Never said it was hidden, only hadn't been released. A tranche of transcripts has been released, including Epps.I not only “try” facts, I provided them. Like the testimony you seemed to think was hidden.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Never said it was hidden, only hadn't been released. A tranche of transcripts has been released, including Epps.I not only “try” facts, I provided them. Like the testimony you seemed to think was hidden.
Sweet, why did a judge have to order the ingredients released and why did Pfizer want 55 years to release the documentsNow YOU read it.
Not so, cross examination by the 118th will have to deal with burden of proof by their investigation.The burden of proof is on you to show Epps is not what he claims.
There is more than enough evidence in his testimony showing he knowingly broke the law in several instances.....and he goes all Hillary on several of his answers.Show me this copious video where he is breaking the law because I don’t see it.
In other words, it was released.Never said it was hidden, only hadn't been released. A tranche of transcripts has been released, including Epps.
A couple days ago.....................Did you read it?In other words, it was released.
They’ve only recently started releasing any testimony, thus why imply there is some mystery behind the release of Epps’?A couple days ago.....................Did you read it?
Follow here. So far I'm only eight tweets in, but both the Trump and Biden admin used tech to suppress information, which does not come as any surprise to me whatsoever. I condone none of it.
Over to you, Biden lackeys:
Thompson said a long time back the testimony would be released. The question was when. It looks like it has been released. I didn't imply anything, I only said it hadn't as of yet.They’ve only recently started releasing any testimony, thus why imply there is some mystery behind the release of Epps’?
are you reading any of the testimony? If so, what do you think, it being all given under oath?Thompson said a long time back the testimony would be released. The question was when. It looks like it has been released. I didn't imply anything, I only said it hadn't as of yet.
are you reading any of the testimony? If so, what do you think, it being all given under oath?
Well the Committee is not a court of law, real or otherwise. It's a Congressional Hearing.There was an interesting comment by Epps atty where he said something the committee was asking would be an objection in a real court if law.
'Real court of law'.....
So they have absolutely no legal jurisdiction then.Well the Committee is not a court of law, real or otherwise. It's a Congressional Hearing.
So how that applies to the Committee's work is, what?
Legal 'jurisdiction'??? What are you talking about?So they have absolutely no legal jurisdiction then.
Not their purview.Legal 'jurisdiction'??? What are you talking about?
What wasn't the purview of the House?Not their purview.
On June 30, 2021, H.Res.503, "Establishing the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol," passed on the House floor by a vote of 222 to 190,
Why do we have the DOJ then?What wasn't the purview of the House?
The House "established the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol" That's within their legislative purview to do.Why do we have the DOJ then?
So why do we need a bunch of clowns attempting to duplicate a DOJ function?The House "established the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol" That's within their legislative purview to do.
The DOJ has been investigating, and prosecuting criminal activity. Their jurisdictional purview leads to this: At least 964 people have been charged in the Capitol insurrection so far. This searchable table shows them all.
actually, it's a not a duplicate of anything. You're confused . Mightily confusedSo why do we need a bunch of clowns attempting to duplicate a DOJ function?
Two branches of gov't doing the same function is ridiculous.actually, it's a not a duplicate of anything. You're confused . Mightily confused
Not the same function. Congress was never doing a criminal investigation and prosecuting crimes. If they did, Trump would be in prison. The Congress made criminal referrals. They carry no legal weightTwo branches of gov't doing the same function is ridiculous.