Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

The Bobulinski Transcript: a lot of smoke but no fire.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 17, 2024 12:31 pm (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (24 comments) [481 views]


Presidential experts rank Biden 14th among presidents in survey, Trump comes in last
President by Curt_Anderson     February 18, 2024 6:57 pm (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: Indy! (13 comments) [189 views]


538's Nate Silver urges Biden: "Reassure voters or ‘stand down’"
Politics by HatetheSwamp     February 20, 2024 7:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [25 views]


Nothing on the KC shootout at their Super Bowl parade?
Sports by Indy!     February 20, 2024 3:14 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (9 comments) [41 views]


So it really is Russia, Russia, Russia that helps Trump get elected
Crime by Curt_Anderson     February 20, 2024 5:42 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [21 views]


GUTFELD! on the nearly $half Billion judgment against Trump
Law by HatetheSwamp     February 20, 2024 7:08 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (3 comments) [31 views]


James Comer Admits He Might Have to Throw in the Towel on Biden Impeachment Quest Because ‘The Math Keeps Getting Worse’
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 20, 2024 11:35 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (2 comments) [16 views]


John Oliver offers Justice Thomas a $2.4 Million Motorcoach and $1 Million a year for life to leave the Supreme Court
Business by Ponderer     February 19, 2024 3:44 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (16 comments) [155 views]


Ryan Girdusky on Clay and Buck today...
Politics by HatetheSwamp     February 20, 2024 9:23 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (1 comments) [35 views]


Will Donald Trump’s legal penalties and legal expenses impact campaign spending?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 20, 2024 10:51 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (3 comments) [27 views]


Politics selectors, pages, etc.
Raskin rips GOP for not agreeing to open hearing for Hunter Biden.
By Curt_Anderson
November 28, 2023 3:07 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)

Hunter Biden Offers to Testify in House Inquiry, but Only in Public
The Republican chairman of the Oversight Committee quickly rejected the offer, saying the president’s son must first provide testimony behind closed doors.

Hunter Biden, the president’s son, who is the subject of an investigation by House Republicans into his family, told Congress on Tuesday that he was willing to testify — but only publicly so that Republicans cannot twist or selectively leak what he says.

In a letter to Congress, Abbe D. Lowell, Mr. Biden’s lawyer, criticized the Republican inquiry as a “partisan crusade,” and said he has watched as Representative James R. Comer, Republican of Kentucky and the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, has used “closed-door sessions to manipulate, even distort the facts and misinform the public.”

Mr. Lowell proposed that Mr. Biden appear at a public hearing on Dec. 13, the date Republicans set for his closed-door interview, or “any date in December that we can arrange.”

“If, as you claim, your efforts are important and involve issues that Americans should know about, then let the light shine on these proceedings,” Mr. Lowell wrote.



House Oversight Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) ripped his GOP colleagues for rejecting Hunter Biden’s request for an open hearing on Dec. 13, when the president’s son is set to appear for a closed-door deposition.

In a statement Tuesday, Raskin called the GOP move “an epic humiliation” and “a frank confession that they are simply not interested in the facts and have no confidence in their own case or the ability of their own Members to pursue it,” referring to the Republicans on his committee.

“Let me get this straight,” Raskin said in his statement. “After wailing and moaning for ten months about Hunter Biden and alluding to some vast unproven family conspiracy, after sending Hunter Biden a subpoena to appear and testify, Chairman [James Comer (R-Ky.)] and the Oversight Republicans now reject his offer to appear before the full Committee and the eyes of the world and to answer any questions that they pose?”

“Chairman Comer’s insistence that Hunter Biden’s interview should happen behind closed doors proves it once again,” he added. “What the Republicans fear most is sunlight and the truth.”

Cited and related links:

  1. nytimes.com
  2. thehill.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 "Raskin rips GOP for not agreeing to open hearing for Hunter Biden. ":

  1. by Indy! on November 28, 2023 3:30 pm

    Neither party cares about the facts - they just care about filling time with nonsense like this instead of doing their jobs.


  2. by Curt_Anderson on November 29, 2023 8:28 am
    Indy,
    There is an obvious difference between Democrats and Republicans, and how they conduct their investigative committees.

    In the Democrat led January 6 committee hearings, the Democrats wanted to be public and on television as much as possible. Many of the Republicans called to testify objected to, ignored and fought the subpoenas.

    In contrast, James Comer and the other Republican committee members want to interrogate Hunter Biden behind closed doors.


  3. by HatetheSwamp on November 29, 2023 9:28 am

    Hunter ain't gettin special treatment from the HouseGOPs as he has from the whole DOJ. Baha.


