Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tiberius

Impeachment Hearings Open In House Of Representatives

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:
 
 

Uh Oh! Schiff’s Staff Forgot to Redact Ciaramella’s Name From Bill Taylor’s Transcript

 

https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/11/07/uh-oh-schiffs-staff-forgot-redact-ciaramellas-name-bill-taylors-transcript/

 

This is a REALLY interesting development. As others pointed out last night when this was breaking, either it's proof CIAramella is NOT the whistleblower -- which is big news by itself... or it's proof that what we're watching unfold is even more of a shitshow than we imagined, with Schiff proving to be incompetent on top of being a proven liar.

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

This is a REALLY interesting development. As others pointed out last night when this was breaking, either it's proof CIAramella is NOT the whistleblower -- which is big news by itself... or it's proof that what we're watching unfold is even more of a shitshow than we imagined, with Schiff proving to be incompetent on top of being a proven liar.

or... it is a play by the Donner Party to protect him (though, as you say, i doubt Schiffty possesses that much guile).

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Foxx said:

or... it is a play by the Donner Party to protect him (though, as you say, i doubt Schiffty possesses that much guile).

 

True. 

 

I really don't know what to make of it, but I lean towards Schiff ***** up. Mainly because several reliable sources I trust told me his name before it was public and have yet to say they messed up. 

 

I honestly hope it's not him -- because if it is, then this whole thing is dirty AF. I'm quite sure it is dirty AF, but I hope to be wrong almost every day on that count. 

 

 

  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Is Pelosi finally sick of the terrible
damage Schiff is doing to her party?

by Patricia McCarthy

 

Original Article

 

This week, Rep. Jim Jordan was officially moved to the House Intelligence Committee, from Oversight, in order to be part of the coming public interrogations of witnesses summoned by committee Chairman Adam Schiff.Jordan is a pit bull, exactly what the committee needs among its Republicans.

 

It was in Pelosi's purview to refuse Jordan's appointment, and she did not.. . . . Hmmm.

 

Is it possible that even she is sick and tired of Schiff's mendacity, his secrecy, his shutout of Republican questions, his witness tampering? He even advised "witnesses" not to answer questions from Republicans. Most of these people being called to testify are not witnesses to anything relevant;

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

Is it possible that even she is sick and tired of Schiff's mendacity, his secrecy, his shutout of Republican questions, his witness tampering?

.

 

No.  More likely she's jealous that his Pelosi imitation is better than hers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Commissar Schiff says 'nyet' to GOP witnesses

American Thinker, by Monica Showalter

 

Original Article

 

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff is taking his "Soviet-style" impeachment to another level. After first setting the House rules to allow himself alone to say which witnesses can appear before his committee hearings, now going public, he's now vetoing one by one pretty much every witness being called by the GOP to present some kind of defense of President Trump. Here's his list of eight who are being blocked by Schiff, via CNN's report on Mark Levin: In a letter to Schiff earlier Saturday, Republicans had listed the anonymous whistleblower, Hunter Biden, former US special envoy for Ukraine Kurt Volker, high-ranking State Department official David Hale and Tim Morrison

 

 

 

.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Historic day! 

 

 

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Historic day! 

 

 

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

That certainly would be historic. I agree. ALL Civil officers should be removed! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole, so called: “public portion of the investigative phase” feels so strange.  It is so one-sided.  It is likely to hit a dead end even if it progresses to an impeachment vote and on to the Senate.  It has all the earmarks of a political show to smear the President ahead of the full blown election season — and actually deep into the 2020 race.  I think that’s part of the ploy here — roll out this first part slowly and partisan so that the process takes even longer to play out.  

 

The people who already hate the President will dig deeper into their position.  I suppose the Democrats in Congress are also hoping to sway independents against Trump, that’s why the press keeps reporting poll numbers about independents. But if that’s their goal, it would seem that they take inspdependents for fools. Nobody should be comfortable with the way this obviously tilted process is playing out.  Dems might win over independents if (I) the process was fair and (ii)if it allowed the President or his proxies to mount any sort of defense and (iii) in conclusion the President did something wrong.  Im open to that.  Unfortunately, since (so far) this is a railroad job, nobody is going to be swayed, not yet.  

 

It also occurs to me that the House Democrats are being hypocritical.  They can’t make any coherent case that an actual crime has occurred.  They can repeat the words “extortion” and “bribery” all they want, but that’s not what happened here.  And if it is what happened here, then I’m sure that there are innumerable cases when prior Presidents used leverage in dealing with foreign heads of state.  A fair response to that is that impeachment doesn’t require a criminal act.  Well if that’s true (and I don’t deny it) then impeachment is much more of a political act. And since the Senate is not going to convict unless there’s more than what’s being presented by the House, this turns out to be a political act to smear the President during his re-election cycle.  That’s exactly the charge against Trump (smearing the former VP). 

 

If this his post sounds obvious to you, then it is probably obvious to a lot of the country that’s following along. And if that’s the case, I really don’t know why the Democrats in the House are traveling this road.  It smacks of desperation. And if they stop now, they look like fools — so they have to play this game right out to the end. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, snafu said:

This whole, so called: “public portion of the investigative phase” feels so strange.  It is so one-sided.  It is likely to hit a dead end even if it progresses to an impeachment vote and on to the Senate.  It has all the earmarks of a political show to smear the President ahead of the full blown election season — and actually deep into the 2020 race.  I think that’s part of the ploy here — roll out this first part slowly and partisan so that the process takes even longer to play out.  

