Matt Barrett wrote: » Why not, "Why don’t the Republicans want us to know what’s going on?"?
notobtuse wrote: » But if you put the 12th word of the 6th paragraph together with 20th word of the 8th paragraph and the 2nd word of he 12th paragraph it spells out 'mid go slow'… that’s Trump’s codespeak for 'quid pro quo.' A guy I know who dated a girl whose brother heard if from a group of guys at Doyle's Bar in Boston (which is closing) said it was so.. IMPEACH!
notobtuse wrote: » Called out on what? I never said Republicans weren't allowed to attend. Don't read anything more into what I say than what I say... Thank you very much. Quit pretending to be Shifty Shiff and making sh!t up.
Two interviews where held in secret and more interviews are coming up which will also be held in secret. Having the proceedings kept secret from the American public is Orwellian, and an abuse of power. Why don’t the Democrats want us to know what’s going on?
mad muffin wrote: » Shhh… we don’t need facts. We have whistleblowers. By the way. Thank you Mr. Whistleblower. At least he has been useful in one regard. We have his memo now.“The following is a record of a conversation I had this afternoon with a White House official about the telephone call yesterday morning between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky… The official described the (July 25th) call as ‘crazy’, ‘frightening’, and ‘completely lacking in substance related to national security’” Notes on the transcript of the call… It’s standard practise for“…the White House situation room to produce a word-for-word transcript that memorializes the call.” Ooooh what’s that last bit?
Matt Barrett wrote: » Consider yourself corrected. You tried to pull your blarney and got called out on it. Now Republicans are allowed attend but not engage? Yeah I'm sure that's true as well. They do seem to be taking the whole impeachment thing lightly
notobtuse wrote: » I said they were meeting in secret, not behind closed doors. Yes, Republicans are there, but it seems all they're allowed to do is serve as onlookers. Correct me if I'm wrong. "Fairness... we don't need no stinkin' fairness' -- Shiff For Brains
notobtuse wrote: » How dare you confuse things with facts? Schiff and Pelosi won't vote to impeach anytime soon. They want to drag the nonsense out as long as they can, with help from their media handmaidens, so Trump's polling numbers keep falling and he loses the election. They can't win by hook so they have to resort to crook.
Matt Barrett wrote: » My point is you said the Democrats were meeting behind closed doors and not telling anyone what's going on. If you meant the Democrats and Republicans are holding meetings and not letting the public know what's going on, fair enough. I don't see a problem. It's an inquiry. What part is a sham? Interviewing those involved?
notobtuse wrote: » That is correct. Your point is? I said they were being held in secret which makes it that the public doesn't know what is going on. Democrats have decided to release only limited snippets of testimony, out of context, to advance their agenda. Republicans are requesting the full transcripts be released. What would you rather see… limited or full? The whole 'inquiry' has been a sham of justice up to this point.
mad muffin wrote: » <snip>.
bad2dabone wrote: » I'm sure you'll hear one of the usual suspects trot it out soon enough.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Did Schiff ever get those compromising naked photos of the president that he asked the Ukrainians to send him?
hetuzozaho wrote: » What's the stock "/r/the_donald" response to this does anyone know? Interesting in hearing the other side.
Overheal wrote: » Looks like the "crystal clear" "I think we should stop the back and forth by text" text authored by Sondland (who got his role by buying it for $1 million to Trump's inaugural fund) was vetted by Trump firsthttps://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1181569881533292544?s=20
Outlaw Pete wrote: » https://twitter.com/RepLeeZeldin/status/1181627963932135424
Matt Barrett wrote: » You said: Ask the Republicans who were there.
notobtuse wrote: » I said the hearings are being held in secret, and they are. Is bipartisan questioning allowed? Don’t go pulling no Shifty Shiff, here. And I would tread lightly before accusing someone of lying... if you want to continue to post in this thread, anyway.https://www.redstate.com/nick-arama/2019/10/07/democrats-trying-to-impeach-trump-in-secret-hearings/ Here you go…https://nypost.com/2019/10/04/fresh-proof-dems-impeachment-inquiry-is-just-a-kangaroo-court/
notobtuse wrote: » I didn't say Republicans should be allowed to call witnesses. I said the Republicans should be allowed to ask questions of the people the Democrats have served with a subpoena or asked to testify. Why else would the Democrats not have called for a full floor vote to hold an inquiry, other than to not allow Republicans to ask questions so they can hold a kangaroo court? The Democrats can fix the situation where Trump is telling someone not to comply with an 'invite.' Democrats can simply call for a vote and put an end to the one-sided process. Instead it looks like they'll start issuing subpoenas to everyone, and people can see Pelosi's no-vote-I-say-so impeachment inquiry sham for what it is.
Penn wrote: » It isn't a trial, so there's no need to call witnesses for a defence. The House Committees are gathering evidence. If they vote to proceed with impeachment, it then goes to the Senate, at which point it effectively becomes a trial and the Senate Majority (in this case the GOP and McConnell) can proceed as a trial, allow witnesses, Trump to testify etc, before they then vote on whether or not to impeach the President. What the Dems are doing now is pretty much grand jury stuff, establishing what evidence there is and if there is enough to warrant going to fully trial by the Senate.
notobtuse wrote: » Not exactly... Kangaroo Court an unofficial court held by a group of people in order to try someone regarded, especially without good evidence, as guilty of a crime or misdemeanor.
Matt Barrett wrote: » You keep saying that Democrats are holding meetings behind closed doors. That's a lie. There are Republicans involved at every stage. You can pretend that's not the case, but you'd be lying. Your little exercise above is childish.
A little source material would be nice to back up your contention. Remember, though, Mad Magazine just shut down publication.
mad muffin wrote: » I guess they didn’t see the McConnell video Did anyone watch the press briefing? I’ve never seen a prosecutor in my life that didn’t want anyone to see the damning evidence so much. I’ve never seen a guilty party so adamant that this damning evidence be released. As the congressmen said. It’s a kangaroo court and Schiff is Captain Kangaroo. By the way. There won’t be anymore interviews until the other two transcripts are released. They’re not having it. No more drip feeding information out of context and half truths.
notobtuse wrote: » Wanna bet? It won't!
notobtuse wrote: » What lies? Are Republicans allowed to ask questions in the hearings? That reminds me of the standard Left talking points…Trump should go to jail!Why?For his crimes!What crimes?All of them!Please tell me what they are.Orange Man Bad!
notobtuse wrote: » Democrats are conducting a kangaroo court.
