You also don't announce the verdict of the investigation before you make it. Issa is VERY guilty of that.
means motive and opportunity makes Obama a suspect. and you would be a fool as an investigator to not label Obama as a suspect till you have evidence saying other wise, and there is no evidence to prove Obama is not involved
Like I said....petty
big difference in "acts of terror" and a "terrorist attack" a tornado could be called a act of terror but would you call a tornado a terrorist attack?
and if Obama said it was a terrorist attack why did he for weeks afterwards say we don't know who it was that attacked the compound when asked if it was terrorist
provide a link to the quote where Issa announced a verdict
provide a link to the quote where Issa announced a verdict
There's no evidence to prove I'm not involved either. Or you. For that matter, there is no evidence to prove that the reanimated corpse of Warren Harding isn't involved.
Point being nobody has to prove Obama wasn't involved, it's incumbent upon Congress to prove that he is. Innocent until proven guilty extends to the President as well. As of now, there's no credible evidence that proves Obama's involvement. There may be yet to come. Proceed carefully and cautiously and the evidence will come if it exists.
CROWLEY: What does your gut tell you? What does your gut tell you now this far into the investigation?
ISSA: My gut tells me that too many people knew that this wrongdoing was going on before the election. And at least by some sort of convenient benign neglect, allowed it to go on through the election, allowed these groups, these conservative groups, these, if you will, not friends of the president, to be disenfranchised through an election.
CNN.com - Transcripts
provide a link to the quote where Issa announced a verdict
CROWLEY: What does your gut tell you? What does your gut tell you now this far into the investigation?
ISSA: My gut tells me that too many people knew that this wrongdoing was going on before the election. And at least by some sort of convenient benign neglect, allowed it to go on through the election, allowed these groups, these conservative groups, these, if you will, not friends of the president, to be disenfranchised through an election.
CNN.com - Transcripts
I don't think it's exactly a secret what he wants the verdict to be.
I gave you the link that you asked for. Go see for yourself he is talking about the Obama administration.:roll:you need a name to announce a verdict i don't see Isaa implicating any single person
I gave you the link that you asked for. Go see for yourself he is talking about the Obama administration.:roll:
do you or me have the means or opportunity you might have the motive but no means or opportunity
so you can assume and speculate all you want but you are being a hypocrite for doing so
Absence of proof of innocence =/= proof of guilt.
Said proof may be forthcoming, but it has not surfaced yet.
Was it right for the head of the committee to speculate about the guilt of a person, no matter who it was. Issa appeared on State of the Union exactly one week prior the when Cummings was on Crowley's show. So what he did was to erase the damage Issa did the prior week.Issa speculated because he was asked by Crowley to do so, and Issa used the testimony of the IRS agents to reinforce that speculation. i don't see anywhere that he announced a verdict
it was Cummings not Issa who announced a verdict case closed
how many are you that don't know the deference of being a possible suspect and being guilty
Was it right for the head of the committee to speculate about the guilt of a person, no matter who it was.
Issa appeared on State of the Union exactly one week prior the when Cummings was on Crowley's show. So what he did was to erase the damage Issa did the prior week.
I love how you and Issa are pretending this is a criminal investigation by using all that nifty prosecutor talk. I bet you picked it up on NCIS.
Double *facepalm*. :2wave:did he speculate on the guilt of a person? no he didn't. he speculated the possible involvement of an administration using evidence provided by testimony to reinforce that speculation
so Cummings lied about testimony because he didn't like what Issa speculated
and who was the one doing wrong again?
Double *facepalm*. :2wave:
President Obama and members of his administration are innocent until proven guilty. Thats my position. If you want to blame Rep. Elijah Cummings for something, I couldn't care less.is that your response? good rebuttal great debating skills
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?