What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

(Acting) Director of National Intelligence Testimony Thread (1 Viewer)

What is the point of Maguire's testimony? HImes is asking who ordered the code red, basically. Is it just to see if the WH or Barr ordered the complaint not to be turned over?

 
FWIW I thought Maguire’s testimony about going through OLC pretty credible. Schiff weirdly and maybe intentionally drew Maguire out as not at all partisan which helps insulate him.

And Maguire’s point is true - just as it was with Comey - that our laws and rules are not designed for a criminal president, that was implicit in what he said.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What is the point of Maguire's testimony? HImes is asking who ordered the code red, basically. Is it just to see if the WH or Barr ordered the complaint not to be turned over?
Yeah - given that we have the complaint now - this is all about figuring out who was involved in the process to try and cover up the allegations.

 
I stopped watching, but it seems to me there are point the Dems can make about the substance of the allegations here, and I am not sure they will take them.  

Maguire is not going to speak to the truth of the allegations, but its a pretty easy step to ask him questions like - if the allegations are true - is that a threat to national security?  Or more broadly, would you consider that to be inappropriate behavior, etc.

 
Maguire was truly stuck in a situation of having to deal with an unclear law.  Frankly, a takeaway from the committee should be to write a law about whistleblowing in areas outside the intelligence community.  

 
I stopped watching, but it seems to me there are point the Dems can make about the substance of the allegations here, and I am not sure they will take them.  

Maguire is not going to speak to the truth of the allegations, but its a pretty easy step to ask him questions like - if the allegations are true - is that a threat to national security?  Or more broadly, would you consider that to be inappropriate behavior, etc.
Why would he comment on such things?  

 
I live in Southwest GA - Trump country where our county was about 88% for Trump - here is how he is defended down here

No other President has been harassed and abused like Trump ! The war hero Senator Joe McCarthy warned us about our government being infested by communist and the left-wing radicals in the major news media back then destroyed him because they had a monopoly on the so-called news. Thank GOD for Trump, Tweets , and the new social media !
Thats right Joe McCarthy = MAGA

 
Maguire was truly stuck in a situation of having to deal with an unclear law.  Frankly, a takeaway from the committee should be to write a law about whistleblowing in areas outside the intelligence community.  
I agree with this.  From his testimony, I don't think Maguire did the anything wrong on this one.  Dems should not be attacking him like this.  It is going to hurt them.  

 
Why would he comment on such things?  
Because someone smart asked him the question.

He won't comment on whether the allegations themselves are credible - but you can phrase it as "If these facts are true, does that constitute a threat to national security?" . 

A little risk because he might say "no" - but he has already hinted that he thinks the allegations are serious.

 
So, networks are pre-emptying programming so everybody can watch the Democrats beat up on a lifelong public servant who has simply been acting within the bounds of the law. 

Up until now, I had always considered the Republicans the stupid party...

:lmao:  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top