Schiff: Biden Inquiry Is ‘an Evidence-Free Impeachment Proceeding’

[jknowgood]

I read the article. It did not substantiate the poster's assertion. Full stop.

Schiff said he saw the overwhelming evidence, even there was none.

 

[Mac1958]

OK here's an integrity test: Is $20,000,000 in banking records "real evidence?"

Let me try to keep this simple for you.

If the money is in Biden's banking records, and he can't explain where it came from, definitely.

Or, if it can be traced to someone he has not disclosed, then definitely.

That's called "proof" in Normal World. You can't just guess or make assumptions based on ignorance. Once you prove it, he deserves anything he gets.

Do you understand?

 

[Marener]

And you don't think it's evidence? Buying a baseball bat at Dick's is evidence. Owning a pair of Bruno Mali shoes is evidence. $20,000,000 in banking records is evidence.

I bought a baseball bat this spring! Am I to be investigated because of the evidence against me?

 

[Mac1958]

The fact that there are endless discussions on boards like this on the subject, and endless allegations, and now talk of an impeachment inquiry, leads the uninformed to think there is something to it. THAT IS THE REPUB'S GOAL.

McCarthy is counting on people being willfully or unintentionally misinformed.

It's just weird to see Gaetz pushing so hard. Either he's sure there is proof, or this is just Kabuki Theatre.

 

[Rawley]

I don't know what you're talking about, but okie dokie.

You people are an intellectual brick wall.

Backatcha. When you deny your own words not two posts later, you better ask yourself what you are doing here in the first place.

 

[berg80]

Schiff said he saw the overwhelming evidence, even there was none.

You are factually incorrect. Read them.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/download

It is a bit of a mug’s game at this point to fight over whether what either Mueller or the Intelligence Committee found constitutes collusion and, if so, in what sense. The question turns almost entirely on what one means by the term “collusion”—a word without any precise meaning in the context of campaign engagement with foreign actors interfering with an election.

So rather than engaging over whether the Intelligence Committee found collusion, we decided to read the document with a focus on identifying precisely what the committee found about the engagement over a long period of time between Trump and his campaign and Russian government or intelligence actors and their cut-outs.

Whether one describes this activity as collusion or not, there’s a lot of it: The report describes hundreds of actions by Trump, his campaign, and his associates in the run-up to the 2016 election that involve some degree of participation by Trump or his associates in Russian activity. In this post—which we are generating serially as we read through the document—we attempt to summarize, precisely and comprehensively, what the eight Republicans on the committee, along with their seven Democratic colleagues, report that the president, members of his campaign and his associates actually did.

A Collusion Reading Diary: What Did the Senate Intelligence Committee Find?

Our summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s final report on Russian interference in the 2016 election.

www.lawfaremedia.org

 

[Mac1958]

Backatcha. When you deny your own words not two posts later, you better ask yourself what you are doing here in the first place.

Again, I don't know what you're talking about.

Let's try this:

What do they have, exactly? What are you talking about, exactly? What bank records? What banks? Who's name is on the bank records? Where did the money come from?

Go ahead.

 

[berg80]

It's just weird to see Gaetz pushing so hard. Either he's sure there is proof, or this is just Kabuki Theatre.

If there was proof we'd all know about it by now.

 

[Rawley]

I bought a baseball bat this spring! Am I to be investigated because of the evidence against me?

If you are being investigated for beating your wife to death with a baseball bat, uh, yeah it's evidence. Guess this is rocket science for some here.

 

[jknowgood]

You are factually incorrect. Read them.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/download

A Collusion Reading Diary: What Did the Senate Intelligence Committee Find?

Our summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s final report on Russian interference in the 2016 election.

www.lawfaremedia.org

The russian collusion was made up, quit proving yourself an idiot.

 

[Sixties Fan]

What a duplicitous asshole. HE KNEW THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE, HE MANUFACTURED SOME OF THE SO CALLED EVIDENCE AND HE LIED OUT OF HIS ASS ABOUT HAVING EVIDENCE....AND NOW HE SAYS THIS?

A Bipartisan committee found out that Russia did try to influence the 2016 election.

Trump and his sons may not have realized that when Russians were asking for meetings with them, they were after information.


But in the end, who was the one who asked Russia to look up for Hilary's emails and released them? Trump.

Who hacked and released DNC emails to influence the election? Russia.


So, that is about the only time Trump directly asked Russia to interfere in the 2016 election and Russia complied.


Everything else Russia attempted to do, has been proven by the bipartisan committee. Both Republicans and Democrats looked into it and found out that Russia did deliberately try to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump.

Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election

The report purposely does not come to a final conclusion, as the other reports did, about whether there is enough evidence that Trump’s campaign coordinated or colluded with Russia to sway the election, leaving its findings open to partisan interpretation.

www.pbs.org

Factbox: Key findings from Senate inquiry into Russian interference in 2016 U.S. election

t - Below are key findings of the U.S. Senate intelligence committee's final report released on Tuesday about Russian efforts to influence the 2016 U.S presidential election in which Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton.

www.reuters.com

Deny or lie all you like, for your own reasons.
The facts remain. Russia influenced the 2016 in order for Trump to win.

 

[Sixties Fan]

The far-left sites these folks visit shield them from anything that could be damning to their teachings. They live in this protective bubble that keeps them on the right track. Democrats are God and Trump is the devil is pretty much all they are taught at this point.

What a Mount Everest load of garbage.

Try the facts, now.

 

[Rawley]

Again, I don't know what you're talking about.

Let's try this:

What do they have, exactly? What are you talking about, exactly? What bank records? What banks? Who's name is on the bank records? Where did the money come from?

Go ahead.

Damn. SOrry, I didn't know you were flat out ignorant of the basic facts here. Are you serious that you don't know about the $20,000,000 in banking records they have uncovered so far? Records that show $$$$ going from these foreign entities to nine BIden family members Really?

 

[berg80]

You asked him to prove that Schiff said he saw the evidence and he showed it to you.

It is a bit of a mug’s game at this point to fight over whether what either Mueller or the Intelligence Committee found constitutes collusion and, if so, in what sense. The question turns almost entirely on what one means by the term “collusion”—a word without any precise meaning in the context of campaign engagement with foreign actors interfering with an election.

So rather than engaging over whether the Intelligence Committee found collusion, we decided to read the document with a focus on identifying precisely what the committee found about the engagement over a long period of time between Trump and his campaign and Russian government or intelligence actors and their cut-outs.

Whether one describes this activity as collusion or not, there’s a lot of it: The report describes hundreds of actions by Trump, his campaign, and his associates in the run-up to the 2016 election that involve some degree of participation by Trump or his associates in Russian activity. In this post—which we are generating serially as we read through the document—we attempt to summarize, precisely and comprehensively, what the eight Republicans on the committee, along with their seven Democratic colleagues, report that the president, members of his campaign and his associates actually did.

A Collusion Reading Diary: What Did the Senate Intelligence Committee Find?​

Our summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s final report on Russian interference in the 2016 election.

www.lawfaremedia.org

 

[Marener]

If you are being investigated for beating your wife to death with a baseball bat, uh, yeah it's evidence. Guess this is rocket science for some here.

Wait, you didn’t say anything about a beaten wife! Beating a wife is a crime.

The baseball bat isn’t evidence unless you have something else. A crime.

I guess that’s what you’re missing with Hunter Biden. A crime.

 

[Rawley]

Wait, you didn’t say anything about a beaten wife! Beating a wife is a crime.

The baseball bat isn’t evidence unless you have something else. A crime.

I guess that’s what you’re missing with Hunter Biden. A crime.

LOL That's where you want to go? OK. Failure to report millions of dollars in income is a crime. FAilure to register under FARA is a crime.

 

[Care4all]

None of that $ has been shown to have gone to Joe.

And none of the $20,000,000 in money over the 10 years is shown to go to Hunter's businesses for anything other than his Consulting and Investment firm, with Hunter's Financial consulting firm deals with these three or 4 foreign investors.....

Hunter has a master's degree from Georgetown University in Economics, and his law degree from Yale Law School.... He has the education and experience to have a consulting firm.

No doubt he used his last name where he could, that may be unethical imo, but it is NOT proof of any crime, not even for Hunter.... Not with what the Republicans have now, which is simply bluster and specultion.....

 

[Rawley]

None of that $ has been shown to have gone to Joe.

You do know, even in a criminal indictment, it doens't have to be shown a single dime went into his pocket.

 

[Rawley]

And none of the $20,000,000 in money over the 10 years is shown to go to Hunter's businesses for anything other than his Consulting business, with Hunter's Financial consulting firm deals with these three or 4 foreign investors.....

Hunter has a master's degree from Georgetown University in Economics, and his law degree from Yale Law School.... He has the education and experience to have a consulting firm.

No doubt he used his last name where he could, that may be unethical imo, but it is NOT proof of any crime, not even for Hunter.... Not with what the Republicans have now, which is simply bluster and specultion.....

So Biden should welcome this investigation to clear up all these questions

 

[Marener]

LOL That's where you want to go? OK. Failure to report millions of dollars in income is a crime. FAilure to register under FARA is a crime.

Joe Biden has nothing to do with Hunter Biden’s failure to file his taxes so that has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry.

Failure to file taxes is almost always a civil matter. Roger Stone did considerable worse and never went to jail for it. I guess that’s what happens when you’re Trump’s political crony.

Two systems of justice, amiright!

Good try but you can’t justify an impeachment hearing because of these two issues since Hunter is actually not president! Are you trying to impeach Hunter?