let me ask the gentlewoman this. She went to this prison and the gentlewoman's visit was fairly well publicized. They knew 2 or 3 weeks in advance that the gentlewoman was coming. The gentlewoman was accompanied by State Department personnel and diplomats, I think. Beyond that, there were professionals and Ambassadors, political-type appointments. They knew the gentlewoman was coming. So did it appear when the gentlewoman was there that the gentlewoman was somewhat insulated from the bare truth? It sounds to me like the gentlewoman saw things that they would ordinarily want to hide from a visitor such as herself. Did my colleague get the impression things were being hidden beyond this, or did she think that she saw all, and they did not care if she did or did not?
Jack Kingston: “let me ask the gentlewoman this. She went to this prison and the gentlewoman's visit was fairly well publicized. They…”
Editor's note · Context
Questioning a colleague about the transparency of a prison visit during a congressional discussion.
Share
More from Jack Kingston
You can't fight a special prosecutor. You can't fight a federal judge when you get in their bull's eye and then you're more likely to talk.
I think it's crucial that he absolutely has to fight for it. But I think the American electorate understands that he is fighting Chuck Schumer, a man who voted for the wall in 2006, along with his Senate colleague Barack Obama.
I often heard during 2016 how important the Clinton Foundation was for the health of world. And now my question would be, if it was such a great foundation, why is it unable to function now that she's not secretary of state?
I want to point out on Israel and that, you know, that bothered me, but Israel's never had a better friend in the White House, and I think you get that from Israel.





