Contributors

  • Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« The Morning Wrap | Main | Foley Lobbyist Decamps to Nonprofit »

May 30, 2012

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451d94869e2016305fbee4f970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dispute Over Issa Statements Flares Up At Clemens Trial :

Comments

Avon

I don't like Clemens much, but I think he should be allowed to inform the jury that Issa doubted the "legitimacy" of the Committee inquiry into the topic on which Clemens is accused of lying. (If Issa merely doubted its "wisdom," my opinion is the opposite. The article says both.) The legitimacy of the Committee's inquiry is a fundamental issue that has nothing to do with total freedom of debate.

I see no reason why Issa should have to actually testify. Not only is the Speech and Debate Clause important, but there's no disputing what Issa said. Any further points he could contribute now that underlie or exceed his quoted statement, such as his present "expert opinion" or whatever else, are irrelevant unless he himself wants to retract or qualify what he actually said.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad

Advertisements