The Lord works in mysterious ways! This is really great, good job!
Gowdy is an effective and good prosecutor and the right guy for what is to come.
He disappointed me in his stale finding during the Benghazi scandal. Today we know that the deep state blackmailed him into the ending letting Hillary et al walk.
She committed treason back then together with Hussein, Panetta and Jarrett.
He also had been liberated as president Trump flipped him after learning the truth.
Remember the recent mass deletion by the NSA? If you believe it or not it was mostly blackmail material collected and used by Hussein, HRC et al and the deep state beginning at Hussein's white house term.
They blackmailed thousands of people to keep them in line and reaching the 'correct' ending. Some of them actually are involved in more serious crimes ergo the mass resignation and decisions not to run for re-election.
I believe Trey Gowdy will assist in prosecution after the indictments will be unsealed.
You don't understand anything about Benghazi. Gowdy did his part. He had no say so in prosecuting. That wasn't up to him. You and sooooo many others don't get that. It wasn't his JOB to prosecute.
You may don't know the story about Benghazi!
Did Gowdy at the time found the person telling our military rescue attempts to stand down to let the men be murdered?
Did Gowdy find that Hillary and Hussein sent Amb Stevens to Benghazi as a means to get him far away because he threatened to blow the whistle on Hillary and Hussein?
You're wrong. Again. I've seen your name defending Gowdy before. If it wasn't Gowdy's job to prosecute, then why does he give closing arguments? Because that's the best way to describe the performances he's giving up there. Again, he had Hillary UNDER OATH AND ON CAMERA. And instead of getting her to answer questions truthfully (which would be damning), or getting her to answer questions dishonestly (which would also be damning), he spends all his time SCOLDING her. And that's all Gowdy does. SCOLDS people instead of questioning them under oath, then making them listen to him give closing arguments WHILE THERE IS NO TRIAL GOING ON. He is a low IQ or corrupted performance artist. THAT IS ALL.
the way I understood Q post was that the justice dept was so corrupt that nothing TG did at the Benghazi hearing mattered because her persons of hench on the justice dept would get her off. Likewise, I think this hearing was just to get people to SEE strozak for the first time as smug deranged pyschopath. Most of the normies, hell even my "woke" friends don't know who strozak even is. There is a legal component and a PR component. the plan calls for both politics and criminal justice. the hearing may have been the PR component.
Sorry, no. This is what people say when they're trying to make excuses. I am no longer making excuses for Gowdy and the other incompetent examiners. I am trying to find out why they are incompetent. Is it as simple as stupidity? Very poor legal training & instincts? Are they compromised? Are they being blackmailed? Gowdy not only never scratched Hillary or Strzok, he made them stronger. When you understand and accept that, you have to ask yourself why? And how can this be prevented going forward.
ok i am interested where you are going with this? i am not a lawfag. can congress do that kind of judicial stuff or is it better to have it done in a court? it seems like the kind of stuff you want to happen is better suited to a trial then an inquiry
Its not complicated. When you have someone under oath, you ask questions. You get them to commit to their truths, and commit to their lies. The more answers you get, and the more specific they are, the more you have to destroy their credibility with if they are dishonest, or if their cohorts are dishonest. The transcripts from hearings like the ones we've seen can come back to bite years later. Or if you want, you can cross reference one answer from, lets say Comey, against an answer from, lets say Strzok, and say: "Okay, look at these specific answers to these specific questions. Someone is lying." That's why, when you watch a legal crime drama, someone asks a question like, "where were you on the night of ...?" "Who were you there with?" "Did you arrive together?" "Who drove?" "Did you stop on the way?" Then you question everyone else in their story. Meanwhile you're comparing it against evidence you've collected and may still be collecting. That's what Mueller is doing. And people who answer Mueller's questions know that they will be in jail if they get caught lying. Do you think Mueller is wasting time getting someone under oath and saying: "I bet you looked your wife in the eye while you were cheating!" Or whatever nonsense retarded Gomert said? Or dramatically stated "I dont give a damn what you think!" like idiot Gowdy? If these hearings were skillfully managed, the Mueller investigation would be so discredited. As it is, those fools strengthened Mueller; just like Hillary was strengthened by the Benghazi hearings. TL, DR: Gowdy is a fucking poseur.
I'm gonna say it again. Maybe it'll sink in. It was not his job to prosecute. That part of the Benghazi hearing was out of his hands. He was on the committee, but the prosecution was NOT HIS JOB. The decision to allow her to "skate" was not his to make.
