Four Biden Impeachment Articles and What the House Will Need to Prove

Below is my column in The Hill on moving forward with the Biden impeachment inquiry. The column discusses four possible impeachment articles that could be brought by the House and what the House would need to prove.

Here is the column:

With the commencement of the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of President Joe Biden, three House committees will now pursue key linkages between the president and the massive influence peddling operation run by his son Hunter and brother James.

The impeachment inquiry should allow the House to finally acquire long-sought records of Hunter, James, and Joe Biden, as well as to pursue witnesses involved in their dealings.

testified this week at the first hearing of the impeachment inquiry on the constitutional standards and practices in moving forward in the investigation. In my view, there is ample justification for an impeachment inquiry. If these allegations are established, they would clearly constitute impeachable offenses. I listed ten of those facts in my testimony that alone were sufficient to move forward with this inquiry.

I was criticized by both the left and the right for the testimony. Steven Bannon and others were upset that I did not believe that the basis for impeachment had already been established in the first hearing of the inquiry. Others were angry that I supported the House efforts to resolve these questions of public corruption.

Without prejudging that evidence, there are four obvious potential articles of impeachment that have been raised in recent disclosures and sworn statements: bribery, conspiracy, obstruction, and abuse of power.

Bribery is the second impeachable act listed under Article II. The allegation that the President received a bribe worth millions was documented on a FD-1023 form by a trusted FBI source who was paid a significant amount of money by the government. There remain many details that would have to be confirmed in order to turn such an allegation into an article of impeachment.

Yet three facts are now unassailable. First, Biden has lied about key facts related to these foreign dealings, including false statements flagged by the Washington Post. Second, the president was indeed the focus of a corrupt multimillion-dollar influence peddling scheme. Third, Biden may have benefitted from this corruption through millions of dollars sent to his family as well as more direct benefit to Joe and Jill Biden.

What must be established is the President’s knowledge of or participation in this corrupt scheme. The House now has confirmed over 20 calls made to meetings and dinners with these foreign clients. It has confirmation of visits to the White House and dinners and events attended by Joe Biden. It also has confirmation of trips on Air Force II by Hunter to facilitate these deals, as well as payments where the President’s Delaware home address was used as late as 2019 for transfers from China.

The most serious allegations concern reported Washington calls or meetings by Hunter at the behest of these foreign figures. At least one of those calls concerned the removal or isolation of a Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Burisma, an energy company paying Hunter as a board member. A few days later, Biden withheld a billion dollars in an approved loan to Ukrainian in order to force the firing of the prosecutor.

The House will need to strengthen the nexus with the president in seeking firsthand accounts of these meetings, calls, and transfers.

However, there is one thing that the House does not have to do. While there are references to Joe Biden receiving money from Hunter and other benefits (including a proposed ten percent from one of these foreign deals), he has already been shown to have benefited from these transfers.

There is a false narrative being pushed by both politicians and pundits that there is no basis for an inquiry, let alone an impeachment, unless a direct payment or gift can be shown to Joe Biden. That would certainly strengthen the case politically, but it is not essential legally. Even in criminal cases subject to the highest standard, payments to family members can be treated as benefits to a principal actor. Direct benefits can further strengthen articles of impeachment, but they would not be a prerequisite for such an action.

For example, in Ryan v. United States, the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the conviction of George Ryan, formerly Secretary of State and then governor of Illinois, partly on account of benefits paid to his family, including the hiring of a band at his daughter’s wedding and other “undisclosed financial benefits to him and his family and to his friends.” Criminal cases can indeed be built on a “stream of benefits” running to the politician in question, his family, or his friends.

That is also true of past impeachments. I served as lead counsel in the last judicial impeachment tried before the Senate. My client, Judge G. Thomas Porteous, had been impeached by the House for, among other things, benefits received by his children, including gifts related to a wedding.

One of the jurors in the trial was Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who voted to convict and remove Porteous. Menendez is now charged with accepting gifts of vastly greater value in the recent corruption indictment.

The similarities between the Menendez and Biden controversies are noteworthy, in everything from the types of gifts to the counsel representing the accused.  The Menendez indictment includes conspiracy charges for honest services fraud, the use of office to serve personal rather the public interests. It also includes extortion under color of official right under 18 U.S.C. 1951. (The Hobbs Act allows for a charge of extortion without a threat of violence but rather the use of official authority.)

