Could Trump do anything to make you stop supporting him?
- Thread starter ResidentAlien
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Don’t believe Democrats’ myths: There’s clear evidence for investigating President Biden
By
Social Links forJonathan Turley
Published Dec. 13, 2023, 11:00 a.m. ET
Wednesday’s vote on the House impeachment inquiry is likely to remain a strictly partisan matter.
Despite overwhelming evidence of a corrupt Biden family influence-peddling operation worth millions of dollars, not a single Democratic member is expected to vote for an inquiry into the allegations.
Nearly 70% of voters (and 40% of Democrats) believe Biden has acted unlawfully or unethically or both.
Yet every Democrat will vote to stop any further inquiry.
Even in our blindly partisan times, that is no easy rationalization.
That’s why members are repeating three myths like a mantra on the Hill.
They’ll likely continue as the House moves to compel testimony of key parties.
When I testified at the first Biden impeachment inquiry hearing months ago, I said the threshold for an inquiry was obviously satisfied by the evidence of these massive payments and the contradictions of the president’s past claims.
Indeed, at least four articles of impeachment could be established if the House confirms critical facts.
That is the point of an inquiry: to compel not impeachment but answers. That’s why I encouraged the House to hold this formal vote.
Three myths, however, will have to be set aside.
Joe Biden did not benefit from the influence peddling
After years of suppressing this scandal, the media and even some Democrats now admit Hunter Biden and his uncles have long been involved in influence peddling.
The United States has led global efforts to criminalize and deter this common form of corruption for years.
Recent testimony from Biden associates confirmed they were selling “the Biden Brand” and Joe Biden regularly called into meetings and met with business associates.
The last line of defense has been to argue that while millions may have been sent to Biden family members in raw influence peddling, there is no evidence Joe actually benefited from the money as opposed to his children, brothers and grandchildren.
This false narrative is being repeated despite the fact courts have rejected this claim in actual criminal cases.
Not only have payments to children and other family members been viewed as benefits to a defendant, but the same is true in impeachments.
I served as lead counsel in the last judicial impeachment tried before the Senate.
My client, Judge G. Thomas Porteous, had been impeached by the House for, among other things, benefits received by his children, including gifts related to a wedding.
It’s about Hunter Biden’s addictions, not actions
Democrats are again insisting that a complex, multimillion-dollar influence-peddling operation was simply the product of Hunter being a blacked-out drug addict for years.
The argument obviously cuts both ways.
Even if Hunter was some addict thinking only about his next fix, it only highlights that these foreign figures were giving millions for access to his father, not the advice or expertise of his son.
But Hunter’s own counsel has undermined this claim by arguing in Hunter’s gun case that he had emerged from his addiction just in time to sign the allegedly false gun form.
Much of the misconduct occurred when Hunter was, by his own lawyers’ account, suddenly clear and responsible.
The evidence belies claims that Hunter was not responsible for these transactions or the underlying influence peddling.
It shows a knowing, organized effort with the involvement of his uncles and, in some cases, his father.
The effort to portray Hunter as some purse-snatching junkie does not fit the evidence as he flies around the world to meet with corrupt figures and secure millions.
It’s all about Hunter’s truck
The latest myth is particularly maddening.
The House Oversight Committee released new evidence showing payments to the president out of Hunter’s business accounts.
The committee used the payments to show these business accounts were being used for personal payments and there was an intermingling of funds.
Democrats and the media immediately latched onto payments where Hunter was allegedly paying back loans to help pay for his truck.
Members told the Ways and Means Committee this was merely “a father’s love” and not anything impeachable.
It’s a cynical effort to focus on a few thousand dollars while ignoring the millions the committees detailed in months of investigation.
Democratic members make it sound like the impeachment inquiry is based on a couple alleged truck payments. It is not.
The truck payments are a handful among dozens of transfers found from these accounts to Hunter or his family members.
The point is the proceeds of influence peddling may have been used to pay back the president, who was supporting his family members.
