Roger that....

 

'Every accusation is a confession!': Jim Jordan called out after 'hypocritical' comment

David McAfee
January 10, 2024 10:19PM ET



Jim Jordan appears on ABC (screen grab)


The GOP's Jim Jordan was called out on Wednesday after the lawmaker made comments about Hunter Biden's potential charges for not adhering to a subpoena.

Jordan himself has a history on this. In fact, after former President Donald Trump's trade adviser Peter Navarro was convicted of contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with a congressional subpoena in the January 6 Select Committee investigation, former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner said that the Justice Department should set its sights on another target: Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH).

ALSO READ: Donald Trump’s un-American ploy for criminal immunity

For his part, Jordan has been more focused on Joe and Hunter Biden.

"What's President Biden's role in Hunter's obstruction of Congress?" Jordan asked on Wednesday.

Political blogger Charles P. Pierce replied, "What was your role on January 6?"

Writer/podcaster Jo Carducci said, "Why did Donald Trump give you a medal when you asked for a pardon?"

U.S. Navy veteran Jared Ryan Sears answered with:

"The most desperate tweet of the day, congratulations Mr. Jordan. You've spent years trying to tie Hunter's actions to Joe Biden and you've failed over and over again. Meanwhile you defied a Congressional subpoena and want to act like you care when others defy them now?" he asked. "MAGA is a sad clown show full of failure and dysfunction."

A social media user by the name of Charlie Fox simply wrote, "What are you hiding from the J6 committee?"

A fact-checking account also replied to Jordan, saying, "What's Gym Jordan's role in the obstruction of the DOJ?"

A user named Dianne Callahan was astonished Jordan would even bring it up.

"Did you really just ask this question?" she asked Wednesday.

Another user added, "Every accusation is a confession! We all know you're still in Trump's pocket."



https://www.rawstory.com/jim-jordan-called-out-hunter-biden/

 

When treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republican's clown show blows up in their faces everyone can get in on the act.






Rep. Jasmine Crockett Goes In On Republicans Over Hunter Biden Hearing: ‘You Should Be Quite Dizzy From All The Spinning’
Tomas Kassahun
Thu, January 11, 2024 at 7:13 AM MST·3 min read
819



Rep. Jasmine Crockett Goes In On Republicans Over Hunter Biden Hearing: ‘You Should Be Quite Dizzy From All The Spinning’ | Photo: Jemal Countess via Getty Images

• 
  

Democratic congresswoman Jasmine Crockett is once again calling out Republicans. The Texas democrat made her latest comments at a House Oversight Committee hearing on Jan. 10, criticizing Republicans for demanding Hunter Biden to testify at a deposition as the House GOP continues its effort to impeach his father, President Joe Biden. Crockett said there is a reason why Biden is ignoring a subpoena to testify at a deposition.

“Let me tell you why nobody wants to talk to y’all behind closed doors — because y’all lie,” Crockett told House Republicans at the meeting, NewsOne reported. “I don’t know how y’all are still standing right now because you should be quite dizzy from all the spinning that you’re constantly doing when it comes to spinning the truth.”


Crockett specifically responded to South Carolina Rep. Nancy Mace, who said Biden is using his “white privilege” to dodge the deposition.


“You are the epitome of White privilege” Mace, who is also white, told Biden when he briefly attended Wednesday’s hearing. “Coming into the Oversight Committee, spitting in our face, ignoring a congressional subpoena to be deposed. What are you afraid of? You have no balls.”

Crockett later fired back at Mace without referring to her by name.

“I can’t get over the gentle lady from South Carolina talking about white privilege,” Crockett said. “It was a spit in the face, at least of mine as a Black woman, for you to talk about what white privilege looks like.”


Crockett also called out Republicans last September for trying to impeach President Biden.

“Because when you’re talking about impeachment, you’re talking about high crimes or misdemeanors,” she said at the time. “And I can’t seem to find the crime, and honestly, no one has testified of what crime they believe the president of the United States has committed.”

Mace attempted to defend her remarks by listing her track record with social justice, The Hill reported. The Republican said she was a member of the Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Subcommittee, who takes “great pride as a white female Republican to address the inadequacies in our country.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez followed up on Mace’s comments, saying the South Carolina woman did lead those organizations, but she also helped dismantle the groups when Republicans took the majority in the House.

“We show up, we give speeches, we give flowery words, but at the end of the day, participate in the structural erosion of the rights and representation of people that are marginalized — women, people of color, people that just need to see their due process and civil liberties protected in this country,” Ocasio-Cortez said at the meeting.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/rep-jasmine-crockett-goes-republicans-141339581.html

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/12/the-wages-of-prosecuting-presidents-over-their-official-acts/

'Law enforcement should only intrude on politics if there is clear evidence of serious crimes, and that the principal check on presidential misconduct should be impeachment, not criminal prosecution. There is no reason to believe Democrats will retreat from two-tiered justice, and an increasing number of Republican supporters expect their candidates to respond in kind if they are returned to power. I hate the new normal, but I am not deluding myself into believing that it’s not the new normal.'

'Judge Chutkan’s immunity opinion is at its weakest when she peremptorily dismisses the reality that henceforth, presidents — including the incumbent president — must fear that a subsequent administration, if led by their political opponents, could investigate, prosecute, and sue them over policy disagreements, and particularly over the questioning of election results (which is not something Trump invented, as Democrats, more than anyone, should recall).'

'While Chutkan acknowledges the potential that presidents may engage in corruption, it seems not to dawn on her at all that a particularly heinous form of presidential corruption would be a leveraging of executive police powers for partisan advantage.'

'It is simply not reality that presidents need only fear prosecution if they violate the law. They must now fear that their official acts will become grist for politically motivated prosecutors (or, more broadly, a politically motivated administration of the opposite party) to pursue criminal investigations and charges based on
(a) highly debatable constructions of criminal statutes and
(b) mind readings of the former presidents’ intent and motives.'

And that's essentially where some crazed Democrats have led us. And make no mistake, And do not feign surprise, when the worm turns and former Democrat office holders are held to the same and at the next level of intensity. When you are aggressed by a surprise escalation, you do not match the strikes thrown at you, you hit back harder. To do otherwise allows your attacker to set the time, the place, and the intensity of the confrontation. It's unwise and unjust to allow your assaulter that level of control over that many aspects of the attack. You cannot effectively deescalate without first escalating and regaining rightful control over your attacker.

It was not unjust or improper for Trump to win the 2016 election, although Dems, from the highest level of the DOJ, FBI and even the outgoing Biden Trump WH, as well as Crooked Hillary and the DNC, responded to their defeat as if a crime had been committed by Trump, simply by beating them. Trump foolishly tried to deescalate by not prosecuting Crooked Hillary for espionage, and of course he did not know at that time that she was the source of the phony Steele Dossier that was laundered by the corrupt FBI into illegal FISA warrants that allowed them to illegally spy on the entire Administration.

They clearly need to be dealt with, this is obvious, which is paving the way for Trump's re-election. Their excesses are empowering him. They are creating their destructor by their unjust actions.

Why We Don't Prosecute Presidents over Their Official Acts | PoliticalForum.com - Forum for US and Intl Politics

 

Yep, I can agree with you there, shooter!

 

Wanna bet. Just what the fuck are you going to do about it? Send another sternly worded letter? I will give you a quick example. You show up on the day and time we tell you Hunter and Abbe. Well we can't. We don't know what you want us to bring and which documents might be needed. And besides your old subpoena is now invalid because the date has passed. Just send us a new one and let us know what you need for us to comply You fucking show up or else. Well I guess its else then because we need a valid subpoena to comply.


Jim Jordan and James Comer: We 'will not tolerate any additional stunts' from Hunter Biden

Kathleen Culliton
January 12, 2024 5:30PM ET



House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) (L) and House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY). (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)




No more of your shenanigans, Hunter Biden. That’s the stern message from Republican Reps. James Comer and Jim Jordan who wrote a very strongly worded letter Friday.

This moratorium on malarkey arrived after President Joe Biden’s legally beleaguered son agreed through attorneys Friday to submit to a House subpoena, amid threats they’d hold him in contempt.

“While we will work to schedule a deposition date, we will not tolerate any additional stunts or delay from Hunter Biden,” the pair wrote.

In their preemptive mishegoss quash, the pair noted they will also pursue a contempt of Congress resolution against Hunter Biden until they set a date for a private deposition.

