My bad. Rep. Stefanik did come out with a statement critical
of the president's notice that he is open to information from foreign sources.
It is nearly identical to the FEC chair's. What is remarkable is that anyone
has to point out the chief executive that it's illegal. So we can only hope
ignorance of the law is not an excuse in 2020. It's reassuring to see our rep
working to protect the sanctity of American elections.
No such sanctity for congressional oversight. Due to my
inexperience with law, I didn't realize obeying subpoenas was optional. Failure
to comply doesn't mean jail? The same article said our rep "voted against
a procedure that would allow the Judiciary Committee to initiate or intervene
in judicial proceedings to enforce subpoenas." Her rationale is "this
resolution does little to strengthen congressional oversight." Enforcing
subpoenas doesn't strengthen it?
She also says it "only furthers House Democrat’s pro-impeachment
agenda." There is a minority of Democrats in the House calling for
impeachment and Speaker Pelosi has continually tamped it down. I saw recently
that Rep. Stefanik has read the Mueller report. She's not curious why the
president put forth so much effort into obstructing the investigation into
Russian interference in the election? Mr. Trump stated in the Stephanopoulos
interview that Don McGahn lied to the grand jury. He resorted to insulting the
interviewer when it was pointed out he did not answer Mueller's obstruction
questions in his written responses. Seems like enough reason to compel Mr.
McGahn to testify. Still time for Republican congress folks to get on the right
side of history.
No comments:
Post a Comment