Skip to comments.British Lawmaker Lashes Out at Senators
Posted on 05/17/2005 1:27:30 PM PDT by Brilliant
click here to read article
Blustering and bullying will not work for Gorgeous George here. Senators have immunity from libel when on the floor/in committee. Also, they can charge him with perjury and/or contempt.
Why was all of the "lashing" coming from one side? Why didn't the senators get tough with him and make some news?
It's about time that somebody stood up to that sanctimonious thug, Norm Coleman, and said, "HAVE YOU NO DECENCY, SIR?"
Yup, if they've got the goods on him. Course, if the "info" came from the same guys who told us there were WMDs in Iraq, I would not make assumptions.
Still I am delighted that Galloway came here to defend himself. Now maybe we'll get some of those documents that the participants in this oil for food fraud have been holding back. He's submitted himself to the jurisdiction of our courts.
I admit I found this whole episode strange. What is the point (other than fair play) of allowing him to come over here, make a telegenically crackpot opening statement and then face a few relatively inconsequential questions from senators before being dismissed?
If I'm reading it right, Coleman is threatening him with perjury, if he lied. I'd say that's getting tough.
I watched it and it did actually work. The Committee never laid a finger on him.
Maybe they were giving him an opportunity to commit perjury.
I thought about that, but as I was listening to the FR discussion I don't recall any events like that. But I could have easily missed one.
I'd say that's talking tentatively in political double speak, like the sanctimonious little twit Norm Coleman really is.
The real problem is that they may or may not have the proof. I'd think that if these allegations are true, then there must be some evidence of it other than some Iraqi official's testimony.
What I find funny about this is its one politico calling another politico a liar, is that like a kettle calling a pot black.
Biased reporting. The committee did not just "say" it used different documents. It entered them into the record.
"face a few relatively inconsequential questions from senators before being dismissed?"
Exactly. It seems like they were just setting up a soap box for him.
They don't have any proof. That is why Galloway is there, and why no-one produced any. If they had proof they would show it.
In other news, Paul Wellstone is still dead and Fritz "Where's the Beef" Mondale still lost.
Just a denial can be perjury, if it's false. He denied it. So if it turns out that it's true, then he's in big trouble.
Of course, I don't know how far the Senate wants to take this. And since a lot of these documents are overseas, they may not be able to get their hands on them.
I would say that he lacks any brains at all. Who knows what kind of incriminating documents Saddam kept under the option of using them to blackmail Galloway, if he failed to toe the line just as Hussein pleased? Those documents would be among the tons and tons of papers preserved by Saddam for just such a purpose.
Coalitition researchers have been combing through this mountain of damning evidence for 2+ years now. Imagine what they have found, and will find?
What do you bet other far wiser European bureaucrats on-the-take secretly offer their testimony and other documents in exchange for immunity? Galloway is spitting into a hurricane. This should be fun to watch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.