Girl what? WOW! That hearing at the Senate Intelligence Committee was somethin' else! It was, in theory, a hearing about FISA surveillance, but what most of the senators wanted to talk about was all the reporting that says Donald Trump made inappropriate advances toward his intel chiefs, specifically NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, to try to get them to shut off the FBI investigation into Trump's ties with Russia. The men testifying -- Rogers and Coats, as well as acting FBI director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein -- did NOT want to talk about that.
Even a dipshit like Trump knows how business gets done. Unless you're a Mafia don, you don't "direct" anybody to do the illegal shit. You suggest it, and - depending on the brainpower of the flunky you want to do it - deliver the appropriate quantity of winks and nudges. Or, if you're a delusional egomaniac, you just "expect loyalty".
"I do believe itβs inappropriate for me to discuss that in an open session." That's practically an invitation. The closed sessions are going to be interesting - and I'm pretty sure that what needs to be known will find its way to the non-Faux news.
They're hiding behind "national security". There will be closed sessions, for select members of Congress who have security clearance, in which they won't be able to refuse to answer.The facts, when they do come out, won't be attributed to any one of them.
I, as a tax paying US citizen, could not get away with it. I would be thrown in jail for Contempt of Congress.
On the other hand, the rich and powerful that inhabit the Washington DC inner sanctum can get away with just about anything because if the people like me found out that the rich and powerful really could get smacked down the whole house of cards would fall.
Being both a man and USAer, it would be my pleasure to USplain.
The short answer is if the chairman or the majority of the committee just don't want an embarrassing answer, tough noogies. That's what is happening here - IOKIYAR.
But to USplain -
In the USA, Contempt of Congress is not charged and prosecuted like drunk driving, lying in a court of law or cheating someone out of their money with a fake University. The charging of Contempt of Congress, and sometimes its prosecution, is a political activity. The chairman of the committee, when faced with a non-chatty-Cathy, can issue a subpoena for the documentation or testimony requested. Assuming the chairman does that with the same result, and the committee votes to report a resolution of contempt to its parent chamber, the parent chamber (House or Senate) can then do one or more of the following:
1.Arrest, imprison, have a trial and punish the accused themselves (Inherent Contempt). Sometime this is used to speedily pressure a witness to testify.
2, Refer a criminal complaint to the US Attorney for the usual Grand Jury and judicial prosecution process. This only happens after the political process.
3. In the Senate they can also Sue The Bastard, by having the Senate Legal Counsel file a civil complaint in Federal Court.
So, yeah, you would get your butt handed to you, but these guys are Republicans.
I know ppl want to champion Kamala Harris bc she's a black woman but she seemed a little out of her element here. I don't blame her because she's new and I root for her to do better.
Even a dipshit like Trump knows how business gets done. Unless you're a Mafia don, you don't "direct" anybody to do the illegal shit. You suggest it, and - depending on the brainpower of the flunky you want to do it - deliver the appropriate quantity of winks and nudges. Or, if you're a delusional egomaniac, you just "expect loyalty".
"I do believe itβs inappropriate for me to discuss that in an open session." That's practically an invitation. The closed sessions are going to be interesting - and I'm pretty sure that what needs to be known will find its way to the non-Faux news.
They're hiding behind "national security". There will be closed sessions, for select members of Congress who have security clearance, in which they won't be able to refuse to answer.The facts, when they do come out, won't be attributed to any one of them.
BRAVO and kudos!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ad infinitum. πππππ
Depends on what the meaning of are are.
Oh my dayum. π½π½π½π½π½
I, as a tax paying US citizen, could not get away with it. I would be thrown in jail for Contempt of Congress.
On the other hand, the rich and powerful that inhabit the Washington DC inner sanctum can get away with just about anything because if the people like me found out that the rich and powerful really could get smacked down the whole house of cards would fall.
ππππ€£π€£π½π½π½π½π½
π½π½π½π½π½
I've got hot sauce in my bag, swag.
^^^^^^^^^^ AD INFINITUM. HRC is a wonder of a woman. History will not be kind to those who voted Cheetolini.
They better have plenty of stomach pumps available. People will die of alcohol poisoning by ten fifteen.
Being both a man and USAer, it would be my pleasure to USplain.
The short answer is if the chairman or the majority of the committee just don't want an embarrassing answer, tough noogies. That's what is happening here - IOKIYAR.
But to USplain -
In the USA, Contempt of Congress is not charged and prosecuted like drunk driving, lying in a court of law or cheating someone out of their money with a fake University. The charging of Contempt of Congress, and sometimes its prosecution, is a political activity. The chairman of the committee, when faced with a non-chatty-Cathy, can issue a subpoena for the documentation or testimony requested. Assuming the chairman does that with the same result, and the committee votes to report a resolution of contempt to its parent chamber, the parent chamber (House or Senate) can then do one or more of the following:
1.Arrest, imprison, have a trial and punish the accused themselves (Inherent Contempt). Sometime this is used to speedily pressure a witness to testify.
2, Refer a criminal complaint to the US Attorney for the usual Grand Jury and judicial prosecution process. This only happens after the political process.
3. In the Senate they can also Sue The Bastard, by having the Senate Legal Counsel file a civil complaint in Federal Court.
So, yeah, you would get your butt handed to you, but these guys are Republicans.
I know ppl want to champion Kamala Harris bc she's a black woman but she seemed a little out of her element here. I don't blame her because she's new and I root for her to do better.
Listening to Johnny McCain's NVA-implanted microchip malfunction, thinking about this bird: https://youtu.be/oXYZttxunPw
Blow job or foreign intervention in elections, obstruction and/or abuse of power?