Hypocrisy and a coverup

[Rye Catcher]

Mark Meadows sues Jan. 6 committee after panel vows contempt proceedings

Former President Donald Trump's onetime chief of staff is refusing to cooperate with the committee, reversing an earlier decision to engage.

www.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON — Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows sued the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol just hours after the panel said it plans to move forward with contempt proceedings against him.
In the lawsuit, which names members of the Jan. 6 committee and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., as defendants, Meadows asked the court to invalidate two “overly broad” and “unduly burdensome” subpoenas that he said the panel issued without legal authority.
“Congress has no freestanding power to issue subpoenas. Instead, its investigative powers are ancillary to its legislative authority,” the lawsuit says. “Because of this tie between the investigative and legislative powers, Congress may only issue subpoenas that serve a valid legislative purpose.”

Rep. Meadows Seeks Answers at Benghazi Whistleblower Hearing, Questions State Department Witnesses

May 9, 2013. Includes video! Meadows: “The false narrative put forth by the Obama Administration about a video sparking the violence is inexcusable. In the investigation that followed, political appointees were protected. Witnesses at the highest level were not interviewed by the Accountability...

www.hcpress.com

May 9, 2013. Representative Mark Meadows (NC-11) sought answers today in the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform’s hearing on Benghazi. The three whistleblowers from the U.S. Department of State testifying before the Committee included Mr. Gregory Hicks, Foreign Service Officer and former Deputy Chief of Mission/Chargé d’Affairs in Libya; Mr. Mark Thompson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism; and Mr. Eric Nordstrom, Diplomatic Security Officer and former Regional Security Officer in Libya.

Meadows
“The powerful testimonies of these three witnesses clarified that senior officials knew right away this was a terrorist attack, not a protest,” Meadows said. “The false narrative put forth by the Obama Administration about a video sparking the violence is inexcusable. In the investigation that followed, political appointees were protected. Witnesses at the highest level were not interviewed by the Accountability Review Board (ARB), even though that level is where the decisions were made. Meanwhile, mid-level officials were wrongly blamed.

“After today, we see that the ARB report did more editorializing than fact-finding. As I told the whistleblowers and the families of the four Americans killed, the people back home are standing with them to get the truth and will not sit down until the questions are answered. I will continue, alongside my colleagues, to pursue the truth about Benghazi until we have answers for the American people and justice for those who paid with their lives.

Mr. Meadows needs to respond to this, it appears to be a clear case of dishonesty and hypocrisy.

 

[Dragonlady]

Mark Meadows sues Jan. 6 committee after panel vows contempt proceedings

Former President Donald Trump's onetime chief of staff is refusing to cooperate with the committee, reversing an earlier decision to engage.

www.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON — Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows sued the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol just hours after the panel said it plans to move forward with contempt proceedings against him.
In the lawsuit, which names members of the Jan. 6 committee and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., as defendants, Meadows asked the court to invalidate two “overly broad” and “unduly burdensome” subpoenas that he said the panel issued without legal authority.
“Congress has no freestanding power to issue subpoenas. Instead, its investigative powers are ancillary to its legislative authority,” the lawsuit says. “Because of this tie between the investigative and legislative powers, Congress may only issue subpoenas that serve a valid legislative purpose.”

Rep. Meadows Seeks Answers at Benghazi Whistleblower Hearing, Questions State Department Witnesses

May 9, 2013. Includes video! Meadows: “The false narrative put forth by the Obama Administration about a video sparking the violence is inexcusable. In the investigation that followed, political appointees were protected. Witnesses at the highest level were not interviewed by the Accountability...

www.hcpress.com

May 9, 2013. Representative Mark Meadows (NC-11) sought answers today in the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform’s hearing on Benghazi. The three whistleblowers from the U.S. Department of State testifying before the Committee included Mr. Gregory Hicks, Foreign Service Officer and former Deputy Chief of Mission/Chargé d’Affairs in Libya; Mr. Mark Thompson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism; and Mr. Eric Nordstrom, Diplomatic Security Officer and former Regional Security Officer in Libya.

