/home/wpurdemo/resistancesuffolk/wp-content/mu-plugins<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Comey Statement for the Record Senate Select Committee on Intelligence	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://resistancesuffolk.wp.urdemo.website/2017/06/07/statement-for-the-record-senate-select-committee-on-intelligence/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://resistancesuffolk.wp.urdemo.website/2017/06/07/statement-for-the-record-senate-select-committee-on-intelligence/</link>
	<description>A collection of writings dealing with current US &#38; Long Island politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 13:56:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: D. Posnett MD		</title>
		<link>https://resistancesuffolk.wp.urdemo.website/2017/06/07/statement-for-the-record-senate-select-committee-on-intelligence/#comment-218</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[D. Posnett MD]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 13:56:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://resistancesuffolk.wp.urdemo.website/2017/06/07/statement-for-the-record-senate-select-committee-on-intelligence/#comment-218</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;Bruce:  how damning is this?  One friend states:  “It is devastating. He demanded loyalty of Comey if he wanted to stay in his job. He asked Comey to close the Flynn investigation down.  We have the basis for impeachment hearings.”&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bruce:  how damning is this?  One friend states:  “It is devastating. He demanded loyalty of Comey if he wanted to stay in his job. He asked Comey to close the Flynn investigation down.  We have the basis for impeachment hearings.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: bcolbath42		</title>
		<link>https://resistancesuffolk.wp.urdemo.website/2017/06/07/statement-for-the-record-senate-select-committee-on-intelligence/#comment-219</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bcolbath42]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 13:56:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://resistancesuffolk.wp.urdemo.website/2017/06/07/statement-for-the-record-senate-select-committee-on-intelligence/#comment-219</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;It’s hard to say.  The upshot of Comey’s testimony will devolve into a convulsion into who is telling the truth.  The legal experts in criminal law for the most part find Comey’s testimony to create a prima facie case of obstruction of justice — indeed, virtually identical conduct formed the basis of the obstruction of justice charge that formed part of the Nixon impeachment charges.  Whether that would be sufficient in light of the makeup of today’s Senate and House is doubtful.  What was more troubling to me was the refusal of the leaders of the IC community to answer publicly questions that had no trappings of confidentiality, nor were they hindered by assertions of executive privilege.  Having to legal basis to refuse to answer was, in short, sufficient to merit a contempt of Congress charge.&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It’s hard to say.  The upshot of Comey’s testimony will devolve into a convulsion into who is telling the truth.  The legal experts in criminal law for the most part find Comey’s testimony to create a prima facie case of obstruction of justice — indeed, virtually identical conduct formed the basis of the obstruction of justice charge that formed part of the Nixon impeachment charges.  Whether that would be sufficient in light of the makeup of today’s Senate and House is doubtful.  What was more troubling to me was the refusal of the leaders of the IC community to answer publicly questions that had no trappings of confidentiality, nor were they hindered by assertions of executive privilege.  Having to legal basis to refuse to answer was, in short, sufficient to merit a contempt of Congress charge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>