Days After REFUSING TO TESTIFY UNDER OATH, TREY GOWDY Just Hit SUSAN RICE With DEVASTATING NEWS … [VIDEO]

GEE, I WONDER WHY THESE KNOWN LIARS DO NOT WANT TO TESIFY UNDER OATH … HOPEFULLY GOWDY STICKS TO HIS GUNS AN REFUSES TO LET THIS CRIMINAL OFF THE HOOK. IF WE DO NOT APPLY THE LAW TO THOSE WHO MAKE AND ENFORCE THE LAWS, All IS LOST.

Susan Rice refused an invitation to testify before Congress next week on the question of unmasking Trump aides and officials.

The excuse that she gave for declining the invitation was that the letter inviting her to testify wasn’t a “bipartisan letter,” that the ranking member hadn’t signed it.

From Free Beacon:

Rice’s lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler, sent a letter Wednesday on behalf of her client to the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism–Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.), respectively–explaining why Rice was declining an invitation to testify.

“Senator Whitehouse has informed us by letter that he did not agree to Chairman Graham’s invitation to Ambassador Rice, a significant departure from the bipartisan invitations extended to other witnesses. Under these circumstances, Ambassador Rice respectfully declines Senator Graham’s invitation to testify,” Ruemmler wrote.

But even Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein said that she had never heard that a letter had to be a bipartisan letter. She also noted that Rice had appeared on various cable news programs to speak on the subject. She said while she was within her rights to choose not to testify, Feinstein urged her to reconsider.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.) told Bill Hemmer during an interview on Fox News on Thursday morning that Congress may subpoena Rice to testify about the unmasking.

From Free Beacon:

“There are things called subpoenas. You shouldn’t have to use it with a former national security adviser, but if you do, you do,” Gowdy said.

He later added that Rice is an important witness to the investigation.

“Members of Congress don’t pick the witnesses. Lawyers don’t pick witnesses. The facts pick the witnesses,” Gowdy said. “And whether Ambassador Rice likes it or not, she’s a really important fact witness.”

Exactly why is she rejecting the invitation if she has nothing to hide?

Shouldn’t she want to help out the investigation?

She’s willing to talk about the subject on cable shows, as Feinstein points out, so she’s able to talk at least that much on the subject. And if there are classified parts of what she has to say, they can question her in closed session.

So one has to ask, when there are no real reasonable excuses, why is she declining?

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *