Hunter agrees to testify; Repubs refuse

[Rebound]

Hunter Biden has agreed to testify publicly before Congress.  The GOP has refused, threatening to hold him in contempt of Congress if he refuses to testify in private.  
 

This demonstrates the sheer depravity of Republicans in Washington. The man agreed to testify.  Why should the American public stand for this insistence that Biden testify in secret?  What would that serve, apart from allowing Republicans to selectively edit and release his testimony… the same guys who plan to release “evidence” of January 6 with blurred faces?

[Deluge]

49 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Hunter Biden has agreed to testify publicly before Congress.  The GOP has refused, threatening to hold him in contempt of Congress if he refuses to testify in private.  
 

This demonstrates the sheer depravity of Republicans in Washington. The man agreed to testify.  Why should the American public stand for this insistence that Biden testify in secret?  What would that serve, apart from allowing Republicans to selectively edit and release his testimony… the same guys who plan to release “evidence” of January 6 with blurred faces?

Why don't you have a link? 

[Aristides]

6 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Why don't you have a link? 

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2023-11-28/hunter-biden-offers-to-testify-publicly-before-congress-setting-up-a-potential-high-stakes-face-off

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/hunter-biden-agrees-testify-house-oversight-committee-rcna126962

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/hunter-biden-offers-testify-publicly-house-republicans-probe-2023-11-28/

Pretty rich from someone like Jim Jordan who himself ignored a congressional subpoena along with four other Republicans.

 

[Rebound]

16 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Why don't you have a link? 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/06/us/politics/hunter-biden-contempt-charge.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
 

If you can’t get past the paywall, I can PM you a one time link which will let you read the story. It’s included in my subscription package.  

Edited December 6, 2023 by Rebound

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Hunter Biden has agreed to testify publicly before Congress.  The GOP has refused, threatening to hold him in contempt of Congress if he refuses to testify in private.  
 

This demonstrates the sheer depravity of Republicans in Washington. The man agreed to testify.  Why should the American public stand for this insistence that Biden testify in secret?  What would that serve, apart from allowing Republicans to selectively edit and release his testimony… the same guys who plan to release “evidence” of January 6 with blurred faces?

Of course they don't want to give Hunter the opportunity to make HIS CASE.

Their ONLY purpose is to make THEIR CASE. AKA, propaganda.

Edited December 6, 2023 by robosmith

[Rebound]

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Of course they don't want to given Hunter the opportunity to make HIS CASE.

Their ONLY purpose is to make THEIR CASE. AKA, propaganda.

Yes, the exact same people who plan to released blurred out January 6 footage.  

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Hunter Biden has agreed to testify publicly before Congress.  The GOP has refused, threatening to hold him in contempt of Congress if he refuses to testify in private.  
 

This demonstrates the sheer depravity of Republicans in Washington. The man agreed to testify.  Why should the American public stand for this insistence that Biden testify in secret?  What would that serve, apart from allowing Republicans to selectively edit and release his testimony… the same guys who plan to release “evidence” of January 6 with blurred faces?

Well if it's true there's no difference then why doesn't hunter just agree to it? Could it be he's hoping to use the opportunity in conjunction with dems to grandstand for the public while not answering questions?

If he has nothing to hide what difference does it make if it's in public or private?

[Legato]

12 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well if it's true there's no difference then why doesn't hunter just agree to it? Could it be he's hoping to use the opportunity in conjunction with dems to grandstand for the public while not answering questions?

If he has nothing to hide what difference does it make if it's in public or private?

Grandstanding, yes exactly.

[Aristides]

19 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well if it's true there's no difference then why doesn't hunter just agree to it? Could it be he's hoping to use the opportunity in conjunction with dems to grandstand for the public while not answering questions?

If he has nothing to hide what difference does it make if it's in public or private?

So why did Jordan and a bunch of other Republicans ignore subpoenas? They set a precedent and have no reason to complain when their own behaviour comes back at them;

Edited December 6, 2023 by Aristides

[Aristides]

25 minutes ago, Legato said:

Grandstanding, yes exactly.

