@arthur-dent I can't remember if it was someone here or somewhere else, but I saw a theory that Clinton purposefully was in contempt because it somehow forces more of the Epstein files to be released/reviewed. I have a meeting in a few minutes, so sorry about the half-assed post here and not looking more into it. I'm not sure how it works and for all I know it may have been a conspiracy theory I saw.
@arthur-dent I just tried to look up what I was talking about and couldn't find anything. It must've been something I saw on Reddit or something.
I don't know what the Clintons' endgame in not testifying is, other than they think it's a Republican ploy to deflect attention from Trump's ties/involvement with Epstein and embarrass the Clintons. They've provided written testimony. I err on the side of wanting them to testify and not being in contempt, but I don't know enough about their reasoning to say I'm for/against at this point.
@ohio-guy Probably that he's 80, believes it's political, doesn't want to draw more attention to it as it relates to himself, and figures the written answers were enough adn the rest is just circus shit.
It is a rule of law question. Congress summoned him, legally. He either must appear, or go to a judge and get it quashed. He doesn't get to determine if Congress was right in the subpoena.
I do not expect any smoking guns in the files or the testimony. But Clinton has an obligation to appear and the DoJ has a legal obligation to publish the files. Neither gets to decide anything different.
Put on your lawyer hat, a client says they want to ignore a subpoena because everyone is sick of dealing with the issue, do you tell them it is fine to ignore it?
What about all the republicans who refused subpoenas about Jan 6th and other cases where they refused subpoenas in order to protect Trump?
Subpoenas are either the rule of law or they are not. Those republicans acting like it is the former now are complete hypocrites after refusing to comply when it was their turn.
@arthur-dent I just tried to look up what I was talking about and couldn't find anything. It must've been something I saw on Reddit or something.
I don't know what the Clintons' endgame in not testifying is, other than they think it's a Republican ploy to deflect attention from Trump's ties/involvement with Epstein and embarrass the Clintons. They've provided written testimony. I err on the side of wanting them to testify and not being in contempt, but I don't know enough about their reasoning to say I'm for/against at this point.
we all know it's nothing but a clown show going after political adversaries.
Subpoenas should be enforced but then again people in congress shouldn't be raging immature assholes that only care about scoring political points.
So yea, they should testify in a perfect world but ignoring spineless hypocrites isn't really high on the piss me off meter.
It is a rule of law question. Congress summoned him, legally. He either must appear, or go to a judge and get it quashed. He doesn't get to determine if Congress was right in the subpoena.
I do not expect any smoking guns in the files or the testimony. But Clinton has an obligation to appear and the DoJ has a legal obligation to publish the files. Neither gets to decide anything different.
Put on your lawyer hat, a client says they want to ignore a subpoena because everyone is sick of dealing with the issue, do you tell them it is fine to ignore it?
What about all the republicans who refused subpoenas about Jan 6th and other cases where they refused subpoenas in order to protect Trump?
Subpoenas are either the rule of law or they are not. Those republicans acting like it is the former now are complete hypocrites after refusing to comply when it was their turn.
Bannon and Navarro went to prison for contempt. Is that what you want for the Clintons?
You better. Otherwise you’d be a “hypocrite”.
"Self made" = hit that stair master in your 30's?@larsiu self-made stay-at-home Carmel wife.
100:1 that she knows that house is hers for the taking any damn time she wants it all to herself.
If men were any more stupid, we would have breed for the extinction of women. Proof yet again that WE are the best thing they have going for them.
It is a rule of law question. Congress summoned him, legally. He either must appear, or go to a judge and get it quashed. He doesn't get to determine if Congress was right in the subpoena.
I do not expect any smoking guns in the files or the testimony. But Clinton has an obligation to appear and the DoJ has a legal obligation to publish the files. Neither gets to decide anything different.
Put on your lawyer hat, a client says they want to ignore a subpoena because everyone is sick of dealing with the issue, do you tell them it is fine to ignore it?
What about all the republicans who refused subpoenas about Jan 6th and other cases where they refused subpoenas in order to protect Trump?
Subpoenas are either the rule of law or they are not. Those republicans acting like it is the former now are complete hypocrites after refusing to comply when it was their turn.
Bannon and Navarro went to prison for contempt. Is that what you want for the Clintons?
You better. Otherwise you’d be a “hypocrite”.
They weren't the only ones that ignored subpoenas. And they both only spent a measly 4 months in jail with Bannon being pardoned by Trump. So don't pretend MAGAts care at all about ignoring subpoenas.
But i'm sure you're pissed about those others that treated them as optional and didn't get punished at all.
We are all fully aware of all MAGAts being hypocrites.
It is a rule of law question. Congress summoned him, legally. He either must appear, or go to a judge and get it quashed. He doesn't get to determine if Congress was right in the subpoena.
I do not expect any smoking guns in the files or the testimony. But Clinton has an obligation to appear and the DoJ has a legal obligation to publish the files. Neither gets to decide anything different.
Put on your lawyer hat, a client says they want to ignore a subpoena because everyone is sick of dealing with the issue, do you tell them it is fine to ignore it?
What about all the republicans who refused subpoenas about Jan 6th and other cases where they refused subpoenas in order to protect Trump?
Subpoenas are either the rule of law or they are not. Those republicans acting like it is the former now are complete hypocrites after refusing to comply when it was their turn.
Bannon and Navarro went to prison for contempt. Is that what you want for the Clintons?
You better. Otherwise you’d be a “hypocrite”.
They weren't the only ones that ignored subpoenas. And they both only spent a measly 4 months in jail with Bannon being pardoned by Trump. So don't pretend MAGAts care at all about ignoring subpoenas.
But i'm sure you're pissed about those others that treated them as optional and didn't get punished at all.
We are all fully aware of all MAGAts being hypocrites.
So it seems like your issue is with the 1/6 committee and the the Democrat controlled House for not referring their colleagues who ignored subpoenas to the DOJ.
If they did anything wrong, the Clintons should be punished, like anyone else. Party makes no difference.
I am hearing rumblings that it might be part of a strategy, that if they face criminal contempt charges then it is an avenue to force the release of ALL of the Epstein files
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
You are all over the place. Is Epstein a failure of government? Likely. Did people get away with criminal conduct? Likely. Can Congress do anything about this. Nope.
From Gonzales, to Holder, to Garland, to Bondi, we have a rich history of highly partisan AG’s who hadn’t hesitated to use the power of their office for politics. Congress can’t do anything about it. This isn’t a system failure, our system is fine. It’s a people failure which is the natural product of low-IQ and highly political office holders in the executive and legislative branches. Politics is now seeping into the judicial branch. We are screwed.
If anybody committed Epstein related crimes, let the DOJ do its job, if it can or even wants to.
That being said, Congress will proceed with this and more dumb-assed hearings because hearings is where stupid people get on TV and where the politics and fundraising is.
I tend to agree with CO here. Doesn't feel like Congress is going to accomplish anything substantive and they've already spent millions (if not billions) and way too much time chasing shit that they can't do anything about. I'm all for public shaming, etc., but this just doesn't seem like a productive use of time and there is no way the Clintons (or anyone else) is going to say anything.
Latest Post: Anyone remember La Bamba restaurant Our newest member: Doug Beder Recent Posts Unread Posts
