What does a BIDEN Presidency look like?

[Syt]

https://thehill.com/homenews/4117556-mccarthy-biden-probes-rising-to-the-level-of-impeachment-inquiry/

McCarthy: Biden probes 'rising to the level of impeachment inquiry'

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said he expects the House GOP's investigations into the foreign business activities of President Biden's family to rise to the level of an impeachment inquiry.

"When Biden was running for office, he told the public he has never talked about business. He said his family has never received a dollar from China, which we prove is not true," McCarthy told Fox News host Sean Hannity on Monday night, referencing Biden's previous statements that he did not talk to his son, Hunter Biden, about his foreign business activities.

McCarthy also mentioned two IRS whistleblowers who alleged that prosecutors slow-walked an investigation into Hunter Biden's tax crimes, and House GOP investigations finding that millions of foreign funds traveled through shell companies to Biden family members and associates.

"We've only followed where the information has taken us. But Hannity, this is rising to the level of impeachment inquiry, which provides Congress the strongest power to get the rest of the knowledge and information needed," McCarthy said.

"Because this president has also used something we have not seen since Richard Nixon: Use the weaponization of government to benefit his family and deny Congress the ability to have the oversight," McCarthy said.

In response to McCarthy's comment, the White House accused House Republicans of failing to focus on important issues.

"Instead of focusing on the real issues Americans want us to address like continuing to lower inflation or create jobs, this is what the @HouseGOP wants to prioritize. Their eagerness to go after @POTUS regardless of the truth is seemingly bottomless," Ian Sams, White House spokesperson for oversight and investigations, said in a tweet.

Last week, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) released an FBI form that documented unverified allegations of corruption stemming from Hunter Biden's work with Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

McCarthy did not use those unproven allegations as a basis for an impeachment inquiry, but its release added fuel to Republican skepticism of the foreign business dealings.

The New York Post reported Monday that former Hunter Biden associate Devon Archer plans to tell the House Oversight and Reform Committee in a closed-door interview this week that Hunter Biden would put then-Vice President Biden on speakerphone during meetings with foreign business partners.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a briefing Monday that the president was never in business with his son.

"If they really ran it for foreign countries, why didn't you get money from France, from Germany, from U.K.? Why is it China, Romania, these countries that have real challenges and had problems going through," McCarthy said on Fox News.

"I believe we will follow this all the way to the end, and this is going to rise to an impeachment inquiry — the way the Constitution tells us to do this — and we have to get the answers to these questions," McCarthy said.

McCarthy just last month floated an impeachment inquiry into Attorney General Merrick Garland, based on Garland contradicting IRS whistleblowers about the authority of the prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden to bring charges in other jurisdictions.

A Morning Consult poll conducted June 22-24 found that 30 percent of registered voters thought that it should be a "top priority" for Congress to investigate whether President Biden should be impeached, including 11 percent of Democrats, 24 percent of independents and 55 percent of Republicans.

And 27 percent of registered voters overall said that it should be a "top priority" for Congress to investigate Hunter Biden's finances, including 12 percent of Democrats, 24 percent of independents and 46 percent of Republicans.

[The Minsky Moment]

The New York Post reported Monday that former Hunter Biden associate Devon Archer plans to tell the House Oversight and Reform Committee in a closed-door interview this week that Hunter Biden would put then-Vice President Biden on speakerphone during meetings with foreign business partners.

Devon Archer is a notorious fraudster - one of his exploits is documented here - https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/devon-archer-sentenced-year-and-day-prison-fraudulent-issuance-and-sale-more-60-million

While his association with Hunter Biden is yet another indictment of Hunter's character his testimony won't be worth the 3 dollar bills it will be printed on.

[Valmy]

President Biden promised he was going to be a bridge to the next generation of Democratic leaders. If he is compromised it would be cool if he could go ahead and fulfill that promise.

I don't know what the hell "weaponized" means. Has McCarthy been shot or something? How has Biden prevented Congressional oversight? I don't know what he is talking about. Seems like the Republicans have been able to conduct their investigation.

[Jacob]

I assume they're just taking nothing - or possibly minor things - and blowing lots of hot air to distract from Trump's upcoming troubles, and to "pay back" for attempts to hold Trump to account.

[HisMajestyBOB]

President Biden promised he was going to be a bridge to the next generation of Democratic leaders. If he is compromised it would be cool if he could go ahead and fulfill that promise.

I don't know what the hell "weaponized" means. Has McCarthy been shot or something? How has Biden prevented Congressional oversight? I don't know what he is talking about. Seems like the Republicans have been able to conduct their investigation.

Despite all evidence to the contrary, Biden stubbornly insists that he is the president and Trump is not.

[Valmy]

Despite all evidence to the contrary, Biden stubbornly insists that he is the president and Trump is not.

That is quite troublesome 

[Syt]

https://www.tampabay.com/opinion/2022/07/09/just-who-is-behind-moms-for-liberty-column/

Who is funding the group and for how much? Moms for Liberty's leaders claim to get by on T-shirt sales. They've barely even heard of the Koch brothers! Yet perhaps they've heard of the Council for National Policy. Two of Moms for Liberty's National Summit sponsors, the Leadership Institute and Heritage Foundation are critical members of the Council for National Policy, a secretive network of right wing billionaires and Christian fundamentalist leaders that underwrites and coordinates right wing politics.

Who is really running the operation? The two "founders" are former school committee member Tina Descovich, a communications and marketing professional and Tiffany Justice, also a former school committee member. But there was a third founder, Bridget Ziegler. She is still a school committee member and her husband, Christian Ziegler, is vice chairman of the Florida Republican Party and the owner of a political marketing firm. He boasts that Moms for Liberty will provide crucial ground support for DeSantis' re-election.

Then there's the odd coincidence of so many grassroots parents organizations arising at the same time with similar missions. Parents Defending Education is Koch-connected. The Koch-funded American Legislative Exchange Council claims credit for the havoc wreaked by anti-Critical Race Theory legislation. The Council for National Policy's Leadership Institute commenced its own program to take over school boards. The Council for National Policy-connected Turning Point USA initiated a School Board Watch List for reporting "woke" school boards.

[Sheilbh]

I assume they're just taking nothing - or possibly minor things - and blowing lots of hot air to distract from Trump's upcoming troubles, and to "pay back" for attempts to hold Trump to account.

It's not just the Biden story but other stuff as well - but I really worry that the mainstream media seem to have learned absolutely nothing in the last 8 years on how to cover Trump.

[Sheilbh]

Saw that McConnell clip doing the rounds and got to wonder if this generation will be the last to hold on like this. I read the piece a while ago on Feinstein and just thought how undignified it all was - and thinking that again today.

[Valmy]

Huh? Then why do we have school nurses?

[Valmy]

Saw that McConnell clip doing the rounds and got to wonder if this generation will be the last to hold on like this. I read the piece a while ago on Feinstein and just thought how undignified it all was - and thinking that again today.

Yes. I really don't get it. Why do people like Feinstein do this? Why not retire and go do philanthropy and build up good will? Why spend decades in the Senate? Especially for people like McConnell or Feinstein where there is 0% chance the other party is going to pick up your seat without your incumbency advantage. I kind of get it for guys like Tester.

[Tonitrus]

Everyone wants to try and take the crown from Strom Thurmond Robert Byrd.

(I typed Strom up first...could have sworn it was him)

[Hamilcar]

Saw that McConnell clip doing the rounds and got to wonder if this generation will be the last to hold on like this. I read the piece a while ago on Feinstein and just thought how undignified it all was - and thinking that again today.

I don't understand why the American public just accepts being ruled by geriatrics. In Switzerland it's seen as inappropriate to stay in office much beyond ~65.

[Maladict]

Yeah. Most employment contracts here automatically terminate at retirement age. This includes judges but not politicians, although most political parties have set age or term limits.

[Valmy]

Saw that McConnell clip doing the rounds and got to wonder if this generation will be the last to hold on like this. I read the piece a while ago on Feinstein and just thought how undignified it all was - and thinking that again today.

I don't understand why the American public just accepts being ruled by geriatrics. In Switzerland it's seen as inappropriate to stay in office much beyond ~65.

Because we aren't really given a choice. The parties really discourage primary challenges to incumbents and voters in recent decades are unlikely to vote for the other major party just to get rid of some fossil.

Why the parties themselves don't force out the olds is an interesting question but I don't know the answer. The Democrats have suffered a ton of damage due to Feinstein's issues. Completely unnecessarily I might add, replacing her would have been really smooth for them. The very same factors that keep these old politicians in office also make them easily replaceable.