Whoa, wouldn't that be legislative oversight of the Executive Branch?Sam Lowry said:
If the DOJ is suppressing evidence, as you claim, are they accountable to Congress? Was Rep. Gaetz wrong to say they should be called to answer for it?
Whoa, wouldn't that be legislative oversight of the Executive Branch?Sam Lowry said:
If the DOJ is suppressing evidence, as you claim, are they accountable to Congress? Was Rep. Gaetz wrong to say they should be called to answer for it?
The dupe didn't see it coming.4th and Inches said:waiting all day to spring that one? You telegraphed it..Sam Lowry said:It's not my opinion at all. It's the opinion I've been seeing on almost every post on every Donald Trump thread for the last three months.Oldbear83 said:Thank you for your opinion, Mr. Schiff.Sam Lowry said:
Did they break the law? Have they been charged with a crime? Why should anyone care?
Well playedSam Lowry said:Waiting since 9:28. It didn't take long.4th and Inches said:waiting all day to spring that one? You telegraphed it..Sam Lowry said:It's not my opinion at all. It's the opinion I've been seeing on almost every post on every Donald Trump thread for the last three months.Oldbear83 said:Thank you for your opinion, Mr. Schiff.Sam Lowry said:
Did they break the law? Have they been charged with a crime? Why should anyone care?
Republicans have all but promised it if they win a majority. The outrage on this board will be something to see!Osodecentx said:Whoa, wouldn't that be legislative oversight of the Executive Branch?Sam Lowry said:
If the DOJ is suppressing evidence, as you claim, are they accountable to Congress? Was Rep. Gaetz wrong to say they should be called to answer for it?
Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to 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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
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.Oldbear83 said:I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
Stop pretending you make the rules.
Like, you know, Congressional oversight?Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
Stop pretending you make the rules.
Yea or nay?
Yawn.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
Stop pretending you make the rules.
Yea or nay?
Directly against Hunter? Nay.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
Stop pretending you make the rules.
Yea or nay?
Doc Holliday said:Directly against Hunter? Nay.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
Stop pretending you make the rules.
Yea or 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.Doc Holliday said:Directly against Hunter? Nay.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
Stop pretending you make the rules.
Yea or 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.
read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
Sam Lowry said:Not directly about Hunter. National security issues related to business dealings, etc.Doc Holliday said:Directly against Hunter? Nay.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
Stop pretending you make the rules.
Yea or 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.
What about my question to JXL? If Dems refuse to participate, should the investigation continue?
I agreeJXL said:Sam Lowry said:Not directly about Hunter. National security issues related to business dealings, etc.Doc Holliday said:Directly against Hunter? Nay.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
Stop pretending you make the rules.
Yea or 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.
What about my question to JXL? If Dems refuse to participate, should the investigation continue?
I'm sorry, I missed this question. I don't like congressional hearings or investigations in which only one side participates, but the other side shouldn't be able to unilaterally stop it by refusing.
So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?4th and Inches said:read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
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 topicOsodecentx said:So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?4th and Inches said:read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."4th and Inches said: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 topicOsodecentx said:So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?4th and Inches said:read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
Osodecentx said:You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."4th and Inches said: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 topicOsodecentx said:So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?4th and Inches said:read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.
Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?
asked an answeredOsodecentx said:You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."4th and Inches said: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 topicOsodecentx said:So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?4th and Inches said:read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.
Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?
Thanks.JXL said:Sam Lowry said:Not directly about Hunter. National security issues related to business dealings, etc.Doc Holliday said:Directly against Hunter? Nay.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:I have answered you fully Sam, more than you have done in return.Sam Lowry said: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.Oldbear83 said:Check the thread topic, Sam.Sam Lowry said:
Who else wants to go on the record?
Maybe you should "go on the record"?
Do you agree? It's a simple question.
Stop pretending you make the rules.
Yea or 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.
What about my question to JXL? If Dems refuse to participate, should the investigation continue?
I'm sorry, I missed this question. I don't like congressional hearings or investigations in which only one side participates, but the other side shouldn't be able to unilaterally stop it by refusing.
I'm not sure how to reconcile 2A with 3. If there's illegal activity that the executive refuses to prosecute, should Congress hold hearings or just ask for answers in writing? What about subpoena power?Golem said:
I'll weigh in.
1. Congressional hearings are only EVER grandstanding political show trials. (J6, steroids in baseball, etc)
2. Grandstanding political show trials are only valuable for two purposes:
A. Shedding light on something actually illegal that the executive refuses to prosecute. (True of HRC, not true of DJT)
B. Hosting a forum for political dbags to hrumph, beat tables, shout things like "have you no decency" and beg for money on the back of said histrionics.
3. Legislators should legislate. If they need answers to legislate, they should ask for answers in writing. They are not the conscience of the nation, as the vast majority of the immoral b @stards don't even have one of their own.
4. The democrat run congress has done nothing of value since taking power but waste mountains of money and host political show trials full of LIQR level lies, distortions and half truths. November can't possibly come soon enough.
Sam Lowry said:I'm not sure how to reconcile 2A with 3. If there's illegal activity that the executive refuses to prosecute, should Congress hold hearings or just ask for answers in writing? What about subpoena power?Golem said:
I'll weigh in.
1. Congressional hearings are only EVER grandstanding political show trials. (J6, steroids in baseball, etc)
2. Grandstanding political show trials are only valuable for two purposes:
A. Shedding light on something actually illegal that the executive refuses to prosecute. (True of HRC, not true of DJT)
B. Hosting a forum for political dbags to hrumph, beat tables, shout things like "have you no decency" and beg for money on the back of said histrionics.
3. Legislators should legislate. If they need answers to legislate, they should ask for answers in writing. They are not the conscience of the nation, as the vast majority of the immoral b @stards don't even have one of their own.
4. The democrat run congress has done nothing of value since taking power but waste mountains of money and host political show trials full of LIQR level lies, distortions and half truths. November can't possibly come soon enough.
AbsolutelyD. C. Bear said:Osodecentx said:You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."4th and Inches said: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 topicOsodecentx said:So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?4th and Inches said:read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.
Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?
Do you favor separation of powers?
Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.4th and Inches said:asked an answeredOsodecentx said:You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."4th and Inches said: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 topicOsodecentx said:So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?4th and Inches said:read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.
Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?
Objection, leading the witnessOsodecentx said:Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.4th and Inches said:asked an answeredOsodecentx said:You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."4th and Inches said: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 topicOsodecentx said:So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?4th and Inches said:read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.
Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?
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, unresponsive4th and Inches said:Objection, leading the witnessOsodecentx said:Only by House Judiciary? I assume the Senate can initiate an investigation by a Senate committee.4th and Inches said:asked an answeredOsodecentx said:You said "I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions."4th and Inches said: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 topicOsodecentx said:So you are in favor of Congressional oversight of the Executive branch?4th and Inches said:read thru what Doc wrote too fast- I am still a house judiciary committee calling the FBI in to answer some questions.Sam Lowry said:
So wait, you're a yes now?
The FBI is part of the Executive branch.
Do you favor legislative oversight of the Executive branch?
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?