@texasag1969 said:

Anything testified to under oath to the U.S.Congress has it's own set of legal penalties for purgery. 

And? Regardless of the set of penalties that can be imposed,  would you rather not have witnesses obligated to tell to truth?

Everything said before a GOP Senate public hearing is of dubious value since everyone has the right to free speech. 

You're so full of shit.

Is It a Crime To Lie to the Government Even If You Are Not Under Oath?

Many people may be surprised to learn that they can be prosecuted for lying to a government official, even if they are not under oath.  Under Section 1001 of title 18 of the United States Code, it is a federal crime to knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the United States.

How about they actually have a real hearing that is inclusive of all Penn. state senators and not just another kangaroo court of one-sided bias.?

If they are so brave then take it into a lawsuit, and not just a hearing, where people will be subject to purgery before a judge which the power to enforce it.

So far none have actually done that.

One step at a time.

@calfoxwc said:

not true. The fact that there are plenty of serious witnesses who are testifying - those legal affidavits are

under penalty of perjury.

Remember all the joy you had, with the false testimonies at the fake impeachment in the House?

those were not legal affidavits, either. Not first person witness, just second hand, and invented for political purpose.

those were "valid" ? ??????? but legal affidavits are not?

egad. The flippity-flippity gets amazing at times.

Anything testified to under oath to the U.S.Congress has it's own set of legal penalties for purgery. 

Everything said before a GOP Senate public hearing is of dubious value since everyone has the right to free speech. 

How about they actually have a real hearing that is inclusive of all Penn. state senators and not just another kangaroo court of one-sided bias.?

If they are so brave then take it into a lawsuit, and not just a hearing, where people will be subject to purgery before a judge which the power to enforce it.

So far none have actually done that.

@texasag1969 said:

Until it's presented as evidence in a real court of law, it is meaningless.

Regardless, why hasn't the media pounced on this like they did for 3 yrs on baseless claims of Russian collusion?

@texasag1969 said:

Until it's presented as evidence in a real court of law, it is meaningless.

not true. The fact that there are plenty of serious witnesses who are testifying - those legal affidavits are

under penalty of perjury.

Remember all the joy you had, with the false testimonies at the fake impeachment in the House?

those were not legal affidavits, either. Not first person witness, just second hand, and invented for political purpose.

those were "valid" ? ??????? but legal affidavits are not?

egad. The flippity-flippity gets amazing at times.

@westside-steve said:

A real court of law? How quaint.

WSS

Like the 'real' evidence that was presented to the FISA court??

@texasag1969 said:

Until it's presented as evidence in a real court of law, it is meaningless.

A real court of law? How quaint.

WSS

@calfoxwc said:

so, any pretend outraged leftie on this forum can open that link and READ the evidence that is being testified to.

This election was STOLEN folks.

Until it's presented as evidence in a real court of law, it is meaningless.

This election was STOLEN folks.