RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Nunes Reveals: ‘Republicans Have an Active Investigation Into Intel Co - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Nunes Reveals: ‘Republicans Have an Active Investigation Into Intel Co Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   pepperonikkid 

  • Trucker
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 13,099
  • Joined: 03-September 03

  Posted 07 January 2020 - 05:18 PM

Nunes Reveals: 'Republicans Have an Active Investigation Into Intel Community IG Michael Atkinson'



https://www.thegatewaypundit.com
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_4062-150x150.jpg by Cristina Laila
January 6, 2020

Article:



Ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes told investigative reporter Sara Carter that Republicans are currently investigating Intel Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.

GOP lawmakers asked Mr. Atkinson to reveal who changed the whistleblower complaint form to allow for second-hand info and office gossip.

"We've mentioned it, but I think people have just kind of ignored it because, of course, we don't have the subpoena power, so we can't bring Atkinson back in but he's got serious questions to answer for because I believe that he either lied to Congress or he really needs to correct his statements and he's refused to respond," said Nunes, who could not elaborate on Atkinson's testimony.

Nunes said that Atkinson's response to their letter was not sufficient.

Atkinson "gave us a very typical IC response, which is to not answer the question," said Nunes.

"Three years ago, that might've worked," he said. "It doesn't work with us anymore. He is under active investigation. I'm not gonna go any farther than that because you know obviously he has a chance to come in and prove his innocence, but my guess is Schiff, Atkinson they don't want that transcript out because it's very damaging."







Full Story
0

#2 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,211
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 07 January 2020 - 07:31 PM

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
0

#3 User is offline   moocow 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 1,138
  • Joined: 18-December 04

Posted 07 January 2020 - 10:05 PM

View PostTicked@TinselTown, on 07 January 2020 - 07:31 PM, said:

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

Spoiler alert: nothing happens in the end.
0

#4 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,211
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 07 January 2020 - 11:03 PM

View Postmoocow, on 07 January 2020 - 10:05 PM, said:

Spoiler alert: nothing happens in the end.


You suck! :tongue2:
0

#5 User is online   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 13,077
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 08 January 2020 - 01:26 AM

View Postpepperonikkid, on 07 January 2020 - 05:18 PM, said:

Nunes Reveals: 'Republicans Have an Active Investigation Into Intel Community IG Michael Atkinson'



https://www.thegatewaypundit.com
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_4062-150x150.jpg by Cristina Laila
January 6, 2020

Article:



Ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes told investigative reporter Sara Carter that Republicans are currently investigating Intel Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.

GOP lawmakers asked Mr. Atkinson to reveal who changed the whistleblower complaint form to allow for second-hand info and office gossip.

"We've mentioned it, but I think people have just kind of ignored it because, of course, we don't have the subpoena power, so we can't bring Atkinson back in but he's got serious questions to answer for because I believe that he either lied to Congress or he really needs to correct his statements and he's refused to respond," said Nunes, who could not elaborate on Atkinson's testimony.

Nunes said that Atkinson's response to their letter was not sufficient.

Atkinson "gave us a very typical IC response, which is to not answer the question," said Nunes.

"Three years ago, that might've worked," he said. "It doesn't work with us anymore. He is under active investigation. I'm not gonna go any farther than that because you know obviously he has a chance to come in and prove his innocence, but my guess is Schiff, Atkinson they don't want that transcript out because it's very damaging."







Full Story

I don’t care who says it. “Come in and prove his innocence...” goes against everything this country used to stand for.
0

#6 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 60,190
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 08 January 2020 - 01:43 AM

View PostJerryL, on 08 January 2020 - 01:26 AM, said:

I don’t care who says it. “Come in and prove his innocence...” goes against everything this country used to stand for.


*DING*DING*DING*

Well said.

:yes:
0

#7 User is offline   Taggart Transcontinental 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 28,397
  • Joined: 22-October 03

Posted 08 January 2020 - 03:32 AM

View PostJerryL, on 08 January 2020 - 01:26 AM, said:

I don't care who says it. "Come in and prove his innocence..." goes against everything this country used to stand for.


Actually the come in and prove his innocence is based upon his testimony previously which was contradicted by the evidence. There is an allowance for people to "correct" their previous misstatements that they give to Federal Agents. So "proving his innocence" means he can correct the original statement to be in line with the actual evidence. Which will then point to where the order came from to change the standard for evidence in whistleblower cases. That's what he's getting at. You are always innocent until proven guilty unless you are Trump, or Flynn. Then you are guilty and must prove your innocence.
0

#8 User is online   erp 

  • Undead Undead Undead
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 38,541
  • Joined: 29-November 03

Posted 08 January 2020 - 05:19 AM

View Postmoocow, on 07 January 2020 - 10:05 PM, said:

Spoiler alert: nothing happens in the end.

Hard to not be cynical when this is the usual outcome.
0

#9 User is offline   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 32,641
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 08 January 2020 - 05:24 AM

View Posterp, on 08 January 2020 - 05:19 AM, said:

Hard to not be cynical when this is the usual outcome.


:yeahthat:
0

#10 User is offline   WillieChuck 

  • <no title>
  • Group: 100+ Posts NonDonor
  • Posts: 555
  • Joined: 07-September 03

Posted 08 January 2020 - 10:04 AM

View PostTaggart Transcontinental, on 08 January 2020 - 03:32 AM, said:

Actually the come in and prove his innocence is based upon his testimony previously which was contradicted by the evidence. There is an allowance for people to "correct" their previous misstatements that they give to Federal Agents. So "proving his innocence" means he can correct the original statement to be in line with the actual evidence. Which will then point to where the order came from to change the standard for evidence in whistleblower cases. That's what he's getting at. You are always innocent until proven guilty unless you are Trump, or Flynn. Then you are guilty and must prove your innocence.

What he said.....
0

#11 User is online   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 13,077
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 08 January 2020 - 10:41 AM

View PostTaggart Transcontinental, on 08 January 2020 - 03:32 AM, said:

Actually the come in and prove his innocence is based upon his testimony previously which was contradicted by the evidence. There is an allowance for people to "correct" their previous misstatements that they give to Federal Agents. So "proving his innocence" means he can correct the original statement to be in line with the actual evidence. Which will then point to where the order came from to change the standard for evidence in whistleblower cases. That's what he's getting at. You are always innocent until proven guilty unless you are Trump, or Flynn. Then you are guilty and must prove your innocence.

He hasn't been charged with anything. If they have follow up questions and/or need to resolve apparent contradictions or suspicion of deliberately false information, fine. Call him in. If found to have broken a law, then charge him and he can defend himself in court. However, through all of that, he has the right to be "presumed innocent."
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users