Dollars are fungible. The money in these accounts were intermingled with personal expenses, including payments to Hunter’s father.
Once again, President Biden would be viewed as benefiting from the millions of dollars going to his family even without direct payments.
By
Social Links forJonathan Turley
Published Dec. 13, 2023, 11:00 a.m. ET
Wednesday’s vote on the House impeachment inquiry is likely to remain a strictly partisan matter.
Despite overwhelming evidence of a corrupt Biden family influence-peddling operation worth millions of dollars, not a single Democratic member is expected to vote for an inquiry into the allegations.
Nearly 70% of voters (and 40% of Democrats) believe Biden has acted unlawfully or unethically or both.
Yet every Democrat will vote to stop any further inquiry.
Even in our blindly partisan times, that is no easy rationalization.
That’s why members are repeating three myths like a mantra on the Hill.
They’ll likely continue as the House moves to compel testimony of key parties.
When I testified at the first Biden impeachment inquiry hearing months ago, I said the threshold for an inquiry was obviously satisfied by the evidence of these massive payments and the contradictions of the president’s past claims.
Indeed, at least four articles of impeachment could be established if the House confirms critical facts.
That is the point of an inquiry: to compel not impeachment but answers. That’s why I encouraged the House to hold this formal vote.
Three myths, however, will have to be set aside.
Joe Biden did not benefit from the influence peddling
After years of suppressing this scandal, the media and even some Democrats now admit Hunter Biden and his uncles have long been involved in influence peddling.
The United States has led global efforts to criminalize and deter this common form of corruption for years.
Recent testimony from Biden associates confirmed they were selling “the Biden Brand” and Joe Biden regularly called into meetings and met with business associates.
The last line of defense has been to argue that while millions may have been sent to Biden family members in raw influence peddling, there is no evidence Joe actually benefited from the money as opposed to his children, brothers and grandchildren.
This false narrative is being repeated despite the fact courts have rejected this claim in actual criminal cases.
Not only have payments to children and other family members been viewed as benefits to a defendant, but the same is true in impeachments.
I served as lead counsel in the last judicial impeachment tried before the Senate.
My client, Judge G. Thomas Porteous, had been impeached by the House for, among other things, benefits received by his children, including gifts related to a wedding.
It’s about Hunter Biden’s addictions, not actions
Democrats are again insisting that a complex, multimillion-dollar influence-peddling operation was simply the product of Hunter being a blacked-out drug addict for years.
The argument obviously cuts both ways.
Even if Hunter was some addict thinking only about his next fix, it only highlights that these foreign figures were giving millions for access to his father, not the advice or expertise of his son.
But Hunter’s own counsel has undermined this claim by arguing in Hunter’s gun case that he had emerged from his addiction just in time to sign the allegedly false gun form.
Much of the misconduct occurred when Hunter was, by his own lawyers’ account, suddenly clear and responsible.
The evidence belies claims that Hunter was not responsible for these transactions or the underlying influence peddling.
It shows a knowing, organized effort with the involvement of his uncles and, in some cases, his father.
The effort to portray Hunter as some purse-snatching junkie does not fit the evidence as he flies around the world to meet with corrupt figures and secure millions.
It’s all about Hunter’s truck
The latest myth is particularly maddening.
The House Oversight Committee released new evidence showing payments to the president out of Hunter’s business accounts.
The committee used the payments to show these business accounts were being used for personal payments and there was an intermingling of funds.
Democrats and the media immediately latched onto payments where Hunter was allegedly paying back loans to help pay for his truck.
Members told the Ways and Means Committee this was merely “a father’s love” and not anything impeachable.
It’s a cynical effort to focus on a few thousand dollars while ignoring the millions the committees detailed in months of investigation.
Democratic members make it sound like the impeachment inquiry is based on a couple alleged truck payments. It is not.
The truck payments are a handful among dozens of transfers found from these accounts to Hunter or his family members.
The point is the proceeds of influence peddling may have been used to pay back the president, who was supporting his family members.
