Sen. Graham to investigate Democrat scandals

PJ Media:
Since taking over the House, Democrats have promised to open the investigation floodgates. If Donald Trump or anyone in his administration ever so much as misplaced a paper clip, you can be sure there would be hearings. When the Mueller probe reveals that there is no evidence of Russian collusion, they will start their own investigation, no doubt. Their main objective is to make sure Trump is not reelected, and in the meantime, they will do everything they can to make it impossible for him to govern. To them, that is called transparency and accountability.

But when the tables are turned, and the real crimes and abuses of power by Democrats are suddenly in the crosshairs of Republicans with a thirst for accountability… well, there’s outrage:

New tensions are flaring on the Senate Judiciary Committee over plans by newly minted Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) to dig into Obama-era scandals.
Graham, a close ally of President Trump’s, has outlined several areas he wants to probe now that he has the Judiciary Committee gavel.

They include the FBI’s handling of its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant applications targeting former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), asked about Graham’s plans, started laughing and compared them to the “thrilling days of yesteryear.”

“This is going to be like the History Channel it turns out. Instead of taking a look at the current issues, Lindsey Graham wants to go back and answer important questions about the Bermuda Triangle and Hillary Clinton,” Durbin told The Hill.

Durbin said he was “concerned” about Graham’s plans but quipped that “you know there is that question about Jimmy Carter which he probably wants to ask.”
Democrats may dismiss Graham’s plans as pointless, but deep down don’t believe for a second they’re laughing. We all remember Graham’s epic smackdown of the Democrats’ actions during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. I’m sure Graham is legitimately miffed that Obama and Hillary have managed to avoid accountability for their illegal actions, so there are really only two possible motives here. The first is that he really wants to see Obama and Hillary get what they deserve. The second possible motive is that Graham wants to hold these investigations over Democrats' heads as a bargaining chip and keep them from abusing their investigative powers as a means to tie Trump’s hands for the next 2-6 years and make it impossible for him to govern.

The big difference between congressional Democrats and Senator Graham is that Graham wants to investigate legitimate scandals. Consider the facts: Even though the BuzzFeed story about Trump directing Michael Cohen to lie to Congress has been proven to be fake news, Democrats still want to investigate it!
...
Democrats politicians think they have gotten away with their criminal conduct and would prefer to continue to use the Trump presidency as a punching bag.  The Senate will act as a counterpunch to that strategy.  That Hillary Clinton was not indicted for her mishandling of classified materials is a real scandal and one that deserved to be exposed and prosecuted.  Also, those who facilitate the actions she engaged in should also be investigated and where appropriate prosecuted.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more