607
Marjorie Taylor Greene is asked not to show porn at Biden impeachment hearing
(www.the-independent.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
607 points (98.1% liked)
politics
18080 readers
2916 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So, do they have any proof that Joe Biden has done anything or are they just pretending that Joe and Hunter are the same person?
They intentionally keep saying "Biden", talking about Hunter but with the intent that people will take it as Joe. They got called out for it but like that would stop them.
It's especially rich coming from the side that's so horribly overtly corrupt and well known for cronyism and nepotism.
Especially considering that their dear leader was impeached twice and is facing a pile of felony charges.
Well, that's the biggest reason they're doing this. If they can get Democrats to yell "this impeachment is bullshit" they don't even have to erase the extra word. Their supporters who desperately want to rationalize their support for their orange idol will do it for them.
They basically don't have proof of anything. They are just doing political theater to distract from the issues they are causing.
Like the shutdown...
He's taken a few steps to help his son which could make him an accomplice, but only if Hunter is a criminal.
They're stretching, but they know that. They just want something to stretch.
I'm not sure that's really true. The only thing they've pointed at is that prosecutor being fired in Ukraine, but that was because the prosecutor was corrupt and people all over the world were calling for it. Also the prosecutor was notably corrupt by not investigating the company Hunter was working for (so Joe getting them fired actually went against his son's interests)
Well no it's not true. They're just saying it, and I only repeat it here because the question was asking for their argument and not facts. Biden almost certainly has a bias for his son (go figure, most dads would) but I haven't heard anything that's actually substantiative in regards to impeachment. They're all hot air.
Shokin did not start Burisma investigation, according to his deputy the case was completly dormant the entire less than the year he was in office (yes, he was in the office for less of a year in total).
All political parties in Ukraine (except the ruling one which was blocking the process) started his impeachment, because of the corruption and also because he refused investigating who ordered to open fire at protesters during Euromaidan protests.
His removal was requested by the United States, European Union, World Bank and IMF. Either Hunter really has a lot of friends or Joe Biden was doing his job, by refusing to provide aid until office responsible to crack on corruption was doing its job.
Is that "shit shit, I almost blew my cover"?
Did "They're stretching, but they know that. They just want something to stretch." not let you know I thought they were full of shit the whole time?
Their whole platform is nothing but stretching lies into shit that sounds just barely true enough that it isn't immediately shut down.
He hasn't taken any steps to help his son with Burisma or Ukraine or anything legal, afaik (and the GOP would be shouting it from the rooftops if it existed). He maybe have taken steps to help his son with addiction, but that wouldn't make him an accomplice. Hunter is a criminal.
Your opening sentence looks like a propaganda admission that's followed with backtracking to gain normal human support. Maybe you didn't intend that, but that one opening sentence looks sus af.
Well your statement made me look into it and I was just wrong on a few things. I thought Biden was more active in what his son was doing. I didn't think it was illegal, but I did think it was a mutual thing.
Looking into it, though, that's not at all true. I apparently did buy into some of the propaganda. Thanks for keeping me honest and not just being a dick about it, always nice to have a good interaction online.
It's also hard to tell if someone's being genuine. I think people grossly underestimate the amount of foreign, nation state level propaganda that occurs on social media. And even if they acknowledge it exists in general, they rarely suspect they've encountered it.
I don't think the US government actively participates, but they absolutely monitor. If the US does participate , it's indirectly by asking someone else to do it for us, ala Five Eyes. There are other governments that give zero fucks about getting caught.
US political parties absolutely do though. I'm actually surprised Hillarys's campaign got so much shit for clearly labeling when they did it with "Correct the Record". Though they picked a shitty name, I think that was the right way to go about things.
(X) doubt. If he had done anything illegal, the repubs would have made that known by now. Instead it’s going to be a boatload of bullshit allegations.
Indeed. They've already investigated this six ways from Sunday, and they've found nothing. It's Hilary and Benghazi all over again - the modern republican strategy of repeating a edit: ~~law~~ lie often enough people start to believe. With their base, it doesn't even take that much repetition.
No. Yes.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna117657
The point is to discredit the whole impeachment process. "Oh, the other side always tries to impeach. It's just political theater." In order to minimize the fact that Trump was impeached for actual crimes.
They don't intend to be successful, they intend to give people an excuse to say "BoTh SiDeS!" The next time a republican is in office and gets impeached for actual crimes.
It's this. They want to impeach Hunter and are using this as a farce to do so, but... Hunter isn't the president, so....
Why would they need proof when they know he’s guilty?
They spent +8 years claiming Barack Obama was born in Kenya, which was true, he was born in Kenya and his son went on to become president.