Dollars are fungible. The money in these accounts were intermingled with personal expenses, including payments to Hunter’s father.
Once again, President Biden would be viewed as benefiting from the millions of dollars going to his family even without direct payments.
BREAKING: Houses approves resolution for Biden impeachment inquiry
Time to get rid of these extremists with their extreme political views who keep pointing the finger at MAGA. This was a majority vote based on the evidence. Now those who have a problem with that are the extremists. This is based on evidence, those who have a problem with evidence are the conspiracy theorists.
Time to get rid of these extremists with their extreme political views who keep pointing the finger at MAGA. This was a majority vote based on the evidence. Now those who have a problem with that are the extremists. This is based on evidence, those who have a problem with evidence are the conspiracy theorists.
-
1
- Show all
This is important. Biden has something the whole world needs to hear.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AD8znvs1qGA
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AD8znvs1qGA
This is terrible slander!
I heard someone give a press conference saying Joe Biden did nothing to earn the money he was paid. This is ugly. Oh hold on, my wife wants to add something...That cannot be right...Wow, OK.
So apparently it was Hunter Biden who was slandering Joe Biden saying he did nothing for the money he was paid. But apparently, if he did do something that would be criminal, so Hunter is trying to defend his father apparently by saying he did nothing and yet was paid $5 million. Oh, hold it, I got that wrong too! Apparently they were paying Joe back, a quid pro quo, they are calling it a "loan repayment" but since there is no check from Joe the loan must have been something that was worth that much, just not money. But that is where it get's weird, the claim is that Joe loaned the money to Hunter and yet the money to pay back the loan came from Ukraine and Russia and China.
This is very confusing, hopefully Hunter can come in and explain this confusing situation. (Really?). OK, turns out that congress did invite Hunter to come and talk to them yesterday and he was in Washington DC at the congress building, but refused to talk to them because he wants to clear this up?!
Wow the gibberish that Joe Biden speaks is hereditary. (Oh no, really?). It seems Hunter may have indicated that his father is really Donald Trump! He said the only reason he is being subpoena'd is because of who his father is. What a tangled mess.
I heard someone give a press conference saying Joe Biden did nothing to earn the money he was paid. This is ugly. Oh hold on, my wife wants to add something...That cannot be right...Wow, OK.
So apparently it was Hunter Biden who was slandering Joe Biden saying he did nothing for the money he was paid. But apparently, if he did do something that would be criminal, so Hunter is trying to defend his father apparently by saying he did nothing and yet was paid $5 million. Oh, hold it, I got that wrong too! Apparently they were paying Joe back, a quid pro quo, they are calling it a "loan repayment" but since there is no check from Joe the loan must have been something that was worth that much, just not money. But that is where it get's weird, the claim is that Joe loaned the money to Hunter and yet the money to pay back the loan came from Ukraine and Russia and China.
This is very confusing, hopefully Hunter can come in and explain this confusing situation. (Really?). OK, turns out that congress did invite Hunter to come and talk to them yesterday and he was in Washington DC at the congress building, but refused to talk to them because he wants to clear this up?!
Wow the gibberish that Joe Biden speaks is hereditary. (Oh no, really?). It seems Hunter may have indicated that his father is really Donald Trump! He said the only reason he is being subpoena'd is because of who his father is. What a tangled mess.
Here is how the Biden family’s story has shifted.
“First of all, I have never discussed with my son, or my brother, or anyone else anything having to do with their businesses, period. What I will do is the same thing we did in our administration. There will be an absolute wall between the personal and private, and the government.” — August 2019 campaign trail remarks
Joe Biden brushed off questions about Hunter Biden’s foreign business deals early in the 2020 race by claiming to have never had so much as a conversation about them with his son.
Emails, witness testimony, Air Force Two flight records, and White House visitor logs have all since undermined Joe Biden’s claim that an “absolute wall” existed between his government work and his family’s business.
Hunter Biden’s business associates flew on Air Force Two, visited Joe Biden in the White House dozens of times, and corresponded directly with the vice president over email.
