The House Oversight Committee Subpoena FBI (1 Viewer)

[Alan]

House Oversight subpoenas FBI for Clinton investigation documents | TheHill

“Will the FBI provide to Congress the full file with no redactions of personally-identifiable information?” Chaffetz asked Jason Herring, the FBI's acting assistant director for congressional affairs, during a late afternoon hearing on the documents. “I can’t make that commitment,” Herring replied.

“Then I’m going to issue a subpoena and I’m going to do it right now,” Chaffetz said, pulling out the document. "We want all the 302s and we would like the full file. You are hereby served.”

 

[BIGSAINTSFAN]

House Oversight subpoenas FBI for Clinton investigation documents | TheHill

“Will the FBI provide to Congress the full file with no redactions of personally-identifiable information?” Chaffetz asked Jason Herring, the FBI's acting assistant director for congressional affairs, during a late afternoon hearing on the documents. “I can’t make that commitment,” Herring replied.

“Then I’m going to issue a subpoena and I’m going to do it right now,” Chaffetz said, pulling out the document. "We want all the 302s and we would like the full file. You are hereby served.”

This is nothing but a political witch hunt. Another waste of taxpayer money. GEAUX CONGRESS!!!!

 

[mt15]

The Chairman of that Committee is the worst sort of "public servant". He totally abuses his office to carry out partisan politics instead of working in the taxpayers' interests. He's just awful.

 

[KingBarkus]

The Chairman of that Committee is the worst sort of "public servant". He totally abuses his office to carry out partisan politics instead of working in the taxpayers' interests. He's just awful.

What part of "House Oversight" committee don't you understand? He's doing what his committee's purpose is. You think the FBI should not allow Congress to view redacted unclassified information in its own report to Congress?

 

[WhoDatPhan78]

What part of "House Oversight" committee don't you understand? He's doing what his committee's purpose is. You think the FBI should not allow Congress to view redacted unclassified information in its own report to Congress?

The house oversight committee isn't the investigative arm of the Republican party, but that's how it's being used.

 

[superchuck500]

The house oversight committee isn't the investigative arm of the Republican party, but that's how it's being used.

It's not unprecedented that a Hill committee would have such an active investigatory profile - Bobby Kennedy came into his own as the principle counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee investigating mob connections to industry, particularly the transportation complex (e.g. the famous Jimmy Hoffa hearing).

But I don't know that Hill committee power has ever been so heavily used to investigate government officials (of the party opposite of the committee chair) and in such a partisan environment. Certainly, I don't think Congress' investigatory and subpoena power were ever intended to serve political/partisan interests. At the same time, however, if the premise is that it is necessary to ensure that important principles of law and American government are protected and the opposing partisans aren't circling their wagons and not doing an objective job - you can argue that is a perfectly legitimate purpose in our system that has features built into it to check power and abuses.

 

[FWtex]

The house oversight committee isn't the investigative arm of the Republican party, but that's how it's being used.

No it isn't. It is the oversight committee for the United States government and it happens to be led by a republican because republicans have a majority in the house.

Now do you want to argue about him being a republican or him doing his job as the representative of the people to provide as much transparency as possible in how the government is operated for the people? If you do not like his committee holding these hearings then how about asking your democrats to be more transparent on their management of government.

 

[WhoDatPhan78]

No it isn't. It is the oversight committee for the United States government and it happens to be led by a republican because republicans have a majority in the house.

Now do you want to argue about him being a republican or him doing his job as the representative of the people to provide as much transparency as possible in how the government is operated for the people? If you do not like his committee holding these hearings then how about asking your democrats to be more transparent on their management of government.

Yea, they sure did a great service to the Country in the Beganzi dog and pony show.

 

[Alan]

Pagliano defies subpoena to avoid testifying on Clinton emails - Washington Times

I agree leave it in the open. Also....what is wrong with folks? If you truly think all the innuendos and other "personally conceived" theories hold no water then you would want that information to prove your stance. You don't go screaming like MSM and say right wing conspiracy theory.

A great example of the conditioning exhibited is in full display just yesterday.

Politicians then reporters start coming up with the "I had pneumonia (or other ailment) and passed out or felt woozy before...."

Next thing its a trending topic and it shows up right here in this very forum.

Turn off that dayum TV and do some of your own research on subjects instead of believing everything thrown at you.