Meadows
“The powerful testimonies of these three witnesses clarified that senior officials knew right away this was a terrorist attack, not a protest,” Meadows said. “The false narrative put forth by the Obama Administration about a video sparking the violence is inexcusable. In the investigation that followed, political appointees were protected. Witnesses at the highest level were not interviewed by the Accountability Review Board (ARB), even though that level is where the decisions were made. Meanwhile, mid-level officials were wrongly blamed.

“After today, we see that the ARB report did more editorializing than fact-finding. As I told the whistleblowers and the families of the four Americans killed, the people back home are standing with them to get the truth and will not sit down until the questions are answered. I will continue, alongside my colleagues, to pursue the truth about Benghazi until we have answers for the American people and justice for those who paid with their lives.

Mr. Meadows needs to respond to this, it appears to be a clear case of dishonesty and hypocrisy.

Meadows could write a book with details of the President's coronavirus diagnosis, providing embarrassing details of Trump's lies and coverups in regards to him spreading a deadly disease throughout the White House and Washington, and killing people at his rallies, but "executive privilege" bars him from talking about January 6th????

WTF is he covering up??????

 

[TNHarley]

“Congress has no freestanding power to issue subpoenas.

Probably why this new bill gives them the power to enforce subpoenas by civil action.
“(a) Cause Of Action.—The United States House of Representatives, the United States Senate, or a committee or subcommittee thereof, may bring a civil action against the recipient of a subpoena issued by a congressional committee or subcommittee to enforce compliance with the subpoena.

Text - H.R.5314 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Protecting Our Democracy Act

Text for H.R.5314 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Protecting Our Democracy Act

www.congress.gov

Weird how he is correct. The constitution does not give congress the power to enforce subpoenas.
Fuck our federal government.

 

[Rye Catcher]

This thread sent to members of the House of Rep.

 

[Rambunctious]

This BS one sided political committee is a waste of time and money and is going to crash and burn...and the ones I can't wait to see go down are Liz and Adam and Pelosi....

 

[Rambunctious]

No one is watching CNN...but I bet a detailed look at their ratings would show a huge decline when they talk about 1-6....no one cares CNN...we see it for what it is....just another tool to bring down Trump....it's not working Nancy....every swing and miss at President Trump makes him stronger....

 

[TNHarley]

Mark Meadows sues Jan. 6 committee after panel vows contempt proceedings

Former President Donald Trump's onetime chief of staff is refusing to cooperate with the committee, reversing an earlier decision to engage.

www.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON — Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows sued the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol just hours after the panel said it plans to move forward with contempt proceedings against him.
In the lawsuit, which names members of the Jan. 6 committee and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., as defendants, Meadows asked the court to invalidate two “overly broad” and “unduly burdensome” subpoenas that he said the panel issued without legal authority.
“Congress has no freestanding power to issue subpoenas. Instead, its investigative powers are ancillary to its legislative authority,” the lawsuit says. “Because of this tie between the investigative and legislative powers, Congress may only issue subpoenas that serve a valid legislative purpose.”

Rep. Meadows Seeks Answers at Benghazi Whistleblower Hearing, Questions State Department Witnesses

May 9, 2013. Includes video! Meadows: “The false narrative put forth by the Obama Administration about a video sparking the violence is inexcusable. In the investigation that followed, political appointees were protected. Witnesses at the highest level were not interviewed by the Accountability...

www.hcpress.com

May 9, 2013. Representative Mark Meadows (NC-11) sought answers today in the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform’s hearing on Benghazi. The three whistleblowers from the U.S. Department of State testifying before the Committee included Mr. Gregory Hicks, Foreign Service Officer and former Deputy Chief of Mission/Chargé d’Affairs in Libya; Mr. Mark Thompson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism; and Mr. Eric Nordstrom, Diplomatic Security Officer and former Regional Security Officer in Libya.

Meadows
“The powerful testimonies of these three witnesses clarified that senior officials knew right away this was a terrorist attack, not a protest,” Meadows said. “The false narrative put forth by the Obama Administration about a video sparking the violence is inexcusable. In the investigation that followed, political appointees were protected. Witnesses at the highest level were not interviewed by the Accountability Review Board (ARB), even though that level is where the decisions were made. Meanwhile, mid-level officials were wrongly blamed.

