8 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. Guess that means you think that Bill Clinton should show up then.

I think Clinton should accept to testify only if Trump also testifies.

On 1/13/2026 at 6:53 AM, Yagoda said:

Did Powell lie to Congresss? If he did, should he be prosecuted?

Based on the information I can glean from various reports, no, he did not lie to Congress. As the Time article below states, everything he says is confirmed by a Fed report and video that were released independently of Powell's testimony.

It reaffirmed Powell’s answers, noting that there is no new VIP dining room, no VIP elevator, no new water features, and that new roof terraces refer to green roofs which are meant to help with stormwater management and building efficiency and are found on other federal government buildings ...

What to Know About the Investigation Into Jerome Powell

https://time.com/7345448/jerome-powell-trump-federal-reserve-doj-investigation-renovations/

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

If after the investigation it is shown that he did knowingly lie under oath, do you think he should be prosecuted?

19 hours ago, FlorC said:

Powell lied about the renovations . Prosecute him.

On the other hand , he will be replaced soon , hopefully by

someone that doesn't stab Trump in the back like Powell.

As evidenced by the Time article mentioned above, it would seem apparent that he did not lie to Congress.

16 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

How would any of these people know that the criminal investigation is baseless?

Why would anyone back anyone without knowing that?

He's not accused of anything, it's an investigation, I thought the left loved investigations, no?

What happened to "no one is above the law."?

They would know because of the publicly available information about the project that would seem to indicate everything Powell said about it, is true.

55 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

They would know because of the publicly available information about the project that would seem to indicate everything Powell said about it, is true.

How would they know that everything Powell said was true from the publicly available information about the project? If all he was asked about was publicly available information, what was he doing there?

In any event, if he was not lying, he has nothing to worry about.

Im guessing after inventing it, ignoring and mocking the warnings the forum left are now in the "oh we are so beyond lawfare these days" stage. The mendacity is off the scale 🤣😅

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. Guess that means you think that Bill Clinton should show up then.

He should probably follow the precedent set by Jim Jordan, don't you think?

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

How would they know that everything Powell said was true from the publicly available information about the project? If all he was asked about was publicly available information, what was he doing there?

In any event, if he was not lying, he has nothing to worry about.

I think all the brouhaha is because of Powel not responding to DOJ inquiries.

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Im guessing after inventing it, ignoring and mocking the warnings the forum left are now in the "oh we are so beyond lawfare these days" stage. The mendacity is off the scale 🤣😅

Where is no one is above the law.

2 hours ago, candide said:

I think Clinton should accept to testify only if Trump also testifies.

LOL. Trump isnt under subpoenae

5 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

If after the investigation it is shown that he did knowingly lie under oath, do you think he should be prosecuted?

Absolutely

9 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. So you think lying to Congress under oath is OK because you think that President Trump lies.

Unfortunately for you, thats not a defense available to folks who lie to Congress.

Does it really matter when people who lie to Congress can get pardons when it fits the agenda of the President? Did Casper Weinberger do any time?

Sorry, but lying to Congress lost its caché a while ago and certainly hasn't had the same ramifications since the clown took over the circus. Did Michael Cohen do any time? Stone? Manafort? Kushner? They eventually got 'Get out of Jail' cards from the Liar-in-Chief.

It's fundamentally the same reason Matt Gaetz is still hanging around like a bad smell. The grifter attracts lowlifes like flies to s__t.

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

LOL. Trump isnt under subpoenae

LOL! That's why I wrote that! 😄

34 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Does it really matter when people who lie to Congress can get pardons when it fits the agenda of the President? Did Casper Weinberger do any time?

Sorry, but lying to Congress lost its caché a while ago and certainly hasn't had the same ramifications since the clown took over the circus. Did Michael Cohen do any time? Stone? Manafort? Kushner? They eventually got 'Get out of Jail' cards from the Liar-in-Chief.

It's fundamentally the same reason Matt Gaetz is still hanging around like a bad smell. The grifter attracts lowlifes like flies to s__t.

Got it. You support lying under oath. Thats what counts, not your reasoning therefor.

14 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. You support lying under oath. Thats what counts, not your reasoning therefor.

Get off your high horse can't you?

I don't support lying under oath, and neither do I support your silly notion that lying to Congress is some sort of ultimate crime and that Congress is the star chamber.

It appears that past and present presidents are happy to snub Congress by doling out pardons to those that have lied to it.

Now, what's that you said earlier about Trump "doing a great job within the limits of the Constitution"?

25 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

I don't support lying under oath, and neither do I support your silly notion that lying to Congress is some sort of ultimate crime and that Congress is the star chamber.

So then you agree that an investigation of Powell is appropriate?

35 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Get off your high horse can't you?

I don't support lying under oath, and neither do I support your silly notion that lying to Congress is some sort of ultimate crime and that Congress is the star chamber.

It appears that past and present presidents are happy to snub Congress by doling out pardons to those that have lied to it.

Now, what's that you said earlier about Trump "doing a great job within the limits of the Constitution"?

Do you think people should be investigated and (if guilty) punished for lying to Congress under oath or not?

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Do you think people should be investigated and (if guilty) punished for lying to Congress under oath or not?

42 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

It appears that past and present presidents are happy to snub Congress by doling out pardons to those that have lied to it.

Do you think that punishments handed down for lying under oath to Congress should be summarily dismissed by Presidents?

BTW, did you get your horse the same place as @Yagoda got his?

18 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

So then you agree that an investigation of Powell is appropriate?

Totally appropriate, but only after the incumbent has folded his circus tent and departed the White House.

1 minute ago, NanLaew said:

Totally appropriate, but only after the incumbent has folded his circus tent and departed the White House.

Got it. So lying under oath is OK if you dont like the President.

3 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. So lying under oath is OK if you dont like the President.

The US President is great. It's Donald John Trump that's the problem.

Time for you to change hands, no?

8 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Do you think that punishments handed down for lying under oath to Congress should be summarily dismissed by Presidents?

Generally? No.

8 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

BTW, did you get your horse the same place as @Yagoda got his?

Another display of your intelligence?

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

Generally? No.

Another display of your intelligence?

Yes, he's got you well and truly sussed, as have most of us ...

20 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Im guessing after inventing it, ignoring and mocking the warnings the forum left are now in the "oh we are so beyond lawfare these days" stage. The mendacity is off the scale 🤣😅

Oooohhh.... mendacity. Such a big word for a narrow mind.

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Generally? No.

Another display of your intelligence?

Got it. You've run out of anything new or meaningful to say as well.

9 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Time for you to change hands, no?

Making it personal means you have nothing.

10 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Generally? No.

Another display of your intelligence?

With this crowd, it always degenerates into insults when their hypocrisy is exposed.

1 minute ago, Yagoda said:

Making it personal means you have nothing.

Oh, yes he has, you've been sussed.........🤥

14 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Making it personal means you have nothing.

Generally yes.

But you had already sucked the air from the room with your repetitious nonsense, so if there's only an empty windbag left, go for it.

15 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Got it. You've run out of anything new or meaningful to say as well.

I asked you: "Do you think people should be investigated and (if guilty) punished for lying to Congress under oath or not?"

Rather than answering the question, you responded with: "Do you think that punishments handed down for lying under oath to Congress should be summarily dismissed by Presidents?"

To which I responded with: "Generally? No." Meaning I do not approve of it, barring any significant circumstances.

You also added: "BTW, did you get your horse the same place as @Yagoda got his? "

To which I responded in kind with: "Another display of your intelligence? "

So:

I ask you a question, you deflect.

You ask me a question, I answer clearly and honestly.

Which of us seems to be trying to have an honest discussion?