  4. by Curt_Anderson on November 29, 2023 10:01 am
    HtS,
    The only special treatment Hunter got was especially harsh treatment.
    politico.com


  5. by oldedude on November 29, 2023 10:54 am
    In the Democrat led January 6 committee hearings, the Democrats wanted to be public and on television as much as possible. Many of the Republicans called to testify objected to, ignored and fought the subpoenas.

    Except prosecution refused to provide exculpatory evidence (meaning it's ILLEGAL NOT TO INCLUDE THIS IN YOUR DISCOVERY). So there's that. And instead of using air Marshals looking for bad guys, most are on the border doing admin work, or following "persons of interest" in J6.

    WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

    Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

    "Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases," said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. "Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages."

    Stone, a veteran Republican operative and self-described "dirty trickster", and Jones, founder of a conspiracy-driven radio show and webcast, are both allies of Trump and had been involved in pro-Trump events in Washington on Jan. 5, the day before the riot.

    FBI investigators did find that cells of protesters, including followers of the far-right Oath Keepers and Proud Boys groups, had aimed to break into the Capitol. But they found no evidence that the groups had serious plans about what to do if they made it inside, the sources said.


    If that's your scale, the dims hid A LOT of "evidence" in the trumpster charges. Most of their erroneous information (LIES) was spread by trickles. Many from shiftless. 99% of what shiftless said was a lie. Which is the reason he got booted from committees. So I think again you have two different scales.

    I know this isn't a "trial" and yet it's just prudent for both sides to figure out what case they have prior to trial. That's just good investigative work. AND it doesn't waste time on TV. In closed doors, You can actually classify the information if you need to. Not that it's any good with someone like shifty, but for the most part you'd be free to ask questions without DOJ telling you it's part of an "ongoing investigation" and to pound sand.
    reuters.com


  6. by Donna on November 29, 2023 11:14 am

    I don't think that they're the reasons Republicans are objecting to Hunter giving a live public testimony, though, od. It's obvious to me that the Republicans are rejecting live televised proceedings because they want to ensure that they'll be able to cherrypick and distort what was divulged.



  7. by Donna on November 29, 2023 11:17 am

    Correction: Not on live TV, but in open-door sessions.


  8. by Indy! on November 29, 2023 11:29 am

    Indy,
    There is an obvious difference between Democrats and Republicans, and how they conduct their investigative committees.

    In the Democrat led January 6 committee hearings, the Democrats wanted to be public and on television as much as possible. Many of the Republicans called to testify objected to, ignored and fought the subpoenas.

    In contrast, James Comer and the other Republican committee members want to interrogate Hunter Biden behind closed doors.



    Curt... Two impeachments - two whiffs. Congresspeople (BOTH "sides") have all the necessary skills to make perfect cops in LA. They know how to bring spine-tingling charges against famous people that won't stick. It's a dog and pony show - watch one hand impeach Trump or investigate Hillary while the other one continues to rob us blind.


  9. by Curt_Anderson on November 29, 2023 11:32 am
    OD,
    I would have refuted your claim that the J6 committee illegally didn't provide exculpatory evidence, except you did a good job of refuted it yourself. Does it need to be said that James Comer and Jim Jordan are not providing exculpatory evidence for Hunter Biden? Or that J6 committee was not a prosecutor and not subject to trial laws?

    The Republicans, other than Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, refused to be on the J6 committee. The MAGAites might have provided some defense. In any event the publicly-held Democrat-led committee was open and transparent so any critics could nitpick their findings. The only thing transparent about House Republicans is their transparent hypocrisy. Like vampires, Republicans fear sunlight and prefer to operate in the dark and shadows.

    "Except prosecution refused to provide exculpatory evidence (meaning it's ILLEGAL NOT TO INCLUDE THIS IN YOUR DISCOVERY)...

    If that's your scale, the dims hid A LOT of "evidence" in the trumpster charges. Most of their erroneous information (LIES) was spread by trickles....

    I know this isn't a "trial" and yet it's just prudent for both sides to figure out what case they have prior to trial." --OD






  10. by HatetheSwamp on November 29, 2023 11:41 am

    The Republicans, other than Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, refused to be on the J6 committee.

    Bullfernerner.


  11. by Curt_Anderson on November 29, 2023 11:45 am
    "Congresspeople (BOTH "sides") have all the necessary skills to make perfect cops in LA." ---Indy

    I don't know what to make of that statement. You cannot be serious. There isn't any entity that can make any profession perfect.