“After today, we see that the ARB report did more editorializing than fact-finding. As I told the whistleblowers and the families of the four Americans killed, the people back home are standing with them to get the truth and will not sit down until the questions are answered. I will continue, alongside my colleagues, to pursue the truth about Benghazi until we have answers for the American people and justice for those who paid with their lives.

Mr. Meadows needs to respond to this, it appears to be a clear case of dishonesty and hypocrisy.

BTW, how is this hypocrisy? the second link doesnt even mention the word subpoenas.
Did the people mentioned receive a congressional subpoena? Did they testify freely?
Can you explain how this is "hypocrisy?"
Horrible OP

 

[LordBrownTrout]

This thread sent to members of the House of Rep.

Good, tell everyone in congress that they are a cancer and a threat to the US.

 

[Dragonlady]

This BS one sided political committee is a waste of time and money and is going to crash and burn...and the ones I can't wait to see go down are Liz and Adam and Pelosi....

The ONLY reason why this committee is "one sided" is because McCarthy refused to participate in the investigation format that gave Republicans equal membership, co-leadership, and subpoena power when Trump told him to scuttle it. That happened AFTER the House member McCarthy charged with negotiating the framework of the investigation got EVERYTHING McCarthy asked for.

You can't refuse to participate in the investigation and then complain the investigation is "one-sided" and not looking at your concerns. But your claims that the investigation is going to "crash and burn" is whistling past the graveyard.

Republicans are already crashing and burning over their obstruction of the Committee's work. When you attempt to cover things up, people want to know what it is you're covering up.

When someone takes the 5th Amendment, law enforcement quite rightly says "What crime would be incriminating themselves over?" and they start investigations, if they weren't investigating already. Especially when the guy taking the 5th, is a senior official at the Justice Department.

Taking the 5th is admitting you committed a crime. So what crimes did Bannon, Stone, Meadows, et al commit?

 

[TNHarley]

Taking the 5th is admitting you committed a crime

Like this?

Lois Lerner pleads the fifth again, doesn't testify on IRS targeting

Sparks flew after the hearing as the committee's top Democrat charged the Republican chairman with running an "un-American" investigation

www.cbsnews.com

Your statist ass reminds me of this bullshit

Pleading the 5th is NOT admitting you committed a crime.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Good, tell everyone in congress that they are a cancer and a threat to the US.

Please explain why you are calling "everyone in Congress" they're a cancer and a threat to the US? Be specific, detailed and concise. Otherwise ...

 

[TNHarley]

Probably why this new bill gives them the power to enforce subpoenas by civil action.
“(a) Cause Of Action.—The United States House of Representatives, the United States Senate, or a committee or subcommittee thereof, may bring a civil action against the recipient of a subpoena issued by a congressional committee or subcommittee to enforce compliance with the subpoena.

Text - H.R.5314 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Protecting Our Democracy Act

Text for H.R.5314 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Protecting Our Democracy Act

www.congress.gov

Weird how he is correct. The constitution does not give congress the power to enforce subpoenas.
Fuck our federal government.

Why ignore this rye?

 

[TNHarley]

BTW, how is this hypocrisy? the second link doesnt even mention the word subpoenas.
Did the people mentioned receive a congressional subpoena? Did they testify freely?
Can you explain how this is "hypocrisy?"
Horrible OP

Why ignore this rye?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Please explain why you are calling "everyone in Congress" they're a cancer and a threat to the US? Be specific, detailed and concise. Otherwise ...

Sure. I'll give you two exact reasons. They vote for never ending wars and they vote for never ending trinkets out of the treasury.

 

[Rye Catcher]

The ONLY reason why this committee is "one sided" is because McCarthy refused to participate in the investigation format that gave Republicans equal membership, co-leadership, and subpoena power when Trump told him to scuttle it. That happened AFTER the House member McCarthy charged with negotiating the framework of the investigation got EVERYTHING McCarthy asked for.

You can't refuse to participate in the investigation and then complain the investigation is "one-sided" and not looking at your concerns. But your claims that the investigation is going to "crash and burn" is whistling past the graveyard.

Republicans are already crashing and burning over their obstruction of the Committee's work. When you attempt to cover things up, people want to know what it is you're covering up.

When someone takes the 5th Amendment, law enforcement quite rightly says "What crime would be incriminating themselves over?" and they start investigations, if they weren't investigating already. Especially when the guy taking the 5th, is a senior official at the Justice Department.

Taking the 5th is admitting you committed a crime. So what crimes did Bannon, Stone, Meadows, et al commit?

Thank you, a clear, concise and specific post with a serious question posed.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I am old enough to remember when the same folks said if you do not have anything to hide, just answer the questions.

 

[Hurricanelover]

The only cover-up I see is the reality that january 6th was pretty much staged by leftist in the fbi and antifa to make the right look bad. At the time the violence that they were doing throughout our country was seriously starting to make the left look like crap. They needed a means to blame the right for the crap storm and this is what they did to achieve such.

 

[Dana7360]

Mark Meadows sues Jan. 6 committee after panel vows contempt proceedings

Former President Donald Trump's onetime chief of staff is refusing to cooperate with the committee, reversing an earlier decision to engage.

www.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON — Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows sued the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol just hours after the panel said it plans to move forward with contempt proceedings against him.
In the lawsuit, which names members of the Jan. 6 committee and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., as defendants, Meadows asked the court to invalidate two “overly broad” and “unduly burdensome” subpoenas that he said the panel issued without legal authority.
“Congress has no freestanding power to issue subpoenas. Instead, its investigative powers are ancillary to its legislative authority,” the lawsuit says. “Because of this tie between the investigative and legislative powers, Congress may only issue subpoenas that serve a valid legislative purpose.”

Rep. Meadows Seeks Answers at Benghazi Whistleblower Hearing, Questions State Department Witnesses

May 9, 2013. Includes video! Meadows: “The false narrative put forth by the Obama Administration about a video sparking the violence is inexcusable. In the investigation that followed, political appointees were protected. Witnesses at the highest level were not interviewed by the Accountability...

www.hcpress.com

May 9, 2013. Representative Mark Meadows (NC-11) sought answers today in the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform’s hearing on Benghazi. The three whistleblowers from the U.S. Department of State testifying before the Committee included Mr. Gregory Hicks, Foreign Service Officer and former Deputy Chief of Mission/Chargé d’Affairs in Libya; Mr. Mark Thompson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism; and Mr. Eric Nordstrom, Diplomatic Security Officer and former Regional Security Officer in Libya.

Meadows
“The powerful testimonies of these three witnesses clarified that senior officials knew right away this was a terrorist attack, not a protest,” Meadows said. “The false narrative put forth by the Obama Administration about a video sparking the violence is inexcusable. In the investigation that followed, political appointees were protected. Witnesses at the highest level were not interviewed by the Accountability Review Board (ARB), even though that level is where the decisions were made. Meanwhile, mid-level officials were wrongly blamed.

“After today, we see that the ARB report did more editorializing than fact-finding. As I told the whistleblowers and the families of the four Americans killed, the people back home are standing with them to get the truth and will not sit down until the questions are answered. I will continue, alongside my colleagues, to pursue the truth about Benghazi until we have answers for the American people and justice for those who paid with their lives.

Mr. Meadows needs to respond to this, it appears to be a clear case of dishonesty and hypocrisy.

If a court buys this then that makes it impossible for republicans to slap subpoenas on democrats in the future.

The republicans better be careful of what they do because what they do will apply to everyone.

So when the republicans take over the congress and start up their non stop investigations again, the republicans will be working with the precedence they set.

Total obstruction.

And they only have themselves to thank.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I am old enough to remember when the same folks said if you do not have anything to hide, just answer the questions.

The Rs were busy bees guilting everyone about their emails during shrubs middle eastern adventures......"if you're not doing anything wrong then you shouldnt mind your wonderful govt snooping around". O came along and expanded on the patriot. Once more govt is created, future govt is never gonna give up that power.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Sure. I'll give be you two exact reasons. They vote for never ending wars and they vote for never ending trinkets out of the treasury.

Clearly your lack of understanding "detailed and concise" is not fitting your response. As for voting for wars, the last war voted was in WW II:

The last time Congress passed joint resolutions saying that a "state of war" existed was on June 5, 1942, when the U.S. declared war on Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania.