...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
...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
I don't think that's a proper objection.Osodecentx said: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?
Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't
You aren't normally so evasive, almost like you are ashamed to have changed your position4th and Inches said:I don't think that's a proper objection.Osodecentx said: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?
Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't
And objection , calls for speculation
It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.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?
my position maintains unchanged, you are attempting to claim it has..Osodecentx said:You aren't normally so evasive, almost like you are ashamed to have changed your position4th and Inches said:I don't think that's a proper objection.Osodecentx said: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?
Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't
And objection , calls for speculation
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)?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..
I'm assuming you're a yes on the special committee?Osodecentx said: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?
Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't
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 .Sam Lowry said:I'm assuming you're a yes on the special committee?Osodecentx said: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?
Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't
And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?Doc Holliday said:It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.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?
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.
You're tying to equate two very different things.Sam Lowry said:And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?Doc Holliday said:It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.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?
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.
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?Doc Holliday said:You're tying to equate two very different things.Sam Lowry said:And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?Doc Holliday said:It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.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?
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.
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.
The kind of committee I support doesn't exist.Sam Lowry said: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?Doc Holliday said:You're tying to equate two very different things.Sam Lowry said:And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?Doc Holliday said:It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.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?
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.
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.
Thanks.Doc Holliday said:The kind of committee I support doesn't exist.Sam Lowry said: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?Doc Holliday said:You're tying to equate two very different things.Sam Lowry said:And you're good with a broad national security investigation, not just an investigation of the investigators?Doc Holliday said:It really doesn't matter because It's all kabuki theater.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?
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.
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 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.
4th is okay with a House standing committee investigating the executive branch, but against a special committee..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 ...Sam Lowry said:
Current tally:
JXL: Y
Sam: Y
4th: N
Oso: Y
Doc: N
Old: N/A
Golem: N/A
Credit where it's due...at least no one can say your answers lack diversity.Oldbear83 said:Sam is feeling very Binary today ...Sam Lowry said:
Current tally:
JXL: Y
Sam: Y
4th: N
Oso: Y
Doc: N
Old: N/A
Golem: N/A
oso is definitely yes on special committeeSam Lowry said:I'm assuming you're a yes on the special committee?Osodecentx said: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?
Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't
My favorite color is "all of them", after all ...Sam Lowry said:Credit where it's due...at least no one can say your answers lack diversity.Oldbear83 said:Sam is feeling very Binary today ...Sam Lowry said:
Current tally:
JXL: Y
Sam: Y
4th: N
Oso: Y
Doc: N
Old: N/A
Golem: N/A
4th and Inches said:oso is definitely yes on special committeeSam Lowry said:I'm assuming you're a yes on the special committee?Osodecentx said: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?
Look, you either believe Congress has the power to investigate or they don't
Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?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!
Does it matter, they are doing it nowSam Lowry said:Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?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!
I think so. If the J6 committee is violating people's rights, do you think it matters?BearFan33 said:Does it matter, they are doing it nowSam Lowry said:Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?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!
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.Sam Lowry said:I think so. If the J6 committee is violating people's rights, do you think it matters?BearFan33 said:Does it matter, they are doing it nowSam Lowry said:Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?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!
That's okay, I don't want to commit you to advocating something illegal unless I'm sure it's your intention.BearFan33 said: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.Sam Lowry said:I think so. If the J6 committee is violating people's rights, do you think it matters?BearFan33 said:Does it matter, they are doing it nowSam Lowry said:Congress has the authority to do all of that, legally and constitutionally?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!
Sam Lowry said:
So we've got two nays and two dodges.
Anyone else?
I got a self-contradictory answer which you cravenly refused to clarify. As expected.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.
Sam Lowry said:I got a self-contradictory answer which you cravenly refused to clarify. As expected.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 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