...Scandal implosion is as much an art as it is a science and could be the most brilliant achievement in this ongoing scandal.

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 3, 2022

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

So wait, you're a yes now?

---

read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.

---

So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?

---

i am sorry but your question is overly broad and too vague to answer without undue burden.. please rephrase to a more specific question or refer to my previous answers on this topic

---

You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.

Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?

---

asked an answered

---

Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.

I'll put you down as a "yes" on the question of legislative oversight of the executive branch.

So a House committee has the power to investigate Trump?

---

Objection, leading the witness

---

Objection, unresponsive

Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't

---

I don't think that's a proper objection.

And objection , calls for speculation

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

So wait, you're a yes now?

---

read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.

---

So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?

---

i am sorry but your question is overly broad and too vague to answer without undue burden.. please rephrase to a more specific question or refer to my previous answers on this topic

---

You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.

Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?

---

asked an answered

---

Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.

I'll put you down as a "yes" on the question of legislative oversight of the executive branch.

So a House committee has the power to investigate Trump?

---

Objection, leading the witness

---

Objection, unresponsive

Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't

---

I don't think that's a proper objection.

And objection , calls for speculation

---

You aren't normally so evasive, almost like you are ashamed to have changed your position

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Who else wants to go on the record?

---

Check the thread topic, Sam.

Maybe you should "go on the record"?

---

The topic is Hunter Biden and his China business deals. I believe in legislative oversight. If the DOJ is turning a blind eye to crimes and national security threats, I'm completely on board with Congress acting independently.

Do you agree? It's a simple question.

---

I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.

Stop pretending you make the rules.

---

Let's say there are no new developments this year. First day of the new Congress, Matt Gaetz announces a select committee to investigate Hunter Biden.

Yea or nay?

---

Directly against Hunter? Nay.

Investigate why the investigators aren't doing their job.

Videos leaks show underage hookers man. Nothing about this is rational and the only thing that explains it is a protection racket from within the system.

---

Not directly about Hunter. National security issues related to business dealings, etc.

What about my question to JXL? If Dems refuse to participate, should the investigation continue?

---

It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.

It's in the interest of both parties to not hold each other accountable and instead pretend.

The closest we can get to actual accountability is having a special counsel, but even if you 're going after corruption, federal judges and juries are loyal to democrats and will give them a pass.

My answer is we have checks and balances in place, we dont need special hearings on stuff.

We already had a committee that performed oversight of the executive branch yet we got a new special committee of different people to perform oversight of the executive branch

You trying to twist my words to trap me into something aint working. Your set up is grade school..

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

So wait, you're a yes now?

---

read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.

---

So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?

---

i am sorry but your question is overly broad and too vague to answer without undue burden.. please rephrase to a more specific question or refer to my previous answers on this topic

---

You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.

Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?

---

asked an answered

---

Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.

I'll put you down as a "yes" on the question of legislative oversight of the executive branch.

So a House committee has the power to investigate Trump?

---

Objection, leading the witness

---

Objection, unresponsive

Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't

---

I don't think that's a proper objection.

And objection , calls for speculation

---

You aren't normally so evasive, almost like you are ashamed to have changed your position

---

my position maintains unchanged, you are attempting to claim it has..

I corrected my mistake in the post reply to Doc back to my original position.

Pound sand..

4th and Inches said:

---

My answer is we have checks and balances in place, we dont need special hearings on stuff.

We already had a committee that performed oversight of the executive branch yet we got a new special committee of different people to perform oversight of the executive branch

You trying to twist my words to trap me into something aint working. Your set up is grade school..

---

Just trying to be fair. You believe congress has an oversight authority over the executive branch but that oversight should not be exercised via a special committee (as opposed to a standing committee)?

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

So wait, you're a yes now?

---

read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.

---

So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?

---

i am sorry but your question is overly broad and too vague to answer without undue burden.. please rephrase to a more specific question or refer to my previous answers on this topic

---

You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.

Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?

---

asked an answered

---

Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.

I'll put you down as a "yes" on the question of legislative oversight of the executive branch.

So a House committee has the power to investigate Trump?

---

Objection, leading the witness

---

Objection, unresponsive

Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't

---

I'm assuming you're a yes on the special committee?

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

So wait, you're a yes now?

---

read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.

---

So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?

---

i am sorry but your question is overly broad and too vague to answer without undue burden.. please rephrase to a more specific question or refer to my previous answers on this topic

---

You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.

Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?

