Subpoena his ass right the fuck now.
Yeah, this should work out just fine for him.
Pretty sure that isn’t how this works, dickhead. See you in contempt.
So acting really guilty of something really bad – that’s the “acting” part of the Acting Attorney General title?
He also said he reserves the right to lie if it helps him and that he won’t answer all the questions unless the committee agrees to buy a hot tub from him.
Or a vanity toilet.
6:01 pm ought to be soon enough.
Why do I feel Dems will fold?
Sort of goes to show that the Committee was right in giving Nadler the subpoena in the first place, doesn’t it?
Of course, Whitaker will now use the subpoena as the reason why he won’t show (I suspect he was looking for a reason to use to justify why he doesn’t show tomorrow)
Someone ought to ask the “Acting AG” how the Department reacts when witnesses it subpoenas to testify decide not to show up…
Double impeachment. Baldylocks and Barr preemptively.
We knew Whitaker was a kiss-up and kick-down kinda guy – a bully as well as a lickspittle – as well as an incompetent or the fake potus would not have chosen him but, like his master, he’s heading into a lesson on the consequences of attempting to kick above his weight; as in way-way above.
I will come and not say anything if not subpoened. I will not come and not say anything if I am. Six of one, half dozen of the other.
That’s not the way it works, dickhead.
Gee, you would think that a guy who marketed big dick toilets and Sasquatch dolls would have some inkling of the law.
His stance makes absolutely no sense.
so how does this process play out?
Nadler issues subpoena compelling appearance.
Big Dick Toilet salesman refuses to show up, citing some privilege bullshit.
Then the courts get involved?
He gets arrested?
Is the goal to punt it to SCOTUS so the unitary executarians can quash it all and we spiral another decade into the morass?
He plans on trying to buy enough time for the next AG to be in place.
Is there a lawyer in this crowd who can explain to me why, if he is willing to come and answer the questions posed to him in good faith, that a subpoena would stop him from coming? I suspect it is the good faith part that is the problem? Subpoena or not, won’t he be giving sworn testimony either way?