Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo pressed House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Sunday about the lack of headway in House Republicans’
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 29, 2024 9:23 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (1 comments) [28 views]


Former GOP congressman David Jolley: even among Republicans puppies have a high favorability rating
Pets by Curt_Anderson     April 29, 2024 9:38 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [3 views]


"Let me start off with two words:" I support Biden. I support Biden.
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 29, 2024 7:36 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [26 views]


Another dire 2024 poll for Joe Biden: Trump widens his lead over the President to 6% with just six months left to Election Day
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 29, 2024 3:49 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [18 views]


Anonymous comments regarding the Presidential Candidate Selector
President by Curt_Anderson     March 19, 2024 10:10 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (26 comments) [1319 views]


The silent Trump voter
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 28, 2024 7:28 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (3 comments) [106 views]


Republicans: Do you know where your political donations are?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 6:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (13 comments) [456 views]


James Comer hopes for divine intervention to save him from embarrassing impeachment fiasco.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:05 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (5 comments) [144 views]


pb's Legal Goobers #s 2 & 3: The NY v Trump case is collapsing
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 3:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [56 views]


The Oval Office Oaf calls for "Four more years. Pause."
Entertainment by HatetheSwamp     April 24, 2024 2:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [112 views]


Politics selectors, pages, etc.
Comer insists his job was ‘never to impeach’ as GOP doubts grow about Biden impeachment vote
By Curt_Anderson
January 14, 2024 12:48 pm
Category: Politics

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post

SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

Gosh, I hope nobody is disappointed by these lowering of expectations.

(CNN)“Well, I mean, if [Hunter Biden] doesn’t show up, then I guess we’ll just have to wrap it up without him and assume that these were bribes from foreign countries,” House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer told CNN, adding that unproven allegations that Hunter Biden was involved in human trafficking and money laundering could also be assumed to be true. [It's the GOP way: the automatic assumption of guilt unless proven innocent.]

In an interview with CNN, Comer gave his latest insight into the committee’s investigation, lowering expectations as doubts begin to grow within GOP ranks about whether it will actually lead to a successful impeachment vote of the president.

Comer said it doesn’t matter to him if Biden is ultimately impeached, arguing his true intent is to conduct the far-reaching probe and then pursue legislation to ban influence peddling. He said that his panel would soon issue a report with criminal referrals, saying he hadn’t decided yet whether to refer the president to the Justice Department for prosecution.

“I would vote to impeach him, but I’m not going to lose any sleep whether he gets impeached or not because we know the Senate’s not going to convict,” Comer said of the Democratic-controlled Senate. He insisted: “My job was never to impeach.”

Doubts grow about impeachment vote
Many Republicans are growing skeptical the probe will lead to a successful impeachment vote.

“I think in order to get the Republican conference to impeach the president, I think that you’ve got an extraordinary amount of groundwork that would have to be laid that is not there right now. Said another way, the votes aren’t there right now,” GOP Rep. Garret Graves of Louisiana told CNN.

“I think it should go to the House floor for a vote, but I don’t know if we have the will to do it. I don’t know if it would pass, quite honestly,” GOP Rep. Troy Nehls of Texas said.


Cited and related links:

  1. cnn.com

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Comer insists his job was ‘never to impeach’ as GOP doubts grow about Biden impeachment vote":

  1. by HatetheSwamp on January 14, 2024 1:37 pm

    ...arguing his true intent is to conduct the far-reaching probe and then pursue legislation to ban influence peddling. He said that his panel would soon issue a report with criminal referrals, saying he hadn’t decided yet whether to refer the president to the Justice Department for prosecution.

    Is any of this new, or a surprise to you, Curt?

    The GOP has always said the very thing pb's been parroting: The connection between "that feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap's" knowledge of the Family's business should be investigated.

    Based on what seems to pb to be true the Flatulent Fool is a crook...and, based on his demise in the polls, voters know it.

    pb's been predicting for some time that the HouseGOPs won't impeach Trump. It seemed to pb, when Mike Johnson got 100% support for the Impeachment Inquiry, he was promising purple district GOPs there'd be no pressure for them to impeach.

    pb...who follows the actual EFFINnews... has gotten this right at every turn. Trust him.

    And, Curt, trusting CNN's reporting on the GOP?


  2. by Curt_Anderson on January 14, 2024 2:10 pm
    HtS,,
    As you have said repeatedly, the Republican Party is the party of openness and inclusion. They’re open to Republican presidents accepting emoluments, including bribes.

    Members of the Oversight Committee finally offered actual concrete evidence of a president benefiting from an influx of foreign money. This isn’t particularly useful for the Republican impeachment effort, though: The president at issue was Donald Trump.
    washingtonpost.com
    oversightdemocrats.house.gov


  3. by HatetheSwamp on January 14, 2024 2:39 pm

    Ah, yes! Whataboutism.

    (Sung to the tune of Row Row Row Your Boat)

    Trump Trump Trump is bad.
    Nasty things Trump did.
    Carefully, carefully will we watch.
    Nuthin will be hid.

    And, Curt, I don't believe that Trump stuff for a minute. But, if it's true? Bring it on!