Courts have held that conspiracy charges do not require the defendant to be involved in all (or even most) aspects of the planning for a bribe or denial of honest services. Thus, a conspirator does not have to participate “in every overt act or know all the details to be charged as a member of the conspiracy.”

Menendez’s case shows that the Biden Administration is prosecuting individuals under the same type of public corruption that this impeachment inquiry is supposed to prove. The U.S. has long declared influence peddling to be a form of public corruption and signed international conventions to combat precisely this type of corruption around the world.

This impeachment inquiry is going forward. The House just issued subpoenas on Friday for the financial records of both Hunter and James Biden. The public could soon have answers to some of these questions. Madison called impeachment “indispensable…for defending the community” against such corruption. The inquiry itself is an assurance that, wherever this evidence may lead, the House can now follow.

Jonathan Turley is the J.B. & Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.

208 thoughts on “Four Biden Impeachment Articles and What the House Will Need to Prove”

  1. With Halloween approaching, it’s only fitting that we have our first cadaver as president.

  2. Come on in here Dennis McInlyre, and fill us all in on what Melania is doing today, as reported in your sewing circle.

  3. Your example of a case involving George Ryan falls flat. Traditionally, the parents of the bride pay for the wedding. So if a benefactor pays for a portion of that wedding – such as a wedding band, that is alleviating a cost the parents should make. So the fact that a benefactor paid for a wedding of George Ryan’s daughter means they were really paying George Ryan.

    1. @Pulley are you being intentionally obtuse?

      The cash went to pay for the band. Meaning that the band received the benefit directly.
      Indirectly, the former governor got the benefit. No cash went to the governor. (indirect benefit).

      Turley is correct.
      You’re actually making his point. Ryan received the indirect benefit hence the bribe.


      1. The governor got an indirect benefit because otherwise he would have had to pay for the band himself, so it saved him money. What is Joe Biden’s indirect benefit?

        1. Anonymous – The Ryan wedding could have proceeded without a band, so no “debt” was paid. Similarly when money is sent to relatives, no debt is being paid. But it is a benefit that the parent wants to be bestowed on his close family members.

  4. “With the commencement of the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of President Joe Biden, three House committees will now pursue key linkages between the president and the massive influence peddling operation run by his son Hunter and brother James.”

    Prior to the commencement of the impeachment inquiry, these committees pursued exactly those same things, using the same subpoena authority. Indeed, these committees have been doing very little else since the Republicans took over the House. Nothing has changed. They have found very little so far.

    1. Topper=bug face the demented lawn boy

      Dude, your ravings carry no more weight just because you use a sockpuppet name to spew them.

  5. “Even Archer admitted he had no idea what those calls were about.”

    That is a provable lie. Do I need to post the proof?

    1. Here ya go sweet cheeks, since you steadfastly refuse to ever read the transcript for yourself and prefer to remain ignorant and duped by Dan Goldman and the left wing media. By the way, did you ever find that “illusion of access” quote from Archer?

      Q Did — during that I’ll say after dinner at the Four Seasons, did Mykola
      Zlochevsky or Vadym ask Hunter Biden to make any phone calls?

      A Yes, though I was not party to that phone call.

      Q What was the request?

      A The request was they were getting pressure and they requested
      Hunter, you know, help them with some of that pressure.

      Q What pressure?

      A Government. Government pressure on their — you know, government
      pressure from Ukrainian Government investigations into Mykola, et cetera

      1. Twist on, dipweed, its there for everyone to read.

        The discussion about what the call was about occurred before the phone call, dum dum. Oh, and after the call as well.

        Here’s the context that you left out, dum dum.

        Q What was the request?

        A The request was they were getting pressure and they requested
        Hunter, you know, help them with some of that pressure.


        Twist on!!

      2. YOU havent read it dum dum. Stop lying LOL.

        Yesterday you claimed that Archer uttered the words “illusion of access”. The only thing you read was Rachel Maddow’s transcript or Philip Bump’s column.

        We are still waiting for you to post the quote. I even sent you the link.


