'The House has no choice but to impeach President ‘Quid pro Joe’ Biden' over Israel aid cutoff threat says Rep Cory Mills

[Aldebaran]

Interesting that you say that 3.2 Palestinians in Gaza losing their homes and infrastructure, being driven to a city on the Egyptian border which is completely closed to them, starving and dying of thirst, exposed to disease, and waiting for the death that has hit tens of thousands of their countrymen to surely come.

Aldebaran's dictionary: 3.2 million starved, dehydrated, bombed, driven from their homes, killed to avenge a one-day attack killing 1300 people = Getting a break.

Withholding Congressionally approved aid to defeat Hamas is giving Hamas a break.
No incentive to release the hostages--which is something I noticed you're not addressing.

 

[rambot]

There's just as many who think it was unnecessary and it didn't accomplish anything. All the democrats were for it and virtually all the republicans were against it. This time it would be the republicans for it and the democrats against it. And if it happens nothing will come of it. Probably most people don't even remember what the impeachments were for. We all remember why Clinton got it though.

See but it doesn't matter who is for or who is against it. It matters WHAT HAPPENNED and what they have evidence to convict and if they can convict on that evidence.

 

[Ceallaigh]

See but it doesn't matter who is for or who is against it. It matters WHAT HAPPENNED and what they have evidence to convict and if they can convict on that evidence.

What happened and the validity of evidence has been subjectively partisan. That's seen in how polarized the impeachments have been. Impeachment has clearly been weaponized. That and the fact that nothing actually results from it, makes it pretty much meaningless. Democrats are talking about impeaching Trump again if he wins. What for? Well they'll come up with something all the democrats will agree with and all the republicans will call bogus. And vice versa in Biden's case.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Interesting that you say that 3.2 Palestinians in Gaza losing their homes and infrastructure, being driven to a city on the Egyptian border which is completely closed to them, starving and dying of thirst, exposed to disease, and waiting for the death that has hit tens of thousands of their countrymen to surely come.

Aldebaran's dictionary: 3.2 million starved, dehydrated, bombed, driven from their homes, killed to avenge a one-day attack killing 1300 people = Getting a break.

All those deaths and hardships are Hamas' doing.

 

[stevil]

Seriously, instead of always trying to "Own da libs" why don't they try governing and improving the lives of Americans? It seems they are only improving the lives of the petulent children who need to see Biden attacked.

Their approach to being the opposition party is to avoid doing anything for the people.
They seem to want to stop progress, stop improvement, blame it all on the ruling party in the hopes their followers will be blind to what is going on and vote them in.

 

[Fantine]

All those deaths and hardships are Hamas' doing.

I've heard of enabling--but enabling mass murderer Netanyahu?
Twelve steps may not be enough for codependency as dysfunctional as this.

 

[Ceallaigh]

I've heard of enabling--but enabling mass murderer Netanyahu?
Twelve steps may not be enough for codependency as dysfunctional as this.

I don't know what that means. I just know the terrorist organization Hamas is to blame for what's happening.

 

[Pommer]

What happened and the validity of evidence has been subjectively partisan.

No, it just “looks partisan” because it’s Trump (the Perpetual Victim of The Man).

That's seen in how polarized the impeachments have been.

There’s been three lately, two for hizzonor President Trump and one for Secretary Mayorkas and yes, impeachments are usually “partisan” to begin with, that’s the nature of the beast.

Impeachment has clearly been weaponized. That and the fact that nothing actually results from it, makes it pretty much meaningless.

The Senate is the only institution barely affected by Trump, but the election is right around the corner!
Wouldn’t it be great if all of ”47’s” political enemies were brought up before the Throne courts to do penance and abase themselves before being thrown in prison!?

Democrats are talking about impeaching Trump again if he wins. What for? Well they'll come up with something all the democrats will agree with and all the republicans will call bogus. And vice versa in Biden's case.

Depending on who’s the vice-president I could go for a Presidential impeachment/conviction either way.

 

[Ceallaigh]

No, it just “looks partisan” because it’s Trump (the Perpetual Victim of The Man).

There’s been three lately, two for hizzonor President Trump and one for Secretary Mayorkas and yes, impeachments are usually “partisan” to begin with, that’s the nature of the beast.

