And Brit Hume is correct. The fact that the person being checked out is an opponent in a campaign has no bearing on whether he should be investigated, if it is in the national interest. It's either let it go and have the voters unwittingly cast their votes for an extortionist, or ask for cooperation with our DOJ AG Barr to see what the facts are.
Should D Senators be allowed to vote against their opponent in an election? Or do we assume and trust any of them would render an unbiased verdict? It's in the national interest, after all.
The Ds want the extortionist let off the hook simply because he is in a campaign and he is a D. How crafty old Joe thinks he is... this is sinking him even if there are no charges.
And Brit Hume is correct. The fact that the person being checked out is an opponent in a campaign has no bearing on whether he should be investigated, if it is in the national interest. It's either let it go and have the voters unwittingly cast their votes for an extortionist, or ask for cooperation with our DOJ AG Barr to see what the facts are.
Should D Senators be allowed to vote against their opponent in an election? Or do we assume and trust any of them would render an unbiased verdict? It's in the national interest, after all.
The Ds want the extortionist let off the hook simply because he is in a campaign and he is a D. How crafty old Joe thinks he is... this is sinking him even if there are no charges.