ALSO READ: How Trump's campaign visits cost local police departments

The private nature of the deposition is exactly what Hunter Biden protested when he appeared on Capitol Hill on Dec. 13 and in a chaotic House Oversight committee hearing Wednesday.

Hunter professed himself willing to testify publicly to the House Republicans probing his father on financial corruption allegations they have, as of yet, been unable to prove.

But Biden stormed out of the committee hearing Wednesday when faced with a lecture from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Georgia Republican whose antics include putting his nude photos on display for everyone.

Her graphic evidence disputed a claim from Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) to Hunter Biden that he “had no b----.”

This embargo on tomfoolery will likely come as welcome news to critics who say the House of Representatives — where members hurl smurf insults and alleged sucker punches at one another — has become a “clown show."



https://www.rawstory.com/jordan-comer-hunter-biden/

 

Hunter will probably think he'd be cute if he wore a white mustache and carried a laptop into the senate ........
Shooter would find that hilarious.

 

Just like with Hunter Biden. All the treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans want is to be able to make a bunch of false accusations in public but God forbid allow the people they are falsely accusing of testifying in public and expose their lies. Because just like we see around here all day eve3ry day is all treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans have are lies. Which is why they will post their lies and then just run away refusing to even answer simple straightforward questions let alone back up what they say with evidence in a debate.


The treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans can pretend they are trying to impeach DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over migrants at the southern border but they can't afford to let him testify in public because he will prove he is doing the best job possible with the resources and laws he has and that the last thing treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans want to do is anything that might help solve the problem. Its nothing more than a cheap political game where cruelty is the point.


On a House GOP conference call Sunday night, Johnson said Congress can't solve the crisis at the border until Donald Trump or another Republican is in the White House.

https://punchbowl.news/article/johnson-mcconnell-border-ukraine/






GOP backtracks on Mayorkas impeachment appearance, demanding written testimony
Rebecca Beitsch
Wed, January 17, 2024 at 7:05 AM MST·4 min read
42



GOP backtracks on Mayorkas impeachment appearance, demanding written testimony

• 
  

House Homeland Security Committee Chair Mark Green (R-Tenn.) demanded written testimony from Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, abandoning plans to have the secretary’s public testimony as part of his impeachment proceedings.

The Wednesday letter comes after Mayorkas’s office said he was unable to meet Green’s demand for testimony that came just two weeks ahead of the slated Thursday hearing, noting that the secretary would be hosting a delegation from Mexico to discuss immigration issues.

While Mayorkas’s office asked to find another time, Green’s letter characterized the response as “declin[ing] to appear.”


“Since you continue to decline to come in person, I invite you to submit written testimony for the January 18th hearing record, so that our Committee Members may hear from you directly,” Green wrote in the letter, first reported by Punchbowl News.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said the disagreement over setting a date amounted to a “rush to impeach” on Green’s part.

“This is just the latest example of Committee Republicans’ sham process. It’s abundantly clear that they are not interested in hearing from Secretary Mayorkas since it doesn’t fit into their bad-faith, predetermined and unconstitutional rush to impeach him. Last week, the Secretary offered to testify publicly before the Committee; in the time since, the Committee failed to respond to DHS to find a mutually agreeable date,” DHS spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg said in a statement.

“Instead, they provided this offer of written testimony to the media before any outreach to the Department. [Homeland Security Committee] Republicans have yet again demonstrated their preference for playing politics rather than work together to address the serious issues at the border.”

Mayorkas appeared before the panel in November as part of the annual worldwide threats hearing and in April for a DHS budget hearing. He has testified before Congress more than any other Biden Cabinet official.

But Green has said the secretary has failed to respond to past invitations for testimony, including letters from August and September.

Green said during an interview on Fox News in late December that he would kick off a series of impeachment hearings for Mayorkas, making his formal request for Mayorkas’s appearance in early January. Committees organizing testimony from Cabinet officials often reach out to arrange it several weeks or even months in advance.

In a letter to Green last week, Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs Zephranie Buetow proposed the two parties try to find a different date, citing a second round of migration talks with Mexican officials in Washington next week.

“In keeping with the secretary’s commitment to cooperate with Congressional Committees, he will make himself available to testify before the Committee,” Buetow wrote.

