Senate opens inquiry into the Bidens
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
Hunter Biden started working for Burisma in 2014. The GOP controlled the house and senate from 2014-2018. The inquiry opens 39 days before 2020.
This is the path that Trump and Rudy should have gone down in the first place. Whatever evidence Rudy was uncovering should have been turned over to (1) DOJ or (2)Congress. So why didn't they do that? Why not have Rudy had his evidence over to DOJ and let Barr work a normal process if there was evidence of crimes by US citizens? I'm not convinced they ever wanted a real investigation. They wanted the political ammunition that an investigation existed during the primary campaign to damage Biden. If he's cleared in 6 months by Ukraine it's irrelevant at that point.
This is a risky play by Graham. Saying he's investigating Hunter Biden helps Trump right now. But it potentially creates some problems. Number 1, if the State Department turns over the documents he's requesting, but still refuses to hand over documents sought by the house inquiry, that's going to be a firestorm. Number 2, this is a double edged sword. If it were to somehow produce hard evidence of Biden being corrupt, then it's a huge win for Trump. However, I don't think the US Senate is going to give much leeway to Graham to chase allegations against a former VP and current presidential candidate. I suspect the leash will be tight and if nothing substantial comes out of it, then Trump is worse off than before, as it gives further credence to the argument that he was chasing a conspiracy theory.
I was cracking up yesterday as Nunes is asking the witnesses if they agree that having political operatives digging up dirt on an opponent in a foreign country is a good idea. I would have lost it if Hill had said "I agree Rudy Giuliani should not be in Ukraine trying to dig up dirt on Trump's political opponents."
You could see in her eyes that it crossed her mind. She was impressive, potential future Sec of State material.
The thing that I have gotten out of this process so far is that we have some really terrific serious governmental employees. The contrast between the "best people" that Trump has hired and professional diplomatic core is vast.
![[eyeroll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/rolleye/rolleye0011.r191677.gif "Eye roll [eyeroll]")
That's true and democrats will make that point but let's be real here - politically motivated investigations are highly dependent on timing. If Biden had been the nominee in 2016, then perhaps this issue gets dealt with then.
If Don Jr runs for POTUS in 2032, there's a bunch of crap from the current time period that's going to be more deeply investigated. Sure, you can argue that if anyone really cared they would have raised the issues at the time, but resources are limited. The political threat in 2016 was Hillary, so that's where the focus was. Now it's Biden, so Hunter's terrible decision to take that board seat is a major liability for his dad.
Still but it's Hunter's terrible decision ( and it looks like he makes plenty of them). Other than him sharing the last name with dad this has nothing to do with Joe. Is DJT responsible for DJTJ's dumbass decisions?
You could say that investigations into Biden started well before the Trump investigation and it was that investigation that landed Trump in hot water and be technically correct.
As for Hunter, your last comment reads like him taking a job with Burisma was just coincidental with Biden being the lead guy from the US that was pressuring Ukraine to clean up corruption. Like the reason that he was hired wasn’t specifically to insulate Burisma from those anti-corruption efforts. Politically-motivated or not, do you agree that there is enough of an appearance of a serious conflict of interest that an investigation is warranted?
No kidding. Hill was nothing short of amazing. How she handled the question regarding Vindman and his "judgement" will end up as a textbook case study for management classes on how to handle delicate personnel issues in a public setting. The single most damaging part of her entire testimony came from Republican questioning. Her long and elegant answer about Sondland being on a "domestic political errand" connected so many dots.
Her testimony also highlights a fundamental flaw in Trump's "deep state" narrative. The Fiona Hill's of government are not trying to undermine POTUS. It's not their fault when they conclusively recommend one thing, he does something else, and his political opponents or the press chase that stuff down.
Rudy was in Ukraine looking into russia collusion way back when the Mueller investigation was going on. While doing that, he discovered the rest of this stuff and went to the state dept, but they weren't doing anything about it. He wasn't looking for dirt on Biden a year before Biden even announced his candidacy, he was serving as trumps lawyer looking for evidence that he is innocent. As he said yesterday, as a defense lawyer it's a dream come true when you find out the accuser is guilty of the very thing your client is being accused of. Biden brought a lot of this on himself when he publicly stated that he demanded that shokin be fired, because prior to that Rudy was just looking into the 2016 election.
I don't mean for it to sound coincidental. Certainly Burisma gave Hunter that job because of who his dad was. With Joe Biden running point on Ukraine anti-corruption efforts for Obama, that absolutely creates the "appearance" of a conflict of interest. But it's important to recognize that Hunter's decision to join the board is not evidence of corrupt intent on the part of Joe Biden. And keep in mind what DJT pointed out to us early on, both POTUS and VP are exempted from the Federal Conflict of Interest Statute.
We assume POTUS and VP are of a moral standard that they act in good faith. We give them the benefit of the doubt. They are going to have friends and family members with financial interests that are directly impacted by official US policy. That is simply unavoidable. Standard practice is to divest your own interests into a blind trust to minimize direct conflicts. But think of all the areas Trump would have to recuse if we had to view every issue through the lens of personal benefit for family members? Does he have to recuse himself from China Trade deals because Ivanka imports product from China? That would be absurd.
So to answer your question, no, I personally do not see enough evidence beyond the appearance to warrant any type of serious investigation. There was ZERO contemporaneous accusations of wrong-doing on the part of Joe Biden. No one questioned his motives at the time, even though Hunter's position on the board was known. Advocating for the removal of Shokin was by all accounts the consensus position of the administration. Knowing what I know about the evidence chain here - Rudy, Lutsenko, and Shokin's statement on behalf of Firtash appearing in Sept of this year, I don't see any credible basis to investigate a former VP.
That said, Congress can investigate whatever they want. They are vested with oversight of the executive branch. While VP/POTUS deserve some deference, this is something I would expect an opposition congress to dive into and I really don't take objection to Graham going down this road. This is the reality of being a major candidate for POTUS.
Prediction: It's fare more likely we see a congressional report detailing efforts by Rudy and crew to smear Yavanovitch AND Biden through their actions in Ukraine, than it is we see a congressional report detailing Joe Biden's wrong doing.
No. The State Dept was instructed to follow one policy while Rudy and the 3 amigos were pursuing their own "domestic errand". This is just a microcosm of Trump's administration, chaos and bilateral agendas.
So, there’s a strong appearance of a serious conflict of interest and you have the Vice President saying that he himself leveraged aid to Ukraine to force them to fire a prosecutor who would be responsible for looking into the company his son works for, but you don’t think that warrants an investigation. Meanwhile, some anonymous person hears a couple of people talking about a phone call and spins that into a narrative full of speculation when the principles involved didn’t think there was an issue contemporaneously and you think that requires a Congressional investigation? Can you not see that there is a double standard here? Can you at least admit that a real investigation into the Bidens has a chance of producing the exact evidence that you’re looking for?
https://johnsolomonreports.com/responding-to-lt-col-vindman-about-my-ukraine-columns-with-the-facts/
For those who think john solomon is a conspiracy theorist about this whole thing, here he provides links to all sorts of corroborating evidence that's pretty hard to refute.
For those who think john solomon is a conspiracy theorist about this whole thing, here he provides links to all sorts of corroborating evidence that's pretty hard to refute.
Trump sets foreign policy. If Rudy was following trumps policy, and it was at odds with the state dept, that problem lies at the feet of state officials.
Bullshit. Trump makes policy but if he is going to put Rudy in charge, then make him the head of state dept. Trump was trying to have an unaccountable to gov't lackey working on his personal behalf because he knew the Hatch act would prevent gov't employees from doing so.
The way I look at it, if the Senate wants to open an investigation of Hunter Biden, that’s fine. If there’s an offense to be found there that others missed, so be it.
But the impeachment trial they will be undertaking has nothing to do with Biden other than he was the motivation behind Trump’s alleged abuse of power.