  4. by Curt_Anderson on January 14, 2024 2:59 pm
    That’s very open minded of you. Just because Trump has been the defendant in about 2,000 lawsuits being accused of perpetrating various scams and being a deadbeat who stiffs suppliers and contractors doesn’t mean he is ALWAYS unscrupulous. Let’s not rush to judgment.
    azcentral.com


  5. by HatetheSwamp on January 14, 2024 3:09 pm

    As I said, I don't believe it. I've been amused by irrational TrumpHate here since 016 and, as Indy has been saying on SS since Trump skunked Hillary in 016, Trump's too slimy to be caught.

    The Legal Goobers say the documents case? Maybe. And, I know you're a serious hoper... but don't count them chickens just yet.


  6. by Curt_Anderson on January 14, 2024 3:15 pm
    "As I said, I don't believe it. I've been amused by irrational TrumpHate here since 016..." ---HtS

    You are understating it, there have been many Trump haters (aka plaintiffs) suing Trump since 1973. So unfair!
    en.wikipedia.org


  7. by Ponderer on January 15, 2024 6:05 am

    It is simply amazing to me the ludicrously absurd lengths that Trump's dedicated defenders and supporters like Hate will go to in order to defend and support this career criminal Donald Trump. How they will steadfastly ignore any and all blatant evidence against him. They just simply won't believe any of it no matter how obvious and dead-to-rights it all is. For it is blasphemy to them to think otherwise. Their Magnificent Mango Messiah can do no wrong. He is Infallible in their glazed-over eyes.

    They declare that anyone who goes after him for crimes he committed is just a Trump hater and part of "The Swamp", as Trump has told them to call the imaginary boogeyman force working against him, to make him fail in his sacred task to "save" our country.

    Their entire logic is totally centered around him and whatever he wants them to think. If he wants them to think and believe him to be "Christlike", then that's just what he is to them. If he says that he was sent by God, then by God he was sent by God! And if he wants them to help him overthrow the government for him, then that is their sacred mission and calling. Even if their only weapon in his service is their vote.


    And all for a guy who is about as "Christlike" as a charismatic 3-card Monte dealer with a $5,000 a day crack habit.


  8. by HatetheSwamp on January 15, 2024 6:12 am

    It is simply amazing to me the ludicrously absurd lengths that Trump's dedicated defenders and supporters like Hate will go to in order to defend and support this career criminal Donald Trump.

    Tell me how I'm wrong: So far, nuthin's stuck.


  9. by oldedude on January 15, 2024 6:56 am
    I thought I'd break this down for curt. First, according to curt, none of these issues can be confirmed because they supposedly come from BSA data. The easiest way for a novice to look at the data is through the SARs. So according to curt, the information is questionable at best, and generally not usable for "evidence."

    curt- Members of the Oversight Committee finally offered actual concrete evidence of a president benefiting from an influx of foreign money. This isn’t particularly useful for the Republican impeachment effort, though: The president at issue was Donald Trump.

    To be sure, we know about only some of the payments that passed into former President Trump’s hands during just two years of his presidency from just 20 of the more than 190 nations in the world through just four of his more than 500 businesses.

    My question since I haven't see the documentation, is who the ultimate receiver is. curt "assumes" that all the money going into the business goes to him. If that's true, what they said in the paragraph above is inaccurate. Trump Enterprises would be the pass through account and would have been seen by the data. They didn't say that.

    Again, I find it amazing curt cannot use BSA data for one source, but for his "enemy of the state," it's gospel. I'm only asking that he makes up his mind. It's either valid information, or it isn't.
    oversightdemocrats.house.gov


  10. by Curt_Anderson on January 15, 2024 1:23 pm
    OD,
    I haven't mentioned SARs or BSA in this thread or used reports of them as the basis of my criticism of Trump, so I don't know why you are harping on that.

    James Comer, Eric Trump among other Trump supporters don't deny that Trump cashes in personally from foreign government money, but insist that Trump has a legitimate business therefore it's OK. That doesn't make any difference. The Constitution’s requirement is that a president disclose foreign emoluments and seek Congress’s consent to keep them.

    Not only is it illegal, it does not pass the smell test that Trump has collected millions of dollars in "hotel room fees" from China, Saudi Arabia, etc. while president. Btw, that's often for rooms that are unoccupied.

    It's not as if Trump isn't blatant about his abuse of the constitutional emolument rules. While president he pitched the idea of hosting the G7 (Group of Seven) summit at Doral, his Florida golf resort. No, he didn't offer to host it for free or at a discount.
    reuters.com


  11. by oldedude on January 15, 2024 3:18 pm
    1. I'm "harping" (read mentioning) a crosstalk in the past when you flat refused to believe these were valid in any case. Then we did it again. Same result. ALL of that was about pedojoe. I don't see how you would react any differently in this case. To shift your opinion in this case, would show you as a Two-faced liar.

    James Comer, Eric Trump among other Trump supporters don't deny that Trump cashes in personally from foreign government money, but insist that Trump has a legitimate business therefore it's OK. That doesn't make any difference. The Constitution’s requirement is that a president disclose foreign emoluments and seek Congress’s consent to keep them.
    So what you need to show is that trumpster still has his vested interest in the hotels, which GAO agreed was separated. OPM and GAO both agreed trump (per se) and Trump, Inc were separated and fulfilled the obligation according to the rules.

