Comer: No impeachment for Biden, criminal referrals instead

Unfortunately, a criminal referral will get nowhere.

 

But if GOP house want, they can impeach Biden.

Clock is ticking. Why not impeach Biden today?

 

Why is that unfortunate ?

 

I'm fine with that. Impeachment should not even be a thing. Let voters decide when it is time for someone to leave office, not a bunch of politicians. IF it is so serious that an elected official should probably get removed, than put it up to a national vote. Don't leave it to politicians to decide. I know we are a republic, but they still need to respect the wishes of voters. removing people elected for office without the consent of those who put them in office is wrong.

Now, if they commit serious crimes, then yeah, put them on trial.

 

Define "serious crime". A felony ? Fraud ? Insurrection ? Influence peddling ?

 

Speeding ticket. I don't care. If they commit a crime, burn them. Like any other person. I don't believe a president should be immune from prosecution. Nobody should be above the law. Not Trump, not Biden, nobody.

 

Treason and insurrection is a few some were never held accountable... impeachment would not be good enough...

All documented... and undeniable.... The Obama Whitehouse was in on it... to attack Trump using a weaponized government.
Strange how our Republican special prosecutor Mueller missed this.... maybe he did not do a very good job of investigation...
""Former CIA Director John Brennan briefed former President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s “plan” to tie the Trump campaign to Russia as a means of distracting the public from her private email server scandal before the 2016 election, according to newly declassified documents.""

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23813493/durham3.pdf

 

So you think the Orange Stain should have been prosecuted while in office for fraud, Insurrection, and treason based on the documented, undeniable facts, including those uncovered in the Mueller Report ?

Well, well, I don't remember you, or the other MAGA's advocating for that during and shortly after his term.

Perhaps we can rectify that now.

 

That's one of the funniest excuses yet for Comer's impotence.

 

Wudys on his cell phone captured footage by Parnas. lol

'Never before seen': Ex-Giuliani associate posts video 'Republicans don't want you to see'
March 27, 2024

"Lev Parnas is rolling out more receipts proving his narrative that Trump's former attorney and ex New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani was trumpeting foul play committed by President Joe Biden and his family despite knowing fully well he didn't have the goods.

Filming himself seated at a table with Giuliani and another gentleman, Parnas can be seen holding a cell phone up reportedly with Ukrainian Prosecutor General Victor Shokin speaking.

Giuliani tells him, "I guess what I'm getting at is — I understand that. I understand why that's wrong; is there any specific act that any of these people performed? Did they get a kickback? Did they get a bribe?"

Shokin unflinchingly answers back: "No."

Parnas, a convicted criminal who was also a former associate of Rudy Giuliani, released the video days after he made headlines while testifying before the House of Representatives to say that Giuliani knowingly spread misinformation from Russia about Biden.

A year prior, Giuliani had badmouthed reportedly Kremlin-aligned prosecutor, Shokin, whom the Ukrainian Parliament supposedly sacked for failing to clamp down on corruption."


cont to video
https://www.rawstory.com/lev-parnas-vide...publicans/

 

That's true too. But I was responding to the claim that you can't indict a sitting president.

 

It appears Comer just realized the Senate, at least for now, would not take action. So instead, send the criminal referrals.

 

[QUOTE="drluggit, post: 1074728219, member: 72987"]It appears Comer just realized the Senate, at least for now, would not take action. So instead, send the criminal referrals.[/QUOTE]

How humiliating, it just shows how desperate and dumb Comer actually is.

 

You can't. The president is the highest ranking officer of the executive branch. If you want to indict a president, you must impeach first.

 

How humiliating, it just shows how desperate and dumb Comer actually is.[/QUOTE]

Does it? So when Pelosi attempted the same? The humiliation that must have created....

 

your narrative conveniently lacks context.

The first dump of Clinton emails happed two days before this meeting. Both the timing of the leaks, and their content were highly suspicious.

So much oso, that they convinced Alexander Downer to report the conversation he had with George Papadopolous in May. A conversation in which Papadopolous openly bragged that the Trump campaign was well aware that the FSB had been the ones who hacked tgevDNC servers.

Thus, when Brennan met with the President on Aug 2nd, an FBI investigation was already underway.

The Clinton campaign did not work to tie Trump to the Russians.

The Steele “dossier”z did not become public knowledge until January of 2017.

When evidence exists that the presidential campaign was recieving covert aid from foreign intelligence sources, and actively communicating with them, it would have been a serious derilection of duty not to investigate.

 

Does it? So when Pelosi attempted the same? The humiliation that must have created....[/QUOTE]

she had the votes and the evidence. The GOP rigged the trial by refusing to admit any evidence.

Comer started an impeachment inquiry without even naming what he was inquiring about. Any alleged crime would do.

The GOP does not have the votes to impeach, and never did.

This was a stunt in order to keep a trope alive in right wing media. Nothing more.

 

she had the votes and the evidence. The GOP rigged the trial by refusing to admit any evidence.

Comer started an impeachment inquiry without even naming what he was inquiring about. Any alleged crime would do.

The GOP does not have the votes to impeach, and never did.

This was a stunt in order to keep a trope alive in right wing media. Nothing more.[/QUOTE]

Making up facts seems to amuse you. What "facts" did Nancy have? Lots of assertions, for sure, and yes, she had votes, but she still dint' have a willing Senate, and that was the same point made about Comer being humiliated. So how was Nancy not similarly humiliated?

Again, making up assertions as fact doesn't help you here.

 

Does it? So when Pelosi attempted the same? The humiliation that must have created....[/QUOTE]

Pelosi wasn't humiliated, Trump ended up getting impeached 2x by the house and acquitted 2x by the Republican Senate.
Trump's legacy. lol

 

Pelosi wasn't humiliated, Trump ended up getting impeached 2x by the house and acquitted 2x by the Republican Senate.
Trump's legacy. lol[/QUOTE]

You're probably right. That woman has no shame. Wait for the referrals though. Entertaining as always.

 

LOL, Comer Pyle doesn't even have the votes he needs in the House for impeachment.

 

Nope. Again, WHERE in the Constitution does it say that a president can't be indicted? You can't find it because you simply made it up.

 

This is a lost cause for Comer Pyle. Dumping this pile of **** on the DOJ knowing that there’s nothing that they can take action on is a big white flag.

Yaknow, I don’t think that drluggit is a real doctor.

 

Why don’t y’all prove it happened instead of asking them to prove it didn’t?
We didn’t make the trump campaign prove they didn’t collide with Russia lol

 

Its quite simple. The president is the highest officer in the executive branch.

If the president is indicted, the office cannot carry out normal functions.