Like Nixon, Trump’s refusal to cooperate is, in itself, another abuse of his power.
But tying any Biden investigation to the impeachment trial is nothing more than a “Hail Mary” partisan attempt to use the Bidens to somehow excuse Trump’s corrupt behavior.
But the impeachment trial they will be undertaking has nothing to do with Biden other than he was the motivation behind Trump’s alleged abuse of power.
Like Nixon, Trump’s refusal to cooperate is, in itself, another abuse of his power.
But tying any Biden investigation to the impeachment trial is nothing more than a “Hail Mary” partisan attempt to use the Bidens to somehow excuse Trump’s corrupt behavior.
Last edited:
They are very tied together especially if Biden's were involved in corruption.
You're pretty dumb.
Rudy isn't a government employee. He isn't subject to the rules that we have in place for government employees. He shouldn't be conducting foreign policy.
I know you think of yourself as something like a common sense intellectual but at the end of the day you're a typical conspiracy theorist doomsday prepper flat earth libertarian chud who believes everyone online who tells you what you already think.
He hasn’t been the same since that DJT Golf date
Look at what Trump does to people. He brings out the worst in everyone
So you think John Kerry negotiating with Iran was fishy then.
Graham when he thinks you're retired from politics:
Joe Biden is as good of a man as God ever made.
Also
Graham when you unretire:
He's corrupt as shit.
That’s part of the point. They say that this was wrong because the Bidens were clean thus the investigation was unwarranted and solely for political gain. If there were a legitimate reason for the investigation, public opinion would be more in favor of it. This is all about public opinion.
Like my conspiracy theory that 2 black guys tied a rope around Jussie Smollets neck? So far I have a pretty good track record whereas you are just a lazy basic non-thinker. I do appreciate your obsession with me, but it's kind of pathetic.
if the point of this is to make it appear messy enough so that their perceived biggest threat Biden doesn’t win the nomination that may turn into a self own
Our Ukraine policy was to get the country’s leadership to quit playing corrupt party politics and start focusing on building their fledging democracy. The irony is if they wanted our help, Trump wanted them to help us play the same game.
Apples and Oranges. John Kerry was not working on behalf of Trump, Rudy was.
*Browses Drudge Report*
*Heads to Water Cooler 3 Cups Deep ready to OWN some Libs*
*Heads to Water Cooler 3 Cups Deep ready to OWN some Libs*
It was a bold stance to take that a black guy tied a noose around his neck for a publicity stunt. I'd rather side with the person claiming to have been attacked and be wrong about it 9/10 times than accuse a victim of staging a hate crime and be wrong 1/10 times.
That changes nothing about the fact that your persona doesn't match your actions. You form whatever argument you need to get to the opinion you already hold.
I want you to think back over the Trump presidency and name one Trump controversy you ever changed your mind on. You seek out the evidence that allows you to side with Trump 100% of the time and you still present yourself as a free thinking libertarian. Its all for show and its obvious.
I question how anyone could be gullible enough to believe Jussie. The story was ridiculous. Goes to show you how far they are going to discredit Trump. I think there has been like mid 20 fake hate crimes using Trump's name and zero proven real ones. Meanwhile liberals are running in blackface. Strange world
Has views on topic
See someone provide statistic that doesn't support views
Must be deep state. Nevertrumper. Soros.
See someone provide statistic that supports views
Woah this person is one of the smartest people I've seen.
Looks up more from this smart person
Well, looks like I was right.
I knew it. The sheeple just listen to the scientists and media and professors and the educated and the experienced diplomats. They should see what diamond and silk have to say on this.
See someone provide statistic that doesn't support views
Must be deep state. Nevertrumper. Soros.
See someone provide statistic that supports views
Woah this person is one of the smartest people I've seen.
Looks up more from this smart person
Well, looks like I was right.
I knew it. The sheeple just listen to the scientists and media and professors and the educated and the experienced diplomats. They should see what diamond and silk have to say on this.
