Another lie debunked- Democratic secret hearings

[IM2]

"The judge also found that despite public protestations from the Trump administration that House Democrats have not actually launched a formal impeachment inquiry, one is underway."

"Even in cases of presidential impeachment, a House resolution has never, in fact, been required to begin an impeachment inquiry," Howell wrote.

Federal judge orders Justice Department to turn over Mueller grand jury material

 

[Third Party]

"The judge also found that despite public protestations from the Trump administration that House Democrats have not actually launched a formal impeachment inquiry, one is underway."

"Even in cases of presidential impeachment, a House resolution has never, in fact, been required to begin an impeachment inquiry," Howell wrote.

Federal judge orders Justice Department to turn over Mueller grand jury material

So much for protecting witnesses. In that case, open up the hearings that Schiff has been so worried about people seeing.

 

[BlindBoo]

47 republicans serve on those committees. You'll see the evidence soon enough.

You realize that Durham's investigation may over shadow any crap Schiff has fabricated so far?

Speculate away.

Meanwhile I look forward to your intense demands that Trump be transparent and provide the subpoened documents and witnesses.

I would not hand over anything unless the hearing was open to the public. Trump does not trust nor do I trust any Democrat. Once that happens, I will call for the release of documents and workers being pulled from their jobs.

I say lets make a deal. Open hearings when Trumpybear agrees to testifies under oath.

Why wait? Open them now-unless these subpoenaed people are not trustworthy?

Trumpybear would be in the lead off position.

 

[Olde Europe]

I say lets make a deal. Open hearings when Trumpybear agrees to testifies under oath.

No, let's not. Currently, the House is taking depositions.

Let's have a fact-finding that is orderly, protecting witnesses and the integrity of the process, and without the bloviation and grandstanding public hearings inevitably entail. Oh, and, let's have as little by way of an open flank to the Goobers' Trumpish obstruction as possible.

Then, when the information is gathered and deemed sufficient, write up the Articles of Impeachment, publish the supporting evidence and, if necessary, have public hearings.

If required, subpoena Trump to testify under oath.

Let him refuse, and add another Article of Impeachment, if he so chooses.

 

[BlindBoo]

I say lets make a deal. Open hearings when Trumpybear agrees to testifies under oath.

No, let's not. Currently, the House is taking depositions.

Let's have a fact-finding that is orderly, protecting witnesses and the integrity of the process, and without the bloviation and grandstanding public hearings inevitably entail. Oh, and, let's have as little by way of an open flank to the Goobers' Trumpish obstruction as possible.

Then, when the information is gathered and deemed sufficient, write up the Articles of Impeachment, publish the supporting evidence and, if necessary, have public hearings.

If required, subpoena Trump to testify under oath.

Let him refuse, and add another Article of Impeachment, if he so chooses.

Nah lets let him hang himself. like this guy.

 

[Olde Europe]

Nah lets let him hang himself. like this guy.

No idea what the pic is depicting, since the silly flickering images from YouDupe do not run on this machine. Ever.

But yes, let's let him hang himself, is probably the guidance as to how to conduct this impeachment. Some way or another, his being impervious to advice should help, a lot.

 

[Lesh]

"The judge also found that despite public protestations from the Trump administration that House Democrats have not actually launched a formal impeachment inquiry, one is underway."

"Even in cases of presidential impeachment, a House resolution has never, in fact, been required to begin an impeachment inquiry," Howell wrote.

Federal judge orders Justice Department to turn over Mueller grand jury material

So much for protecting witnesses. In that case, open up the hearings that Schiff has been so worried about people seeing.

It is not unusual for Grand Jury testimony to be turned over to Congress. In fact that was done in Watergate and that testimony was never made public.

So Barr can go after Mueller all he wants. He'll come up with exactly what the Benghazi hearing (all 19 of them) came up with.

Nothing

But Congress now has everything from the Mueller Report

 

[WillowTree]

I wonder who wrote the “Mueller” report? Maybe we will find out!

 

[Lesh]

I wonder who wrote the “Mueller” report? Maybe we will find out!

Why would you wonder such a thing?

Mueller was the head of that investigation. He was public about the release of that report.

 

[WillowTree]

I wonder who wrote the “Mueller” report? Maybe we will find out!

Why would you wonder such a thing?

Mueller was the head of that investigation. He was public about the release of that report.

He couldn’t answer any questions the congress put to him. He don’t know Jack shirt!

 

[Lesh]

I wonder who wrote the “Mueller” report? Maybe we will find out!

Why would you wonder such a thing?

Mueller was the head of that investigation. He was public about the release of that report.

He couldn’t answer any questions the congress put to him. He don’t know Jack shirt!

Actually he refused to do so..stating that the Report spoke for itself.

I have issues with that myself but how in the hell would that lead anyone to think he didn't write (or at least over see and sign off on) the Report?

That's batcrap crazy logic there bud.

 

[Syriusly]

Both sides have equal access to every witness. Nor are they limited to the 5 minute time constraints in the open hearings where we see more partisan grandstanding from members of both parties than we hear actual facts. They just get better information in closed door settings. It's all going to become public.

I repeat How do we know-the whole process has been secretive? And how about that "better" information? Don't we deserve to hear that?

We know that it has not been secretive where one side, the majority, excludes the minority from attending.

They will not release the information until the evidence gathering phase is complete, as per the established rules.

Republicans established the rules. Why do republicans want to break the rules they set?

It HAS been secretive as regards US! If we watch, NOBODY gets to spin, not Dems, not Reps, not CNN.
TRANSPARENCY NOW!

Funny how the only TRANSPARENCY you seem to care about is
a) When Democrats are in charge and
b) When it doesn't have anything to do with President Trump being transparent and providing witnesses and documents.