---

asked an answered

---

Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.

I'll put you down as a "yes" on the question of legislative oversight of the executive branch.

So a House committee has the power to investigate Trump?

---

Objection, leading the witness

---

Objection, unresponsive

Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't

---

I'm assuming you're a yes on the special committee?

---

Certainly. Congress gets to set their own rules of procedure and it isn't reviewable by a court. The House followed their own rules and established a special committee .

Show me voting aye

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Who else wants to go on the record?

---

Check the thread topic, Sam.

Maybe you should "go on the record"?

---

The topic is Hunter Biden and his China business deals. I believe in legislative oversight. If the DOJ is turning a blind eye to crimes and national security threats, I'm completely on board with Congress acting independently.

Do you agree? It's a simple question.

---

I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.

Stop pretending you make the rules.

---

Let's say there are no new developments this year. First day of the new Congress, Matt Gaetz announces a select committee to investigate Hunter Biden.

Yea or nay?

---

Directly against Hunter? Nay.

Investigate why the investigators aren't doing their job.

Videos leaks show underage hookers man. Nothing about this is rational and the only thing that explains it is a protection racket from within the system.

---

Not directly about Hunter. National security issues related to business dealings, etc.

What about my question to JXL? If Dems refuse to participate, should the investigation continue?

---

It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.

It's in the interest of both parties to not hold each other accountable and instead pretend.

The closest we can get to actual accountability is having a special counsel, but even if you 're going after corruption, federal judges and juries are loyal to democrats and will give them a pass.

---

And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Who else wants to go on the record?

---

Check the thread topic, Sam.

Maybe you should "go on the record"?

---

The topic is Hunter Biden and his China business deals. I believe in legislative oversight. If the DOJ is turning a blind eye to crimes and national security threats, I'm completely on board with Congress acting independently.

Do you agree? It's a simple question.

---

I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.

Stop pretending you make the rules.

---

Let's say there are no new developments this year. First day of the new Congress, Matt Gaetz announces a select committee to investigate Hunter Biden.

Yea or nay?

---

Directly against Hunter? Nay.

Investigate why the investigators aren't doing their job.

Videos leaks show underage hookers man. Nothing about this is rational and the only thing that explains it is a protection racket from within the system.

---

Not directly about Hunter. National security issues related to business dealings, etc.

What about my question to JXL? If Dems refuse to participate, should the investigation continue?

---

It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.

It's in the interest of both parties to not hold each other accountable and instead pretend.

The closest we can get to actual accountability is having a special counsel, but even if you 're going after corruption, federal judges and juries are loyal to democrats and will give them a pass.

---

And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?

---

You're tying to equate two very different things.

With Hunter Biden there's video evidence of criminality that nobody can deny and he's still a free man probably still hooking up with underage prostitutes. Why isn't he in handcuffs yesterday?

You can't really equate this to J6 where you're tying all the events that unfolded to the words of the president and banning him from holding office and then pushing for criminal charges.

I don't think any investigative body is going to act in good faith. There's really no options because congress as a whole is made of 99% elitist scumbags.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Who else wants to go on the record?

---

Check the thread topic, Sam.

Maybe you should "go on the record"?

---

The topic is Hunter Biden and his China business deals. I believe in legislative oversight. If the DOJ is turning a blind eye to crimes and national security threats, I'm completely on board with Congress acting independently.

Do you agree? It's a simple question.

---

I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.

Stop pretending you make the rules.

---

Let's say there are no new developments this year. First day of the new Congress, Matt Gaetz announces a select committee to investigate Hunter Biden.

Yea or nay?

---

Directly against Hunter? Nay.

Investigate why the investigators aren't doing their job.

Videos leaks show underage hookers man. Nothing about this is rational and the only thing that explains it is a protection racket from within the system.

---

Not directly about Hunter. National security issues related to business dealings, etc.

What about my question to JXL? If Dems refuse to participate, should the investigation continue?

---

It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.

It's in the interest of both parties to not hold each other accountable and instead pretend.

The closest we can get to actual accountability is having a special counsel, but even if you 're going after corruption, federal judges and juries are loyal to democrats and will give them a pass.

---

And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?

---

You're tying to equate two very different things.

With Hunter Biden there's video evidence of criminality that nobody can deny and he's still a free man probably still hooking up with underage prostitutes. Why isn't he in handcuffs yesterday?

You can't really equate this to J6 where you're tying all the events that unfolded to the words of the president and banning him from holding office and then pushing for criminal charges.

I don't think any investigative body is going to act in good faith. There's really no options because congress as a whole is made of 99% elitist scumbags.

---

I'm just asking what kind of committee you'd support. Congress doesn't investigate crimes for the sake of investigating crimes. If they turn up crimes in the process, they can refer them for prosecution. If the DOJ isn't doing its job, you've said Congress can investigate that. It's likely that they'll have a broader mandate, not just to investigate the DOJ but also any potentially compromising dealings with China, whether legal or not, and any implications for national security. Is that something you would support?

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Who else wants to go on the record?

---

Check the thread topic, Sam.

Maybe you should "go on the record"?

---

The topic is Hunter Biden and his China business deals. I believe in legislative oversight. If the DOJ is turning a blind eye to crimes and national security threats, I'm completely on board with Congress acting independently.

Do you agree? It's a simple question.

---

I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.

Stop pretending you make the rules.

---

Let's say there are no new developments this year. First day of the new Congress, Matt Gaetz announces a select committee to investigate Hunter Biden.

Yea or nay?

---

Directly against Hunter? Nay.

Investigate why the investigators aren't doing their job.

Videos leaks show underage hookers man. Nothing about this is rational and the only thing that explains it is a protection racket from within the system.

---

Not directly about Hunter. National security issues related to business dealings, etc.

What about my question to JXL? If Dems refuse to participate, should the investigation continue?

---

It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.

It's in the interest of both parties to not hold each other accountable and instead pretend.

The closest we can get to actual accountability is having a special counsel, but even if you 're going after corruption, federal judges and juries are loyal to democrats and will give them a pass.

---

And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?

---

You're tying to equate two very different things.

With Hunter Biden there's video evidence of criminality that nobody can deny and he's still a free man probably still hooking up with underage prostitutes. Why isn't he in handcuffs yesterday?

You can't really equate this to J6 where you're tying all the events that unfolded to the words of the president and banning him from holding office and then pushing for criminal charges.

I don't think any investigative body is going to act in good faith. There's really no options because congress as a whole is made of 99% elitist scumbags.

---

I'm just asking what kind of committee you'd support. Congress doesn't investigate crimes for the sake of investigating crimes. If they turn up crimes in the process, they can refer them for prosecution. If the DOJ isn't doing its job, you've said Congress can investigate that. It's likely that they'll have a broader mandate, not just to investigate the DOJ but also any potentially compromising dealings with China, whether legal or not, and any implications for national security. Is that something you would support?

---

The kind of committee I support doesn't exist.

I don't support a GOP controlled house to carry out investigations because I know for a fact it will be all talk and no real accountability. I'd rather not listen to them grandstand about corruption and pretend like they're gonna do something about it.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Who else wants to go on the record?

---

Check the thread topic, Sam.

Maybe you should "go on the record"?

---

The topic is Hunter Biden and his China business deals. I believe in legislative oversight. If the DOJ is turning a blind eye to crimes and national security threats, I'm completely on board with Congress acting independently.

Do you agree? It's a simple question.

---

I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.

Stop pretending you make the rules.

---

Let's say there are no new developments this year. First day of the new Congress, Matt Gaetz announces a select committee to investigate Hunter Biden.

Yea or nay?

---

Directly against Hunter? Nay.

Investigate why the investigators aren't doing their job.

Videos leaks show underage hookers man. Nothing about this is rational and the only thing that explains it is a protection racket from within the system.

---

Not directly about Hunter. National security issues related to business dealings, etc.

What about my question to JXL? If Dems refuse to participate, should the investigation continue?

---

It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.

It's in the interest of both parties to not hold each other accountable and instead pretend.

The closest we can get to actual accountability is having a special counsel, but even if you 're going after corruption, federal judges and juries are loyal to democrats and will give them a pass.

---

And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?

---

You're tying to equate two very different things.

With Hunter Biden there's video evidence of criminality that nobody can deny and he's still a free man probably still hooking up with underage prostitutes. Why isn't he in handcuffs yesterday?

You can't really equate this to J6 where you're tying all the events that unfolded to the words of the president and banning him from holding office and then pushing for criminal charges.

I don't think any investigative body is going to act in good faith. There's really no options because congress as a whole is made of 99% elitist scumbags.

