Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)

8. It may be because they have trouble subpoenaing a British citizen. Just a guess.

Reply to ananda (Reply #6)

Wed Nov 8, 2017, 07:56 PM

Nov 2017

So this way they get information, but it's not under oath, and Simpson can still be protected legally. For example, could be some of his taping may have been illegal.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

House panel drops effort to force testimony on Trump 'dossier' [View all] Eugene Nov 2017 OP

Yet Another Win To Record Today Me. Nov 2017 #1

Are they afraid? mamas Nov 2017 #2

Don't think I ever had much confidence in the House's ability to police the administration or itself pecosbob Nov 2017 #3

How about interviewing the Mercers. hedda_foil Nov 2017 #4

We don't need to know what Republican paid for the original vetting of trump- we do need to Sunlei Nov 2017 #5

I think we know that, don't we? Bannon is going after the guy: Honeycombe8 Nov 2017 #7

Adam Schiff went along with this? ananda Nov 2017 #6

It may be because they have trouble subpoenaing a British citizen. Just a guess. Honeycombe8 Nov 2017 #8

It's a crime to lie to Congress whether you're under oath or not. mobeau69 Nov 2017 #9

I bet they got word Mueller will be interviewing them as well madville Nov 2017 #10