The Senate is the only institution barely affected by Trump, but the election is right around the corner!
Wouldn’t it be great if all of ”47’s” political enemies were brought up before the Throne courts to do penance and abase themselves before being thrown in prison!?



Depending on who’s the vice-president I could go for a Presidential impeachment/conviction either way.

In the first line you're arguing with me about it being partisan, and in the second you're agreeing with me. As for the rest, as usual I don't follow whatever it is you're attempting linguisticly.

 

[Pommer]

In the first line you're arguing with me about it being partisan, and in the second you're agreeing with me. As for the rest, as usual I don't follow whatever it is you're attempting linguisticly.

We’re just having a “conversation”.
The “correctness” (or lack thereof) is subjective and we might be closer than we know on some positions except that people tend to view debate as “adversarial“.

The seldom-used provision for impeachment has gotten a bit more “popular” of late, this is true; it is, by its nature, “partisan”.

When President Trump was in office, he had a tendency to “push-the-envelope“ with regard to political “norms”. The Institutions that value/vouchsafe those norms are going to have a tenancy to “push back”.

The impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas was bogus in that no “high crimes and misdemeanors“ were identified except charges that he was incompetent at doing his job, (which is not “impeachable”).

 

[Aldebaran]

After all, if the House doesn't try to impeach President Biden again, how else will the Freedom Caucus be able to waste enough time to prevent them from doing something truly productive?

Was it productive when the democrats impeached Trump for supposedly withholding Congressionally-approved aid to Ukraine? If so, then the same productivity can be accomplished by impeaching Biden for withholding congressionally approved aid to Israel, which is actually one of our allies.

 

[Hans Blaster]

That last sentence really stood out, because Biden is withholding material support (which was constitutionally authorized by our elected members of Congress) from our closest middle-east ally

If it is "authorized" that is one thing, if it is "mandatory" it is a different thing.

If any violation of the law by the WH/Biden Administration occurred will depend on:

1. The detailed text of the aid bill;
2. The text of any treaty obligation with Israel to provide aid;
3. The text of any other US laws (passed by Congress) regarding foreign military aid; and
4. The text of any other US treaty obligations with other nations or the international community, such as the Geneva Convention responsibilities to avoid civilian casualties.


The rest of this is irrelevant:

(a democracy in the middle east) that just underwent a major attack on its people that killed over a thousand innocent Israeli civilians. As a result, the attackers are now getting a break, even as they continue holding hostages (some of which are Americans).
Small wonder Hamas continues holding those hostages. They probably feel more emboldened now that Israel's closest ally is now treating Israel as the bad guys.

 

[Fantine]

Trump tried to coerce Ukraine's president to lie about Biden. He wanted to withhold aid.
There were several witnesses to his recorded blackmail attempt.

Biden saw Netanyahu violating human rights, threatening the lives of 3.2 million civilians. Mostly women and children.

Leveling their homes, forcing them to flee to the southern border, where they are starved, dehydrated, wounded, sick, homeless and unable to escape.

Now that they are cornered, he wants to finish the jobs.

It would be immoral and complicit to support this genocide, against our founding principles.

We are still providing humanitarian help.

Thank God we have a decent, moral president.

 

[Ceallaigh]

We’re just having a “conversation”.
The “correctness” (or lack thereof) is subjective and we might be closer than we know on some positions except that people tend to view debate as “adversarial“.

The seldom-used provision for impeachment has gotten a bit more “popular” of late, this is true; it is, by its nature, “partisan”.

When President Trump was in office, he had a tendency to “push-the-envelope“ with regard to political “norms”. The Institutions that value/vouchsafe those norms are going to have a tenancy to “push back”.

The impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas was bogus in that no “high crimes and misdemeanors“ were identified except charges that he was incompetent at doing his job, (which is not “impeachable”).

If someone has really done something seriously wrong, it's something both sides are going to recognize as such. It's not going to be so one sided. Both parties in the house and senate as well as a majority of the citizenry of both parties are going want that person ousted. But instead it's one party trying to oust someone by cobbling together scrounged up offenses that fall well short of being egregious enough to garner a more unanimous outcry to boot someone from office. Instead it ends up as nothing more than a symbolic badge of shame. If Biden gets impeached it's practically certain to actually amount do nothing as has been the case with Johnson, Clinton, Trump, and Mayorkas.

