Ok back to inherent contempt.

[bluestarone]

Why not pick the best chance for it? Would Giuliani be a good choice? Would love for the House to pick someone and give it a try out. Who would be the BEST choice to use it on? Maybe NEVER use it? Anybody have an opinion on this?

[Mike 03]

1. Interesting to ponder.

I think Giuliani's not a bad pick, but I'd try to pick someone I think would tell the truth under oath. My pick would be Mulvaney, because for whatever reason I think as obnoxious and despicable as he is, deep down he's not a "Trump guy" and that he would crack under the pressure and tell the truth.

EDIT: This is why I don't think deep down Mulvaney is a Trump guy.

Mulvaney Called Trump a ‘Terrible Human Being’ in 2016

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/15/us/politics/mulvaney-trump-terrible-human-being.html

[bluestarone]

2. Mulvaney would be a good one too!

[Mike 03]

3. Don't get me wrong: I'd LOVE to see Giuliani under oath.

I think it would be hilarious.

[NewJeffCT]

4. At least it would put the TrumpGOP on the defensive

Heck - I say Rudy and Mulvaney both.

Team Trump would need to sue to get them out of jail.

[Generic Brad]

5. Be careful what you wish for

Trump will use that as an excuse to unleash even more and jail anyone with a dissenting voice. Laws? Trump believes the law is what he says it is.