Joe Biden intervened on behalf of Hunter Biden’s associates; for example, Joe Biden wrote a college recommendation letter for the son of a Chinese business partner in 2017.
The president and his allies have stopped referring to a “wall” that separated Joe Biden from Hunter Biden’s foreign network since evidence to contradict the claim emerged.
“I don’t know what he was doing. I know he was on the board, I found out he was on the board after he was on the board, and that was it.” — Joe Biden, December 2019 interview
Then-candidate Joe Biden faced questions about his son’s work with Ukrainian energy firm Burisma months before the leaks from Hunter Biden’s laptop began.
Joe Biden told Axios in an interview during the Democratic primary that as vice president, he knew nothing about what Hunter Biden was doing for Burisma when his son was earning millions of dollars from the company as a board member.
Significant evidence has emerged to contradict this statement from Joe Biden. For example, Joe Biden attended a private dinner in April 2015 with Hunter Biden and a Burisma executive.
Devon Archer, one of Hunter Biden’s former business partners, said Hunter Biden frequently put his father on speakerphone with Burisma executives.
And messages from Hunter Biden’s laptop showed that Joe Biden used email aliases to coordinate schedules with his son on days when Ukrainian policy was on his agenda as vice president.
“My son has not made money in terms of this thing you’re talking about — what are you talking about, China — I have not had — the only guy who made money from China is this guy. He’s the only one. Nobody else has made money from China.” — Joe Biden, October 2020 presidential debate
During the final debate of the 2020 race, Joe Biden accused Donald Trump of profiting off Chinese interests as he denied that Hunter Biden ever earned income from Chinese sources.
Hunter Biden and his uncle, James Biden, in reality earned millions of dollars from Chinese government-linked entities starting shortly after Joe Biden left office in 2017. Their business relationship with the Chinese company CEFC began while Joe Biden was vice president.
Prosecutors cited Hunter Biden’s income from China in their nine-count indictment against Hunter Biden in California. The House Oversight Committee has also released financial records detailing the flow of Chinese money through companies owned by Hunter Biden and James Biden.
In his speech at the Capitol on Wednesday, Hunter Biden acknowledged that he did business in China. He instead denied only that his father was involved in the Chinese dealings.
“As we have said many times before, the president was not in business with his son.” — White House spokesman Ian Sams, June 2023 statement
The White House narrowed Joe Biden’s denial significantly this summer after two IRS agents who spent years working on the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden came forward with records that included a 2017 message in which Hunter Biden threatened a Chinese businessman with retribution from his powerful father.
The new statement marked a subtle but significant departure from the claim that Joe Biden was oblivious to his son’s dealings. It left room to allow for the new evidence that the president had extensive knowledge of what his son was doing overseas while he was vice president.
“My father was not financially involved in my business — not as a practicing lawyer, not as a board member of Burisma, not my partnership with a Chinese private businessman, not in my investments at home nor abroad, and certainly not as an artist.” — Hunter Biden, December 2023 remarks at the Capitol
The first son’s insertion of the word “financially” implied that short of evidence Joe Biden owned stake in or drew income directly from Hunter Biden’s businesses, his father should not face consequences.
Of course, the new denial reflects a materially different claim than the ones Joe Biden made during the campaign, and it raises questions about whether the White House could shift its story even further as House Republicans prepare to advance an impeachment inquiry.
Deuteronomy 33:29 Happy art thou, O Israel: who is like unto thee, O people saved by the Lord, the shield of thy help, and who is the sword of thy excellency! and thine enemies shall be found liars unto thee; and thou shalt tread upon their high places.
“First of all, I have never discussed with my son, or my brother, or anyone else anything having to do with their businesses, period. What I will do is the same thing we did in our administration. There will be an absolute wall between the personal and private, and the government.” — August 2019 campaign trail remarks
Joe Biden brushed off questions about Hunter Biden’s foreign business deals early in the 2020 race by claiming to have never had so much as a conversation about them with his son.
