this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
380 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19239 readers
2580 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
 

Republicans announced Friday that they had uncovered a “direct payment” to President Joe Biden — exactly the kind of evidence they’ve sought linking Biden to his family’s foreign business deals.

But the March 2018 payment came from Joe Biden’s brother James, not a Ukrainian oligarch or Chinese tycoon, and the check was marked as a “loan repayment.”

Still, House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), who obtained the records via subpoena, said the $200,000 check looks suspicious for the president.

“Does he have documents proving he lent such a large sum of money to his brother,” Comer said in a video, “and what were the terms of such financial arrangement?”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 103 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Okay. If this was an example of influence peddling, let's pursue it. Let's also investigate the billions of dollars the Saudis invested into Kushner while he was operating from the White House.

[–] fresh 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I’m not in favor of investigating things frivolously when there is no reason to think there’s any wrongdoing.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only while Republicans hold the majority.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

and only when the target is a democrat

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey that reminds me, did they ever figure out how many babies Hillary Clinton ate in Benghazi?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Bet it's on Hunter Bidens lappytahp

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

The Laptop thats in the child sex dungeon of a pizza place?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I get that. This is another nothingburger from Republicans to create the illusion that they've found criminal activity on the part of the President. They're very conspicuously not mentioning how this took place in 2018 while Biden was a private citizen and hadn't announced his candidacy for President.

But if they really want to follow evidence of clear influence peddling with breathtaking bribes, they could look closer at Jared and Ivanka during their tenure in the White House.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

This is another nothingburger from Republicans to create the illusion that all political investigations are nothing burgers. The hope is the next time a Republican in being charged for actual crimes people will dismiss it as nothing more than the Joe Biden investigation. 'It's just what political parties do'.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't forget the copyrights that Ivanka had approved while her father was in the Oval Office. She had unsuccessfully tried to get those for years and they were worth millions, but they mysteriously got approved once daddy was President.

But the GOP thinks all this is totally fine while screaming "HUNTER BIDEN."

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don’t forget the copyrights that Ivanka had approved while her father was in the Oval Office.

Yeh, don't see this one talked about enough.