Putting Axelrod under oath means nothing if you don’t have the conclusive evidence to prove that he is lying under oath. There is not one ounce of honor in this whole damned Executive Branch (and apparently, the agencies they control directly).
Agree. But my theory is that several dozen people know the truth about Benghazi but have not come forward. Speculation on why. Axelrod won’t know what/who the committee has on it’s side, so he would be compelled to answer questions honestly. Plus, Axelrod testimony might compel others to come forward.
Not a lawyer, just my thoughts.
“Putting Axelrod under oath means nothing if you don’t have the conclusive evidence to prove that he is lying under oath. There is not one ounce of honor in this whole damned Executive Branch (and apparently, the agencies they control directly).”
__________________________________________________________
O.K., we’ve established the complete corruption of the parties at fault and with authority to right things, but they are corrupt. So then what is our recourse, friends?
God help us.