House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) said that his committee, which has been investigating the foreign business dealings of President Biden’s family members, will eventually move to subpoena the Biden family — a move Comer hinted could include the president himself.
“This is always going to end with the Bidens coming in front of the committee. We are going to subpoena the family,” Comer said Thursday on Fox Business.
“We know that this is going to end up in court when we subpoena the Bidens. So we’re putting together a case, and I think we’ve done that very well. We’ve shown the bank records,” Comer said. “If I had subpoenaed Joe and Hunter Biden the first day I became chairman of the committee, it would have been tied up in court and the judge would have eventually thrown it out. … We have put together a case that I think would stand up in any court of law in America.”
Comer’s subpoena tease comes a day after his committee released a third staff memo outlining millions of dollars in foreign funds paid to Hunter Biden and his former associates while Joe Biden was vice president.
That memo noted that the committee has so far only subpoenaed banks tailored to specific individuals and companies, but has not yet issued subpoenas for bank records for members of the Biden family.
Comer, though, indicated that subpoenas for members of the Biden family would not be imminent.
The difference here is that this ‘investigation’ was called for by republicans before they even knew what to investigate. And on top of that, even admitting they have no evidence to present (suspicions is not evidence) yet claim to have evidence. Witnesses they claim to have seem to be lost somehow and cannot be produced for investigation.
And based on this obviously flimsy, if not outright lies, you want to be ‘reasonable’?
I distrust your honesty
Great, and as I said, whatever they have should go in front of a grand jury for indictment if it’s worthwhile. If it’s nothing, should be no indictment. Simple. If they have something plausible, indict him. Again simple.
For now, they have a suspicion. Investigate it. If there is a hint at an issue, let’s get statements for the record.
Let’s take Clarance Thompson for example. There’s some pretty good suspicions there that some sort of payments/“gifts” have taken place. Let’s investigate him for wrong doing. We should also subpoena him (if possible) to get his official statements on things. Not sure why this is hard to agree on.
And I fail to understand you not being able to make a distinction on having a reasonable concern and investigating vs creating a platform of accusations based on a ‘desire’. This so called investigation is used as a tool to hammer someone, just because.
Indeed, take Clarence Thomas as an example. People disagree and abhor his political stance. It was not that what drove the current calls for investigation. It is based on records which became available and an admission he took those ‘gifts’.
Your failure to understand this make me doubt you know what you are talking about. Your suggesting a methodology we know all to well. It’s what was used to accuse ‘witches’, just because someone yelled ‘witch!’
As I said previously:
“I also hope anyone using this as a political weapon faces legal repercussions as well if it can be proven.”
I can read.
Again, we know this methodology and the way to prove you are not a witch is being thrown in a pool and drown. To bad you are dead but hey, your innocent and surely the prosecutors will get their comeuppance!
Your method relies on people being held to account after you have proven to be innocent on charges brought up with the motivation to destroy you or your reputation. Damage is done already.
I wonder, what rule of law you support. It sure as heck isn’t based on a fair and reasonable case being brought forward. You are promoting a kangaroo court style of law and I am absolutely not on board with that.
At what point then would you say you are allowed to investigate someone of something?
For the Clarance Thompson thing (funny my phone keeps trying to write clearance, which makes sense what he’s being accused of), someone had to have a suspicion and dig into it, found something, built a case, then put it out there. I assume you agree with that method?
That’s what I feel should happen here. Again as I said, should gather their evidence, build a case, and get an indictment. Without one, everything they say means nothing. I do disagree with putting it out in the public like this, to me that’s already coming close to, if not already, defamation.
“When you have the facts, pound the facts. When you have no facts, pound the table.”
Facts start a case. This investigation is based on retaliation. They admitted as much and had to grudgingly admit they have none but keep accusing and communicating there are facts. The lie.
We are seeing vindictive children pounding the table.