 

[efil4stnias]

Pagliano defies subpoena to avoid testifying on Clinton emails - Washington Times

I agree leave it in the open. Also....what is wrong with folks? If you truly think all the innuendos and other "personally conceived" theories hold no water then you would want that information to prove your stance. You don't go screaming like MSM and say right wing conspiracy theory yet people do.

A great example of the conditioning exhibited is in full display just yesterday.

Politicians then reporters start coming up with the "I had pneumonia (or other ailment) and passed out or felt woozy before...."

Next thing its a trending topic and it shows up right here in this very forum.

Turn off that dayum TV and do some of your own research on subjects instead of believing everything thrown at you.

research into what? she was diagnosed with pneumonia per her statement. Are you saying that is incorrect?

 

[Alan]

research into what? she was diagnosed with pneumonia per her statement. Are you saying that is incorrect?

I was more referring to seeking the answers to questions regardless of what they are to find the truth.
Broad brush on the last sentence as I was in a hurry, sorry about that.

 

[efil4stnias]

I was more referring to seeking the answers to questions regardless of what they are to find the truth.
Broad brush on the last sentence as I was in a hurry, sorry about that.

But arent some answers just obvious with the "eye ball " test and given information?

I mean, too MUCH seeking can lead you in the opposite direction.

I go back to my pool playing days...."you think long, you think wrong".

I guess what im saying is for most, its pretty obvious ( the answers) when it comes to candidates and their platforms and statements.

Once you get into governance, there are so many levels, so convoluted...on purpose. You NEVER get the real info. You are offered bits and pieces and ultimately have to live with that. Formulate your own opinion based on your own experiences. but then that leads to biases ( depending on your experiences ) that influence your final decision.

ive chosen to make decisions based on what i see/hear when someone speaks. In my profession, i have to...and i have gotten pretty good at "listening" - because it will lead you to the information that will ultimately make my decision.

 

[Galbreath34]

but i don't know that hill committee power has ever been so heavily used to investigate government officials (of the party opposite of the committee chair) and in such a partisan environment.

HUAC is closest, but wasn't turned on elected officials as much, and honestly I think the current Republican mess from Starr to present makes HUAC look like a tiny amateur affair. I guess at least they leave artists and citizens out of it.

 

[Alan]

But arent some answers just obvious with the "eye ball " test and given information?

I mean, too MUCH seeking can lead you in the opposite direction.

I go back to my pool playing days...."you think long, you think wrong".

I guess what im saying is for most, its pretty obvious ( the answers) when it comes to candidates and their platforms and statements.

Once you get into governance, there are so many levels, so convoluted...on purpose. You NEVER get the real info. You are offered bits and pieces and ultimately have to live with that. Formulate your own opinion based on your own experiences. but then that leads to biases ( depending on your experiences ) that influence your final decision.

ive chosen to make decisions based on what i see/hear when someone speaks. In my profession, i have to...and i have gotten pretty good at "listening" - because it will lead you to the information that will ultimately make my decision.

The point I am referencing is that some people see a little and accept a lot.
A conditioned response to accepting authority which can be easily manipulated.

I am saying people need to quit accepting blindly. Does that make sense?

 

[coldseat]

I was more referring to seeking the answers to questions regardless of what they are to find the truth.
Broad brush on the last sentence as I was in a hurry, sorry about that.

I've never commented on the whole email thing with Hillary because it's been such a long drawn out ordeal that hasn't really interested me. But it's been going on for so long that you can't avoid it. Everything I have seen and read is that Hillary did something she shouldn't have for the sake of her own comfort, but it hasn't hurt anybody and national security wasn't compromised. The FBI investigated, but decided it didn't rise to the heights of sufficient evidence to charge her. So since they didn't charge her with a crime, now they're suspicious and accusations fly against the FBI. :eyebrow:

The longer this is drawn out, the more obvious it is that the only answer that will satisfy Republicans is that she is guilty of horrible crimes and she should be tried and thrown in jail. "Crooked Hillary" after all. This has nothing to do with justice or truth, it is plain and simply a witch hunt. They want all of her private email and information out in the public so that they can use as much of it as possible to embarrass her.

I'm guessing the majority of the people are like me. They recognize this for what it is and just don't care about this. Whatever.

Freaking Congress has time to continue with this BS, but can't find the time to pass funding for Zika research.

Now I have to go take a shower for typing what amounts to a defense of Hillary ..... Ugh. Thanks again republicans.

 

[Saint_Ward]

^^ Zika.