Wise-Compare.com: Empowering Wise Decisions.

Not even Republican epistemic closure could save them from the humiliation of their own witnesses refuting their claims during their hearing. A senior Republican aide expressed frustration as Republicans’ own witnesses say there is no evidence of crime against President Biden.

“NEW: Frustration in the GOP over 1st impeachment hearing, as the GOP witnesses undercut their narrative & say no evidence of crimes.

“Picking witnesses that refute House Republicans arguments for impeachment is mind blowing. This is an unmitigated disaster,” said senior R aide,” Melanie Zanona, Capitol Hill reporter for CNN, shared.

It’s true, Republicans had two witnesses lined up who both said today that there is no evidence and the third got busted for having published an op-ed in which she left out “Hunter” in what was a clear attempt to mislead the reader about just which Biden had committed “crimes”.

Mind you, the hearing is titled: “The Basis for an Impeachment Inquiry of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr,” which suggests that they would be focusing on this rather than the impending shutdown they have orchestrated because the evidence was so compelling. It literally says it is the basis for the impeachment inquiry, and yet they have provided no basis.

First up we have conservative commentator Jonathan Turley, who didn’t think Donald Trump should be impeached for attempting to extort Ukraine into manufacturing dirt on Joe Biden, but did think Bill Clinton should be impeached over a lie about a sex act, for context of his priorities.

Turley said during the Oversight Committee’s first hearing since Speaker McCarthy launched his cosplay impeachment inquiry based on nonexistent evidence that he did “not believe that the current evidence would support articles of impeachment” against Biden.

“In fact, I do not believe that the current evidence would support articles of impeachment. They’re merely allegations and they should not become presumptions of impeachable conduct.”

Well. Not to worry, there is not enough current evidence, but Turley does think they should keep fishing. You know, in case there’s a lie about a blue dress to be found, which is totally worse than trying to withhold Congressionally appropriated aide to Ukraine.

Next up, Fox News commentator Bruce Dubinsky. Yes, the Fox News parade was in the House today, which is sort of its own version of a self-own. Yet he, too, was unable to provide anything other than lukewarm encouragement to keep fishing, “I am not here today to even suggest that there was corruption, fraud, or any wrongdoing. In my opinion, more information needs to be gathered and assessed before I would make such an assessment.”

So far, their witnesses say, there is not only no evidence of fraud or corruption, but there’s not even evidence of wrongdoing.

What are we doing here again? Oh, right — this is the “basis” for the impeachment inquiry.

Then we had Ms. Eileen O’Connor, who is a former assistant Attorney General, but more importantly was a member of the Trump transition team. Not that she’s biased. We’ll let you decide for yourself, but just know that she wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal titled “You’d Go to Prison for What Biden Did.” (It has apparently been updated without disclosure.)

What’s that? What is it Biden did? Oh, see, she just left off the first name. Totally an oversight she regrets.

But she meant “Hunter Biden.” You know, the guy who does not work in the White House and never has. The one who was charged more harshly than others are for tax crimes and lying on the application of a gun purchase. So, no, you wouldn’t go to jail had you done what Hunter did — but more importantly, O’Connor had a time trying to defend her omission this morning.

“I was cutting down words to stay within my five minutes,” O’Connor said, trying to justify leaving Hunter’s name off of her op-ed for a widely read publication.

Rep. Lynch just demolished one of the GOP witnesses pic.twitter.com/tNPsmZZv6N

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 28, 2023

She finished up with the claim, “I did not delete it intentionally, only in the service of time.”

Oh, yes, in the “service of time” many a former assistant Attorney Generals have accused the wrong someone of a crime in a published commentary piece for a highly regarded publication that somehow changed this without disclosing the rather pertinent correction. Many a time, I’m sure, she has filed legal documents leaving off the first name — just a general attack on all family members, just in case. Very professional.

O’Connor is totally reliable, though. She’s definitely NOT clutching a partisan grudge like a lover.

Just yesterday, House Impeachment Leader Representative Jason Smith (R-MO) made a fool of himself presenting “evidence” of politicization against Joe Biden that was dated in 2017 and 2020, both times during which Donald Trump was president. He was unable to defend this rather glaring issue with his “evidence” so just waved around blathering on about 700 pages, because there was a time when that would have worked. These, however, do not seem to be those times anymore.

So yeah, this has been beyond mortifying for Republicans. It’s starting to look like they have some kind of weird political fetish for public humiliation and indignity on behalf of dear leader Donald Trump.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *