Kansas Crimson

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:52 pm**

Leawood wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:40 pm Why do you think Trump is unhinged?

Is this a trick question?

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:53 pm**

Ha. Ha.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:01 pm**

Leawood wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:40 pm 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.

In seriousness, though, THIS is different from grand jury proceedings, police investigations, and even Starr and Cox. This IS a nakedly partisan effort. Period. That doesn't mean that's it's wrong or that Trump didn't do anything to deserve investigation. Quite the opposite. But there is no denying that the partisan divisions in the country and the distrust between the parties is higher now than at any point since, perhaps, 1860, and this is an effort deemed important and necessary by one party alone.

In this sense and because of these reasons, procedure matters. And to this point, the Democrats have been procedurally secretive and dishonest and have been dismissive of precedent. All of that may be secondary to the acts that POTUS may or may not have committed, but it is nonetheless important, particularly if we are ever to achieve any sort of consensus about the validity of removing the President.

Honestly, if I didn't know that he's not actually smart enough to pull it off, I'd say that Schiff is orchestrating this to be as divisive as possible so as to guarantee the greatest emotive reaction -- both positive and negative -- because it suits his political ends.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:26 pm**

Schiff happens to be the chairman. There are Republicans on the Committee listening to the testimony. They aren’t precluded from questioning witnesses.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:28 pm**

Sorry DC todays talking point about process fails. We'll see what tomorrows talking points will be.

And BTW you have no right to know what's going on. It will be released when finished.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:46 pm**

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:28 pm
And BTW you have no right to know what's going on.

How perfectly "Democratic" of you.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:55 pm**

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 6:02 pm
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?

Pretty much everything that is being discussed is classified at the secret level because it deals with a foreign government. That doesn't take into account the stuff this administration over classified to cover their ass and try to hide stuff.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:00 pm**

Republicans are on the committees that gather the testimony. Were you not aware of that? This is the investigation phase anyway. Did you expect Mueller to question his witnesses in public and in front of cameras during his investigation? Plus, if the questioning is done in private it's more difficult for witnesses to know what others have testified to and change their answers. That means it's easier to catch the liars.

"Meadows, one of Trump’s staunchest allies, said each side has been allowed an unlimited amount of questions they can ask of witnesses. “Oh yeah. Of the witnesses? We have, yeah. You just keep going until you wear out,” Meadows, who has attended all but one session, said during a break Tuesday evening.

Those participating in the closed-door depositions generally say that these interviews are very professional and that both sides have operated under rules that were approved in January."

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:01 pm**

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:46 pm
Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:28 pm
And BTW you have no right to know what's going on.
How perfectly "Democratic" of you.

Did Muellar conduct his investigation in public or did he keep you informed back channel?

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:06 pm**

It’s not fair unless Trump knows who said what so future witnesses can be intimidated. Or told what to say.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:07 pm**

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:01 pm
DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:46 pm
Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:28 pm
And BTW you have no right to know what's going on.
How perfectly "Democratic" of you.
Did Muellar conduct his investigation in public or did he keep you informed back channel?

Wow! You're right! It IS the same thing! The EXACT same thing.

Good job.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:10 pm**

I expect Trump will have a stroke soon. This is proving too much for him.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:10 pm**

One thing they have in common, the process is none of your business.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:18 pm**

Geezer wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:10 pm One thing they have in common, the process is none of your business.

Bullshit.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:25 pm**

Well good, write your congressman.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:26 pm**

Is it Trump’s business to have an advanced witness list with Rudy at the intelligence committee hearings?

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:49 pm**

Leawood wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:26 pm Is it Trump’s business to have an advanced witness list with Rudy at the intelligence committee hearings?

Honestly, I couldn't care less about Trump and what he deserves. I care about me. And you. And even Geezer.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 9:54 pm**

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:01 pm
Leawood wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:40 pm 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.
In seriousness, though, THIS is different from grand jury proceedings, police investigations, and even Starr and Cox. This IS a nakedly partisan effort. Period. That doesn't mean that's it's wrong or that Trump didn't do anything to deserve investigation. Quite the opposite. But there is no denying that the partisan divisions in the country and the distrust between the parties is higher now than at any point since, perhaps, 1860, and this is an effort deemed important and necessary by one party alone.

In this sense and because of these reasons, procedure matters. And to this point, the Democrats have been procedurally secretive and dishonest and have been dismissive of precedent. All of that may be secondary to the acts that POTUS may or may not have committed, but it is nonetheless important, particularly if we are ever to achieve any sort of consensus about the validity of removing the President.

Honestly, if I didn't know that he's not actually smart enough to pull it off, I'd say that Schiff is orchestrating this to be as divisive as possible so as to guarantee the greatest emotive reaction -- both positive and negative -- because it suits his political ends.

Wow. We've disagreed about a lot over the years, but even then, this is hard to believe. Seriously? In light of how republicans treated President Obama for 8 years, and in light of what Majority Leader McConnell did when Merrick Garland was nominated for the SCOTUS, the six, seven, eight different Benghazi investigations in the republican-controlled house resulting in how many convictions, and the ongoing absolute disregard and obstruction by the president/WH, the DOJ, and the Executive branch in general regarding congressional requests for documents, witnesses, and subpoenas, you want to complain about partisanship, divisiveness, "procedures", and "process"? "Process", that thing "conservative" republicans have claimed to value so highly for decade upon decade? "Process"?

Hey, good for you. It's a strategy. I guess you confirm the adage that: If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, argue the process.. But even then, this is hard to believe.

My hat is off to you.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 10:04 pm**

The term Hack comes to mind.

Posted: **Wed Oct 23, 2019 10:09 pm**

well, to ponder the assertion that it IS a nakedly partisan effort -- is that meant to suggest it is partisan cuz it's a legit witch hunt by democrats? or cuz republicans are so reluctant to acknowledge there may be a legit constitutional crisis?

Kansas Crimson

republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame

Re: republicans have no shame