Posted on 04/03/2017 5:33:23 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) told reporters Monday afternoon that former Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice “ought to testify under oath” after Bloomberg News’s Eli Lake revealed that, during the presidential transition, she deliberately sought to “unmask” President Donald Trump’s associates from intelligence surveillance.
Paul called the reports that Rice made dozens of requests to learn more about the identities of anonymous people thought to be close to the Trump transition team, inadvertently caught on tape during investigations into foreign persons of intelligence interest, “enormous news.”
“If it is allowed, we shouldn’t be allowing it. I don’t think we should discount how big a deal it is that Susan rice was looking at these,” Paul told the assembled reporters.
The Kentucky Senator then cut to the heart of the growing political fight behind what President Trump has called “wiretapping.”
“She needs to be asked, ‘did President Obama ask her to do this?’ I think she ought to testify under oath on this,” Paul opined.
Paul also tried to tie Monday’s revelations about Rice to the slew of leaks on the topic around the time of the handover of the White House. “I think she should be asked under oath, did she reveal it to the Washington Post?” he asked.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I’d safely bet that nothing is going to happen to Susan Rice or an other high profile Obama Admin. official. They can openly lie to Congress and walk free - see Clapper.
bttt
“:^)
You need a civics and history lesson I see.
1) Congress does not prosecute, that is the role, as per constitution, of the Executive, the Justice Department for starters.
2) Perhaps you have been in a coma but prior to Trump we had a lawless administration which supported criminals, not prosecute them.
You are welcome.
If politics is all that correct why do you bother. Just become a hermit and stop spreading negativism.
Another person unable to understand our constitution.
When Democrats control the Executive Department and the Justice Department no Democrats will be prosecuted.
Congress has limited roles in criminal prosecutions, at best suggesting that a party be indicted.
You are aware of who the Attorney Generals were for the past eight years, I would think.
You are not only an arrogantsob, you are kind of dense, too.
It is unconstitutional for the Attorney General to play party politics with the law - inequality before the law. They can’t interfere with the FBI’s work which is under the same constitutional requirements. If they do this they are breaking the law. Lynch and Comey broke the law while in power under Obama. Can’t believe that Trump let Comey stay in power.
Congress (thank God) does not do criminal investigations.
There is an excellent chance that Rice (and her co-conspirators) could go to prison over this, as long as Congress doesn’t screw it up.
You can bet some grandstanding Member will do something or say something that shields her from future prosecution.
Maybe it will even be done on purpose.
All very interesting but of no relevance to what I said.
As to why Comey is still there, my guess is Trump knows more about that than you. I would say he has been handling things very well.
Most freepers would know more about the constitution than you do. So dismount your high horse so you don’t hurt your nasty self.
I can make my own assessment on Comey after watching him during the Hillary e-mail crimes. I can understand that you would have a hard time with that level of independent thought. But realize it’s your problem, bless your heart.
Those in the Negativism Chorus don’t know beans about the Constitution as your remarks show.
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.