The Biden Impeachment Thread

[Dotini]

Who was is that whined throughout the first go-round that the Democrats had supposedly been set on impeaching Trump since day one? Why aren't they in here right now denouncing the Republicans for actually doing the same?

Haven't they mostly left or been driven from the forum?

Even so, the question is a good one. Maybe the answer is that politics has devolved into all out siege warfare, a battle of attrition with no winners, no one safe and no one left standing. Zombie apocalypse.

 

[Danoff]

Maybe the answer is that politics the GOP has devolved into all out siege warfare, a battle of attrition with no winners, no one safe and no one left standing. Zombie apocalypse.

FTFY

 

[huskeR32]

Haven't they mostly left or been driven from the forum?

I don't know, I honestly can't recall who it was.

Though I think I object to the notion that anybody has been "driven from" a forum here, if the implication is that they were bullied. Despite what many would-be victims around here would have you believe, being asked to substantiate nonsense claims isn't bullying.

 

[UKMikey]

I don't know, I honestly can't recall who it was.

Though I think I object to the notion that anybody has been "driven from" a forum here, if the implication is that they were bullied. Despite what many would-be victims around here would have you believe, being asked to substantiate nonsense claims isn't bullying.

These guys haven't won the popular vote in 32 years and they still think the system is biased against them.

 

[Dotini]

IMHO, we are on the cusp of creating the perfect forum. All on the same page, everyone agreeing with a unipolar worldview, no dissenters, everyone confirming all the others, all singing Kumbaya in perfect harmony. Diversity of opinion having melted away, our bubble smaller, we are cozier and more comfortable.

 

[Joey D]

IMHO, we are on the cusp of creating the perfect forum. All on the same page, everyone agreeing with a unipolar worldview, no dissenters, everyone confirming all the others, all singing Kumbaya in perfect harmony. Diversity of opinion having melted away, our bubble smaller, we are cozier and more comfortable.

You're kidding, right? We have a huge diversity of opinions in this section of the forum. It's just that those of us who frequent this section of the site tend to expect intelligent debate and we just happen to agree on this particular issue because someone calling for the impeachment of Biden before he's even been sworn in is just all kinds of asinine.

 

[UKMikey]

IMHO, we are on the cusp of creating the perfect forum. All on the same page, everyone agreeing with a unipolar worldview, no dissenters, everyone confirming all the others, all singing Kumbaya in perfect harmony. Diversity of opinion having melted away, our bubble smaller, we are cozier and more comfortable.

Everybody who's abiding by the AUP and not providing unsubstantiated BS claims, at any rate. I can always go to FB for those now that the outgoing president's Twitter is no longer active.

 

[Blitz24]

You're kidding, right? We have a huge diversity of opinions in this section of the forum. It's just that those of us who frequent this section of the site tend to expect intelligent debate and we just happen to agree on this particular issue because someone calling for the impeachment of Biden before he's even been sworn in is just all kinds of asinine.

Can we impeach the 2024 winner on precedent? Just like make it a new challenge each incoming President has to pass?

 

[NotThePrez]

Who was is that whined throughout the first go-round that the Democrats had supposedly been set on impeaching Trump since day one? Why aren't they in here right now denouncing the Republicans for actually doing the same?

Because that would require them to admit that the Republicans they support are, at minimum, hypocrites (despite the gargantuan amounts of evidence that already suggests this), and it would also require them to hold those Republicans accountable for their actions.

It's literally the Ruth Ginsburg situation all over again.

 

[Imari]

Everybody abiding by the AUP and not providing unsubstantiated BS claims, at any rate. I can always go to FB for those now that the outgoing president's Twitter is no longer active.

It's remarkable what a discussion looks like when only factually based evidence is allowed. Including people who think that Trump trying to get other politicians killed is patriotism isn't diversity of opinion, it's encouraging criminals to be treated like they've done nothing wrong.

 

[Dotini]

It's remarkable what a discussion looks like when only factually based evidence is allowed.

^This is a genius level insight and truth, IMHO.

When opinions, ideas, emotions, needs and desires, beliefs, intuitions, culture, history and personal sensory experiences are all eliminated from a discussion and only factually based evidence is allowed, it is indeed remarkable what you have left over. It is no longer a debate or a discussion, but a one-sided exercise in instruction and conversion of those who are in error. It is a form of autodidacticism in which forum rules and prevailing worldview (scientific materialism) are used to maximum advantage. It is a wise and perfect system which will either convert the apostate, or eliminate them from the discussion.

 

[Tired Tyres]

What is the point of this thread? There's a democrat majority in one house and parity in the other.

 

[Blitz24]

What is the point of this thread? There's a democrat majority in one house and parity in the other.

The point is a freshman House representative is using "What About-ism" to trivialize the impeachment charges against Trump.

 

[Scaff]

^This is a genius level insight and truth, IMHO.

When opinions, ideas, emotions, needs and desires, beliefs, intuitions, culture, history and personal sensory experiences are all eliminated from a discussion and only factually based evidence is allowed, it is indeed remarkable what you have left over. It is no longer a debate or a discussion, but a one-sided exercise in instruction and conversion of those who are in error. It is a form of autodidacticism in which forum rules and prevailing worldview (scientific materialism) are used to maximum advantage. It is a wise and perfect system which will either convert the apostate, or eliminate them from the discussion.

Except that's not what's happening at all, but Dotini's got to Dotini!

