The Briefing Room
General Category => Trump Legal Investigations => Topic started by: mrclose on May 05, 2014, 05:14:06 pm
-
The title is from Gretawire and is all the info available for now.
(Full Title) BREAKING NEWS: Congressman Trey Gowdy named Chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi (per FNC Mike Emanuel)
http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/breaking-news/breaking-news-congressman-trey-gowdy-named-chairman-of-the-house-select-committee-on-benghazi-per-fnc-mike-emanuel/
-
Damn, I like it. Gowdy strikes me as a serious man who has fidelity with the Constitution and the rule of law. I hope he doesn't disappoint. I sense he won't.
:patriot:
-
great news. Hope this goes somewhere near the truth, if not all of it!!!
-
Gowdy told Fox News host Greta Van Susteren:
“I have evidence that, not only are they hiding it, there is an intent to hide it,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) told Greta van Susteren on FOX News. “I can’t disclose that evidence yet, but I have evidence that there was a systematic, intentional decision to withhold certain documents from Congress. And we’re just sick of it. So we’re gonna have him come explain why we’re getting documents 20 months late.”
“If you want to have Greg Hicks and the station chief from Tripoli and Hillary Clinton all sitting at the same table, you need to have a committee that has the power to do that. And a select committee would have that power,” Gowdy said on Friday.
-
Compare and contrast with Sen. Sam Ervin.
Ervin was 58 years of age, when he joined the Senate. He was Harvard Law educated.
He didn't state at the beginning, what he felt the facts of the case would prove.
Ervin brought down a President, but Gowdy will not do the same.
-
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) released this statement regarding the announcement that Speaker John Boehner has chosen him to lead the select committee to investigate the Benghazi attacks:
“I applaud Speaker Boehner for his decision to establish a select committee and am honored to serve as Chairman. Twenty months after the Benghazi attacks, there remain unresolved questions about why the security was inadequate, our response during the siege itself, and our government's interaction with the public after the attack. All of those lines of inquiry are legitimate and should be apolitical. Facts are neither red nor blue.
“While people are free to draw different conclusions from the facts, there should be no debate over whether the American public is entitled to have all of the facts. In a courtroom, juries are free to believe one witness over a hundred witnesses. But you cannot make that or any other credibility determination if you do not have access to all relevant witnesses, documents and other tangible evidence.
“Four of our fellow citizens were murdered, and a facility emblematic and representative of our country was attacked and burned on the anniversary of 9-11. Our fellow citizens are full well capable of processing the truth about the attacks and aftermath, and most assuredly entitled to hear it.”
http://gowdy.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=378883
-
Ervin brought down a President, but Gowdy will not do the same.
You misspelled "Washington Post" :nono:
-
Compare and contrast with Sen. Sam Ervin.
Ervin was 58 years of age, when he joined the Senate. He was Harvard Law educated.
He didn't state at the beginning, what he felt the facts of the case would prove.
Ervin brought down a President, but Gowdy will not do the same.
Of course not. And that would not happen even if we had a hundred voice and video recordings of Obama specifically ordering that no assistance be given. Obama's teflon makes Reagan's look positively pathetic.
-
You misspelled "Washington Post" :nono:
Terrific point. It WAS the Washington Post!