Funny that.

If you think that is funny:
When Durham has his hearings next month, I expect and will push for here that they be open and transparent-fair to both, I say, and fair to US!

Oh I will enjoy hearing you tell us how you expect Grand Jury hearings to be 'open and transparent'.

LOL

When are you going to support Trump being open and transparent by providing the secret documents he is hiding?

 

[Syriusly]

I wonder who wrote the “Mueller” report? Maybe we will find out!

Why would you wonder such a thing?

Mueller was the head of that investigation. He was public about the release of that report.

He couldn’t answer any questions the congress put to him. He don’t know Jack shirt!

He refused to answer some questions. Was unable to answer a few. And answered the rest.

But you keep spinning those conspiracy theories!

 

[Coyote]

Is the OP seriously trying to compare a phone call made and released by TRUMP to the death of 4 Americans who were left defenseless during a terrorist attack by the Obama administration who went on TV and blamed everything on a youtube video no one had heard of...

They were not left defenseless. Stop lying.

 

[Syriusly]

Besides the opening statements being released by some of the witnesses themselves, what parts of their testimony has been leaked to the press by either side?

How do we know-the whole process has been secretive?

47 republicans serve on those committees. You'll see the evidence soon enough.

You realize that Durham's investigation may over shadow any crap Schiff has fabricated so far?

Speculate away.

Meanwhile I look forward to your intense demands that Trump be transparent and provide the subpoened documents and witnesses.

I would not hand over anything unless the hearing was open to the public. Trump does not trust nor do I trust any Democrat. Once that happens, I will call for the release of documents and workers being pulled from their jobs.

So you demand transparency of the House- but not the President.

Once the full investigation starts, and Trump is still stonewalling on documents- lets revisit.

My guess is you will still support the President's lack of transparency.

 

[Syriusly]

Both sides have equal access to every witness. Nor are they limited to the 5 minute time constraints in the open hearings where we see more partisan grandstanding from members of both parties than we hear actual facts. They just get better information in closed door settings. It's all going to become public.

I repeat How do we know-the whole process has been secretive? And how about that "better" information? Don't we deserve to hear that?

We know that it has not been secretive where one side, the majority, excludes the minority from attending.

They will not release the information until the evidence gathering phase is complete, as per the established rules.

Republicans established the rules. Why do republicans want to break the rules they set?

It HAS been secretive as regards US! If we watch, NOBODY gets to spin, not Dems, not Reps, not CNN.
TRANSPARENCY NOW!

So why do you want them to change the rules in the middle of the Congressional session? Because you suddenly realize how unfair they were to President Obama?

Don't know nuthin bout no Obama. There should be NO rules that exclude the public by Democrat or Republican.
TRANSPARENCY NOW!

But not when the GOP controlled the House.

We understand.

 

[Third Party]

I repeat How do we know-the whole process has been secretive? And how about that "better" information? Don't we deserve to hear that?

We know that it has not been secretive where one side, the majority, excludes the minority from attending.

They will not release the information until the evidence gathering phase is complete, as per the established rules.

Republicans established the rules. Why do republicans want to break the rules they set?

It HAS been secretive as regards US! If we watch, NOBODY gets to spin, not Dems, not Reps, not CNN.
TRANSPARENCY NOW!

Funny how the only TRANSPARENCY you seem to care about is
a) When Democrats are in charge and
b) When it doesn't have anything to do with President Trump being transparent and providing witnesses and documents.

Funny that.

If you think that is funny:
When Durham has his hearings next month, I expect and will push for here that they be open and transparent-fair to both, I say, and fair to US!

Oh I will enjoy hearing you tell us how you expect Grand Jury hearings to be 'open and transparent'.

LOL

When are you going to support Trump being open and transparent by providing the secret documents he is hiding?

Trump said he would send paper and people once the vote was taken but not until-your move Nancy.

 

[Third Party]

How do we know-the whole process has been secretive?

47 republicans serve on those committees. You'll see the evidence soon enough.

You realize that Durham's investigation may over shadow any crap Schiff has fabricated so far?

Speculate away.

Meanwhile I look forward to your intense demands that Trump be transparent and provide the subpoened documents and witnesses.

I would not hand over anything unless the hearing was open to the public. Trump does not trust nor do I trust any Democrat. Once that happens, I will call for the release of documents and workers being pulled from their jobs.

So you demand transparency of the House- but not the President.

Once the full investigation starts, and Trump is still stonewalling on documents- lets revisit.

My guess is you will still support the President's lack of transparency.

Ok, you know where to find me.

 

[Third Party]

I repeat How do we know-the whole process has been secretive? And how about that "better" information? Don't we deserve to hear that?

We know that it has not been secretive where one side, the majority, excludes the minority from attending.

They will not release the information until the evidence gathering phase is complete, as per the established rules.

Republicans established the rules. Why do republicans want to break the rules they set?

It HAS been secretive as regards US! If we watch, NOBODY gets to spin, not Dems, not Reps, not CNN.
TRANSPARENCY NOW!

So why do you want them to change the rules in the middle of the Congressional session? Because you suddenly realize how unfair they were to President Obama?

Don't know nuthin bout no Obama. There should be NO rules that exclude the public by Democrat or Republican.
TRANSPARENCY NOW!

But not when the GOP controlled the House.

We understand.

Not being GOP or even liking them-they have far worse past sins than that, but we are here now. I want transparency for these hearings AND the ones Durham will have-that much is owed us. As far as who is banging whom-just vote in 2020 to settle who is right.

 

[MeBelle]

Clinton didn't have a hearing , and Ken Starr was not on national TV. It was up to the Judiciary Committee whether to impeach him. It took 2 days of them pretending to read the report.

Wrong - so wrong.

Do your homework instead of making false statements.