Nope, unless you have specific information that ties an individual to the leak, OR for Jan 6. The fact that many on the left support this move is cause for concern.
3 Likes
Indeed. Remember when you were totally for Trump doing the same thing to find leakers?
3 Likes
Bongino daily screams into his microphone that the big tech companies are “commies!”
There in it together!
Two birds of much differing stripes.
I appreciate your keen memory and search skills.
Pelosi does not comprehend how absurd it appears for her to push on like this. I hope nobody tells her.
Yeah, you’re fine with one side doing it but not the other. Hypocrisy noted
Not at all.
None of the leaks against Trump were factual. They were narrative driven, as is the Pelosi demands here.
There is a new call transcript between Biden and the little crook Ghani that you need to see…from July 23, 2021. The last call.
“Look over there!”
LOL
1 Like
You are adding imaginary qualifiers that simply do not apply.
Asking for the metadata to see if Congress comminicated with the rioters before January 6th is a legitimate part of the investigation no matter how much you wish it wasn’t
1 Like
Support what?
A call to preserve certain records?
This is nefarious…how?
Talk to me when they actually look at said records and under what circumstances they are looked at.
Until such time, all they’ve asked is the records not be thrown out.
1 Like
Several members of Congress were seen giving tours on January 5th to people that ended up a part of the riot the next day. Probing for additional points of contact between the 2 parties is the next natural step in determining whether there is a connection. Pretty much standard for any investigation
What does this have to do with Marxism?
1 Like
It SOUNDS bad!
The projecting never stops.
I agree, subpoenas are Marxist.
Going full Marxist= literally anything (c)Republicans don’t like.
1 Like
Nope. You are not thinking clearly. This is so basic, you should be embarrassed that you don’t get it. Or maybe you are just being dishonest because you’re okay with it being uses against republicans? Either way it reflects very poorly on you.
It’s the DOJ’s job to conduct investigations of possible crimes. Never in the history of this country has one member of a political party demanded to be given the personal information of her political rivals. If you don’t get it, you’re in trouble. If you do get it and are okay with it, you’re dangerous to democracy.
1 Like
Yet you had no problem with the Trump organization pressuring big tech companies to turn over the communication records of Democrats and members of the press who were not being accused of crimes.
That is not true. Newt Gingrich set this precedent more than 2 decades ago
You speaketh with forked tongue. Nobody has said that. Invented by you. Thus accusation reflects poorly on you. This is a specific case.
So you think that your hag can be trusted with the personal information of her opponents? What the hell has she done to earn that kind of trust?
1 Like
Nah it’s funnier than that, they want from “government shouldn’t pick winners and losers” to cheering Trump doing just that and now back again like this isn’t the age where nothing you write or say or do ever goes away
