Bill and Hillary Clinton ordered to testify on their long-time ties to Epstein

[Nostra]

There is no legislative purpose.

What was the “legislative purpose: if Nazi Piglosi’s Hollywood produced J6 clown show Marener

 

[Marener]

What was the “legislative purpose: if Nazi Piglosi’s Hollywood produced J6 clown show Marener

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4573

 

[Nostra]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4573

Haha.

Never got past “introduced”. Your Cult leaders lied to you again, Stupid.

 

[Marener]

Haha.

Never got past “introduced”. Your Cult leaders lied to you again, Stupid.

Irrelevant.

 

[sartre play]

I believe I may be one of the last people to ever want to come to the assistance of either Bubba or Shrillary.

But I do have a couple of questions.

First: Congress certainly does have Constitutional authority to subpoena witnesses; but I’m curious what actual legislative purpose is served by grilling them about their relationships with Epstein or Jizzlaine. (It may prove to be political theater, although I suspect we’d only get an assload of “on the advice of counsel I respectfully decline to answer any questions on the grounds of my 5th Amendment privilege.”)

Second: since that is what we can expect to get out of it and not much of anything else, it seems to be just partisan politics. Is anyone actually still worried that Shrillary has any hopes of ever running again?

In fairness, Just picking out ONE Democratic who looks like they may be in the know about the EIPSTEIN deal.

 

[BackAgain]

In fairness, Just picking out ONE Democratic who looks like they may be in the know about the EIPSTEIN deal.

They can be compelled to appear. That is, they can be forced to comply with a lawful subpoena.

But, short of granting either one of them immunity, I’m not convinced that making them appear will pan out. If Bubba has a good criminal lawyer, he’d be well advised to demand full transactional unity.