Trump would provide ONLY written answers in the Russia scandal. So why is the whistleblowers same offer now "insufficient" to the GOP?

This is a complete joke, right?           

"Written answers will not provide a sufficient opportunity to probe all the relevant facts and cross examine" - Jim Jordan, November 3, 2019          

Why didn't Trump Apologist Jim say this exact same thing in April when Trump refused to meet face-to-face and would only provide written answers?          

Do republicans really think America is this stupid and we don't see the contradiction?????   

6 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 year ago
    Favorite Answer

    The whistle-blower has no need to testify at all. I saw the results of an accident a few months ago. It happened just before I drove by. I called 911. The police came and investigated the accident. The police never called me to testify because their investigation produced the information they needed to resolve the case.

    The House Intelligence Committee investigated the report made by the whistle-blower. They quickly were able to corroborate the report the WB made so testimony from the WB is not needed.

    Any attempt to obtain the identity of the WB is a crime.

  • martin
    Lv 7
    1 year ago

    There is a difference in treatment of a whistle-blower verses the president.

  • 1 year ago

    Trump just wants to confront whoever it is and get revenge. The whistleblower act protects whistleblowers by law, so they cannot be exposed. Otherwise no whistleblower would be able to come forward in safety. 

    The person who said Trump has the right to confront his accuser is incorrect in the case of a whistleblower, who has complete anonymity. 

  • 1 year ago

    Hard to use ad hominems as a specious argument when the person remains anonymous.  You have to deal with what was said or, as so many are, make up schitt about who the whistleblower is.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 year ago

    Republicans are complaining about process because they can’t address the substance.

  • 1 year ago

    He's the accuser. Trump has a Constitutional right to face him.

    If he doesn't want to that's fine but the accusal means nothing if he doesn't.Under the Fifth Amendment you don't have to testify about something you were accused of at all.  In fact almost no one does.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.