        1. And if you ever did read it with an IQ greater than 80, you would CLEARLY see from all the context that Archer is doing EVERYTHING HE CAN to keep from implicating himself in the Biden bribery scheme.

          There are several moments where he makes “you know what I mean (wink wink)” types of comments. He keeps pointing to Rosemont Seneca, because thats not his business. He keeps saying, “I was spun the narrative” and “I was intentionally left out of the loop”.

          The sh!t that was going on was filthy dirty rotten corruption and he knew it, we all know it, and yes, even you know it, toad.

  6. IMO, best to let the biden scandals simmer. Make the democrats get rid of him. No chance biden wins in 2024 w/o massive fraud – I can’t imagine the dems getting away with the level of fraud that would be required, but you never know.

  7. First, Articles of Impeachment don’t have to be proved, in fact there is no such thing as an article of impeachment. Impeachment is a rein to control government officials, not a tool to use against political enemies, and the impeachment process has two conditions for removal, the first is on impeachment for, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors, which creates an absence in that office, albeit temporarily depending on the outcome of the trial in the senate, the second condition is conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors, which creates a vacancy in that office.

    What constitutes treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors?

    A misdemeanor is like spitting on the sidewalk, so anything as all constitutes a justification for impeachment.

    Who, or what, has the power of impeachment, and who, or what, has the power of conviction?

    The answer is the Same in both cases, the States as the Union assembled in congress! The States assembled proportionally with proportional suffrage to reach a simple majority consensus in the House of Representatives have the power of impeachment, which is a indictment referral, the States as the Union assembled in the Senate as equals with equal suffrage have the power of conviction, which is concurrence of the indictment, and it takes 2/3 of the States present, and it takes the presence of both of a State’s Senators to be counted towards the quorum. That’s at least 26 States with both of their senators, 1 vote per State, which requires at a minimum 18 States to convict, if all 50 States are present, then it takes the vote of 34 States to convict.

    [Article 1 Section 3 Clause 6

    The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.]

    Only the States are members of congress, only the States are members of the Senate, only the States can form a quorum in congress, and only the States have suffrage to vote to reach a majority consensus of all the States as the Union!

    For those who are slow, representatives and senators only represent the members, the States, they are not members themselves.

    1. “two thirds of the Members”

      “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.”

      You’re an idiot.

    2. So we all know how to Google
      . Yes, u r an idiot. Sounds like liberal gaslighting swamp water swilling extremophile ebonics.

          1. The entire Trump family cares, as it could be extremely costly for them. You think they’re left wing nut jobs with TDS?

            1. Only left wing nut jobs care about what the trump family cares about…and the trump family isn’t reading or commenting on this blog, nut job.

        1. Plenty of meaningless whackoffs care, but no sane people. You and joy reid can phone sex using the indictment transcript all you like, doesn’t matter and Trump will be your next President, so dust-off the pussy hat and rally the lobotomized by xanax insurrection bimbos and himbos and thembos (none of whom matter IRL) – you don’t want to let china down, do ya?

        1. “You will when . . .”

          Which is why, in this decrepit culture, it is suicide to create anything more than a lemonade stand. And even then, you’re not safe.

    1. No cameras allowed in the court….except the judge allowed cameras and aped for the camera himself. This is 100% political and the judge is aiding in the theater

    2. LOL. Trump has a bench trial because his lawyers were too incompetent to check the box for a jury trial.

    3. The Trump family attorney, Clifford Robert, tells Judge Engoron that Trump, Don Jr., and Eric will testify in their defense during this civil fraud trial. I look forward to the cross-examination. Will Trump be able to refrain from lying under oath?

  8. Abrogating his oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States by ignoring, disregarding, and violating existing promulgated laws in many respects is not on any impeachment agenda. I am most curious as to why not?

  9. Turley doesn’t present four articles of impeachment. He presents four possible topics without articles of impeachment, and then he only discusses the first of these, misrepresenting what must be shown. He says “What must be established is the President’s knowledge of or participation in this corrupt scheme.” But that should be an “and” rather than an “or.” Both must be shown.