 

[Dotini]

What is the point of this thread? There's a democrat majority in one house and parity in the other.

Good question. Since there is in fact no such thing as the impeachment of Biden either in the real world or here, the thread title The Biden Impeachment Thread may be fake or misleading. But it is a useful device to posture, call out and condemn the incorrect thinking and offensive political actions of a freshman US congressperson who is clearly, in our lights, on the wrong side of history.

 

[Famine]

Park life.

 

[Imari]

^This is a genius level insight and truth, IMHO.

When opinions, ideas, emotions, needs and desires, beliefs, intuitions, culture, history and personal sensory experiences are all eliminated from a discussion and only factually based evidence is allowed, it is indeed remarkable what you have left over. It is no longer a debate or a discussion, but a one-sided exercise in instruction and conversion of those who are in error. It is a form of autodidacticism in which forum rules and prevailing worldview (scientific materialism) are used to maximum advantage. It is a wise and perfect system which will either convert the apostate, or eliminate them from the discussion.

Way to twist what I said into something I didn't mean.

All the things that you mentioned are not omitted from a discussion that only allows factually based evidence, but they are not presented as evidence. The only evidence that is allowed is that which is factually based, and anything else that is included into the discussion should be added as something other than evidence.

It requires a certain amount of self-awareness and honesty that can be confronting, which is why you continue to see people presenting obviously false things as facts despite clear evidence to the contrary. Or attempting to complain about the idea that they won't be able to shop their conspiracy theories as factual, when the only problem with that in the first place was the claim of fact.

Good question. Since there is in fact no such thing as the impeachment of Biden either in the real world or here, the thread title The Biden Impeachment Thread may be fake or misleading. But it is a useful device to posture, call out and condemn the incorrect thinking and offensive political actions of a freshman US congressperson who is clearly, in our lights, on the wrong side of history.

Since when have you ever been concerned about misleading thread titles?

 

[Joey D]

So we're now 12 hours into January 21st in DC, has this domestic terrorist wannabe introduced the articles yet or not? I looked at her Twitter, but it was just the rambling of a lunatic and complaints about pronouns, so I'm not exactly sure.

 

[McLaren]

So we're now 12 hours into January 21st in DC, has this domestic terrorist wannabe introduced the articles yet or not? I looked at her Twitter, but it was just the rambling of a lunatic and complaints about pronouns, so I'm not exactly sure.

When she’s done with Trump, Pelosi needs to bring Marjorie up for expulsion after those FB posts surfaced and claiming she told Hillary to start school shootings.

That’s Alex Jones level of lunacy.

 

[Blitz24]

She did it.

 

[Rossell2]

That'll easily fail won't it?

She's probably having a meltdown from the Qanon meltdown.

 

[Danoff]

She did it.

That'll easily fail won't it?

She's probably having a meltdown from the Qanon meltdown.

There's a wikipedia page on efforts to impeach trump. I'm counting articles filed... uh.... maybe 8 times?

Obama has a page on it too. And there were calls for impeachment, but according to that page, Obama was "the first president since Jimmy Carter who managed to not have any articles of impeachment referred against him to the House Judiciary Committee".

Anyway, point being, it's common.

 

[Joey D]

Looks like Congressman Adam Scott (Georgia's 8th district) wants nothing to do with this.

"You will not see my signature on that." U.S. Congressman Scott on impeaching Biden

His reasoning is exactly the same reasoning all of Congress should take as well:

"It's not possible to commit an impeachable offense as the President of the United States prior to being sworn in as the President of the United States and I absolutely do not intend to support her in this. You will not see my signature on that," explained the congressman.

Greene needs to be thrown out of Congress since she's clearly not fit for public service, also she's a domestic terrorist.

 

[Blitz24]

There's a wikipedia page on efforts to impeach trump. I'm counting articles filed... uh.... maybe 8 times?

Obama has a page on it too. And there were calls for impeachment, but according to that page, Obama was "the first president since Jimmy Carter who managed to not have any articles of impeachment referred against him to the House Judiciary Committee".

Anyway, point being, it's common.

Common? Yes.
Common for one to be filed 24 hours after being sworn in and clearly done on an agenda with no merit? Pretty sure that one is not common.

 

[Famine]

The internet took around 0.68 seconds before starting to call her, and hashtag it as, #Qaren.

 

[McLaren]

She did it.

Narrator: It did not go anywhere.

 

[EngieDiesel]

That'll easily fail won't it?

She's probably having a meltdown from the Qanon meltdown.

Or adding early bullet points to her re-election campaign in a manner that costs far less than any publicity measure, as when it fails she can simply say she was "making a statement" and did it "for the American people", and totally not initiating a hollow gesture at a point when the groups she's seeking votes from (but still keeping at barge-pole's length) are still wound up and shouting "not MY president". Of course, this also is counting on Biden making a significant gaffe in the next year or two that she can say she was "standing up to".

Or I could be giving her too much credit, and maybe she's just trying to ride a dying wave without realizing it's dying out. Could go either way really.

 

[UKMikey]

This is my favourite reply so far to her now-ratioed tweet:

 

[Tornado]

I like how her official statement is so poorly written that she's saying she wants Biden impeached because his son stole money from America's enemies.

 

[GranTurNismo]

I bet you Marjorie Greene's articles of impeachment against Joe Biden would read like that homeless schizophrenic at the street corner who wants to talk to you about god. Very passionate, but completely irrational and all over the place.