 

The people who already hate the President will dig deeper into their position.  I suppose the Democrats in Congress are also hoping to sway independents against Trump, that’s why the press keeps reporting poll numbers about independents. But if that’s their goal, it would seem that they take inspdependents for fools. Nobody should be comfortable with the way this obviously tilted process is playing out.  Dems might win over independents if (I) the process was fair and (ii)if it allowed the President or his proxies to mount any sort of defense and (iii) in conclusion the President did something wrong.  Im open to that.  Unfortunately, since (so far) this is a railroad job, nobody is going to be swayed, not yet.  

 

It also occurs to me that the House Democrats are being hypocritical.  They can’t make any coherent case that an actual crime has occurred.  They can repeat the words “extortion” and “bribery” all they want, but that’s not what happened here.  And if it is what happened here, then I’m sure that there are innumerable cases when prior Presidents used leverage in dealing with foreign heads of state.  A fair response to that is that impeachment doesn’t require a criminal act.  Well if that’s true (and I don’t deny it) then impeachment is much more of a political act. And since the Senate is not going to convict unless there’s more than what’s being presented by the House, this turns out to be a political act to smear the President during his re-election cycle.  That’s exactly the charge against Trump (smearing the former VP). 

 

If this his post sounds obvious to you, then it is probably obvious to a lot of the country that’s following along. And if that’s the case, I really don’t know why the Democrats in the House are traveling this road.  It smacks of desperation. And if they stop now, they look like fools — so they have to play this game right out to the end. 

 

 

 

 

 

It's a blatantly dishonest and politically orchestrated proceeding.  It is an example of our government at its very worst.  Gosh what a better country we'd be if they just worked on some fiscal disciplines, put a lid on illegal immigration and made some sweeping changes to health insurance regulations rather than consuming what has been invested in electing 536 people to their positions on this impeachment horse *****. 

Edited by keepthefaith
  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

 

It's a blatantly dishonest and politically orchestrated proceeding.  It is an example of our government at its very worst.  Gosh what a better country we'd be if they just worked on some fiscal disciplines, put a lid on illegal immigration and made some sweeping changes to health insurance regulations rather than consuming what has been invested in electing 536 people to their positions on this impeachment horse *****. 

I think it shows the system working exactly as its suppose to 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, snafu said:

This whole, so called: “public portion of the investigative phase” feels so strange.  It is so one-sided.  It is likely to hit a dead end even if it progresses to an impeachment vote and on to the Senate.  It has all the earmarks of a political show to smear the President ahead of the full blown election season — and actually deep into the 2020 race.  I think that’s part of the ploy here — roll out this first part slowly and partisan so that the process takes even longer to play out.  

 

The people who already hate the President will dig deeper into their position.  I suppose the Democrats in Congress are also hoping to sway independents against Trump, that’s why the press keeps reporting poll numbers about independents. But if that’s their goal, it would seem that they take inspdependents for fools. Nobody should be comfortable with the way this obviously tilted process is playing out.  Dems might win over independents if (I) the process was fair and (ii)if it allowed the President or his proxies to mount any sort of defense and (iii) in conclusion the President did something wrong.  Im open to that.  Unfortunately, since (so far) this is a railroad job, nobody is going to be swayed, not yet.  

 

It also occurs to me that the House Democrats are being hypocritical.  They can’t make any coherent case that an actual crime has occurred.  They can repeat the words “extortion” and “bribery” all they want, but that’s not what happened here.  And if it is what happened here, then I’m sure that there are innumerable cases when prior Presidents used leverage in dealing with foreign heads of state.  A fair response to that is that impeachment doesn’t require a criminal act.  Well if that’s true (and I don’t deny it) then impeachment is much more of a political act. And since the Senate is not going to convict unless there’s more than what’s being presented by the House, this turns out to be a political act to smear the President during his re-election cycle.  That’s exactly the charge against Trump (smearing the former VP). 

 

If this his post sounds obvious to you, then it is probably obvious to a lot of the country that’s following along. And if that’s the case, I really don’t know why the Democrats in the House are traveling this road.  It smacks of desperation. And if they stop now, they look like fools — so they have to play this game right out to the end. 

 

 

 

 

 

Good Post.  I disagree on several fronts but, well stated.  I am an Independent but have been of the opinion that this impeachment process should move forward.  Most certainly, it is a political process that only loosely resembles assembling charges or putting on a criminal trial.  Those that are unaware may be honestly upset but those knowledgeable of the process should stop throwing out this chaff.

 

Claiming it is one-sided is true but there are 2 main reasons for that.  I am sure that you are aware that this is not really yet the trial phase.  That will happen in the Senate.  In this phase, Democratic 'prosecutors' are making their case to bring charges to the representatives in the House.  The House will likely eventually vote to (or not to) send the charges to the Senate for the trial phase.  I believe that the defense will then be able to call whoever they wish, especially since the Republicans control the Senate.

 

The other reason we don't have the Republican side of the story is that the President's defenders have defied subpeonas to testify to the House committees.  There were no transcripts released from the president's soldiers because they are afraid to go under oath and testify, just like their leader.   It seems to me that they are afraid of perjury.  Would you want to get folks under oath speaking on your behalf if you were guilty?  How about if you were innocent?  Those answers should be telling to an unbiased observer.

 

Presidents have historically overstepped their authority, that is true.  Differences here are that Trump's actions appear to be for personal political gain, as opposed to being in the interests of our country.  He also continues to see election interference by foreigners as acceptable.  He has repeatedly proved that point.  Foreign election interference taints the upcoming election.  That must be stopped cold. 

 

Perhaps if the Congressional Republicans had a spine to stand up to this president, the whole impeachment process would be unnecessary.  As it is today, there appears to me to be a severe integrity shortage in the Republican party in Congress.

Edited by Bob in Mich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kent has quit the pedigree! 

That's right, 2014 Revolution was against the Russian puppet government 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...