Yeah, I too would like to know what that entails.
Trey Gowdy wants in on CoJ and FBI.
100% liberal projection, anything else?
Also, as a senior Congressman, Gowdy has many tools available to achieve his agenda he believes is just and the right thing for the people. Doing nothing is not the answer.
“I can claim anything”
Not if you want to be taken seriously.
Nah…factual…you guys love playing the victim…you just did with this post…liberals are projecting…lol…you guys are so simple
The FBI is not credible in any matter involving the 2016 election or the events leading up to it.
Without getting inside.
Trey Gowdy. He doesn’t decide what I like the FBI to do or not.
Allegation? Seriously? How about every intelligence agency admitting that they had NO evidence prior to this investigation being opened. After almost a year, there were indictments levied on some Russians and a statement that there is no allegation of Americans being involved.
During a press conference, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein said, “There is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in the alleged unlawful activity,” adding “There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.”
And how do you know doing nothing is not right? What if there is nothing wrong with what happened? Is that not a possibility in your mind?
Ok, so Trey Gowdy is better informed on the details than you are. On what evidence do you dismiss his position? Or re you just going by gut?
He doesn’t decide for me and the lack of credibility of the FBI.
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
2 Likes
Yes, he has many tools that you don’t have. He’s not doing nothing, he’s been looking at everything. He’s a lawyer. A former prosecutor. If there was anything remotely wrong, you know he would be the first one bringing it out there. You know that.
The only reasonable conclusion is just the one that you don’t want to have.
Did she lie to Congress, yes or no?
Section 1621 covers general perjury, and stipulates that anyone who “willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true” is guilty of perjury and shall be fined or imprisoned up to five years, or both. Section 1001 covers false statements more generally, without requiring an oath. The section stipulates that “whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the government of the United States, knowingly and willfully” falsifies or conceals information, including before a congressional committee’s inquiry, may also be fined or imprisoned up to five years.
“Remotely wrong”? Please…just stop. Conducting top secret, government information on a private, unsecured server is way past “remotely wrong”.
[quote=“Smyrna, post:54, topic:2265, full:true”]
Allegation? Seriously? How about every intelligence agency admitting that they had NO evidence prior to this investigation being opened. After almost a year, there were indictments levied on some Russians and a statement that there is no allegation of Americans being involved. [/quote]
Investigations take time. I’m willing to give him more time. What about you? Whitewater and Benghazi went on much longer.
“…in that indictment…” seems pretty key, doesn’t it? Is it possible more indictments are forthcoming? Also, the investigation is not confined to activities that altered the outcome of the election. Why would you think that?
I don’t belong to a party. Try another tree.
I understand but how I framed it was after almost a year…………?
