Matt Gaetz - Twitter (X) Post - Impeach Jack Smith - Congressional Immunity for Trump

Morning All,

I was perusing X.com (Twitter for you boomers ) this morning and came across a post by Rep. Matt Gaetz where he says, and I paraphrase, Rep Matt Gaetz offers House Republicans a plan to fight back against Jack Smith: demand a transcribed interview, send a subpoena, hold him in criminal contempt of Congress, and impeach him if Garland doesn't enforce the contempt. He goes on to layout how Congressional committees have the ability to immunize witnesses for their testimony. He is actually proposing that a Congressional committee could subpoena Trump for his testimony and in exchange provide Trump immunization.

What are your thoughts on this?

For reference - twitter.com...

a reply to: hotspace

Congress should shut Smith down. He will keep inventing charges until he has all online Trump supporters marked for arrest... Just As Biden wants to see.

a reply to: hotspace

Do it, do it, do it.....

2nd line

a reply to: hotspace

Why? Challenges to the 2020 election were squashed by the Courts stating that the people who filed lawsuits contesting it did not have "standing" to file those lawsuits.

Trump now has "standing" to challenge the election. Plain and simple. One of the Fox News stories actually asks "If Smith wants to prove the validity of the election process in Philadelphia?"

This could open a huge can of worms.

Personally - if Congressional Immunity is granted to Pres Trump .... that would be a huge blow to all of the nonsense the other side of the aisle is bringing at him. And - it would sway my opinion that most every Congressional inquiry is nothing more than political theatre.

a reply to: hotspace

Hail Mary pass...

Congress can't impeach a special counsel.

a reply to: JIMC5499

I thought that might be the case also, that discovery could be very interesting. So far, they have managed to try Trump 3 times without defense counsel, due process and rules of a fair trial.

The judge is a lefty tho'. She may shut down any examination of the 2020 election for reasons....

a reply to: JIMC5499

The case doesn't include the election in its scope. It specifies that it's focused on a conspiracy that started on November 14th. Any discovery that falls outside that scope will be rejected.

They'll suggest any tactic except for the obvious...let trump prove his innocence in the court room. It's the only way this ever ends. They don't want that though, because they know he did everything he has been charged with and so much more. They know their wagons are forever attached to the derailed trump train and , at this point, there's nothing they can do to escape their poor decisions. Deflection and grasping at straws is all they got left in their bag. It's the most pathetic, desperately sad thing I've ever witnessed in national politics. They should all be forced to wear a large scarlet L for loser.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JIMC5499

The case doesn't include the election in its scope. It specifies that it's focused on a conspiracy that started on November 14th. Any discovery that falls outside that scope will be rejected.

Counselor I would like to see a copy of your law degree.
I suspect it will look something like this…..

a reply to: WeDemBoyz

They should all be forced to wear a large scarlet L for loser.

The Nazi’s did something similar to people they didn’t like.
But it’s no surprise that a Liberal would suggest something like that.

Unfortunately the Jewish people didn’t stand a chance against the Nazi’s, there would be quite a different outcome this time around though.

a reply to: JIMC5499

I was listening to Donald Trump's attorneys explain how they will subpoena everyone at the DOJ and FBI and HHS who told media companies to hide Biden's crimes and simultaneously damage Donald Trump, leading up to November 2020.

The January 6th related documents and communications Nancy Pelosi had sealed so the present Congress could not view them, will be unsealed also.

It appears this will take place while Donald Trump is president, in 2025.

Like you said, his attorneys are looking forward to it.

originally posted by: Threadbare
Congress can't impeach a special counsel.

And if that was what this was about, you would have a point. It isn't, and you don't.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: JIMC5499

I thought that might be the case also, that discovery could be very interesting. So far, they have managed to try Trump 3 times without defense counsel, due process and rules of a fair trial.

The judge is a lefty tho'. She may shut down any examination of the 2020 election for reasons....

The "establishment" seems to be rolling with the policy that elections are a foundational stone of our government, and as such, should not be questioned. For quite some time, it has appeared that the national security card has been played with regard to the 2020 election and any fraud that took place regarding it.

Five takeaways from Trump's indictment for 2020 election interference

"The Defendant repeated and widely disseminated them anyway - to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and erode public faith in the administration of the election."

From the preponderance of evidence that I've seen, Trump was correct in his assessment, although maybe incorrect about some aspects of the evidence of fraud found. I don't think that he intentionally said anything that he believed to be false, or do so with malice.

Protecting the appearance of election integrity, over actual election integrity, has been a seemingly ongoing theme since Time magazine published a feature about an “extraordinary shadow effort” to “fortify” the election, uniting Democrat operatives and anti-Trump Republicans.

There's been so much evidence ignored, destroyed, and covered up, that there is now a mountain of evidence indicating a government cover-up and election fraud suppression.

What if?

What if the full force and power of the establishment government is being used to squash and cover-up all the election fraud evidence? What recourse would Americans have if our government decides to perpetuate lies to hide a stolen election at any costs, up to and including indicting a former President?

I think a full Congressional inquiry is a good place to start, and the least that can be done.

If there is evidence that shows a reasonable doubt that Trump was correct with his assessment of the 2020 election being stolen, I think he deserves immunity in exchange for what he knows and the evidence he has, and Americans deserve to see all of the evidence and discover the whole truth about the 2020 election for themselves.

a reply to: Threadbare

Really? Their entire case is based on Trump believing that he lost the election and they lying about it to try to influence a different outcome. If he's not allowed to show why he believed that he won, then this will be exposed for the kangaroo court that it is. (no disrespect to kangaroos)

a reply to: hotspace

A guest on Fox News just said Jack Smith needs to come back to Congress to request additional funding to keep his witch hunt going, on September 1st.

The GOP house quietly approved his summer funding, back in May.

They should not approve any more Jack Smith budget requests. He has burned through over 8 million this year alone on his witch hunt... And won't even tell the house judiciary chairman the full extent of the scope of this witch hunt, assigned to him by Merrick Garland.

a reply to: carewemust

Special counsels aren't funded through the normal allocation avenues. There's an account that's solely controlled by the Treasury Department.

a reply to: JIMC5499

His rationale for why he did what he did has no bearing. He was told by multiple lawyers that what he was attempting fell outside the law and still he proceeded.

a reply to: network dude

So the thread whose title is about impeaching Smith isn't about impeaching Smith?