Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Biden doesn't have Trumpybears minions who swore allegianceIn other words, Biden's minions indicted him.
Yet he is the one most responsible for it happening and especially for not doing anything to quell the attack.Trump didn't start the riot, jackass.
Guess. Go-on, guess.Who are you quoting,
Come on guess.That doesn't prove shit.
Tax payers from both parties paid for the aid he was using as leverage in his corrupt quid pro quo.Even if that's true, where's the crime?
impeaching Dims is never a waste of money.You ain’t in reality and never have been…
House can impeach daily and the Senate will lack the votes to remove, so enjoy wasting time and money as usual, and you claim you ain't a Democrat at heart!
LOL Gave up trying to support your claim Smart move. There is no support. Firing Shokin wasn't US policy until Biden made it policy after the phone call from his client Burisma.Lots of people in DC that could help with the pressure and Hunter spoke to his dad nearly everyday. When the Neo-GOP makes shit up, they make shit up. Still, it doesn't prove that the pressure to fire him wasn't international or bipartisan either.
"It undercuts the idea that Biden, now a top Democratic presidential candidate, was seeking to sideline a prosecutor who was actively threatening a company tied to his son. Instead, it appears more consistent with Biden’s previous statements that he was pressing for the removal of a prosecutor who was failing to tackle rampant corruption:"Nope. He heard them ask Hunter to "call DC" for help in getting Shokin fired. That is not hearsay. Four days later the big guy flies to Ukraine and demands Shokin be fired.
I assume you are having the same problems your fellow travelers had in finding any support for your talking point that it was US policy to have Shokin fired (prior, that is, to Biden making it US policy in December 2015 at the request of Burisma).
PS - Kudos for even trying though - the other Bidenfluffers here stopped after supplying the irrelevant 2016 links.
www.bloomberg.com
Yeah, keep telling yourself that!impeaching Dims is never a waste of money.
LOL Written by the Bidenfluffers at Bloomberg in 2019."It undercuts the idea that Biden, now a top Democratic presidential candidate, was seeking to sideline a prosecutor who was actively threatening a company tied to his son. Instead, it appears more consistent with Biden’s previous statements that he was pressing for the removal of a prosecutor who was failing to tackle rampant corruption:"
Ukraine Ex-Official Casts Doubt on Biden Conflict Claim
President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer is raising the specter that Joe Biden intervened in Ukrainian politics to help his son’s business.
After the U.K. request, Ukrainian prosecutors opened their own case, accusing Zlochevsky of embezzling public funds. Burisma and Zlochevsky have denied the allegations.
The case against Zlochevsky and his Burisma Holdings was assigned to Shokin, then a deputy prosecutor. But Shokin and others weren’t pursuing it, according to the internal reports from the Ukrainian prosecutor’s office reviewed by Bloomberg.
In a December 2014 letter, U.S. officials warned Ukrainian prosecutors of negative consequences for Ukraine over its failure to assist the U.K., which had seized Zlochevsky’s assets, according to the documents.
Those funds, $23.5 million, were unblocked in 2015 when a British court determined there wasn’t enough evidence to justify the continued freeze, in part because Ukrainian prosecutors had failed to provide the necessary information.
No Action
Shokin became prosecutor general in February 2015. Over the next year, the U.S. and the International Monetary Fund criticized officials for not doing enough to fight corruption in Ukraine.
Shokin took no action to pursue cases against Zlochevsky throughout 2015, said Kasko, who was Shokin’s deputy overseeing international cooperation and helping in asset-recovery investigations. Kasko said he had urged Shokin to pursue the investigations.
The U.S. stepped up its criticism in September 2015, when its ambassador to Ukraine, during a speech, accused officials working under Shokin of “subverting” the U.K. investigation.
Biden has not done anything worth impeaching. Unfortunately, we have 74 million Americans that are mentally incapable of voting!
Right, "casual socializing" on a conference call with 20 Ukrainian "businessmen."
Is there anything so absurd that you won't believe it if the party tells you to believe it?
His wife is probably a Chinese spy.China prob has the turtle on the payroll.
View attachment 813154
Bullshit, forcing Ukraine to remove a notoriously corrupt prosecutor is BRAG WORTHY, was applaused by IMF, DoS and Ukranian anti-corruption groups.You are a fool. There is a mountain of evidence against Biden.
Just starting with the quid pro quo for $1 billion to Ukraine. The dumb motherfucker bragged about it on video in front of a crowd.