  10. Please re-read my comment, I clarified the first but cancel me if you want to. Nobody should be blipped today. Once more I will go to post elsewhrre

    1. @Anonymous…RE:” Once more I will go to post elsewhere” If that’s your need, you, as well as others, need to get a life. All the time, effort and ink will distill down to one vote in November ’24. The rest is but airy persiflage, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

  11. I must add, Professor Turley that Hunter Biden, no matter what the scenario is disallowed from being a passenger on Air Force One or Two. Obviously, there is a case for potentially Joe Biden being complicit in this. He was right there with Hunter next seat did not object. Did Joe aid or abet Hunte, a crack head awaiting other legal troubles in flying all over on Government planes, for what purpose. I have already brought up the history of the $250 check to Biden’s home home requires a much better look see. This appears to be superficial investigation of serious allegations that are not being revealed to the voters. Can we add these to the Inquiry?

      1. Funny, I thought he was a “private citizen”. Doesnt sound like it. God knows he didn’t have a clearance anymore after being drummed out of the Navy.

        1. “They can take grown a$$, corrupt, drug addicted family members with them.”

          Fixed that for ya.

          Funny thing about “can” and “should”, they have entirely different meanings.

          Substitute “should” in that sentence and read it out loud to yourself. Or just go on back to the banyard, comrade.

  12. The most corrupt president in US History.

    The most corrupt administration in US History.

    The most corrupt government agencies in US History. ATF, FBI, DOJ, IRS, DOE, DHS, Joint Chiefs………..

    CHAOS is coming.

    1. You people are so sad. You have out in the open corruption by Trump, Jared, Ivanka, and Malaria, and his cronies, and you do a Swift Boat smear on Biden. Useful idiots for the Russians. Nothing more.

      1. “You people?” OK. Your into broad brushes. Check.

        But Trump and his adult children have had no shortage of scrutiny, so one subject (and his projeny) in no way precludes scrutiny of the other (and his projeny.) That’s ludicrous.

        If you want to be taken seriously, perhaps rethink your approach. If that doesn’t matter to you, then others here know to take your future comments with the requisite seriousness.

        1. Amazing that these people are so obsessed with the Russians®™.

          …one of the biggest takeaways is what a destructive, vicious, damaging person Hillary Clinton is to our political process. This Russia collusion thing didn’t only damage Trump. He won the 2016 election anyway, despite this, think how big a victory he might have had without it. But it really froze and paralyzed the country politically for over four years. The damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign did was so tremendous to this nation. I think that to some extent, while it’s being highlighted by a lot of the news coverage, they’re not really doing it personal to Hillary and it to be, she really is possibly the most destructive politician we’ve certainly had in this century, in recent memory. The manipulation that she perpetrated here is so horrible, not for what it did to Donald Trump, that’s bad enough, but what it did to our nation. We’re at each other’s throats because of what Hillary Clinton did. And she needs to be roundly condemned, and she’s not getting a fraction of the criticism that she deserves ….So I think the damage that’s been done is long lasting it tears at the fabric of our society. And it was caused by Hillary Clinton, the federal government and the mainstream corporate media all acting in unison….

  13. Olly gets it!

    The Professor has always held that good information (like truth, facts, evidence) is the counter to bad information (lies, fraud, scamming, obstruction, detraction, deflection) and when the media has to report accurately (remembering the video cameras and audio recordings are creating a historical record using sources like C-Span and other unbiased sources) the American People as a whole get to see the process take place in real time, live, and in re-runs and thereby get to make up their own minds about how the Cow ate the Cabbage.

    Biden cannot survive this coming onslaught of evidence of the wrong doing by the Biden family (including himself) down through the years.

    Remember he also has a problem looming re the classified documents he obtained and retained while a Senator and VP….with no legal justification for his doing so.

    The DOJ, FBI, and IRS may have failed to perform their duty in this matter and now it is up to the Republican controlled House of Representatives to do their job for them.

    The Media is headed for a huge dinner of very cold Crow over how they have conducted themselves from the time Trump came down the escalator and have continued doing yet today.

    This is a new benchmark in the history of the United States and has been a long time coming.

    Remember when the media and the Democrats (of course I repeat myself) saying the Red Wave did not happen and denied the loss of the House was just that….a loss.

    As BH Obama told us “Elections have Consequences” and in that he was quite correct….and now we see the Biden Family version of “Truth or Consequences” being played out the Center Ring of that Circus known as Washington DC.

