US Politics

Primaries begin in Feb. When do you think they hold a vote on the articles of impeachment?

Againnnn

and also easiest to explain to the public.

Plenty of witless fuck holes on the Twitter saying it's a "nothing burger" based on the sentence that says that the whistleblower doesn't have first hand experience of some of the allegations.

It might not be the worst thing he has done in office but it appears that it's the thing that the Dems think they have the most evidence of.

I think there’s a good case for of breach of the Emoluments Clause (regarding hotels, Saudi Arabia and Yemen). It’s just top brass dems aren’t beyond reproach in this area.

Bill Clinton’s impeachment failed at the senate. He got a bump in the polls.

The only good I can see coming of this is it exposes Biden. Hopefully leaving the Democratic nomination open to someone less rubbish.

How does it expose Biden? He's saying that he has done nothing wrong other than encouraging the Ukrainians to get rid of a weak prosecutor and appoint a better one.

Which was US policy at the time.

The crime that brought Nixon down was the cover up. It was hard to prove he organized or knew about the Watergate break-in but the White House tapes proved he tried to bury the evidence and protect the criminals on his team. Similarly Clinton was impeached for lying about what he did, not the act itself.
From a legal viewpoint the issue is not what Trump said to Zelenskiy but that he and his team tried to hide the evidence.

There might not be strong evidence about Biden/Biden Jr./Ukraine wrong doing but it still smells bad
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/463307-solomon-these-once-secret-memos-cast-doubt-on-joe-bidens-ukraine-story

Is it worth sacrificing Biden to get Trump?

he and his team tried to hide the evidence.

Unfortunately I feel that we may have reached the point where people just go; "well of course, like you wouldn't hide the evidence you communist."

Is it worth sacrificing Biden to get Trump?

If it means that Warren gets to run for president than yes I guess.

I have some trouble getting behind that opinion piece.

The author refers to memos that have never been seen and then talks about the contents of them. Perhaps I'm reading it too literally.

Then again, Solomon does have form for "mis-reporting".

Paul McCleary, writing for the Columbia Journalism Review in 2007, wrote that Solomon had earned a reputation for hyping stories without solid foundation.[5] In 2012, Mariah Blake, writing for the Columbia Journalism Review, wrote that Solomon "has a history of bending the truth to his storyline," and that he "was notorious for massaging facts to conjure phantom scandals."[6] During the 2004 presidential election between George W. Bush and John Kerry, Thomas Lang wrote for the Columbia Journalism Review that a Solomon story for the Associated Press covered criticism of John Kerry's record on national security appeared to mirror a research report released by the Republican National Committee. Lang wrote that Solomon's story was "a clear demonstration of the influence opposition research is already having on coverage of the [presidential] campaign."[22][23]

In 2007, Deborah Howell, then-ombudsman at The Washington Post criticized a story that Solomon wrote for The Post which had suggested impropriety by Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards in a real estate purchase; Solomon's reporting omitted context which would have made clear that there was no impropriety.[24] Progressive news outlets ThinkProgress, Media Matters for America and Crooked Media have argued that Solomon's reporting has a conservative bias and that there are multiple instances of inaccuracies.[25][26][27] Independent journalist Marcy Wheeler accused Solomon of manufacturing fake scandals which suggested wrongdoing by those conducting probes into Russian interference in the 2016 election.[28] Reporters who worked under Solomon as an editor have said that he encouraged them to bend the truth to fit a pre-existing narrative.[6]

In January 2018, Solomon published a report for The Hill suggesting that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page had foreknowledge of a Wall Street Journal article and that they themselves had leaked to the Wall Street Journal.[29] According to the Huffington Post, Solomon's reporting omitted that the Wall Street Journal article Strzok and Page were discussing was critical of Hillary Clinton and the FBI, Strzok and Page expressed dismay at the fallout from the article, and Strzok and Page criticized unauthorized leaks from the FBI. According to the Huffington Post, "Solomon told HuffPost he was not authorized to speak and does not comment on his reporting. He may simply have been unaware of these three facts when he published his story. But they provide crucial context to an incomplete narrative that has been bouncing around the right-wing echo chamber all week."[29]

That same month, Erik Wemple of The Washington Post said that newsroom staffers at The Hill had complained about Solomon's reporting for the publication.[30] The staffers reportedly criticized Solomon's reporting as having a conservative bias and missing important context, and that this undermined The Hill's reputation.[30] They also expressed concerns over Solomon's close relationship with Sean Hannity, whose TV show he appeared on more than a dozen times over a span of three months.[30]

Having spent rather a lot of time looking at Ukraine’s gas industry over the years - it’s nearly impossible to find a company where shady things haven’t happened in the past. While of course there are still some actors who would like things to return to the pre-2014 situation, there are also a lot of people working hard to reform the system and stamp out corruption. But because you have to work within a web of pre-existing contracts and relationships, the reformers have little choice but to engage with entities that may in the past have been corrupt. That’s just how this kind of thing inevitably works.

So I don’t think that we can impugn Hunter Biden just because he worked at a Ukrainian gas company. I do remember thinking at the time that this would burn Joe Biden and was a politically naive move. It’s like everyone forgot Swiftboat Veterans for Freedom.

Hopefully leaving the Democratic nomination open to someone less rubbish.

I agree with this. Biden is a terrible candidate.

It’s worth sacrificing your firstborn.

Biden can get fucked.
Claiming it's a Biden vs. Trump conflict is a false dichotomy. We need both men gone.

The covering up and hiding the evidence is what I think they'll be focusing on too, it implies the President himself is a threat to their own national security, and that cannot be tolerated and requires urgent and immediate intervention to stop.

Ah, so you think Solomon is an advocate of the Boris Johnson school of journalism.

FBI tweeting a link to it's archive of documents relating to Roy Cohn is a thing
https://twitter.com/FBIRecordsVault/status/1177644087874179072

Biden's son has no prior experience in gas. He was receiving $50 a month, not for his expertise.

Only slightly related ... but kinda interesting ... how do we know about Manafort? Hillary Clinton (when in office) asked the Ukrainian PM to look into it.

Biden is useless by every measure. He's propped up by recognition and the feeling of familiarity to an older demographic. He's also gone backwards in the polls since the debates began. The conventional wisdom that's he's the Democrat's 'best bet' should be questioned for sure.

Biden's son has no prior experience in gas

what about after eating chickpeas?

I love houmous.

That'll be $50k plz

Biden's son has no prior experience in gas. He was receiving $50 a month, not for his expertise.

It's very normal to appoint a well connected lawyer, consultant and lobbyist to your oil and gas board even if they have no oil and gas experience. Similarly, $50k per month is not an unusual pay package.