 

[Aldebaran]

If it is "authorized" that is one thing, if it is "mandatory" it is a different thing.

If any violation of the law by the WH/Biden Administration occurred will depend on:

1. The detailed text of the aid bill;
2. The text of any treaty obligation with Israel to provide aid;
3. The text of any other US laws (passed by Congress) regarding foreign military aid; and
4. The text of any other US treaty obligations with other nations or the international community, such as the Geneva Convention responsibilities to avoid civilian casualties.


The rest of this is irrelevant:

The part of my post you considered irrelevant just happens to be a description of why those weapons are needed, and was authorized by Congress.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The part of my post you considered irrelevant just happens to be a description of why those weapons are needed, and was authorized by Congress.

The are irrelevant to the law. If Congress specified something about it in the law feel free to cite it.

 

[Pommer]

Was it productive when the democrats impeached Trump for supposedly withholding Congressionally-approved aid to Ukraine?

I do not recall this being in the Bill of Impeachment, largely since President Trump released the funds when the “do me a favor” story broke.

If so, then the same productivity can be accomplished by impeaching Biden for withholding congressionally approved aid to Israel, which is actually one of our allies.

The President being concerned that our ally is overdoing its reaction to provocations begun on October 7 2023 to the point of withholding vital, necessary aid to that ally, will likely hurt him at home…it’s not the quid pro quo of President Trump’s tenure, since that rather being a benefit to Biden, it’d be a detriment, like a person who stands by principles rather than personalities.

 

[Pommer]

If someone has really done something seriously wrong, it's something both sides are going to recognize as such. It's not going to be so one sided. Both parties in the house and senate as well as a majority of the citizenry of both parties are going want that person ousted. But instead it's one party trying to oust someone by cobbling together scrounged up offenses that fall well short of being egregious enough to garner a more unanimous outcry to boot someone from office. Instead it ends up as nothing more than a symbolic badge of shame. If Biden gets impeached it's practically certain to actually amount do nothing as has been the case with Johnson, Clinton, Trump, and Mayorkas.

Well, see it’s not so much the “who does what”, but it’s the tendency (of the last ~20 years that the party out of the White House acts as an opposition party like would happen in a parliamentary system.
But ours isn’t a parliament, it’s designed for opposing sides to wrestle with deep questions in their houses of legislation.

Politics is a lot more difficult than it seems, doubly so when we have so few statesmen.

We have always fought with one another, we need “the other side”.

 

[Aldebaran]

I do not recall this being in the Bill of Impeachment, largely since President Trump released the funds when the “do me a favor” story broke.

In this case, the favor Israel has to do for biden is to refrain from eliminating Hamas and freeing around 130 hostages, many of which are Americans.

The President being concerned that our ally is overdoing its reaction to provocations begun on October 7 2023 to the point of withholding vital, necessary aid to that ally, will likely hurt him at home…it’s not the quid pro quo of President Trump’s tenure, since that rather being a benefit to Biden, it’d be a detriment, like a person who stands by principles rather than personalities.

This has nothing to do with either principles or personalities. It has to do with biden's betrayal of our ally's trust to stand with them. Our "ironclad commitment to the security of Israel" (biden's own words) seems to not be what biden claimed: Statement from President Joe Biden on Iran's Attacks against the State of Israel | The White House

 

[Pommer]

In this case, the favor Israel has to do for biden is to refrain from eliminating Hamas and freeing around 130 hostages, many of which are Americans.

Oh?
But it’s not just a favor for Biden, it’s a favor that aligns with the policy of the USA, (which yes, is largely under the control of the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave).
Huh

This has nothing to do with either principles or personalities. It has to do with biden's betrayal of our ally's trust to stand with them. Our "ironclad commitment to the security of Israel" (biden's own words) seems to not be what biden claimed: Statement from President Joe Biden on Iran's Attacks against the State of Israel | The White House

Tell it to the Kurds.