“Consistent with the customary accommodations process, we look forward to working through the details with Committee staff and agreeing upon the date and structure of the hearing. As you can appreciate, the Secretary’s schedule is quite committed with the work of the Department including hosting Mexican Cabinet Members next week to discuss border enforcement.”

Mexico is a key partner as the U.S. works to stem migration flows from Central and South America.

Mayorkas, along with Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Homeland Security adviser Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, last month visited Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador in Mexico City for a first round of bilateral migration negotiations.

He’s also in the midst of negotiations with Senate leaders over a possible immigration reform package.

But Green previously blasted Mayorkas for “putting the interests of Mexico ahead of the American people.”

“Apparently, he needs to be reminded that Congress is a co-equal branch of government, and our Committee, not Mexico, has oversight over his department,” Green wrote last week on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.

Green’s committee last week held its first of several hearings to examine a possible impeachment of Mayorkas, though Green previously said articles of impeachment have already been drafted and are expected to be marked up shortly. The hearing offered no new evidence to back Republican assertions that Mayorkas should be removed from office over his handling of the border.

While some Republicans such as Green have claimed Mayorkas is derelict in his duty to manage the border, it’s not clear that is an impeachable offense or even a legal term outside its use in the military.

Republicans have also accused Mayorkas of lying to Congress — a claim that largely rests over testimony he’s given where he’s maintained the government has operational control of the border, which the GOP disputes.

Republicans have mainly pointed to his testimony about the Secure Fence Act, which defines operational control of the border as a status in which not a single person or piece of contraband improperly enters the country.

No secretary of Homeland Security has met that standard of perfection, but GOP members have accused Mayorkas of lying by asserting his department has maintained operational control of the border.

Mayorkas has argued the law puts the onus on the secretary to maximize their resources to have the most effective results possible.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-backtracks-mayorkas-impeachment-appearance-140519777.html

 

Ah.
So, it's just coincidence that under Biden and Mayorkas we've not only seen record masses of ILLEGAL MIGRANTS crossing our borders, but border patrol is doing little more than checking for a pulse, making sure they aren't packing terrorist tools, and sending them on through.
No court date, no requirement they stay in touch, just "go on now".

And the certainty that terrorists have taken advantage of Brandon and Mayorkas ............ hard work ............ and are already in the country, well that's on Trump, is that it?

And the administration push to put those ILLEGAL MIGRANTS to work, in a departure from long standing laws, that's just "humane", right?

Swear to God, american hater is getting more radical and exposing his rabid hate more with each post.

 

'Excellent sarcasm': Trump roasted in Oversight hearing for alligator moat immigrant plan

Kathleen Culliton
January 17, 2024 1:05PM ET



Rep. Robert Garcia discusses immigration policy in the House of Representatives on Jan. 17, 2024. (Via the House of Representatives livestream)




As tensions mount nationwide over immigration policy at the U.S. southern border, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) decided Wednesday to float some ideas previously proposed by former President Donald Trump.

Garcia came prepared to the Republican-led House Oversight committee hearing on President Joe Biden’s efforts to “undermine U.S. immigration law” with a visual: a poster of alligators on a moat.

“This one’s got a little hat,” Garcia noted.

Garcia questioned David Bier, associate director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, about the plan depicted in his poster.

“Do you think it would be a good idea to build a water-filled trench, filled with alligators, along the border?” asked Garcia.

“That would be a misuse of taxpayer dollars,” a deadpan Bier replied. “And extremely inhumane.”

Garia doubled down.

ALSO READ: Behold: Donald Trump the chosen son — and religious con

“You think it would be inhumane to build a moat, put alligators in them, along the border, that would not be a good idea?”

“No.”

“What if,” Garcia replied, “we instead ordered soldiers to shoot migrants in the legs?”

“That would be attempted murder,” Bier explained.

Garcia then questioned Bier about the 85 miles of fencing that resulted from Trump’s pledge to build a wall on nation’s border with Mexico.

“Would it be better if we electrified it and put spikes at the top?” Garcia asked.

“That would dramatically increase the cost that the border patrol would incur,” Bier said. He noted fall injuries have already cost the U.S. millions of dollars.

How about trying military strikes in Mexico, Garcia asked. “Would that make the border more or less secure?”

“Creating a crisis in Mexico would probably be the best thing you could do to increase illegal immigration,” Bier replied.

Garcia appeared to agree.

“Every single one of these ideas — alligator moats, missiles into Mexico, shooting migrants in the legs, putting spikes on top of the wall — these are all the ideas on how to make our border system, and our immigration system, more fair according to Donald Trump,” Garcia said.

“Obviously Donald Trump has no idea what he’s talking about. Over and over, we’re seeing these horrific ideas.”

This exchange made it's way to X where users delighted in the scene, despaired at the policy and asked questions.

"Bier is fantasticly dry," wrote Bill deMayo. "Excellent sarcasm."

"Not so funny if put in context that #Trump, despite all his insanity, is the leading #GOP candidate for president," wrote Orest. "Yes the same one that suggested injecting disinfectant to help fight COVID."

"The border is more that 3,000 miles long," noted Rick W. "How many gators would it take?"

Watch the video below or click here.



https://www.rawstory.com/trump-immigration-alligators/

 

GOP AGs Urging Impeachment Of Secretary Mayorkas Squirm When Asked About Trump
Jennifer Bendery
January 10, 2024·4 min read
1.5k

• 
  

WASHINGTON ― Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) made a panel of GOP state attorneys general squirm on Wednesday when he got them to all agree on what counts as impeachable offenses ― and then asked them about Donald Trump’s conduct.

House Republicans brought in three GOP state attorneys general to testify in a hearing in support of impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Republicans, who have been blaming President Joe Biden for a record surge in migration at the U.S.-Mexico border, are now refocusing on Mayorkas in their efforts to make the border crisis a major political issue heading into the 2024 elections.

The hearing itself was a stunt. The standard for impeachment, per the Constitution, is committing “high crimes and misdemeanors” like treason or bribery. Mayorkas, a cabinet secretary charged with carrying out immigration laws, as broken as they may be, has not been accused of any such crimes.

But Swalwell took the opportunity to ask the GOP’s witnesses ― Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, Oklahoma Attorney General Genter Drummond and Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey ― what they consider to be an impeachable offense.

“Bribery?” Swalwell asked the panel. All three said yes.

“Extortion?” Swalwell asked. All said yes.

“Obstruction of justice?” he continued. All three said yes, though Knudsen said he thought it would require a conviction first.

“Inciting violence against police officers?” asked Swawell. Knudsen said yes, if there was a conviction. Drummond said yes. Bailey said he “would need more facts.”

And then, the California Democrat threw them for a loop. He brought up Trump’s conduct in recent years, and asked the attorneys general for their legal opinions on whether their party’s presidential front-runner deserved to be impeached over his actions.

“In the summer of 2019, former President Donald Trump used $300 million of taxpayer dollars to ask President Zelenskyy of Ukraine to get dirt on his potential primary political opponent, Joe Biden. He was impeached in the House for that,” Swalwell said. “Should he have been impeached for that?”

Suddenly, nobody had legal opinions about impeachment anymore.

“I’m not a member of this Congress. I’m not privy to all of that information,” the Montana attorney general said of the verypublicizedscandal. “I certainly haven’t seen a lot of those reports. This body chose to go forward with those proceedings, as is its purview.”

“It’s outside my lane,” said Drummond. “I’m just a simple attorney general from Oklahoma.”

“That’s beyond the purview of my testimony today,” said Bailey.


Trump who, what? Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen (left), Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond and Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas definitely deserves to be impeached, but clammed up when asked about Trump's past conduct.
Trump who, what? Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen (left), Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond and Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas definitely deserves to be impeached, but clammed up when asked about Trump's past conduct.

Swalwell moved on, asking about Trump inciting an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021.

“He incited and aimed a violent mob at the Capitol. Six police officers would later lose their lives. One lost a finger. One lost an eye,” he said. “The president was impeached. Ten Republicans voted for that impeachment. Mr. Knudsen, should he have been impeached for that?”

“He was,” said Knudsen.

“He was impeached for that,” echoed Drummond. Asked if he believed that Trump should have been impeached for that, Drummond replied, “I don’t have an opinion.”

“He was acquitted of those charges,” is all that Bailey said.

The California Democrat called it “interesting” that the GOP state attorneys general came all the way to Washington, D.C., to share their legal opinions in support of impeaching Mayorkas, but had nothing to say about Trump’s past actions.

