Printable View
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/s12
The main support for FISA, in its current form, has always come from Republicans and even Trump signed this bill to extend it to 2023. In fact, in a tweet, he said his one regret is that he couldn’t make it permanent.
Maybe Republicans have had a change of heart now and you can get some FISA reform.
So based upon the IG report, do you think Brennan and Sr Leaders at FBI should be held accountable for the lies told to both Congress and FISA court?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Sure, if he lied.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
You misspelled “since”.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Brennen lied to Congress according to Horowitz report. https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/09...-interference/
Certainly looks that way, maybe they should charge him. What is Barr waiting on?Quote:
Originally Posted by DONW
Also, why are the democrats worried about Trump withholding documents? They obviously feel they have what they need to impeach him without it. Otherwise, they would go to the courts and fight to have all those documents and witnesses produced before bringing any impeachment articles.
Because they have the Constitutional power to get them. Perhaps they could get some Republicans on board (doubtful) if Trump produced them.Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
They shouldn’t have to go to court. There is no proper basis to refuse to comply and refusal to comply is itself an unconstitutional, and therefore impeachable act (obstruction of Congress).
We don’t know that Trump would produce them even if the SC says he has to, so why waste any more time?
Name another president who has not withheld things from Congress. If it’s not okay now, it was t okay then. Let’s go back and get them all. Even the dead ones.
That's a bad argument. The question is whether or not it's okay now. You can show someone to be a hypocrite without showing them to be wrong. What matters is whether or not obstruction is taking place...not whether or not others have obstructed.Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
So, now we are in favor of selective enforcement. Got it.
Another bad argument...and not what I said.Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
I guess I am too simple to understand anything other than a double standard.
Nobody said you misunderstood the double standard. It's just a different matter all together. Now, I could make an argument that the most important one to "go after" is the one who's actively obstructing, but that would be to lend credence to the claim that the accusers are wrong BECAUSE they're hypocrites. You must prove they're wrong FIRST. Their hypocrisy is tangential (and I agree that they are hypocrites).Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
Okay, now we’re talking the same. Thanks for elaborating.