Kansas Crimson

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 1:13 pm

Feral wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:56 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:21 pm

Well argued.

Which tends to be how you approach things these days.

Gosh, that's so burn!

Were the Nixon and Clinton impeachment investigations "public"? No.

Lulz.

Starr delivered his report and the supporting documents to the Congress on 9/9. EVERY member had access to the room in which they were stored, and TWO days later, the House voted 363-63 to release the report TO THE PUBLIC.

The impeachment inquiry -- which was voted on by the ENTIRE House, as per precedent -- did not even begin until October 8.

Sounds familiar:

"At a time that it will not jeopardize investigative equities, we will make the interview transcripts public, subject to any necessary redactions for classified or sensitive information," Schiff wrote.

"We also anticipate that at an appropriate point in the investigation, we will be taking witness testimony in public, so that the full Congress and the American people can hear their testimony firsthand," he added.

But do keep on keepin' on with your attempts to distract by talking about the process, rather than the facts.

To the surprise of no one, because

"Rule of Law Party!"



...Trump had advance knowledge and supported a protest by Republicans who told him they planned to barge into a secure hearing room on Capitol Hill where Democrats are holding impeachment testimonies, according to four people familiar with the matter.

Trump on Tuesday met with about 30 House Republicans at the White House to talk about the situation in Syria and the impeachment inquiry. During a nearly two-hour meeting, which focused mostly on the impeachment inquiry, lawmakers shared their plans to storm into the secure room, the people said. Trump supported the action, saying he wanted the transcripts released because they will exonerate him, the people said.

About two dozen GOP House members occupied the secure hearing room early Wednesday, delaying a scheduled deposition...

Still waiting on a ruling from Leawood on this one.

http://www.citypages.com/news/warrant-i ... /563649391

Was Starr's investigation done in a public setting?

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:02 pm Just curious. Why is it outrageous to want impeachment proceedings to be public?

It's not. All Trump needs to do is unclassify everything and they can hold these sessions in an unsecured space. Until then it's against the law to make this information public. Republicans should look from within for answers than always being the victims.

Can I get a “lulz”?

RussianHawk wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 5:23 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:02 pm Just curious. Why is it outrageous to want impeachment proceedings to be public?

It's not. All Trump needs to do is unclassify everything and they can hold these sessions in an unsecured space.

From your lips to God's ears.

That's what we need, Devin Nunes, and Gym Jordan with the cameras on.

Feral wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 5:43 pm Can I get a “lulz”?

Now that you mention it, I DO remember you going on and on about how Issa was a threat to democracy. Because, consistency.

RussianHawk wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 5:23 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:02 pm Just curious. Why is it outrageous to want impeachment proceedings to be public?

It's not. All Trump needs to do is unclassify everything and they can hold these sessions in an unsecured space. Until then it's against the law to make this information public. Republicans should look from within for answers than always being the victims.

What, exactly, is classified? And if the material discussed is classified, then why don't the committees say as much? In fact, as I'm sure you know, Schiff has given a much different reason, i.e. to keep Republicans in the dark. "“We want to make sure that we meet the needs of the investigation and not give the president or his legal minions the opportunity to tailor their testimony and in some cases fabricate testimony to suit their interests.”

That's weird, right?

So DC, what would be the benefit of turning the hearings into a televised circus?

chiknbut wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 3:27 pm Still waiting on a ruling from Leawood on this one.

http://www.citypages.com/news/warrant-i ... /563649391

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 5:59 pm

Feral wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 5:43 pm Can I get a “lulz”?

Now that you mention it, I DO remember you going on and on about how Issa was a threat to democracy. Because, consistency.

I don't think anyone could have predicted that the "flailing" you referred to was projection.

DC, there is nothing “weird” about about closing police stations and even courtrooms from folks who have a direct interest (a witness), an indirect interest (someone affiliated with a witness, for example a lawyer), or an interest in the outcome. It is called “The Rule.” You don’t want a proceeding polluted by having some third party rushing back to an interested person to tell that interested person what was said in a proceeding because that leads to alterations to a witness’ testimony or to the intimidation of a future witness (“I demand to know who the whistleblower is.”)

The “process” being demanded by Trump and his loyalists wants to do away with this century’s old procedure and process. It dates to the Magna Carta. It preserves liberty and the purity of fact gathering. The unfortunate part about this is that the ones clamoring for Trump’s “process” are lawyers who know better.

You don’t get to “confront” witnesses during fact gathering.

Any person who took a civics class should know this, particularly the snowflakes who stormed the secure room.

As long as we're all in agreement. Secrecy is necessary because: it prevents a circus.

Or...maybe classified information.

Or because that's how police do it.

Or, akshully, BeNGhAzi!

I just want to make sure I'm following.

I think there should be more transparency because WE have a right and a need to know what is taking place -- for better or worse.

Grand jury proceedings are not public. Police investigations are not public. Discovery in civil matters generally is not public. Trials and hearings are public, but, even then, are subject to the Rule. Why do non-members of the committee have a right to witness testimony and then report back to Trump? Starr’s investigation was not open to the public or Clinton. Archibald Cox’s investigation was not open to the public or Nixon. Why do you think Nixon was so agitated during the investigation? Why do you think Trump is unhinged?

This isn’t partisan witch-hunt or lynching. It is fact gathering. And he doesn’t like it because he is not in control. Thus, you see his minions of the ilk of the Iowa representative, King, put on this circus today. It wasn’t the committee.

Grand jury proceedings are not public. Police investigations are not public. Discovery in civil matters generally is not public. Trials and hearings are public, but, even then, are subject to the Rule. Why do non-members of the committee have a right to witness testimony and then report back to Trump? Starr’s investigation was not open to the public or Clinton. Archibald Cox’s investigation was not open to the public or Nixon. Why do you think Nixon was so agitated during the investigation? Why do you think Trump is unhinged?

This isn’t partisan witch-hunt or lynching. It is fact gathering. And he doesn’t like it because he is not in control. Thus, you see his minions of the ilk of the Iowa representative, King, put on this circus today. It wasn’t the committee.

Sorry. Double post.