    That is includes Clowns like we see on the Democrat side only emphasizes the comparison.

    Just like the Carnival Barker yelling “You ain’t seen. nothing yet!”…..when the clothes come off the Biden’s finances… is going to expose them for what they are…..Grifters of the worst kind.

    1. The Professor has always held that good information (like truth, facts, evidence) is the counter to bad information (lies, fraud, scamming, obstruction, detraction, deflection)…

      That is an absolute truth Ralph.

  14. I agree with Prof. Turley that it is good the House follows proper procedure and adheres to proper impeachment standards. Re-establishing these norms, after they had been abandoned by Speaker Pelosi twice when impeaching President Trump, is important to stop further travel down the route to constitutional anarchy.
    With all the evidence already available, it is likely that the House will develop a solid basis for impeachment and that this will actually happen. Whether President Biden will be convicted by the Senate is of course not clear. The Democrats want to protect him but may have a hard time doing so if the evidence is overwhelming. Voting for acquittal is risky for those senators facing a re-election battle as that vote will be used against them.

    So, we may arrive at the historically unique situation that we will have two presidential candidates in 2024, one under impeachment and one facing four criminal indictments. My guess is that President Biden will resign if he loses his party’s support, and it will become likely that he will be convicted by the Senate (as Nixon did when Republican senators withdrew their support). He will pardon his son and brother and may, unlike Nixon, pardon himself, unless the optics of that action would jeopardize the political changes of his party, in which case Kamala Harris will pardon him (‘in the interest of the country’). Republicans, preparing to face Biden in this election, may be preparing for the wrong opposition candidate. At their National Convention, Democrats will come with a consensus alternative candidate (Newson, Michelle Obama), one without much obvious baggage, which may provide that candidate with an edge over former president Trump. Perhaps, the Republicans and Mr. Trump should also contemplate on applying a similar strategy, i.e., replacing Mr. Trump as a candidate at the very last minute with an impeccable and strong candidate. My suggestion would be Kristi Noem.

    1. At his point, I reject the veiled process of political parties choosing any candidate. Especially the myth that the only ‘viable’ candidates must be Democrats or Republicans.

      *e.g. RFK jr. seems somewhat intellectually honest and reasonable imho .. . which seems to be attributes the Democrats reject out of hand.

  15. Look at the bright side: If not for the greed of Joe Biden and the incompetence of Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party with the help of Mitch McConnell would likely have sealed their control of governing power in the United States by now.

  16. The great thing about the impeachment process is the state-run media has to cover it. The people will get to see for themselves the facts and evidence. Then, when the regime’s defenders attempt to gaslight the public, they will be competing with the truth.

    Bust out the popcorn, this is going to be good.

    1. You hit all of the choice words, Olly: state-run media, regime, gaslight. However, I do not believe any mountain of facts and evidence as deep as the ocean will make any difference. Unlike Republicans, for whom I have little to no respect, Democrats are obsessed with power (e.g. see Peter Shill/Sammy’s comment below). We are in a battle of eunuchs vs evil.

      Extending my example of Peter Shill (aka screaming trolling, queen), perhaps an analogy of “gelding vs FTM Trans on 1 gram (1000 mg) of testosterone cypionate weekly” would be apropos. Just trying to be inclusive!

      NB: Standard therapy of testosterone for hypogonadism is 100 mg every 14 days

      1. OLLY, Estovir,
        I agree.
        As we have seen already, Sammy has already declared facts as “a false narrative pushed by the radical right media.”
        Yesterday Dennis commented three or was it four times his rubbish. I read the first two lines of the first of his comments, rolled my eyes and just scrolled past.
        Even if and when there is overwhelming evidence, more so then there is now, they will continue scream “That is not evidence of anything!”
        Or, “WhataboutTrump!!!!”

        With RFK, Jr. expected to run as a third party candidate, some polls have already shown Democrats would vote for him than Biden.
        Heck, I would consider it just as an FU to Biden.

          1. UF and Olly,

            I have long supported the idea of multiple political parties like in Germany, where the winner is forced to build coalitions with other parties to get things done.

