• Madrigal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      149
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      The whole point is to ‘normalise’ all the issues with Trump’s presidency so that the public just sees impeachment etc as a normal political process rather than a sign of something being seriously wrong.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      They don’t have to find a specific statute to charge him under, but they do have to present some sort of coherent accusation of wrongdoing to avoid looking quite so much like the absolute clowns they are.

      • TechyDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        They don’t care about looking like absolute clowns. They only care about appeasing Trump and MAGA base. Both say that Biden needs to be impeached. They don’t care why - just impeach him. If anyone says they look like clowns, they’ll just call those people “woke liberal elites working for Soros globalists” or “RINOs” (depending on whether they are Democrats or Republicans).

        Then, if they lose their elections due to a blue wave, they’ll parrot Trump, claim voter fraud, and demand that they be installed into office because they won when you subtract all the “fraudulent” (read: Democratic) votes.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Normally I’d agree with everything you said, but the fact that they’re struggling with the impeachment process tells me they do need something more than just saying they don’t like him.

          I paid attention to the legal side of things during Trump’s impeachments, so I’m quite sure “high crimes and misdemeanors” is open-ended and not limited to violating laws passed by Congress. It more or less means they can just make up a crime to fit the circumstances.

          Why then are they struggling to find an accusation to charge him with? If you have another explanation, I’d love to hear it.

  • Omega@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    149
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Wait, what accused action? I thought they didn’t even have an accused action.

    • Crowfiend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      58
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The optimist in me wants to say: “yeah, you go girl!”

      But the pessimist in me is saying: “cool, so if they’re so bad, who ARE you voting for?”

      Out of the options, the lesser of two evils is easier to fight against.

      Edit: I don’t actively support Biden. But between the guys who promise to either: A) have made it their purpose to impoverish and delegitimacize everyone but themselves, and the people that, B) are trying to do so without getting caught

      I’ll go for the people that don’t want to get caught. They’re at least minimizing the damage they do to the world. 🙄

      Extra edit for the dipshits that can’t read properly: I was saying that between the Bidens and the big orange blob and his fanatical cohorts, I’d rather have the Bidens. Y’all think I’m talking shit about the wrong person, and that reading comprehension (or lack thereof) is why I don’t actively support EITHER side because they’re BOTH full of fanatical retards.

    • yOya@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      11 months ago

      No, if they have the votes they can do a sham impeachment for any reason they want. They can vote to impeach just because they don’t like his stupid ugly face. But I doubt they actually have the votes. This is just revenge for daring to impeach Trump. It won’t succeed but they get to do “investigations”. They hope that will hurt Biden next November.

      • TechyDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        11 months ago

        History says that it won’t. See: The impeachment of Bill Clinton. For the young ones out there, President Clinton was relentlessly attacked by the Republicans. They claimed that he and Hillary killed a guy and also had crooked land deals. (Among other things.) They launched huge investigations which turned up nothing.

        Nothing except that Bill was having an affair with an intern and lied about it once to Congress. Got him!

        So they impeached him for lying to Congress, though to most of America it sounded like impeaching him for having an affair. Certainly, not a very moral thing to do, but not “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The impeachment passed the House but not the Senate.

        The Republicans expected that impeaching President Clinton would neuter his support and they would rise to victory. Instead, the opposite happened. People are angry over the obvious political impeachment and gave the win to the Democrats.

        I think that most of the Republicans realize that this will backfire on them. However, Trump is demanding that Biden be impeached and they are too cowardly to say no. So they are hoping against hope that they find something, ANYTHING to actually impeach Biden on while they rocket towards a repeat of Clinton’s impeachment minus the affair.

      • lad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        They hope that will hurt Biden next November.

        Like when one badmouthes someone then publicly renounces but everyone will only remember the first part and not the second?

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Republicans: This guy is the oldest president in the history of the USA, what do you mean his son isn’t pulling the strings? That is how it works with all elder politicians!

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Honestly, it’s kind of amazing that they have spent all this time investigating Biden and haven’t found anything crooked. How is that even possible for a politician at his level?

      • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Well as far as I see it he either is the folksy Grampa that he wants you to believe he is or he is a lizard person protected by dark forces within the world government. I see no other options.

      • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        89
        ·
        11 months ago

        I mean, as far as I can tell they have found a lot of crooked, IE suspicious as hell, stuff. Just nothing actually illegal. Like, it was both legal and crooked for him to get his son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company. Seems like everyone skips over that there is plenty of substance in the nonsense republicans are yelling about, this time. Though tbh I could be wrong, because I have no way of knowing for sure which parts of their yelling are completely made up and which are a twist of the truth.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          61
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Did he get his son on the board of Burisma or did his son just get himself on the board by using his father’s name just like he made “hey, what’s up dad?” calls to his father in meetings to make it seem like his father had influence?

          Also, I’m not sure that using your influence to put your son on a company’s board is inherently crooked. Maybe unethical, but I wouldn’t put it as far as crooked.

          • TechyDad@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            33
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Also, the Republicans are screaming about Hunter Biden using his father’s name to get a job, but are dead silent on Trump’s kids doing the same thing. Ivanka got a bunch of trademarks approved in China while her father was President. She had been trying to get them for years unsuccessfully. Then daddy becomes President and suddenly it goes through.

            But that’s fine, apparently, because Trump.

            • Beetschnapps@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              35
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              It’s worse than that. Hunter Biden may have benefitted from what most of us would call “privilege” using his name.

              Jared Kushner was denied top secret clearance because the intelligence agencies believed he would be too easily leveraged by foreign powers, especially given his finances. Donald Trump hired him into an official White House job, called him a Middle East advisor, reversed the intelligence decision and gave him top secret clearance.

              At the end of the administration Qatari money helped buy a 1.2 billion dollar property Kushner could not manage to sell otherwise for years. It was a well timed bailout from a group that never showed interest before trump was president.

              6 months after leaving the White House Saudis invested 2 billion in a fund to managed by Kushner despite his lack of experience managing funds that size.

              I’ve never heard of anything like that related to Hunter.

          • nomous@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Yeah they’ll sit around and say stupid shit like it has any meaning. The rich have been riding their parents coattails forever. I don’t like it either but it’s not exactly earth-shattering news.

            Don’t like it? Eat the rich.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              And untalented nepo babies getting to do things that no one who was not in their position would be able to do at their skill level is also really common. See Tom Hanks’ son and Will Smith’s kids.

              • nomous@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Exactly, if we’re being honest it’s half the reason (the more honest) people who do work hard and accumulate wealth do it in the first place. So that their kids/grand kids can have better lives. I’m not saying that I think nepotism is a good thing, but that on our list of issues to worry about it’s not very high.

                I think it’s hilarious that after years and years of digging the best they found was that a born-rich-ruling-class, already-a-hedge-fund manager got a cushy job at a natural gas company.

                It’s so blatantly obvious the GOPs attack on him is all tied to Russias interest in Ukraine.

          • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I don’t know the details, but in general it seems pretty obviously crooked. Like, hunter clearly isn’t qualified for it. It’s entirely possible Joe had nothing to do with it, but if that’s so, why haven’t we seen any evidence against? I get that this would be proving a negative, but I think the onus is on Biden regardless when something so openly suspicious comes out.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Why does there need to be evidence? It’s not illegal to use your connections to get your son a cushy job whether he did it or not.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  First of all, he wasn’t president when Hunter got on the board of Burisma. Secondly, that is not an impeachable offense. Thirdly, if you want to talk about presidents using their powers to help out their kids, let’s talk about Trump and Ivanka and Jared.

        • Zron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          58
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          One of my friends got hired as a structural welder because his father was friends with a guy who owns a construction company.

          My friend also happens to be a kickass welder.

          Should I tell the police?

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          30
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          to get his son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company

          Sure seems like Joe didn’t do shit beyond father a child 53 years ago. The Biden name is all Hunter really needed for that.

        • jordanlund@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          11 months ago

          People forget that W. Bush put Hunter on the Amtrak Board, and one board seat leads to other board seats. Joe didn’t do jack to get him on the Burisma board.

        • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          All of it. All of their yelling is completely made up. Because if they had evidence, they’d show it to us.

        • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Republicians are never going to go after a Democrat for sleazy, self-serving neoliberalism because they’re also sleazy, self-serving neoliberals.

          It’s one of the unspoken rules of the rich – you can use unimportant bullshit to jostle for votes, viewers and market share but you’re never, ever to attack the system that makes them richer.

