608

During the first hearing of the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene was interrupted for a specific request – to not show pornography.

Ms Greene said at the House Oversight Committee hearing, “It is sad that my Democratic colleagues pretend to care about women’s rights while allowing Hunter Biden to exploit women.” She was holding up a blown-up photo of a plane ticket and a photo of a nearly-naked woman for whom Hunter Biden allegedly purchased the ticket.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Fisk400@feddit.nu 258 points 1 year ago

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?

[-] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 106 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] Endorkend@kbin.social 62 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] Naia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 54 points 1 year ago

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...

[-] Khanzarate@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.

[-] nick@campfyre.nickwebster.dev 58 points 1 year ago

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)

[-] Khanzarate@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

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.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

(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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.one 31 points 1 year ago

No. Yes.

WASHINGTON — The House Oversight Committee on Thursday convened its first hearing in the GOP's impeachment inquiry, presenting a panel of Republican-picked witnesses who said while there is no evidence of a crime by President Joe Biden, more bank records are needed from him and his son Hunter Biden to determine if there might be.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna117657

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 28 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] PhAzE@lemmy.ca 25 points 1 year ago

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....

[-] danc4498@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Why would they need proof when they know he’s guilty?

[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 120 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

*again.

She’s being asked again to not show porn at the proceedings again.

these are very unserious proceedings…. And she has a very serious crush….so it’s not allowed.

[-] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 31 points 1 year ago

Her Dem opponent should honestly take out ads in her ultra-conservative district reminding everyone that she's the Larry Flynt of Congress 😂

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Repubs don’t give a shit about anything but their fascist dream.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Kichae@kbin.social 83 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Have they remembered to ask Boebert to abstain from making ~~pork~~ porn during Biden's impeachment carnival, too?

[-] TheLowestStone@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

Whoa now. How is she preparing the pork?

[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

With an over-the-pants handjob in a public theater in the presence of minors.

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

Tempting but I think I'll pass.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] altima_neo@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Makin bacon at the beach

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Slow down a minute. You know she wouldn't share any with Democrats. This could work out pretty well.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Don't worry she'll probably have her "hands full"

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JakenVeina@lemm.ee 78 points 1 year ago

while allowing Hunter Biden to exploit women

Why is the US House Oversight Committee resposible for the behavior of a private citizen?

[-] loutr@sh.itjust.works 51 points 1 year ago

You forgot the best part:

She was holding up a blown-up photo of a plane ticket and a photo of a nearly-naked woman for whom Hunter Biden allegedly purchased the ticket.

OK so caring about women's rights is displaying huge private pictures of women without their consent. Got it, thanks Marjorie!

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] macrocephalic@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

I agree, Hunter Biden should not hold the role of US President. Now, can you they back to work?

[-] xc2215x@lemmy.world 59 points 1 year ago

Glad MTG is being asked this. Hunter Biden naked is something they think about just as much as the prostitutes themselves.

[-] Endorkend@kbin.social 43 points 1 year ago

That title belongs in brandnewsentence.

Anyone ever predicted the day would come a US representative would have to REPEATEDLY be told not to show revenge porn in impeachment hearings??

[-] Zerfallen@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Not sure it counts as a brandnewsentence if the brand new part is the word "again".

[-] iHUNTcriminals@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago
[-] Endorkend@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago

Lord knows.

You can't wear casual wear in the Senate without being excluded, but you can show revenge porn on the House floor and probably actually gain votes by doing so.

Nothing is illegal if it's not enforced.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 31 points 1 year ago

MTG strikes me as the kind of person who absentmindedly starts staring when farm animals go at it

Her apparent needing to be reminded multiple times to not bring literal revenge porn into political discussions is not helping this image in my mind

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

This is like telling a toddler not to eat candy out of the candy dish when you leave the room.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago

Does the "Boebert rule" apply here? Over-the-top is "family friendly"?

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Pretty sure the Boebert rules are “in the top”… and uh, everywhere else, apparently.

[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 28 points 1 year ago

How come the Christian Nationalist Protect The Children Party can't stop showing porn or giving handjobs in public?

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

Because they're always thinking of the children!

[-] millie@lemmy.film 21 points 1 year ago

You should be able to show.. a little bit of porn during impeachment hearings. 🥚

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

MTG:"But the last impeachment of a democrat president had porn! It had millions of dollars spent on a report detailing exact sex scenes! Why can we do it for this one!"

[-] spider@lemmy.nz 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

She was holding up a blown-up photo of a plane ticket and a photo of a nearly-naked woman for whom Hunter Biden allegedly purchased the ticket.

Perhaps wishing that she was the nearly-naked woman.

I think MTG wants him.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
608 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19244 readers
2366 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  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 2 years ago
MODERATORS