I have always acknowledged that they were properly done subpoenas. I am still an institutionalist.
What I disagree is, it is not about abuse of power, it is not everything else.
My problem comes is the way it was actually put in, is what I will consider a political hit job in the report itself.
it is common.
They are not depending on a crime. They are depending on a pattern of action, abuse of power is what they are calling it...
I don't want anything, I just want him to do the job that he ran for.
Depending on how you are wording that question, no.
There is no proof. There is no proof of this. It is like wishful thinking or something.
I have argued both the process problems and the factual problems. I have not been afraid to back away from either.
I think the process, I think we are looking the wrong direction here...
When you stop Members from being Members, then inherently no matter how good your, quote, intention is or how breathless...