• ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    10 months ago

    Isn’t this the clown who Bernie Sanders chastised for wanting to have a physical fight with someone who was testifying to a Congressional committee?

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Yes lol and he should always be remembered for the time Bernie Sanders saved him from an ass-whooping that would literally go down in history.

    • Crowfiend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The optimist in me wants to say: “yeah, you go girl!”

      But the pessimist in me is saying: “cool, so if they’re so bad, who ARE you voting for?”

      Out of the options, the lesser of two evils is easier to fight against.

      Edit: I don’t actively support Biden. But between the guys who promise to either: A) have made it their purpose to impoverish and delegitimacize everyone but themselves, and the people that, B) are trying to do so without getting caught

      I’ll go for the people that don’t want to get caught. They’re at least minimizing the damage they do to the world. 🙄

      Extra edit for the dipshits that can’t read properly: I was saying that between the Bidens and the big orange blob and his fanatical cohorts, I’d rather have the Bidens. Y’all think I’m talking shit about the wrong person, and that reading comprehension (or lack thereof) is why I don’t actively support EITHER side because they’re BOTH full of fanatical retards.

      • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I love how you just read whatever you wanted to, and then wrote this scree like we give a fuck what you think, and you’re not even intelligent enough to catch the joke that’s literally one sentence long.

  • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m pretty sure the stuff the Rs were actually going after Clinton over didn’t happen in office either, Lewinsky just presented a big target they could attach it all to.

    • yOya@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      No, if they have the votes they can do a sham impeachment for any reason they want. They can vote to impeach just because they don’t like his stupid ugly face. But I doubt they actually have the votes. This is just revenge for daring to impeach Trump. It won’t succeed but they get to do “investigations”. They hope that will hurt Biden next November.

      • lad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        They hope that will hurt Biden next November.

        Like when one badmouthes someone then publicly renounces but everyone will only remember the first part and not the second?

  • Tremble@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I don’t think they actually need a valid reason for impeachment.

    They could have impeached Obama for wearing his brown suit. Or Jaywalking when he went to the restaurant and put ketchup on his burger or whatever the heck that was about.

  • Klypto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    10 months ago

    In my opinion it would be a disaster if you could receive compensation for future policy input, act on that input in office, and be immune simply because you were not in office when you received it.

    Just prove he did or did not do it instead of whatever this nonsense take is.

    • JonEFive@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t think that that is the case here though. I agree what you’re saying in terms of a presidential candidate for example. But let’s be real, it’s already happening there. Candidates accepting campaign donations in return for implied favorable consideration if they win.

      In my mind though, what you’re taking about still pertains directly to the presidency and would be fair game for impeachment. To me, it isn’t so much important whether the person is in office, but whether the prior action impacts their ability to preside (mostly) free from undue external influence.

    • Rusticus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      lol. Here is how this is going to play out. Nothing will happen officially on this until next fall, within 30 days of the election. Then, there will be “leaks” to the media about details of Biden guilt, which will be complete bullshit but an attempt to swing independent voters.

      Source: Hillary Clinton in 2016. Buttery males.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      None that he committed, anyway.

      What his adult kid may or may not have done isn’t the legal (or even moral) responsibility of the parents.

    • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Because the one party state rigged it to be this way. They make sure the Dems aren’t a meaningful improvement ever, to sow apathy.

  • Pratai@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    To be impeached- wouldn’t one need to have done something worthy of impeachment?

  • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    The best part is their Orange Leader is trying to get Courts (at the Supreme Court now) to rule that the President has some kind of ultimate immunity. This would of course put Presidents above the law and out of reach of even the Supreme Court. It would also of course make it so Biden could do whatever he wanted (not that he actually would) - negating their whole farce.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      I wouldn’t put it past the Republican judges to rule that only Trump specifically has immunity.