Especially on FR, Gowdy is a victim of his cheerleaders. He is a crafty prosecutor, we were told, building a case step by step with aces up his sleeve. The romance of a dragon-layer was easy to fall into. In fact, he had limited committee powers and the Dems on the committee made sure no one would be surprised.
Gowdy wants to play ball with Boehner instead of going public with alarm and pointing out the case needs an actual prosecutor.
Too late now. Hillary’s running so any real investigation will look like a mere political stunt.
I think you meant “dragon-slayer”, but you’re right about the romance. However, has Gowdy not said all along that because he is a prosecutor it would be nice to have evidence— evidence that has *not* been forthcoming, which he has also said on a number of occasions has been obfuscated, denied and is now missing entirely?
Gowdy seems pleased with the evidence he does have, as far as it goes, but it was he who first put the finger on the “private personal server”, which caused the confirmation of that fact to come tumbling out into the media. A fact that also insured that he had to kiss goodbye to much hope for a direct link to the role of and any directives by Hillary Clinton, once he learned she had then destroyed the personal server contents.
My suggestion is simply that if he is full of it, on the subject of his retrieval and enforcement powers over evidence, there should be a precedent that proves it.
So we have to ask Gowdy critics to seek out the precedent that proves that he is wrong on the powers of a Congressional Special Committee. If he is, then we can drop the crush, and say instead that he is shady, insincere and incompetent, hapless and too bi-partisan to function.