Replies

Since you cited impeachment, consider:

So you really think a Ryan (I guess it was Boehner then!) led House would have voted impeachment on Hillary (or any Zero appointed Rat!)? And you really think that you would have gotten 30 some Rats to cross over and vote for removal?

Now back to something slightly more plausible but only slightly!:

1) The special prosecutor law was changed thanks to Rat abuse, if I remember it right both Congress and the President have to come to an agreement on its need & who to appoint. Not likely to happen! (There is more to it then this, I don’t have time to look up the details.)

2) Due to separation of powers all Congress can do is investigate - gather information. Congress can’t prosecute, DOJ does that. Again in the Zero administration not likely to happen and didn’t. Yes Congress can authorize the Sergeant-at-Arms to compel someone to appear, they even used to have a holding cell. They can charge someone with contempt! They did that to Holder I believe over the “Fast & Furious” investigation. It didn’t even scratch his paint!

I understand your frustration but Gowdy did what he could do and did it well given Constitutional limitations & GOP respect for the law. The other side is not constrained by such things. If you want to fault him, fault him over incompetent PR, something almost all GOP’ers suck at.

All that being said let Gowdy stay in the House. Rudy for AG, maybe appoint a special prosecutor for it. This time you have all the ‘governmental tools’ and maybe the political mandate to do it.