“You believe pretty clearly that [Mayorkas] can be impeached for his conduct, but when we go through pretty egregious conduct of using taxpayer dollars, of inciting and aiming a mob, having the greatest attack ever on this Congress, this Capitol, our Constitution, you don’t want to comment on it,” he told the witnesses. “At all.”

More broadly, Swalwell said their silence on Trump’s conduct shows how hollow the House Republicans’ effort is to impeach Mayorkas.

“They’re not interested in finding any solution to the border,” he said of the GOP. “We have witnesses who want to comment only on Mayorkas, but don’t want to comment on President Trump…. I just see a party that does not want to fix, but only wants the fiction.”


https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-ags-urging-impeachment-secretary-212457528.html

 

Don't impeach that hard working humble civil servant Mayorkas!
No matter he and biden has abdicated their most basic and important responsibility, our borders!
Nope, instead, lets talk about trumps failed impeachments 4 years ago.

TWAT

 

Treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans don't want the truth. In fact they can't handle the truth. Which is they resort to being name calling bullies. Or at least trying to be except no one is afraid of them. they are too stupid, ignorant, and cowardly to be any kind of real threat. The simple truth is, and treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans just proved it again, the last thing they want to do is anything that might help solve the problems at the border. They love what is happening down at the border because they think it helps them and Trump.


Watch Marjorie Taylor Greene Shamelessly Bully Witness In Mayorkas Hearing
Ron Dicker
Fri, January 19, 2024 at 5:19 AM MST·2 min read
53



Watch Marjorie Taylor Greene Shamelessly Bully Witness In Mayorkas Hearing

• 
  

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) badgered a witness on the House floor Thursday to coerce her into answering a leading question about the immigration crisis. (Watch the video below.)

Deborah Pearlstein, a professor of law and public affairs at Princeton, was not on trial during Republicans’ impeachment hearing for Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. But it sure didn’t seem like it. Greene launched an absurd interrogation marked by interruptions to browbeat Pearlstein so she would narrow down the cause of the border crisis to either President Joe Biden or Mayorkas.

In one exchange, Greene said: “Ms. Pearlstein, you talked about policy in your testimony today. So that would be Joe Biden ― I’m sure you voted for him for president. You’ve been talking about the Biden administration policy has been the cause of all of this. So is it Joe Biden’s policy, the administration’s policy, or is it Secretary Mayorkas?”


“The Constitution, no matter which...” Pearlstein replied.

“I asked you a question,” Greene interrupted. “Is it the Biden administration or Secretary Mayorkas, not the Constitution. We’re not talking about the Constitution. Is it the Biden administration’s open border policies or is it Secretary Mayorkas breaking federal law? One or the other. Because the statistics are clear. Are you capable of answering that question?”

“I’m not sure, those were about four questions,” Pearlstein said.

Greene again rewound her effort to get Pearlstein to blame Biden or Mayorkas, snapping at the witness that she “can’t point to the Constitution!”


House Republicans are advancing their attempt to impeach Mayorkas despite a lack of proof that he has committed high crimes or misdemeanors, the constitutional guideline for impeachment, the New York Times reported.

Pearlman, who was invited by House Democrats, reportedly made the point that disagreement with policy was not constitutional grounds for impeachment in her exchange with Greene.


https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/watch-marjorie-taylor-greene-shamelessly-121955257.html

 

"Bullys" .......................................
Oh lordy, save us from the liars and propagandists!

It's really telling that in the entire history of America we've never, NOT EVER seen the kind of mass invasion of ILLEGAL MIGRANTS at our borders who successfully make it into the country. They are now literally being given a free pass if they can just make it to a border point, or even if they don't. They literally just walk across, maybe get fingerprinted and checked for a pulse, and are sent on their way. No court date, no requirements that they check in, just carry on.

Never in our history has such a thing been tolerated. Not during the Obama administration. For damn sure not during the Trump administration.

Biden takes office and the invasion begins, unchecked. And when Americans express concern, the Biden bunch blame climate change, the constitution, world economy, and of course, Trump.

And now the american haters favorite punching bag (besides Trump, Boebert, Johnson, conservatives and Israel) is accused of being a "bully" because she challenges the bullshit excuse that its the fault of the constitution.

What a load of bullshit, even for american hater.

 

This just keeps getting funnier all the time. And what I think is the most funny is when a bunch of treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans go running to the press to anonymously cut Comer's throat and stab him in the back its a way of saying get fucked you don't have our votes on impeachment.


'Parade of embarrassments': James Comer slammed by fellow Republicans for impeachment dud

Carl Gibson, AlterNet
January 24, 2024 2:39PM ET



WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 13: (L-R) Chairman of the House Oversight Committee Rep. James Comer (R-KY) and Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) arrive to speak to reporters after the House voted to formally authorize the impeachment inquiry into U.S. President Joe Biden. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)




House Republicans are reportedly fatigued of House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer's (R-KY) impeachment quest against President Joe Biden.

According to more than a dozen anonymous Republicans who confided to the Messenger, the Kentucky Republican's ongoing impeachment crusade has been a "disaster" for both his committee and the majority as a whole.

Republicans speaking on condition of anonymity in order to protect relationships dismissed Comer's efforts as a "clueless investigation."

"One would be hard-pressed to find the best moment for James Comer in the Oversight Committee," one Republican told the Messenger. "It’s been a parade of embarrassments."

The core of Comer's investigation has been a probe into Biden's son, Hunter, and his foreign business dealings. However, after more than a year of subpoenas of bank records and testimonies, Comer has yet to produce any smoking gun that would directly implicate the president in any "high crimes and misdemeanors" that would necessitate impeachment.

Comer was additionally embarrassed after Hunter Biden's attorney pointed out that the original subpoena of his client was "legally invalid."

Following a recent committee meeting where members were set to vote to hold Biden's son in contempt, he made a surprise appearance at the hearing, effectively nullifying the committee's argument that he was dodging them. A "senior House GOP aide" told the Messenger that the oversight chair "got played by Hunter Biden" and that committee members "looked like buffoons."

"James Comer continues to embarrass himself and House Republicans. He screws up over and over and over," a Republican source told the outlet. "I don’t know how Republicans actually impeach the president based on his clueless investigation and lack of leadership."

An ally of former President Donald Trump told the Messenger that Comer had "cast a wide net and caught very little fish," saying that it was becoming "a big problem" for the GOP. He added that Republican voters are "starting to get more and more frustrated with [Comer] because they see all this smoke but they don’t see the movement."

READ MORE: Hunter Biden just delivered a 'devastating blow' to Comer and Jordan's contempt case

Click here to read the Messenger's report in full.


https://www.rawstory.com/parade-of-...ed-by-fellow-republicans-for-impeachment-dud/

 

Turley says there’s no ‘cognizable basis’ for Republicans to impeach Mayorkas
Dominick Mastrangelo
Mon, January 29, 2024 at 7:54 AM MST·1 min read
703

• 
  

Conservative pundit and legal scholar leaving the page." data-wf-tooltip-position="bottom">Jonathan Turley reiterated his belief this week that House Republicans lack sufficient evidence to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

“I don’t think they have established any of those basis for impeachment,” Turley said during an appearance Monday morning on Fox News, where he is also a regular contributor for legal affairs. “The fact is, impeachment is not for being a bad Cabinet member or even a bad person. It is a very narrow standard.”

“I just don’t believe that they have a cognizable basis here for impeachment,” Turley said, noting lawmakers and constitutional experts have long warned about the weaponization of impeachment against government officials for political purposes.


Turley’s comments were first highlighted by Mediaite.

House Republicans over the weekend introduced articles of impeachment against Mayorkas, as they lob attacks against President Biden’s administration over its handling of the southern border and other immigration issues.

The impeachment push also comes as lawmakers work on a massive border security package, which faces opposition from conservatives in both chambers.

Turley has previously expressed skepticism of the merits of Republicans’ impeachment push, writing in a recent op-ed for The Daily Beast that Biden “has been dead wrong on immigration, but voters will soon have an opportunity to render a judgment on those policies in the election.”

“Mayorkas has carried out those policies,” Turley wrote. “What has not been shown is conduct by the secretary that could be viewed as criminal or impeachable.”



https://www.yahoo.com/news/turley-says-no-cognizable-basis-145451966.html

 

And yet, the articles of impeachment on Mayorkas are released.

Fail