---

I'm just asking what kind of committee you'd support. Congress doesn't investigate crimes for the sake of investigating crimes. If they turn up crimes in the process, they can refer them for prosecution. If the DOJ isn't doing its job, you've said Congress can investigate that. It's likely that they'll have a broader mandate, not just to investigate the DOJ but also any potentially compromising dealings with China, whether legal or not, and any implications for national security. Is that something you would support?

---

The kind of committee I support doesn't exist.

I don't support a GOP controlled house to carry out investigations because I know for a fact it will be all talk and no real accountability. I'd rather not listen to them grandstand about corruption and pretend like they're gonna do something about it.

---

Thanks.

Current tally:

JXL: Y
Sam: Y
4th: N
Oso: Y
Doc: N
Old: N/A
Golem: N/A

Sam Lowry said:

---

Current tally:

JXL: Y
Sam: Y
4th: N
Oso: Y
Doc: N
Old: N/A
Golem: N/A

---

4th is okay with a House standing committee investigating the executive branch, but against a special committee..

"read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.

I am still against a special committee specific for Hinter Biden."

Sam Lowry said:

---

Current tally:

JXL: Y
Sam: Y
4th: N
Oso: Y
Doc: N
Old: N/A
Golem: N/A

---

Sam is feeling very Binary today ...

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Current tally:

JXL: Y
Sam: Y
4th: N
Oso: Y
Doc: N
Old: N/A
Golem: N/A

---

Sam is feeling very Binary today ...

---

Credit where it's due...at least no one can say your answers lack diversity.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

So wait, you're a yes now?

---

read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.

---

So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?

---

i am sorry but your question is overly broad and too vague to answer without undue burden.. please rephrase to a more specific question or refer to my previous answers on this topic

---

You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.

Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?

---

asked an answered

---

Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.

I'll put you down as a "yes" on the question of legislative oversight of the executive branch.

So a House committee has the power to investigate Trump?

---

Objection, leading the witness

---

Objection, unresponsive

Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't

---

I'm assuming you're a yes on the special committee?

---

oso is definitely yes on special committee

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Current tally:

JXL: Y
Sam: Y
4th: N
Oso: Y
Doc: N
Old: N/A
Golem: N/A

---

Sam is feeling very Binary today ...

---

Credit where it's due...at least no one can say your answers lack diversity.

---

My favorite color is "all of them", after all ...

Democrats have gotten their show trials, republicans should get theirs. It seems only fair to me. If the republicans get control of the house, they should also impeach biden for any of a number of things like failure to enforce laws at the border,etc. Impeach him at least 3 times. No need to worry about the country as feelings and politics are much more important. Democrats have shown the way here.

If the democrats refuse to show up for the committee trials and repubs can't get any Cheney equivalents to participate, proceed with out them. Then issue subpoenas, ruin lives, bankrupt folks, and persecute anyone foolish enough to be in the Biden orbit. US government in 2020's baby!

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

So wait, you're a yes now?

---

read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.

---

So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?

---

i am sorry but your question is overly broad and too vague to answer without undue burden.. please rephrase to a more specific question or refer to my previous answers on this topic

---

You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.

Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?

---

asked an answered

---

Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.

I'll put you down as a "yes" on the question of legislative oversight of the executive branch.

So a House committee has the power to investigate Trump?

---

Objection, leading the witness

---

Objection, unresponsive

Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't

---

I'm assuming you're a yes on the special committee?

---

oso is definitely yes on special committee

---

Definitely yes

BearFan33 said:

---

Democrats have gotten their show trials, republicans should get theirs. It seems only fair to me. If the republicans get control of the house, they should also impeach biden for any of a number of things like failure to enforce laws at the border,etc. Impeach him at least 3 times. No need to worry about the country as feelings and politics are much more important. Democrats have shown the way here.

If the democrats refuse to show up for the committee trials and repubs can't get any Cheney equivalents to participate, proceed with out them. Then issue subpoenas, ruin lives, bankrupt folks, and persecute anyone foolish enough to be in the Biden orbit. US government in 2020's baby!

---

Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Democrats have gotten their show trials, republicans should get theirs. It seems only fair to me. If the republicans get control of the house, they should also impeach biden for any of a number of things like failure to enforce laws at the border,etc. Impeach him at least 3 times. No need to worry about the country as feelings and politics are much more important. Democrats have shown the way here.

If the democrats refuse to show up for the committee trials and repubs can't get any Cheney equivalents to participate, proceed with out them. Then issue subpoenas, ruin lives, bankrupt folks, and persecute anyone foolish enough to be in the Biden orbit. US government in 2020's baby!