          The moment someone does, watch them band together across “left-wing” and “right-wing” in a show of class solidarity and signal strength the rest of us can only dream of.

  • Pratai@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    To be impeached- wouldn’t one need to have done something worthy of impeachment?

    • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Unfortunately not. The House can begin impeachment over anything they want, including things that are not even against the law, as long as they have the votes.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      One of the articles of impeachment against Johnson was basically “this guy is an asshole”. The Senate didn’t vote on that article, and acquitted him otherwise.

      So there is an argument that you can impeach a President for being an asshole, but it’s not entirely clear.

  • steakmeout@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    11 months ago

    Mullin is a piece of shit who couldn’t even handle himself with a bored union rep who was halfheartedly teasing him.

    • iheartneopets@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m just surprised that anything has come out of his mouth that resembles any understanding of the law. As an Oklahoman, my bar is pretty much on the ground for our politicians.

    • jballs@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Lol would be hilarious if this was referring to Hunter. “Oh wait, shit this guy’s not in the government? Why the fuck have we been talking about him for the last 4 years?!”

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        “Also, how many people died in Benghazi? Four? And we caught the guy who did it? And it wasn’t Hillary?”

      • TechyDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Greene: “Because I wanted to introduce his penis photos into the Congressional record. I mean, look at this thing!” (Holds up a giant poster board sized zoom in on Hunter’s privates.)

    • Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The plan is to make it appear that he gets off on a technicality, rather than them having no case from the beginning.

    • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Because the one party state rigged it to be this way. They make sure the Dems aren’t a meaningful improvement ever, to sow apathy.

  • Tremble@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t think they actually need a valid reason for impeachment.

    They could have impeached Obama for wearing his brown suit. Or Jaywalking when he went to the restaurant and put ketchup on his burger or whatever the heck that was about.

  • laverabe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-times/

    Reasoning: Numerous Failed Fact Checks, Poor Sourcing, Lack of Transparency

    Bias Rating: RIGHT-CENTER

    Factual Reporting: MIXED

    Country: USA

    Press Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE

    Media Type: Newspaper

    Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic

    MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

    History

    Launched in 1982, The Washington Times is a daily newspaper concentrating on politics and news. Based in Washington, D.C., The Washington Times was founded by a self-professed messiah, Korean Sun Myung Moon. According to its parent company, during Washington Times’ 20th anniversary, Moon said: “The Washington Times is responsible for letting the American people know about God” and “The Washington Times will become the instrument in spreading the truth about God to the world.”

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      None that he committed, anyway.

      What his adult kid may or may not have done isn’t the legal (or even moral) responsibility of the parents.

  • ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Isn’t this the clown who Bernie Sanders chastised for wanting to have a physical fight with someone who was testifying to a Congressional committee?

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Yes and he should always be remembered for the time Bernie Sanders saved him from an ass-whooping that would literally go down in history.

      • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        I honestly kind of wanted to see that fight. You know how much good PR the UAW would have gotten regardless of the outcome.

        "Union president takes punch to the face for workers rights*

        That is a headline that sells all day long.

  • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The best part is their Orange Leader is trying to get Courts (at the Supreme Court now) to rule that the President has some kind of ultimate immunity. This would of course put Presidents above the law and out of reach of even the Supreme Court. It would also of course make it so Biden could do whatever he wanted (not that he actually would) - negating their whole farce.

    • Unaware7013@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      11 months ago

      Its so stupid too, because that’s literally against the written word of the constitution. The damned thing literally says that the president is still liable under the rule of law even after being impeached and removed from office. These chucklefucks don’t give a single wet shit about the constitution, they’re just hoping their base is stupid enough to go along with the subversion.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I wouldn’t put it past the Republican judges to rule that only Trump specifically has immunity.

    • TechyDad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Exactly. Say the President has absolute immunity to do anything he wants. Joe Biden could then declare Trump Public Enemy #1 and have him imprisoned pending trial. Then all MAGA Republicans could be called Public Enemies 2 through however many and have them imprisoned. And doing this would be perfectly legal because the President is immune.

      Of course, the President isn’t immune, Biden wouldn’t do this, and he’d be wrong if he did. Still, if we accept Trump’s assertion that the President can do anything he wants and it’s always legal, then they are opening the door for Biden to take any action he wants with no repercussions.