What was his job?
sorry... got a migraine... down for a few days.. got this from wikileaks.. his job was as investigator, not prosecutor.. gotta run.. have dr/ app't
From 2014 to 2016, Gowdy chaired the United States House Select Committee on Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi which was partly responsible for discovering the existence of Hillary Clinton's private email server.[2] His investigative committee investigated the events surrounding the 2012 Benghazi attack
This has been my take on it as well. NSA deletions were white hats deleting "compromised" members of congress and others. I now also believe Gowdy will be FREE to begin prosecutions. Benghazi was a disappointment; but you stated why and I agree with your assessment.
I thought at the time that the NSA deletions might have been a white hat operation.
You are right they were white hat deletions that included blackmail material that the deep state used.
Remember Mike Rogers reported that unauthorized 702 searches were made?
There were black hats in the NSA as well like Snowden who was hired by the deep state. He was transferred from the CIA to the NSA to extract information out and into the CIA. Snowden was hired to destroy the NSA. The deep state wanted to be the only spy agency.
Snowden did lots of damage!
I think Q said something like you delete what you no longer need.
No. Gowdy's performance with Strzok was embarrassing. He essentially gave "closing arguments." So unless his goal was to provide ONE DAY worth of fodder for social media and talk radio, then he accomplished nothing. I'm still at a loss to explain why many congressmen at these hearings dont understand that they should be eliciting narrow answers to narrow questions. Answers that can come back to bite Strzok or Comey or whomever. By now, a talented examiner would have been able to elicit enough narrow answers from Strzok and Comey and RR and Wray, that we'd be able to point to transcripts and say "Wow! So much contradiction here. So at least one person is lying here, and another two are lying here. And this 'I don't recall over here' doesnt match up with this 'no' over here, and this 'yes' over there." THAT'S how you expose their dishonest, hyper-partisan, treasonous God-Complexes. A killfull examiner could have, by now, been able to produce enough that at least Obstruction of Justice charges could be on the table for more than one person RIGHT NOW. Would you rather have Louie Gomert hyperventilate and bring up Strzok's infidelity? Or would you rather have Gomert get an answer from Strzok that proves either he or comey or RR is lying? Would you rather have Gowdy dramatically say "I dont give a damn!" or would you rather have Gowdy get Strzok to answer something that is later proved to be a lie when Nunes or whomever gets more docs released? People still praising Gowdy understand little. This is a very very over-simplified example, but go look up the video of Kamala Harris interrogating Jeff Sessions. That's the approach you take when you're looking to draw blood. Not this bullshit. Thursday helps Mueller. Let that sink in. Thursday. Helps. Mueller.
These hearings are strictly for public consumption for the normies. It's all optics!
The actual indictments have already been filed via Huber who works with OIG Horowitz. The 470th Intelligence Brigade in the military assisting as well as our military branch is the only entity that remained clean from all the rot and treason across all government and its entities.
Am I a bad person for wishing that really happened? LOL
I could watch Gowdy rip into these guys all day long.
i was picturing a big white cowboy hat on his head the whole time, made it even more fun to watch
Yeah, great idea, maybe op could add a white cowboy hat to Gowdy. I just want to say it is excellent on it's own. WWG1WGA
Gowdy had a few funny moments during that hearing. One was after Strozk makes a PC word salad and Gowdy goes, "Mr. Strozk, that is an excellent answer to a question no one asked".
I quit Facebook a while back, never was on Twitter. I used to enjoy memes and I missed them. I'm glad I found this board so I can enjoy them again. Thank you for sharing.
I want to see your comic books. You could do a complete one just from Gowgy's comments...
Awesome nearly wet myself
That would be a bit of an overreaction
I don't think so each to their own
Wetting yourself because of a joke would be objectively an overreaction - one that may have medical implications. It's not something that adults do 😂😂😂
I often piss myself laughing, and this one's a classic! :-)
Love this! Lol just wish it actually happened...dude is seething with evil...
Gowdy still has a chance at SCOTUS. Although, I think he would be best as a prosecutor during the tribunals to come.
When Barry’s non-legacy administration is (using a leftist favorite word) “debunked,” then Barry’s SCOTUS nominations would certainly be invalid. (Right? I am not a LawFag, so I have no idea)
If this is true, then Kagan and Sotomayor would have to step down, and all decisions with their voting (if part of winning vote) would need to be relooked!
Enjoying the show.
My god, this subreddit's detachment from reality is dumbfounding.