    My son is a cop and I have friends who are doctors. My son and my friends are called upon to make life and death decisions. The difference is my friends can take their time to consult colleagues and medical books. Even in an ER there is time to assess the situation with other doctors. My son has to make his decisions in a split second and often alone.


  12. by Curt_Anderson on November 29, 2023 11:59 am
    The Republicans, other than Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, refused to be on the J6 committee. --Me

    Bullfernerner. --HtS


    Ponderer was right when she asked about where people like you get your information. You must really have to work at being ignorant and oblivious to the facts.

    McCarthy pulls all Republicans from January 6 Select Committee after Pelosi rejects two picks

    The two rejected Republicans were Jim Jordan and Jim Banks, both are insurrectionists and co-conspirators of Donald Trump.
    cbsnews.com


  13. by HatetheSwamp on November 29, 2023 12:05 pm

    So, pb was exactly correct!


  14. by oldedude on November 29, 2023 12:31 pm
    I would have refuted your claim that the J6 committee illegally didn't provide exculpatory evidence, except you did a good job of refuted it yourself.

    Does it need to be said that James Comer and Jim Jordan are not providing exculpatory evidence for Hunter Biden? Or that J6 committee was not a prosecutor and not subject to trial laws?


    If you said it, you'd be wrong. The reason they're wanting a closed hearing is to collect evidence. They haven't gotten to the "trial" phase. That's where you continually confuse the two.

    Normally in a criminal case, the prosecution and defense run two separate investigations. Therefore, you don't have a phase where both sides work together. Once prosecution collects the case (from interviewing witnesses, subjects, suspects, experts, etc), they'll affect an arrest, and give all of their information to the defense as per the law.

    They're seeing now, if they in fact have evidence to prove their charges and predicate acts. AND defense gets to sit in on these hearings. This is where shiftless opened up his big gob many times. If they find they don't, they won't move on to the next phase.

    These are committee hearings. The full house has to be able to hear the evidence and vote on the issues. This is where Nixon was hung. There was just too much not to pay attention to. Cliton? not so much and that was a reach.


  15. by Indy! on November 29, 2023 2:25 pm

    Try answering the question instead of waxing poetic about your son. My dad was a cop long before your son made that mistake.


  16. by Curt_Anderson on November 29, 2023 2:32 pm
    "Congresspeople (BOTH "sides") have all the necessary skills to make perfect cops in LA." ---Indy

    Where is the question in that post?


  17. by oldedude on November 29, 2023 4:11 pm
    Curt- I'm on your side with this. I think your statement #11 was logical. And then out of left field!!!!!! comes indy as usual.


  18. by Indy! on November 29, 2023 4:48 pm

    Curt - the question is why do you continue to treat the Ds differently when they are exactly the same as the Rs on this subject.

    OD - Of course you're on Curt's side with this - both of you are part of the problem, just residing on different (fake, totally imaginary) "sides".


  19. by Curt_Anderson on November 29, 2023 6:02 pm
    Thanks OD. Naturally when discussing politics any differences we might have are scrutinized and become the fodder of long threads. Where we agree are short conversations. I am sure that are many more things that we all agree on, including even with a contrarian like Indy.


  20. by oldedude on November 29, 2023 6:31 pm
    curt- okay.
    indy- it's a matter of legal procedure. There is no "side" except to follow precedence and the law. And unlike you, I don't care which side is doing the "thing." Both sides have to play with the same rules. curt did bring up good point in a logical manner. Therefore, I read it.

    Also curt- This issue that I've found is without the longer posts, we usually get into about 15 or 20 posts on whataboutisms. Which is nothing more than a pain in my ass. I'd rather put it out there, and call someone on not reading, rather than saying it was in the citation.

    I have also found that if I post my own thoughts filled with citation, I'm immediately attacked for having my own thoughts. It's something everyone does...🙄 So this is what I choose.


  21. by Curt_Anderson on November 29, 2023 9:45 pm
    Regarding the Republicans' aversion to Hunter Biden testifying publicly in a committee hearing, it's not what James Comer was saying last month. Then he said, "we can bring these people in for depositions or committee hearings, whichever they choose, and we can ask these questions with evidence."

    I posted what Comer said in the opening post of the thread below.


    selectsmart.com


  22. by oldedude on November 29, 2023 10:08 pm
    So things changed. WTF? The political world changes faster than the 24-hour news cycle. Global politics even faster. This has been a full month. I don't get it. If the dims change, it's no big deal to you. Not worth mentioning. And then you cherry pick this? I'm actually stunned at the stupidity and inane reason to pull this up again. I hate to use that word, but dang!


Go To Top

Comment on: "Raskin rips GOP for not agreeing to open hearing for Hunter Biden. "

* 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