It gives Biden some control over his own message rather than a committee editing his testimony and giving theirs. 

Edited December 6, 2023 by Aristides

[CdnFox]

40 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So why did Jordan and a bunch of other Republicans ignore subpoenas?

What's in it for them not to?

Quote

They set a precedent and have no reason to complain when their own behaviour comes back at them;

Oh precedent was set many years ago. People ignore those subpoenas all the time and have for ages. There's no repercussions.  I'm sure they'll point fingers but whatever.  The issue was why would hunter specifically agree to one but not the other? And why are republicans not ok with that?

And the answer is grandstanding.

If it's public then he stalls and doesn't answer Rep questions and gets questions from the dems like "would you say that your unfair treatement at the hands of the republicans for no reason other than political gain is tragic or is it more hateful?" "I"ve always thought of it as more being sadistic and vendictive sir, but i suppsoe tragic and hateful also fits".

 

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Well if it's true there's no difference then why doesn't hunter just agree to it? Could it be he's hoping to use the opportunity in conjunction with dems to grandstand for the public while not answering questions?

If he has nothing to hide what difference does it make if it's in public or private?

Cause there’s a hell of a difference! It is FACT that House Republicans release doctored evidence! They said so!  So Hunter will testify PUBLICLY, where his answers can’t be doctored. 
 

Would you testify in PRIVATE to people who have full control over the recordings of what you say and release only portions they want to release? If he’s forced to do that he should take the fifth to every question.  

Edited December 7, 2023 by Rebound

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

What's in it for them not to?

Oh precedent was set many years ago. People ignore those subpoenas all the time and have for ages. There's no repercussions.  I'm sure they'll point fingers but whatever.  The issue was why would hunter specifically agree to one but not the other? And why are republicans not ok with that?

And the answer is grandstanding.

If it's public then he stalls and doesn't answer Rep questions and gets questions from the dems like "would you say that your unfair treatement at the hands of the republicans for no reason other than political gain is tragic or is it more hateful?" "I"ve always thought of it as more being sadistic and vendictive sir, but i suppsoe tragic and hateful also fits".

 

Hunter hasn't ignored the subpoena, he just wants his testimony to be public. If he stalls and doesn't answer questions, it will be out there for all to see. If he testifies in secret, the committee can just spin it the way they want. It is the committee that is afraid of transparency, not Biden.

The real question you should be asking is, what is the committee afraid of?

Edited December 7, 2023 by Aristides

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Cause there’s a hell of a difference! It is FACT that House Republicans release doctored evidence! They said so!  So Hunter will testify PUBLICLY, where his answers can’t be doctored.

Such meetings are duly recorded and the dems will be there too - so that's not a valid excuse.  If it was just republicans that would be different but that's not the case.

He'd have to do better than that.

[Aristides]

54 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Such meetings are duly recorded and the dems will be there too - so that's not a valid excuse.  If it was just republicans that would be different but that's not the case.

He'd have to do better than that.

So who are the Democrat committee members?

[Legato]

3 hours ago, Aristides said:

It gives Biden some control over his own message rather than a committee editing his testimony and giving theirs. 

Don't you mean Biden's lawyers?

[Aristides]

11 minutes ago, Legato said:

Don't you mean Biden's lawyers?

Hunter would be testifying on his own but since when do you think he should be denied legal advice, do you think these committees should be some sort of star chamber?

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

So who are the Democrat committee members?

• Jamie Raskin, Maryland, Ranking Member
• Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia
• Stephen Lynch, Massachusetts
• Gerry Connolly, Virginia
• Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
• Ro Khanna, California
• Kweisi Mfume, Maryland
• Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York, Vice Ranking Member
• Katie Porter, California
• Cori Bush, Missouri
• Jimmy Gomez, California
• Shontel Brown, Ohio
• Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
• Robert Garcia, California
• Maxwell Frost, Florida
• Becca Balint, Vermont (until June 22, 2023)
• Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
• Greg Casar, Texas
• Jasmine Crockett, Texas
• Dan Goldman, New York
• Jared Moskowitz, Florida
• Rashida Tlaib, Michigan (since September 20, 2023)

 

 

Why do you ask? Are you suggesting they'd lie about biden or something?