By "the U.S." you mean Biden."It undercuts the idea that Biden, now a top Democratic presidential candidate, was seeking to sideline a prosecutor who was actively threatening a company tied to his son. Instead, it appears more consistent with Biden’s previous statements that he was pressing for the removal of a prosecutor who was failing to tackle rampant corruption:"
Ukraine Ex-Official Casts Doubt on Biden Conflict Claim
President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer is raising the specter that Joe Biden intervened in Ukrainian politics to help his son’s business.
After the U.K. request, Ukrainian prosecutors opened their own case, accusing Zlochevsky of embezzling public funds. Burisma and Zlochevsky have denied the allegations.
The case against Zlochevsky and his Burisma Holdings was assigned to Shokin, then a deputy prosecutor. But Shokin and others weren’t pursuing it, according to the internal reports from the Ukrainian prosecutor’s office reviewed by Bloomberg.
In a December 2014 letter, U.S. officials warned Ukrainian prosecutors of negative consequences for Ukraine over its failure to assist the U.K., which had seized Zlochevsky’s assets, according to the documents.
Those funds, $23.5 million, were unblocked in 2015 when a British court determined there wasn’t enough evidence to justify the continued freeze, in part because Ukrainian prosecutors had failed to provide the necessary information.
No Action
Shokin became prosecutor general in February 2015. Over the next year, the U.S. and the International Monetary Fund criticized officials for not doing enough to fight corruption in Ukraine.
Shokin took no action to pursue cases against Zlochevsky throughout 2015, said Kasko, who was Shokin’s deputy overseeing international cooperation and helping in asset-recovery investigations. Kasko said he had urged Shokin to pursue the investigations.
The U.S. stepped up its criticism in September 2015, when its ambassador to Ukraine, during a speech, accused officials working under Shokin of “subverting” the U.K. investigation.
The part where talking to a dozen of Hunter's business associates mean you don't know anything about Hunter's business. You have to be pretty damn gullible to fall for that claim.I don't know what ass you pulled "20 Ukes on a call" from, but what part of Archer testifying that he has never heard Joe Biden discuss bussiness on any phone call do you not get?
Your fantasy about what was discussed on calls IS NOT EVIDENCE.
I do every time it comes up.Yeah, keep telling yourself that!
So, no, you can't explain what ass you got got "a call with 20 Ukrainians" from.The part where talking to a dozen of Hunter's business associates mean you don't know anything about Hunter's business. You have to be pretty damn gullible to fall for that claim.
I think 20 was the number of these non-business conference calls that Joe claimed he didn't know anything about.So, no, you can't explain where the hell you got "a call with 20 Ukrainians". Correct?
Now we are on to a a bit smaller claim - "Joe Biden was on a call with 12 associates".
Ok, go ahead and explain where you got that.
I think 20 was the number of these non-business conference calls that Joe claimed he didn't know anything about.
Now your changing the subject. The claim that Joe didn't know anything about Hunter's so-called business is obvious horseshit.
I am not a Mitch McConnell fan but in this case I have to agree with him. A Biden impeachment will go nowhere without a 2/3rd majority in the Senate to convict and remove him. Most will not see it as justified but rather as the GOP taking revenge for the Trump impeachments which the MSM will continue to propaganda as justified while pointing out the vindictive vengeful Republicans.
McConnell warns House GOP on Biden impeachment: ‘Not good for the country’
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) gently nudged the GOP to pump the brakes on chatter of impeaching President Biden.nypost.com
No, MITCH…what is not good for the country is having a POTUS taking bribes from foreign countries.
He is compromised. His bribes from Ukraine led to this extended war that was over in March 2022, and mayblead us into WWIII.
Biden must be impeached.
Eff Mitch.
I am not a Mitch McConnell fan but in this case I have to agree with him. A Biden impeachment will go nowhere without a 2/3rd majority in the Senate to convict and remove him. Most will not see it as justified but rather as the GOP taking revenge for the Trump impeachments which the MSM will continue to propaganda as justified while pointing out the vindictive vengeful Republicans.
I cannot see how anything good would come from it.
But impeachment without a Senate conviction is not punishment. Nobody on the left would see it as anything other than GOP vindictiveness. The MSM would use it to make him a victim of a unrighteous GOP. All that would be accomplished is a brief media circus that would reflect much more poorly on the GOP than it would on Biden.But if he is taking bribes he must be impeached. You cant let that go unpunished.
