>>7714617

Baker, Eyes on Please

Please consider changing the title of the below notable to be less sensational. Something like "Judge Rao and House Counsel Douglas Letter discuss House options to compel DOJ."

>>>7713915 Speaker Pelosi Threatens Possibility of Armed Conflict Against U.S. Department of Justice

I listened to the youtube source material for the article ( https://youtu.be/GC79g2Yh18s ). Nothing in the source material suggests Pelosi is going to order, or even considering ordering a "gun battle" between the house and the DOJ.

This is sensationalist bullshit reporting. The discussion is about whether the court has the authority to compel the executive, and what other means - besides a court order - the house has to compel the executive to comply. This is where Counsel Letter responds with "the House Sergeant at Arms could be directed to compel the DOJ, but that has never been done" gun battle is mentioned in his response but it was not in a threatening way, more to illustrate why the house has never sent the sergeant at arms.

This is BULLSHIT sensationalist reporting quoted in the notable. The source video is linked.

>>7715136

(You) speak for none but yourself. So STFU with this We shit. You do not represent me. Go project somewhere else.

>>7715231

The point isn't if the sergeant of arms is armed or not. The point is the story is materially misrepresenting the facts. Pelosi did not threaten the possibility of an armed conflict. A lawyer and a judge discuss the means the house has to compel the DOJ.

Material misrepresentation of facts is a MSM tactic and the notables headline is incorrect and misleading based on that bullshit webpage's reporting.

>>7715059

Develop thicker skin. You're the one in the audience at a comedy show that laughs at all the jokes UNTIL the comedian touches on a topic (you) care about. This is the price of a free speech board.

Fuck off visiting my house telling me how my furniture should be arranged. Who the fuck are you?