Comer and Jordan demand that Hunter actually appear. His lawyers ask for something else

So, apparently his refusal was deliberately not put to the test. Maybe because he was a sitting member of Congress?
What made the subpoena necessary was Jordan's highly unusual refusal to comply with the committee's request to testify voluntarily. McCarthy, Biggs, and Perry all refused to testify. The Dems likely did not try to enforce the subpoena because it became clear Jordan was going to delay enforcement by asking for materials from the committee. They knew the clock would run out before a resolution by the end of that congressional session and of course when the Repubs took over it was all swept under the rug.
Then the Repubs did what Repubs do, they made someone who had illegally stonewalled a subpoena a committee chairman.
 
Time and time again, We've seen the GOP led committees claim stuff from closed hearings, that later in open hearings is proven to be misleading or outright falsehoods.

Facts Matter
Such as?
 
Same with democrats.......it's called 'POLITICS'
Don't kid yourself


False comparison. Reminds me of somebody who equates a lie of a fraudster stealing millions bankrupting families, with the proverbial kid with hand in a cookie jar. Political spin is one thing, what people like Jordan have done their whole career, and people like Comer are now doing is outside the playing field.

If one were to list things side by side, you'd see how false your failed comparisons are.
 

Comer and Jordan demand that Hunter actually appear.​


IOW, there was a lot of embarrassing blowback after Comer turned down Hunter's offer to testify so now it's time to CYA for the rubes.
 
False comparison. Reminds me of somebody who equates a lie of a fraudster stealing millions bankrupting families, with the proverbial kid with hand in a cookie jar. Political spin is one thing, what people like Jordan have done their whole career, and people like Comer are now doing is outside the playing field.

If one were to list things side by side, you'd see how false your failed comparisons are.
So says the liberal minion. :rolleyes-41:
 
What made the subpoena necessary was Jordan's highly unusual refusal to comply with the committee's request to testify voluntarily. McCarthy, Biggs, and Perry all refused to testify. The Dems likely did not try to enforce the subpoena because it became clear Jordan was going to delay enforcement by asking for materials from the committee. They knew the clock would run out before a resolution by the end of that congressional session and of course when the Repubs took over it was all swept under the rug.
Then the Repubs did what Repubs do, they made someone who had illegally stonewalled a subpoena a committee chairman.
Whatever. We all know you’re blowing smoke. Fucking Piglousy set up that committeee in a manner to insure that she would not herself get subpoenaed. She had relevant testimony to offer. Why did she choose to evade?

It isn’t a sin to say, “no I decline to voluntarily testify” when you know you’re being asked to participate in a partisan show hearing. In fact, one can ignore a subpoena up until there is action taken to compel compliance. There was no such action taken.

Bottom line; you need to stop quibbling.

That was a travesty of a partisan committee. A couple of token Republicans, BUT a fully stacked deck (100%) of Trump antagonists.
 
“We appreciate your confirmation that Mr. Biden is available and willing to testify on December 13. Pursuant to the terms of the subpoenas … this testimony will occur initially in a deposition setting,” Comer and Jordan reiterated in their Friday letter, adding they looked forward to also having a public hearing “at the appropriate time.”

Pointing back to Lowell’s concerns about a closed-door interview, Comer and Jordan added they would videotape the deposition and release a transcript “soon after its completion.”


If I were Lowell I would stipulate that dates be set for a public hearing and the release of the complete transcript.
 
Hunter is doing what he told the Congress he would do: testify openly. No closed hearings.
Again: when the Dims had their partisan hack J6 Committee, they didn’t permit anybody to testify openly until first they spoke privately. There are arguably some fair and valid reasons for that.

But suddenly, now that it’s Hunter Biden the meth addicted scumbag son of President Potato, those rules are supposed to be different?

Fuck off.
 
It isn’t a sin to say, “no I decline to voluntarily testify” when you know you’re being asked to participate in a partisan show hearing.
You really are a master of spinning bullshit. Jordan's or any other congressman's opinion of the hearings does not allow them to ignore a legally issued subpoena.
 
You really are a master of spinning bullshit. Jordan's or any other congressman's opinion of the hearings does not allow them to ignore a legally issued subpoena.

Your ignorance is already blindingly clear.

Mr. Jordan kind of did ignore it. And no effort to compel compliance was forthcoming.

The dildo Dims sealed it with their choice to do nothing. 👍
 
There's no legislative purpose to his appearance. Hunter Biden should take it to court and have them throw it out after a long, protracted 13 month legal battle, at which point the Congressional term ends and the subpoena becomes null.
 
A House Subpoena is practically worthless after Jordan and Trump sycophant's refused to appear when subpoenaed . All they can do is take it court and let a judge decide.
Whatever privileged get away with I have lost faith in the system even though there is a glimmer of hope. Still have to survive though. Hunter is a felon on the drugs alone. He documented himself. The system with its authoritarians will prove to you that is what they are. Easy deaths are too lenient for them.
 
Your ignorance is already blindingly clear.

Mr. Jordan kind of did ignore it. And no effort to compel compliance was forthcoming.

The dildo Dims sealed it with their choice to do nothing. 👍
Yes, he did. Illegally so, in keeping with the practices of Repubs. As I explained, what would be the point of pursuing enforcement when the issue would not have been resolved during that session of Congress?
 
Yes, he did. Illegally so, in keeping with the practices of Repubs. As I explained, what would be the point of pursuing enforcement when the issue would not have been resolved during that session of Congress?
So your choice is to just run away. Check.

Fully expected.

Little bug.08 can’t just step up.

The point of pursuing enforcement includes (among other things) setting precedent for the future members who might seek to decline like Jordan did.
 

Forum List

Back
Top