            Democrats would commit seppuku if RFK Jr ran as an independent. All the more reason why he should? Throw in Tulsi with RFK Jr and I would vote for them hands down.

            The RNC and DNC have a monopoly on our national politics. They need competition. Let Trump run on the Bloviator Ticket, DeSantis the Republican ticket, Matt Gaetz the Cray-Cray ticket, Lauren Boebert on the Hot Mamacita ticket, who would compete with AOC in her “Aye Caramba Mami” ticket, Joe Biden-Kamala Harris the Democrat ticket and to appease the Black Marxist Anarchists, Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman could run on the “Burn it all down” ticket. It would be glorious to see the RNC / DNC disembowel themselves, the sooner we rid these 2 corrupt political parties from America, the better for all

            1. Estovir,
              That was a great comment! Thank you for the laugh.
              The way things are set up, it is rigged for a two party system.

      2. However, I do not believe any mountain of facts and evidence as deep as the ocean will make any difference.

        Estovir, that depends on the difference you’re looking for. The point has been made many times; this election, like most, will come down to the Independents and Undecided. I estimate that’s about 40% of voters. The down ticket effect will be significant. These Congress-critters know they are now on the 2024 election cycle clock. They are going to have to face their constituents and explain why they defend the most corrupt President in American history. If all of this makes no difference with voters, then our “democracy” is already too far gone.

        1. OLLY,
          Through various polls, Independent voters favor Trump or RFK to Biden.
          The majority of Democrats do not want Biden to run.
          If Biden is the candidate come election day, I think a lot of Democrats will just stay home.

          1. You underestimate how much we detest Trump. And both he and RFK Jr. are nutjobs.

            As a lefty, I think Biden’s been a decent President, and I’ll gladly vote for him to keep Trump and RFK Jr. out of office.

            1. “As a looney tunes lefty, I think Biden’s been a decent President”

              Fixed that for ya.

              Hope you enjoy being in the 15% that won’t admit he’s a complete disaster.

          2. I agree UF. If the Democrats truly believed Biden was a lock to be reelected, they wouldn’t be in full attack mode against any Republican candidate, let alone Trump. If they truly believed an impeachment inquiry would prove there was no evidence, they would welcome watching the Republicans flail around proving this was a partisan witch-hunt and then campaign off of that. They would also put Biden up against RFK Jr. in a debate setting.

            The tell on what they truly believe is evident by their regime’s 3rd world totalitarian hatred of the rule of law and the democratic process.

            1. RFK Jr. isn’t running as a Democrat, and even if he were, the incumbent never debates others in the primary.

              If RFK Jr. gets enough support, he and Biden will be on the debate stage in the general. Will Trump join them or chicken out, like he has in the GOP primary debates?

    2. Olly, the judge already proved his decision to be rubbish and political. He valued MAL at $18 Million which is next to insane. Smaller and less elegant, both house and land, down the block, Rush Limbaugh’s house sold for $155 Million. The judge is intentionally ignorant of Florida real estate prices in the area. He is also ignorant about evaluations and disclaimers. He should be removed from the bench.

      1. The judge did NOT “value MAL at $18 Million”

        The judge did not state any value himself.

        He did note the FACT that because of the restrictions on the property’s Deed, “From 2011-2021, the Palm Beach County Assessor appraised the market value of Mar-a-Lago at between $18 million and $27.6 million.” Trump does not dispute that that’s the value assigned by the Palm Beach County Assessor during those years.

        Those restrictions include things like “Trump agreed that ‘Trump intend[s] to forever extinguish [his] right to develop or use the Property for any purpose other than club use,'” and “the 2002 Deed ‘limits changes to the Property including, without limitation, the division or subdivision of the Property for any purpose, including use as single family homes, the interior renovation of the mansion, which may be necessary and desirable for the sale of the Property as a single family residential estate, the construction of new buildings and the obstruction of open vistas,'” in exchange for which he got the huge tax break.

      2. Olly, I said intentionally ignorant, but that doesn’t matter. Considering intracoastal homes that are on tiny lots and square footage compared to MAL in the area go for ~$5-$25million, it is dumb to use that $18 Million number. Even Democrats will see it for what it is and politically harms their case.

