44

GOP investigators believe they don't need proof the president received a 'direct payment' to prove bribery, but legal experts are dubious of the impeachment strategy

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] archiotterpup@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Look, I'm keeping an open mind. If there is evidence then let's see it. I want the smoking gun.

[-] NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

I would like to say the same, and I'm all for fighting corruption, but it's all so nakedly political as to be meaningless. What's the standard? Lying during a deposition about getting a blowjob? Impeachable. Pressuring the president of a foreign government to open an investigation into a political rival in exchange for weapons? Not impeachable. Lying about a stolen election and inciting a riot on the capital? Not impeachable. Having a fuckup as a son? Impeachable. Then there's Clarence Thomas - lying on federal disclosure forms for decades and receiving lavish gifts of travel, cash, home improvements for your mom? So not impeachable nobody even seriously considered it.

The point is, we all know Biden is getting impeached no matter what, it's all political bullshit. If he actually did receive bribes, that would just be a happy coincidence, because ultimately the evidence doesn't matter.

[-] HWK_290@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Tbf trump was impeached on both counts, just not convicted

But I agree with your sentiment. Some of these are not like the others..

[-] dudinax@programming.dev 10 points 1 year ago

Here's a sequence of the firing of Shokin, Prosecutor General for Ukraine:

  1. A new vice-prosecutor starts pursuing corruption.
  2. The new prosecutor charges and convicts a fellow prosecutor for corruption.
  3. The U.S. issues a statement that they support these efforts, explicitly because public corruption makes it easier for Russia to control Ukraine. They urge Shokin to back this new prosecutor.
  4. Shokin fires the new prosecutor.
  5. Protests to have Shokin fired occur in Ukraine.
  6. There's a movement in Ukrainian parliament to fire Shokin.
  7. E.U. issues a statement that Shokin should be fired.
  8. Biden goes to Ukraine, threatens aid cancellation if Shokin isn't fired.
  9. The Ukrainian parliament fires Shokin.

It's crucial to note that Biden's threat could only have weight if Obama was backing it.

While I appreciate your open mindedness, these jokers in Congress are accusing Biden of something they know he didn't do. Even Trump's personal hatchet man in the DOJ, Bill Barr, refused to investigate Biden over this.

[-] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 year ago

They've been looking for a smoking gun for years now and haven't shown any evidence yet.

this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
44 points (86.7% liked)

politics

19100 readers
4283 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS