per Devon Archer’s testimony. We also have an apparent “fact” that Biden the elder assisted Biden the younger in extorting $5 from a Chinese businessman over the telephone. Extortion is also a crime. Whether these apparent facts can be turned into evidence depends on the upcoming investigation. If you believe in the innocence of your boys, you should welcome the chance to clear their names.

        3. DM if you are oblivious to FACTS – that is your problem.

          We are way past suspicion – if’s in most of this.

          It is a FACT that the Biden Syncicate recived millions of dollars – do you honestly doubt that ?

          It is a FACT that they received that money in return for deliverables that REQUIRED VP Joe Biden to excercise his public powers as VP.

          Those are the requirements for CRIMINAL bribery. They have been PROVEN beyond any doubt.

          What has been established – but NOT beyond reasonable doubt – is that VP Biden personally profited,
          That is NOT a requirement for public corruption convictions. But Jurries tend to want to see the money get to the hands of the government official executing the ACT.
          I would note that we have EVIDENCE of that – we have the emails from Hunter that Joe is getting 50% of his income.
          We have the mixing of bank accounts between Hunter and Joe. We have Hunter paying a variety of expenses that are Joes.

          Each of us is Free to decide if THAT is proof of payments directly to Joe, regardless it is Evidence. and the only “If” regarding it, is If Hunter is lying in emails he never expected to be made public – something that is unlikely. Hunter MAY be exagerating – but it does not change the crime if Joe’s share was 1% or 90%.

          Whether you like it or not Joe Biden is toast.

          There will be no revalations that will explain or exhonerate him.

          The impeachment investigation may not turn up video of VP Joe receiving envoles full of money from Russia or China, but it will crtainty will find ever more damning evidence.

          There will be more bank accounts more deals more money moving arround, more money. more official acts,
          more, more, more.

          Most people have already correctlt concluded this is criminal public corruption. slowly more will over time.

          A wise person can figure out the likely trajectory of things.

          The Trump prosecutions are all entirely based on unusally legal theories that have never been tried and tested.
          People are righting suspicious that this is political not actually criminal.
          And though not impossible the odds of everything going the way prosecutors need is small. They will win some battles and lose others. Trump will likely lose most of the legal battless, bujt for most of these charges he only needs to win ONE and the case goes away complete. Smith Willis, Bragg, need to win nearly all their claims,
          Most of which are novel and untested. The odds are against them.

          Conversely the Biden case is not novel. There is no unusal application of the law.
          The closest thing we have to an unresolved legal or factual question is whether Joe recived money and whether that is nececary for public corruption.
          The Law saying that direct personal payment is not necescary is not a new or novel applitcation.

          You can debate that law, but ultimately it is unlikely to matter.
          There is already evidence that Joe Biden personally benefited and the odds that further inquiry will deliver ever more evidence is high.

          Throughout the Collusion delusion, the Hunter Laptop nonsense – all the Trump issues and on and on, one of the fundimental problems those on the left have had is the failure to understand in each and every instance what direction something was likely to go.

          It never made any sense for Putin to try to get Trump elected. That did not make it impossible, but it made it highly unlikely that evidence would be produced.
          It was also highly unlikely that the Trump campaign would engage with Putin. The downside would be enormous and the upside tiny.
          Even criminals RARELY do things that they are likely to get caught and get no benefit from.

          Conversely it was NEVER likely that Hunter Biden’s laptop was “russian disinformation” The difficulty in forging something that substantial without making an error that would expose the forgery is enormous.

          The odds of Trump not winning his legal cases at some point ios quite small – specifically because the legal claims are a stretch and untried. But also because
          as they are being applied to Trump they would equally apply to Biden, Clinton, …

          In fact Smith’s charges against Trump are equally aplicable to Smith’s own conduct.

          Most of the courts are not stupid. They are not going to bless legal theories that result in anarchy and chaos.

          And if they do – you can expect Republican states to follow suit and start indicting democrats for political crimes.

          Regardless, democrats and those on the left are really just demonstrating how weak and desparate they are and how scared they are of Trump.

  17. “…president Biden didn’t make these deals, didn’t set up the shell companies, and didn’t receive the money. Hunter Biden and his partners did. Hunter is a private citizen, not the president. Republicans want pretend Hunter Biden’s actions are Joe Biden’s and therefore justify impeachment..”

    “…The allegation of Bribery is based on pure hearsay and zero evidence.”

    Haha. Anon, look up the word “inquiry.”

    During the INQUIRY, the House will dive into the Biden family’s alleged influence peddling by subpoenaing characters, gathering docs and presenting facts. If the evidence warrants, Biden will be impeached.

    Oh, and the “whataboutism” at the end of your post doesn’t become you.

    1. “Oh, and the “whataboutism” at the end of your post doesn’t become you.”

      I beg to differ. Whataboutism, red herrings, straw men, obfuscation, and gas lighting all very much become him.

    2. These deals probably were made at the instigation of Joe, or with his knowing assistance. The brothers, and Hunter, and Hunter’s partners all had a role to play in extorting money from foreign entities. Joe played the crucial role because he was the whore whose favors were being sold. Even if that picture turns out to be wrong, it looks like it is true, and any rational person who is not a DNC toady would agree that it demands further investigation.

  18. Honest question: Is it proper for a powerful politician to arrange for his relatives to get cushy, overpaid jobs for which they have no qualifications and for which they do little to no actual “work.” When that happens, is it OK?

    Let’s say you own Acme Inc which makes widgets for a fine profit. Your state’s Governor’s daughter sets up a lunch meeting with you and proposes that she be hired as a contract employee for $250K per year. Her job would be to provide a few suggestions for how to improve your widget marketing. She has no experience or credentials in marketing. While at lunch, she takes a Face-time call from her father and shows him that she is lunching with you to discuss some business; you and the Gov exchange a few pleasantries. Is this OK with you, the owner of Acme? What if you currently have plans to expand and you will need approvals from various State agencies? You might very well think that your permits will be approved in an expedited manner if you hire her—or that they will be denied, if you refuse to hire.

    In any case, would you deny that the Governor considers it to be of some benefit to him if his daughter were to get this great job? I have kids and it is a high priority of my husband and I to do anything legal and ethical to help them succeed. My husband and I have enough money at this point in our lives (probably) to continue a comfortable lifestyle—I would far rather any kind of big money come into the lives of our kids than to us, so that they and our grandchildren can be set up for financial security.

    1. Honest question:

      Is “incontrovertible proof” a thing?

      Beyond a reasnable doubt
      A preponderance of the evidence
      Probable cause

Leave a Reply