He wouldn’t read the question “as submitted”. This means the problem Roberts had was with the names themselves.
This stinks to high heaven. If nobody knows the name of the “whistleblower” then why censor a question on that principle? We already know the answer to what Paul is asking so this is to force the judge to make the decision and expose him as partisan.
He wouldn’t read the question “as submitted”. This means the problem Roberts had was with the names themselves.
This stinks to high heaven. If nobody knows the name of the “whistleblower” then why censor a question on that principle? We already know the answer to what Paul is asking so this is to force the judge to make the decision and expose him as partisan.
So much for the people having a Congress where they are free to speak through their senators an Representatives.
But, isn’t that the root of most of our problems —— a judiciary running the show?