        1. None of those homes have the restrictions on their deeds that MAL has. And if the actual value of MAL is higher, then Trump must owe back taxes on it, because he asserted in his tax filings that the tax assessor’s valuation was correct.

        2. I missed that SM. My apologies. The value, wherever it came from, is a farce and anyone not dieting on lead-based paint would recognize that.

          1. He may have gotten the valuation from a service like Zillow that do not have the ability to price this type of home. I am very familiar with this area, and when I read it, all I could say, was the judge had to be ignorant. I think the judges valuation hurts the Democrat case badly because it is so far away from True

            However, I know how the left tries to justify it on this blog.

            1. . I am very familiar with this area, and when I read it…

              Party for Res Ipsa Loquitur commenters at the Palm Beach Breakers, tab is on S Meyers! Thanks  bruh!

    3. Olly,
      Nobody will even notice the televised trial in Georgia where person after person points to Trump as the leader in their racketeering case (one person has flipped and pleaded guilty already. Things will get good around the Sydney Powell trial later this month, by the time they get to Rudy it will get real good, then Mark Meadows. The airwaves will be full of testimony about Trump committing crimes, not to mention the occasional tidbit from DC and Mar-a-Lago, and the trial starting today where Trump could have to sell off many assets (not Trump Tower which he doesn’t actually own). White Turley may get his wish with an Impeachment hearing and trial. He might need to find new Republican congressmen to whisper in their ears as McCarthy, Gaetz, Boebert, and Greene may all cancel each other.

            1. I’ll never convince you otherwise, hopefully you’ll go after all bigots you see here. It wasn’t my intent to call Turley “white” it took away from the point I was making having nothing to do with race. I’ve never mentioned Turley’s race previously and probably won’t again.


        [Rasmussen] presented survey takers with an oddly phrased question: Did they agree or disagree with the statement, “It’s OK to be white”?

        When a [significant minority] of Black respondents said yes, comic strip creator Scott Adams cited the results to argue that Black Americans are “a hate group,” urging White people to “get the hell away from” Black people. [This statement] prompted hundreds of newspapers to drop his “Dilbert.”

        – WAPO

        SCOTT ADAMS: As you know, I’ve been identifying as Black for a while – years now – because I like – you know, I like to be on the winning team.

        TSIOULCAS: He went on to call Black people, quote, “a hate group” and added…


        ADAMS: The best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from Black people. Just get the f*** away. Wherever you have to go, just get away because there’s no fixing this. You just have to escape, so that’s what I did. I went to a neighborhood where, you know, I have a very low Black population.

        – NPR

  17. Wow Turley is obsessed with continuing to push the Hunter Hoax, a false narrative pushed by the radical right media.

    1. Oh Sammy, the “Hunter Hoax”? Even Hunter is now going to have to admit that the laptop and the contents therein are his. And what will happen to all the blinded stooges following down the ‘Biden yellow brick road’?

      PS Sammy: Did you get a chance to look over the Espionage Act yet?

      1. Biden did nothing wrong. He is a great president, best I have ever seen. This is nothing more then a political witch hunt.

        1. “He is a great president, best I have ever seen.”

          Ok, let’s just say stupid sh!t for the sake of saying it. How does it feel to be in the 15% who won’t admit he’s a moron with bad policies?

        2. This is what a low information, no information voter looks like. They blindly believe everything MSM tells them without question.
          Polls show the majority of Democrats dont want Biden as their candidate.
          That would be the sane Democrats like Bill Maher and James Carville. They think leftists Democrats are stupid.

          1. Only right wing nut jobs care about this hoax. Hunter, Hunter, Hunter. What would you people do without that bogeyman?

          2. That would be the sane Democrats like Bill Maher and James Carville. They think leftists Democrats are stupid.

            I would love to meet James Carville (and his wife, Mary Matalin), have coffee together in New Orleans and just listen. They both are intelligent, politically shrewd and have the gift of impactful communication.

  18. As those with agendas and partial facts flood social media, bars and dinner discussions on the sides of their choice: either – there is no evidence for impeachment – or – there is evidence to impeachment Biden now – we now have a great resource to reference and share that makes sense, legal reasoning, and clarity about where we are with this topic today, October 2, 2023.

    This article. Thank you.

Leave a Reply