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Hunter would be testifying on his own but since when do you think he should be denied legal advice, do you think these committees should be some sort of star chamber?

There are representatives on both sides present and asking questions.  It's hardly a star chamber.

[West]

6 hours ago, robosmith said:

Of course they don't want to give Hunter the opportunity to make HIS CASE.

Their ONLY purpose is to make THEIR CASE. AKA, propaganda.

Hunter will just pull a crooked Hillary and say he doesn't recall, or a comey and claim everything is classified. 

He should be forced to testify publicly with no classified excuses tho so we can see the criminal enterprise at work

[myata]

Derailing of a major party, turning it into an authoritarian mob is a tragedy in a binary democratic system. It will lead only to the degradation of democracy, and eventually, its downfall.

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

• Jamie Raskin, Maryland, Ranking Member
• Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia
• Stephen Lynch, Massachusetts
• Gerry Connolly, Virginia
• Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
• Ro Khanna, California
• Kweisi Mfume, Maryland
• Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York, Vice Ranking Member
• Katie Porter, California
• Cori Bush, Missouri
• Jimmy Gomez, California
• Shontel Brown, Ohio
• Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
• Robert Garcia, California
• Maxwell Frost, Florida
• Becca Balint, Vermont (until June 22, 2023)
• Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
• Greg Casar, Texas
• Jasmine Crockett, Texas
• Dan Goldman, New York
• Jared Moskowitz, Florida
• Rashida Tlaib, Michigan (since September 20, 2023)

 

 

Why do you ask? Are you suggesting they'd lie about biden or something?

There are representatives on both sides present and asking questions.  It's hardly a star chamber.

So why not do it in public?

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, West said:

Hunter will just pull a crooked Hillary and say he doesn't recall, or a comey and claim everything is classified. 

He should be forced to testify publicly with no classified excuses tho so we can see the criminal enterprise at work

Hunter has no classified ACCESS. Duh

He is willing to testify; he just doesn't want Republicans picking what is made public. AKA, in control of the narrative.

Only you fools trust them to be honest about it. And right after Mr. Speaker said he would hide faces to obstruct justice. ?

[CdnFox]

38 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So why not do it in public?

Ahhh - so you had no reason to ask me which democrats were on the committee. Just being a sealion. See if you can waste my time digging up and posting information you don't care about.   You're a dink.

And i answered that previously very clearly. So more sealioning. Public allows him to grandstand and his dem friends to ask him loaded and leading questions like 'clearly this is an unwarranted attack on you by the evil republicans, do you think that's because they're jealous of your greatness or because they're scum?"

At any rate - as i've demonstrated there's no way for the republicans to lie about what he's said in private, so might as well do it there.

[Hodad]

11 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Hunter has no classified ACCESS. Duh

He is willing to testify; he just doesn't want Republicans picking what is made public. AKA, in control of the narrative.

Only you fools trust them to be honest about it. And right after Mr. Speaker said he would hide faces to obstruct justice. ?

Exactly. We after Devon Archer trusted Republicans went on FOX and claimed that he said literally the opposite of what he actually said. Because it's not a crime to lie and they know full well that their credulous sheep will believe absolutely anything without so much as a fact check.

[Rebound]

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Such meetings are duly recorded and the dems will be there too - so that's not a valid excuse.  If it was just republicans that would be different but that's not the case.

He'd have to do better than that.

No, the issue is that the GOP wants to take his deposition in PRIVATE, meaning the record will be private. And the concern with that is the Republicans will release snippets of the deposition to selected media outlets, who will put their spin on it.  
 

So Hunter Biden has said No, he will agree to testify in public, in front of cameras, for all the world to see. No Spin Zone.  
 

So far, as you well know, Republicans have brought witness after witness without finding any crime at all. Deluge found a “crime” of Joe Biden embellishing his resume at U Penn. Not exactly impeachable, but that’s the level of detail.