“The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress... is wrong,” Gowdy

“I wish the president would also follow your advice because when he said there is not a smidgen of corruption on national television talking about an ongoing investigation, not only did he undermine people’s confidence in the efficacy of that investigation, in my judgment, he undermined your department, because you cannot comment on it,” Gowdy said.

“The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress, no matter whether you’re the party in power or not in power is wrong,” Gowdy said during one investigation of the Obama administration. “Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles.”

“From our perspective, there are neither good nor bad witnesses; there are witnesses,” Gowdy said about the email. “And if she is in possession of facts that Congress might be interested in, she’s a witness we need to hear from.”

That impeachment power, he argued, didn’t even depend on finding a criminal violation. “The notion that you can only impeach someone who commits an actual violation of the criminal code is nonsense,” he said. “There are lots of ways to screw up in your job that don’t rise to the level of meeting the U.S. criminal code.”

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive.
The lot of them should be deported and not allowed back for 10 years.
Have new elections for EVERY political office.
Only requirements....No political affiliation or experience.

www.yahoo.com...

a reply to: ErEhWoN

Point of Order sir/madam/it/cis

Trey Gowdy is not longer in legislation

He is not in office. so you CANNOT VOTE HIM OUT.

(your premise is off)

a reply to: ErEhWoN

You must not be familiar with defense attorneys.

a reply to: ErEhWoN

Horribly constructed OP. No link to your source? You damage ATS when you do that. Follow the rules.

Reported to ATS Admin.

a reply to: thedigirati

Never mentioned voting.

Deportation is rather appropriate, dontcha think?

a reply to: ErEhWoN

www.c-span.org.../nadler-clinton-impeachment

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahhah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tell em, Fat Jerry!

a reply to: ErEhWoN


Gowdy is going to get slammed for all the crap he pulled in the 8+ hearings he had with Hillary. His quotes are going to get slammed back at him as he back-tracks on the things he claimed when attacking the Obama administration, as he deflects for Trump.

They should have go another Harry Potter person to defend Trump. Draco Malfoy is too corrupt, too quotable, and too stupid to be a credible advocate.

But, he only hires the best....

a reply to: ErEhWoN

I guess it needed to be said twice. AI.

a reply to: ErEhWoN

There is a vast difference between being a Prosecutor and being a Defense Attorney. Nearly every aspect of the law is parsed from a completely different perspective. Seeing as how a goodly amount of our Senators and Congressmen/women also are degreed attorneys it is easy to understand how they are able to get away with so many unsavory things as they are professionals in the art of manipulating the law. Regardless, when you retain an attorney to represent your side of an issue it is pursuant to their oath to use the law to your advantage in all foreseeable ways.

Trust me, if you ever end up being the defendant in any court situation you definitely want your representation manipulating the law in your favor to the best of their ability!

It's really funny comparing what all these right wingers said when Obama was in office to what they're saying now. Or during Clinton's impeachment.

How anyone can respect them or take what they say seriously after seeing their hypocrisy laid out like this is beyond me.



You're completely right Senator *checks notes* Lindsey Graham???

originally posted by: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk
a reply to: ErEhWoN

Trust me, if you ever end up being the defendant in any court situation you definitely want your representation manipulating the law in your favor to the best of their ability!

So true. I was falsely accused of a crime, and was under investigation under the RICO act for 7 years. It took a very connected and creative attorney to keep the Feds from railroading me. Had to fight off the ATF, TBI, and DofR all based on a anonymous tip.

originally posted by: underwerks
It's really funny comparing what all these right wingers said when Obama was in office to what they're saying now. Or during Clinton's impeachment.

How anyone can respect them or take what they say seriously after seeing their hypocrisy laid out like this is beyond me.

You're completely right Senator *checks notes* Lindsey Graham???

it's equally as funny to watch the dems who were all pious and self riotous back then. Fat Jerry above being one. Pelosi is another. I'd tell you to look at her video, but you won't, because partisan.

a reply to: ErEhWoN

Obviously the rule of law only applies to the party you do not belong to.

originally posted by: underwerks

You're completely right Senator *checks notes* Lindsey Graham???

Kinda like Thomas Jefferson ignored a subpoena? Yeah...a patriot and founding father did the same when unfairly subpoenaed. Trump is a patriot and I respect his decision to take the same route against these enemies of the state and their never-ending witch-hunts.

a reply to: Anathros

Kinda like Thomas Jefferson ignored a subpoena?

Yeah not really. There's nothing unfair about the subpoenas the Trump admin is getting. Unless you believe a President should be above the law..

If that's what you believe I'm sure North Korea would be happy to have you.

originally posted by: underwerks
It's really funny comparing what all these right wingers said when Obama was in office to what they're saying now. Or during Clinton's impeachment.

How anyone can respect them or take what they say seriously after seeing their hypocrisy laid out like this is beyond me.

Apples and Orangutans.

The Congress that was investigating Clinton voted to do so, giving them broad investigatory powers, including the power to compel.

The Congress that was investigating Benghazi was investigating an extraordinary occurrence where one of our Ambassadors was actually killed as a result of negligence on the part of the State Dept.

the current FAKE impeachment sham is just that, unless/until they have a vote.

originally posted by: underwerks
There's nothing unfair about the subpoenas the Trump admin is getting. Unless you believe a President should be above the law.

Nothing unfair, no, except that they aren't really subpoenas, they are simply letters falsely labeled as such.

In order for them to be considered subpoenas, Congress would have had to vote to initiate an Impeachment Inquiry.

Wake me up when they do that.

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Anathros

Kinda like Thomas Jefferson ignored a subpoena?

Yeah not really. There's nothing unfair about the subpoenas the Trump admin is getting. Unless you believe a President should be above the law..

If that's what you believe I'm sure North Korea would be happy to have you.

After serving a tour in Iraq and two in Afghanistan for my country, I think I'll stay to watch the outcome of your traitorous party losing to our duly elected President in 2020, thanks.

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Anathros

Kinda like Thomas Jefferson ignored a subpoena?

Yeah not really. There's nothing unfair about the subpoenas the Trump admin is getting. Unless you believe a President should be above the law..

Does there not need to be an actual crime being adjudicated in a court of law in order to subpoena witnesses?