    Not only is it illegal, it does not pass the smell test that Trump has collected millions of dollars in "hotel room fees" from China, Saudi Arabia, etc. while president. Btw, that's often for rooms that are unoccupied.
    Is that TRUMP, Inc? or Trumpster per se? Two different entities. Please clarify.

    It's not as if Trump isn't blatant about his abuse of the constitutional emolument rules. While president he pitched the idea of hosting the G7 (Group of Seven) summit at Doral, his Florida golf resort. No, he didn't offer to host it for free or at a discount.
    All of this has to go through GAO and OPM to get the contract. The one that skipped out on this was pedojoe and his contracts to his brother and sister.


  12. by Curt_Anderson on January 15, 2024 3:54 pm
    OD,
    I cannot find anything that supports your contention that the GAO and OPM agreed that Donald Trump and the Trump Organization were properly separated.

    Regardless, Trump claimed that his sons were put in charge of the Trump Organization. Does anybody outside of the MAGA cult believe that Trump really removed himself from the Trump Organization? He certainly wasn't above acting as a pitchman for his hotels and golf courses while president (one example is noted above, see link)

    Honest political office holders in similar situations place their business in independent trusts to avoid the appearance and actuality of conflict of interest.


  13. by oldedude on January 15, 2024 5:12 pm
    I cannot find anything that supports your contention that the GAO and OPM agreed that Donald Trump and the Trump Organization were properly separated.
    Most were like pedojoe. They had been in gov'mnt for so long, they did stuff under the sly. Most of the Union congress and military members were in on the "trans-continental railway" because that's how "gave votes.

    Regardless, Trump claimed that his sons were put in charge of the Trump Organization. Does anybody outside of the MAGA cult believe that Trump really removed himself from the Trump Organization? He certainly wasn't above acting as a pitchman for his hotels and golf courses while president (one example is noted above, see link)
    1. no link
    2. OPM and GAO who are responsible for the oversight.

    Honest political office holders in similar situations place their business in independent trusts to avoid the appearance and actuality of conflict of interest.

    Whom are you referring to?



  14. by Curt_Anderson on January 15, 2024 6:10 pm
    “He certainly wasn't above acting as a pitchman for his hotels and golf courses while president (one example is noted above, see link)
    1. no link”. — OD

    I linked in #10 as noted.

    Recent examples of politicians who separated themselves from their business interests with blind trusts include Senators Jon Ossoff and Mitt Romney. Jimmy Carter did as president.


  15. by oldedude on January 16, 2024 1:34 am
    I don't see the difference between them. Except jimmy lost money, and trumpster gained money. In fairness to you, this article is about jimmy "selling" his peanut farm before he entered office, which is not what you said. He still signed the investments over to family. Was it the best thing to do? Maybe not, and it is/was fully legal.

    A 2021 Forbes analysis found that Trump's business made $2.4 billion in revenue between January 2017 and December 2020 through commercial real estate, licensing, management and hotel businesses, property sales and other ventures.

    Trump's businesses were put in a revocable trust for his presidency despite calls to sell his assets and put the proceeds in a blind trust, the New York Times reported in 2017.


    It confirms your statement that jimmy put it in a "blind trust" which has someone else running it while he was in office. trumpster's was in a "revocable trust." So trumpster was more precise in his terminology.

    Blind trusts can be irrevocable or revocable. With a revocable trust, you have the authority to modify or terminate the trust and take back control of the accounts and property upon termination. On the other hand, you cannot easily modify or terminate an irrevocable trust.

    Mitt also had issues with his "blind trust"
    ... But in 2003, as he prepared to take office as governor of Massachusetts, Romney placed his family's funds in his own blind trust to avoid whatever accusations could surface.

    Romney's aides have referred to the blind trust in fending off political attacks about his investments ever since. In 2007, his GOP primary opponents took aim at several of his investments, including a stake in a firm that did business with Iran, shares of a Chinese oil company, and an interest in a company that engaged in embryonic stem cell research. Romney responded by announcing that Malt would take greater pains to insure Romney's investments would not conflict with his political views.


    Ossoff- What Ossaff did is the same thing government employees do. He put his stocks into a blind trust. Government employees choose a "Plan" not the companies they invest in. These are handled by someone else in the ether world the employees don't have access to. This is an actual step added to what he is/was required to do. Congress has the "ability" to choose what companies to invest in (making people like pelosi very rich).
    usatoday.com

    ossoff.senate.gov


  16. by HatetheSwamp on January 16, 2024 4:27 am

    To get back on point: How does Trump being despicable excuse Biden Crime Family activity?

    What this thread, as po'd say, EFFINproves that the whole freakin Swamp is dysfunctional and corrupt...

    ...and that many SSers have fallen for the Swamp scam...

    ...fools.


Go To Top

Comment on: "Comer insists his job was ‘never to impeach’ as GOP doubts grow about Biden impeachment vote"


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page