
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Peter King argues against the legal precedent of forcing a former president to testify before Congress based on unsubstantiated rumors or mere association with a criminal figure. He asserts that compelled testimony in the absence of evidence of criminal conduct risks turning the American political system into a "banana republic" driven by guilt by association rather than actual wrongdoing. King emphasizes that while Jeffrey Epstein’s actions were heinous, the high volume of hearsay and innuendo in investigative files should not be used to disrupt 200 years of historical tradition regarding the treatment of former leaders.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
By 77 WABC4.6
7575 ratings
Peter King argues against the legal precedent of forcing a former president to testify before Congress based on unsubstantiated rumors or mere association with a criminal figure. He asserts that compelled testimony in the absence of evidence of criminal conduct risks turning the American political system into a "banana republic" driven by guilt by association rather than actual wrongdoing. King emphasizes that while Jeffrey Epstein’s actions were heinous, the high volume of hearsay and innuendo in investigative files should not be used to disrupt 200 years of historical tradition regarding the treatment of former leaders.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

23,066 Listeners

11,951 Listeners

2,271 Listeners

10,128 Listeners

12,744 Listeners

731 Listeners

863 Listeners

6,505 Listeners

43,848 Listeners

475 Listeners

225 Listeners

151 Listeners

1,157 Listeners

1,227 Listeners