---

Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?

---

Does it matter, they are doing it now

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Democrats have gotten their show trials, republicans should get theirs. It seems only fair to me. If the republicans get control of the house, they should also impeach biden for any of a number of things like failure to enforce laws at the border,etc. Impeach him at least 3 times. No need to worry about the country as feelings and politics are much more important. Democrats have shown the way here.

If the democrats refuse to show up for the committee trials and repubs can't get any Cheney equivalents to participate, proceed with out them. Then issue subpoenas, ruin lives, bankrupt folks, and persecute anyone foolish enough to be in the Biden orbit. US government in 2020's baby!

---

Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?

---

Does it matter, they are doing it now

---

I think so. If the J6 committee is violating people's rights, do you think it matters?

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Democrats have gotten their show trials, republicans should get theirs. It seems only fair to me. If the republicans get control of the house, they should also impeach biden for any of a number of things like failure to enforce laws at the border,etc. Impeach him at least 3 times. No need to worry about the country as feelings and politics are much more important. Democrats have shown the way here.

If the democrats refuse to show up for the committee trials and repubs can't get any Cheney equivalents to participate, proceed with out them. Then issue subpoenas, ruin lives, bankrupt folks, and persecute anyone foolish enough to be in the Biden orbit. US government in 2020's baby!

---

Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?

---

Does it matter, they are doing it now

---

I think so. If the J6 committee is violating people's rights, do you think it matters?

---

I don't have time to go down a rabbit hole with you. Put me down as a yes. Republicans should get to hold their show trials with the Biden's in the spotlight if they so choose.

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

Democrats have gotten their show trials, republicans should get theirs. It seems only fair to me. If the republicans get control of the house, they should also impeach biden for any of a number of things like failure to enforce laws at the border,etc. Impeach him at least 3 times. No need to worry about the country as feelings and politics are much more important. Democrats have shown the way here.

If the democrats refuse to show up for the committee trials and repubs can't get any Cheney equivalents to participate, proceed with out them. Then issue subpoenas, ruin lives, bankrupt folks, and persecute anyone foolish enough to be in the Biden orbit. US government in 2020's baby!

---

Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?

---

Does it matter, they are doing it now

---

I think so. If the J6 committee is violating people's rights, do you think it matters?

---

I don't have time to go down a rabbit hole with you. Put me down as a yes. Republicans should get to hold their show trials with the Biden's in the spotlight if they so choose.

---

That's okay, I don't want to commit you to advocating something illegal unless I'm sure it's your intention.

Yes, congress has the right to investigate the executive branch. Unfortunately, we have been about half a step away from investigating whether Trump put his toenail clippings in the trash or dropped them on the floor.

If MSM did their job, rather than choosing sides, it would make it easier for the voters to do their jobs and vote out a bunch of scoundrels.

Ultimately it comes down to lazy, apathetic voters.

Sam Lowry said:

---

So we've got two nays and two dodges.

Anyone else?

---

Standard leftist crawfishing from you, Sam. You got a thorough answer that addressed ALL the aspects at play. You don't want to deal with the realities addressed. It's ok. I understand. You are a coward. I hear you shat your pants over Covid too. No surprise.

Golem said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

So we've got two nays and two dodges.

Anyone else?

---

Standard leftist crawfishing from you, Sam. You got a thorough answer that addressed ALL the aspects at play. You don't want to deal with the realities addressed. It's ok. I understand. You are a coward. I hear you shat your pants over Covid too. No surprise.

---

I got a self-contradictory answer which you cravenly refused to clarify. As expected.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Golem said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

So we've got two nays and two dodges.

Anyone else?

---

Standard leftist crawfishing from you, Sam. You got a thorough answer that addressed ALL the aspects at play. You don't want to deal with the realities addressed. It's ok. I understand. You are a coward. I hear you shat your pants over Covid too. No surprise.

---

I got a self-contradictory answer which you cravenly refused to clarify. As expected.

---

No you didn't. You got a clearly delineated explication of all the factors at play. You either tried to misunderstand that…or you are simply that stupid. Which is it?

I wonder what's in Hunter Biden's safe?

— Matt Wolking (@MattWolking) August 9, 2022

😂 Hunter Biden Breathes Sigh Of Relief As FBI Raid Team Passes By His House On Way to Mar-A-Lago | Babylon Bee https://t.co/e38M1Wpwe6

— Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) August 9, 2022