Posted on 03/27/2017 5:33:51 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
This just in from O'Reilly. Nunes is on right now and, shockingly, it seems Comey and Rogers refused to show up.
Short explanation: He voted for the Iran Deal, with the Corker Amendment, along w/ 97% of the Senate.
This PDF details the entire argument.
Well that is how they operate now in all these events...they simply don't show up. What are they going to do ? make them pay a fine, or simply use the time while someone .might actually subpoena them?
They're all game players in this deadly game...with no desire to get at the truth....they are all equally as professional as professional criminals and play their games just like them. Nobody's running this government because they're all busy fighting , stealing and protecting their own butts from the criminal charges.....! Yet they know they all have immunity one way or another! All about judges and lawyers and committee's now.....while Trump tries to run the nation among them....
The Democrat accusations are, frankly, stupid.
On the other hand, I can tell you didn't read the linked PDF.
>>They’re all game players in this deadly game...with no desire to get at the truth....they are all equally as professional as professional criminals and play their games just like them. Nobody’s running this government because they’re all busy fighting , stealing and protecting their own butts from the criminal charges.....! Yet they know they all have immunity one way or another! All about judges and lawyers and committee’s now.....while Trump tries to run the nation among them....
***********************************************************
Wow, just wow. You’ve described it exactly. It’s so true, so sad and so frightening.
I keep wondering how this is all going to end. Violence, bloodshed, and will Goodness actually prevail for once.
bttt
Really, I had no idea. Remind me what the Corker amendment is, if you would be so kind.
Okay, I did searches to find out how Sessions voted on the Iran deal, and read as much as I could tolerate of the pdf. I can’t read legalese or governmentese very well.
I find it VERY hard to believe that Sessions voted for the Iran deal.
The Yes vote that E.Fish says is a vote FOR the Iran deal, is described here, and it does not appear to me to be a vote for the Iran deal, but a vote saying that Congress should have oversight on it. Hopefully someone who knows about this will explain. But I do not remember 98 Senators voting FOR the Iran deal. And since Sessions was on record as saying he was not going to vote for it (I found that), it is very hard to believe that he and almost all other R Senators voted for it.
Vote Summary
Question: On Passage of the Bill (H.R. 1191 As Amended )
Vote Number: 174
Vote Date: May 7, 2015, 02:24 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2
Vote Result: Bill Passed
Measure Number: H.R. 1191 (Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015 )
Measure Title: A bill to provide for congressional review and oversight of agreements relating to Iran’s nuclear program, and for other purposes.
Here’s another explanation, this stuff is so arcane it is very difficult for me to understand unless it is explained in simple layman’s language.
http://graphics.wsj.com/table/IranDealWhipList_0815
Where Senators Stand on the Iran Deal
President Obama secured support from enough senators to protect his nuclear agreement with Iran. The House voted to block the deal, but in the Senate opponents of the deal could not gather enough votes to block it, and the disapproval resolution was defeated on a procedural vote Sept. 25. Here’s the rundown.
Name
Party
State
Supports deal?
Link
Sasse, Ben Republican NE No Facebook post
Schatz, Brian Democrat HI Yes Statement
Schumer, Charles Democrat NY No Medium post
Scott, Tim Republican SC No Tweet
Sessions, Jeff Republican AL No Video from Senate Foreign Relations Hearing
Shaheen, Jeanne Democrat NH Yes Statement
Shelby, Richard Republican AL No WVTM interview
Stabenow, Debbie Democrat MI Yes Statement
Sullivan, Dan Republican AK No Tweet
Tester, Jon Democrat MT Yes Statement
Uh isn’t that insubordination?
Fire their A$$ and no pension!
Your boss tells you to report, you report.
Yep the rats scurry when you shine the light on them.
And the link he’s pushing goes to his blog..
Sessions should hire a conservative outside lawyer to handle this and they need to find a hand-picked team of honest FBI agents, probably from a field office.
___________________________________________
I think Andy McCarthy would be a good choice.
The Corker Amendment was the one that altered the protocol for accepting treaties, something which cannot be done w/o Constitutional amendment. However, it is the main bill itself which is the Treason: it kept in place the sanctions/embargo on Iran (preserving its place on the official “State Sponsors of Terrorism” list) while rendering them aid and comfort.
It’s actually a direct link to the PDF.
(Yes, it’s hosted on my blog.)
President Trump should order them to go, then he should go sit in on the hearing and order them to answer.
This is a closed door hearing with all having security clearance.
If either refuses, The President should fire them on the spot for insubordination.
So is this bill that 98 Senators voted for the actual Iran Deal or something else?
Yes, it is the Iran Deal.
.....”President Trump should order them to go, then he should go sit in on the hearing and order them to answer”.....should fire them on the spot for insubordination.”....
No can do.
Why not, they are part of the executive, therefore they work for him. As president he can declassify anything and everything he wants to declassify.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.