Log in

View Full Version : Should people be allowed to lie to the FBI or congress?



jp1
6-3-22, 11:51pm
Louis Gohmert posed an interesting question today. He thinks people should be allowed to lie to the FBI or Congress. Agree? Disagree?

https://mobile.twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1532776813692342272

iris lilies
6-4-22, 7:30am
Louis Gohmert posed an interesting question today. He thinks people should be allowed to lie to the FBI or Congress. Agree? Disagree?

https://mobile.twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1532776813692342272

This is a silly poll, obviously.


I don’t even know who Louis Gohmert is

Alan
6-4-22, 8:11am
I guess it depends on the context. I think you have to consider the recent Michael Sussman (D) acquittal for lying to the FBI followed by the Peter Navarro (R) indictment for keeping quiet when asked to talk to Congress. Is it ok for one but not for the other?

I think a better question might be 'Can the FBI or Congress lie to the American people in pursuit of a political result'.

jp1
6-4-22, 8:14am
I wish it were a silly poll. But when we have a 17 year sitting congressperson saying the quiet bits out loud (that the law shouldn’t apply if a Republican breaks it) it doesn’t feel particularly silly. But by all means, republicans should feel free to continue believing the obvious lie that their party is the ‘law and order’ party despite the fact that any conscious person can see from many many events of the past few years that that most obviously is not the case.

LDAHL
6-4-22, 9:12am
There goes jp1 nut-picking again. Gohmert was the twit who tried to sue Pence over not exercising his imaginary 12th Amendment powers after the election.

I think ever since a certain President left a bad taste in America’s mouth, there is very little to be gained in casting stones about untruthfulness as the province of a specific party.

Yppej
6-4-22, 11:56am
I like to think if the FBI wanted my help spying on Martin Luther King I would have lied and sent them in the wrong direction.

jp1
6-4-22, 12:15pm
There goes jp1 nut-picking again. Gohmert was the twit who tried to sue Pence over not exercising his imaginary 12th Amendment powers after the election.

I think ever since a certain President left a bad taste in America’s mouth, there is very little to be gained in casting stones about untruthfulness as the province of a specific party.

One person's nitpicking is another person's lying about something deadly serious as a blowjob. And considering Clinton's diet at the time, there was probably at least one democrat who had a bad taste in her mouth after that blowjob.

But you're probably right. There's no use trying to make sure the republicans don't succeed the next time they try to overthrow the government since it'll probably be a more competent group of people and they will succeed and our country will be over. After all, as awful as republicans are they aren't all stupid ****s like trump and guiliani.

JaneV2.0
6-4-22, 12:25pm
I really didn't know how to process Gohmert's daft assertion, really.

Alan
6-4-22, 12:45pm
I really didn't know how to process Gohmert's daft assertion, really.I think it's impossible to accurately process without context, something that our news sources rarely do lest they diminish the impact of their slant. Context may change it from really, really daft to just daft. ;)

jp1
6-4-22, 2:21pm
I think it's impossible to accurately process without context, something that our news sources rarely do lest they diminish the impact of their slant. Context may change it from really, really daft to just daft. ;)

Indeed. It was pretty clear that he thinks subpeonas are optional. At least for republicans. Imagine the howls that would have happened if either Clinton had refused to testify.

Alan
6-4-22, 2:37pm
Indeed. It was pretty clear that he thinks subpeonas are optional. At least for republicans. Imagine the howls that would have happened if either Clinton had refused to testify.
If I recall correctly Hillary Clinton testified before Congress many times and lied multiple times during each session without consequence. I also recall that Obama era Attorney General Eric Holder was cited for Contempt Of Congress for refusing to provide subpoenaed documents. There were 'howls' at the time regarding both but that was a wasted bit of political showmanship, I suspect the current howling is as well.

frugal-one
6-4-22, 3:40pm
My question is... Why should ANYONE be allowed to lie to the FBI or congress. The answer is, of course, they should not be able to and have consequences if they do.... NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE! The same goes for subpoenas... who is above the law?

happystuff
6-4-22, 3:58pm
Call me old, but I was raised that lying is wrong and telling the truth is, ultimately, the right thing to do. The act, in and of itself, is a choice - you lie or you don't lie. Period.

Edited to add: To answer the question - people should not lie! "Allowed to lie" should not be an opinion at all, as people simply should not lie - in my opinion!

JaneV2.0
6-4-22, 5:57pm
Louis Gohmert is not know for his lofty, nuanced pronouncements, so I'll take his statement at face value.

jp1
6-4-22, 10:57pm
There were 'howls' at the time regarding both but that was a wasted bit of political showmanship, I suspect the current howling is as well.

You're probably right. Actually showing up when subpeonaed is so overrated. Both Clintons should have followed Nancy Reagan's advice and just said no like all the jackasses in the republican party these days.

And you're probably right about the current howling. After all, screaching about someone lying about a damn blowjob is identical to howling about the leaders of a political party trying to overturn an election and then refusing to show up when subpeona'd to talk about it.

But yeah, I just didn't like the last president...