this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
31 points (94.3% liked)

politics

19233 readers
2242 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
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
31
House votes to formally authorize Biden impeachment inquiry (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
2 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

Glad to see our lawmakers wasting time and resources on this circus. This is shameful. Everyone involved should feel deeply ashamed of themselves. They seriously need to touch grass, and to stop eating paint chips. Seriously, how can anyone support this nonsense?

If Biden committed impeachable crimes, then he should face it. There doesn’t seem to be any tangible evidence to support the accusations. Trump is not a figurehead—he is their god. But even if Trump is ousted from the party, the rhetoric will only continue to become more and more unhinged. This is only going to get worse, as many of them seem to be true believers. Can one reason at all with these sycophants? An exercise in futility, right? Then what are we to do? They have plenty of strongholds, so voting enough of them out seems unlikely to affect the behavior and rhetoric. So what do we do?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

The House voted Wednesday to formally authorize the impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden, even as Republicans have failed to produce evidence showing that the president financially benefitted from his family’s business dealings.

Instead choosing to hold a press conference on Capitol Hill, Hunter Biden reiterated his willingness to testify publicly, an offer that House Republicans have rejected.

The previous House speaker, Republican Kevin McCarthy, unilaterally launched the inquiry in September without a formal vote on the matter.

At the time, a number of more moderate Republicans expressed concerns about launching a formal inquiry, given the lack of clear evidence about Biden’s involvement in his son’s business dealings.

House Democrats defended Hunter Biden’s decision to defy his subpoena, accusing Republicans of attempting to “cherry-pick” testimony to advance baseless allegations against the president.

“They wanted to conduct the deposition in a closed-door interview, so the public couldn’t see it and so they could continue to cherry-pick little pieces of evidence and distort and misrepresent what had taken place there,” Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House oversight committee, told reporters.

The original article contains 454 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 61%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!