Emails, witness testimony, Air Force Two flight records, and White House visitor logs have all since undermined Joe Biden’s claim that an “absolute wall” existed between his government work and his family’s business.
Hunter Biden’s business associates flew on Air Force Two, visited Joe Biden in the White House dozens of times, and corresponded directly with the vice president over email.
Joe Biden intervened on behalf of Hunter Biden’s associates; for example, Joe Biden wrote a college recommendation letter for the son of a Chinese business partner in 2017.
The president and his allies have stopped referring to a “wall” that separated Joe Biden from Hunter Biden’s foreign network since evidence to contradict the claim emerged.
“I don’t know what he was doing. I know he was on the board, I found out he was on the board after he was on the board, and that was it.” — Joe Biden, December 2019 interview
Then-candidate Joe Biden faced questions about his son’s work with Ukrainian energy firm Burisma months before the leaks from Hunter Biden’s laptop began.
Joe Biden told Axios in an interview during the Democratic primary that as vice president, he knew nothing about what Hunter Biden was doing for Burisma when his son was earning millions of dollars from the company as a board member.
Significant evidence has emerged to contradict this statement from Joe Biden. For example, Joe Biden attended a private dinner in April 2015 with Hunter Biden and a Burisma executive.
Devon Archer, one of Hunter Biden’s former business partners, said Hunter Biden frequently put his father on speakerphone with Burisma executives.
And messages from Hunter Biden’s laptop showed that Joe Biden used email aliases to coordinate schedules with his son on days when Ukrainian policy was on his agenda as vice president.
“My son has not made money in terms of this thing you’re talking about — what are you talking about, China — I have not had — the only guy who made money from China is this guy. He’s the only one. Nobody else has made money from China.” — Joe Biden, October 2020 presidential debate
During the final debate of the 2020 race, Joe Biden accused Donald Trump of profiting off Chinese interests as he denied that Hunter Biden ever earned income from Chinese sources.
Hunter Biden and his uncle, James Biden, in reality earned millions of dollars from Chinese government-linked entities starting shortly after Joe Biden left office in 2017. Their business relationship with the Chinese company CEFC began while Joe Biden was vice president.
Prosecutors cited Hunter Biden’s income from China in their nine-count indictment against Hunter Biden in California. The House Oversight Committee has also released financial records detailing the flow of Chinese money through companies owned by Hunter Biden and James Biden.
In his speech at the Capitol on Wednesday, Hunter Biden acknowledged that he did business in China. He instead denied only that his father was involved in the Chinese dealings.
“As we have said many times before, the president was not in business with his son.” — White House spokesman Ian Sams, June 2023 statement
The White House narrowed Joe Biden’s denial significantly this summer after two IRS agents who spent years working on the criminal investigation of Hunter Biden came forward with records that included a 2017 message in which Hunter Biden threatened a Chinese businessman with retribution from his powerful father.
The new statement marked a subtle but significant departure from the claim that Joe Biden was oblivious to his son’s dealings. It left room to allow for the new evidence that the president had extensive knowledge of what his son was doing overseas while he was vice president.
“My father was not financially involved in my business — not as a practicing lawyer, not as a board member of Burisma, not my partnership with a Chinese private businessman, not in my investments at home nor abroad, and certainly not as an artist.” — Hunter Biden, December 2023 remarks at the Capitol
The first son’s insertion of the word “financially” implied that short of evidence Joe Biden owned stake in or drew income directly from Hunter Biden’s businesses, his father should not face consequences.
Of course, the new denial reflects a materially different claim than the ones Joe Biden made during the campaign, and it raises questions about whether the White House could shift its story even further as House Republicans prepare to advance an impeachment inquiry.
Deuteronomy 33:29 Happy art thou, O Israel: who is like unto thee, O people saved by the Lord, the shield of thy help, and who is the sword of thy excellency! and thine enemies shall be found liars unto thee; and thou shalt tread upon their high places.