He had his opportunity to advise and consent. This letter is not it.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
he certainly advised. He said torture is bad, don't do it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @magicbravosolo
And then said, But I'll vote for you even though you are pro-torture. Ergo, he is ON THE RECORD supporting a torturer.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
we will have to disagree. If pompeo answers his questions more quickly because of courtesy, it's better than nothing (protest)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @magicbravosolo
A vote is not "protest." It is what Warner is constitutionally called on to do, but which he abdicated.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Constitutionaly, the Senate consented. I don't demand my Senator cast a feel good vote if it can help his relationship w/cia
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @magicbravosolo
He's supposed to be oversight, not dating the agency. You don't exercise oversight by handing away all your leverage
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
how would a no vote have given leverage? Thats the mechanism I don't understand
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @emptywheel
c'mon, no need for snark. Same side here. Hypothetical Leverage is gone after vote...How do we know it wasn't used?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Look, I'm actually writing stuff. There is 1) constitutional duty Warner shirked 2) no obvious payback 3) tactics.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
1 is dependent on 2, key word being obvious. 3 is far more necessary for interparty tactics
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.