GOP getting scared - they just stormed the impeachment hearings.

[icanhelp1]

You lie.

The Benghazi hearings were, for the most part, public hearings. They only went behind closed doors is when they were dealing with issues of national security.

It's ironic that the left can't differentiate between a hearing and an impeachment process. Impeachment should be out in the open for all america to see. Republicans are for open hearings it's the democrats that want everything done behind closed doors.

 

[icanhelp1]

Witness interviews for Nixon, Clinton even by the dipshit Trey Gowdy during Benghazi interviews - they were almost all private.

Gowdy "The private interviews almost always produce better results".

FFS deplorables - have some tiny modicum of pride and consistency.

That's funny; I remember watching them on CSPAN!

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

The Benghazi hearings were, for the most part, public hearings. They only went behind closed doors is when they were dealing with issues of national security.

It's ironic that the left can't differentiate between a hearing and an impeachment process. Impeachment should be out in the open for all america to see. Republicans are for open hearings it's the democrats that want everything done behind closed doors.

https://media.giphy.com/media/Vsl4fGedmYFRC/giphy.gif

 

[coati]

It's ironic that the left can't differentiate between a hearing and an impeachment process. Impeachment should be out in the open for all america to see. Republicans are for open hearings it's the democrats that want everything done behind closed doors.

More weeping from the whine cellar...

 

[cowslinger64]

After Republican members of the House literally stormed the gates of the impeachment hearings on Wednesday, Judge Andrew Napolitano stopped by Fox & Friends Thursday morning to deliver a harsh wake-up call: Democrats are just “following the rules”—rules written by Republicans.

“I read the House rules,” Napolitano said. “And as frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors—the hearings over which Congressman Schiff is presiding—they are consistent with the rules.”

“They can make up any rules they want?!” Brian Kilmeade replied

Speaking more slowly, Napolitano told him, “Well, they can’t change the rules, they follow the rules.” He went to explain that those rules were last written in January 2015 when Republicans held the majority and the Speaker of the House was John Boehner.

“The rules say that this level of inquiry, this initial level of inquiry, can be done in secret,” Napolitano said, effectively dismantling the primary talking point of both Fox News and the Trump White House. “Secret evidence doesn’t work in this world, so eventually there will be a public presentation of this,” he added, “at which lawyers for the president can cross-examine these people and challenge them.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/judge-napolitano-schools-fox-friends-152237558.html

The Benghazi hearings were, for the most part, public hearings. They only went behind closed doors is when they were dealing with issues of national security.

It's ironic that the left can't differentiate between a hearing and an impeachment process. Impeachment should be out in the open for all america to see. Republicans are for open hearings it's the democrats that want everything done behind closed doors.

That's not true..


Gonna skip over the facts once again?

 

[Gypsytag]

Timmy McRapey, vettebitch and botanybitch will be along shortly to admit they are wrong and there is nothing illegal about the process. I'm willing to put money on it that they will.

 

[RobDownSouth]

The Benghazi hearings were, for the most part, public hearings. They only went behind closed doors is when they were dealing with issues of national security.

Demonstrably false. Small wonder Que hides behind disposable alts to advance his more egregious falsehoods.

It's ironic that the left can't differentiate between a hearing and an impeachment process. Impeachment should be out in the open for all america to see. Republicans are for open hearings it's the democrats that want everything done behind closed doors.

Investigation: Private
Trial (if any): Public

 

[HisArpy]

One of the Fox talking heads usually four square behind Trump said he read the house rules and Schiff is absolutely following the rules and has actually opened the proceedings to three committees instead of just one, as he could have done.

Moreover, the rules he’s following were made by Republicans in 2015 and singed in by Boehner.

Yeah, Harpy is just lying on the rules issue. Channeling Trump.

The Dems are following the House rules-- you just don't happen to like those rules, and apparently no one in the Republican Party has actually filed a lawsuit regarding alleged violation of rules.

As far at the Senate goes, if they make up rules that warrant a lawsuit, one would probably be filed.

Meanwhile, forget about the goose and go back to chokin' your chicken.

Really?

B. Procedure in the House


Sec. 6 . In General; Initiation and Referral of Charges

Generally

Under the modern practice, an impeachment is normally instituted
by the House by the adoption of a resolution calling for a committee
investigation of charges against the officer in question.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-112/html/GPO-HPRACTICE-112-28.htm

That's one violation of the rules.

Resolutions introduced through the hopper that directly call for
an impeachment are referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, whereas
resolutions merely calling for a committee investigation with a view
toward impeachment are referred to the Committee on Rules.

GPO-HPRACTICE supra (emphasis added)

That's 2 violations.

Committee impeachment investigations are governed by those
portions of Rule XI relating to committee investigative and hearing
procedures, and by any rules and special procedures adopted by the
House and by the committee for the inquiry...

Authorities to conduct an investigation in one Congress have been ``re-invigorated'' in a subsequent
Congress. 111-1, H. Res. 15, Jan. 13, 2009, p __.
Under the earlier practice the committee sometimes made its
inquiry ex parte. 3 Hinds Sec. Sec. 2319, 2343, 2385. However, the
modern trend is to permit the accused to testify, present witnesses,
cross-examine witnesses, and be represented by counsel.

GPO-HPRACTICE supra (emphasis added)

That's 3 violations right there.

So, tell us again how the House is "following the rules" when it's CLEAR they aren't.

Timmy McRapey, vettebitch and botanybitch will be along shortly to admit they are wrong and there is nothing illegal about the process. I'm willing to put money on it that they will.

Hi Luk, imaging stepping in you again here.

 

[coati]

Really?

That's one violation of the rules.

That's 2 violations.

That's 3 violations right there.

So, tell us again how the House is "following the rules" when it's CLEAR they aren't.

So, write to your Deplorable Reps and tell them to sue the Dems. You know, put up or shut up.

 

[HisArpy]

So, write to your Deplorable Reps and tell them to sue the Dems. You know, put up or shut up.

So, since I've now shown everyone that the D's ARE NOT FOLLOWING THE RULES; by your own statement, are you and the rest going to STFU?

Or, are you going to not follow the rules too?

If you and the House D's don't, why should the R's in the Senate?

 

[coati]

So, since I've now shown everyone that the D's ARE NOT FOLLOWING THE RULES; by your own statement, are you and the rest going to STFU?

Or, are you going to not follow the rules too?

If you and the House D's don't, why should the R's in the Senate?

Already answered that question. I don't agree that rules have been violated. Sue or STFU.

Same for the Dems if they disagree with the Senate proceedings.

 

[RoryN]

are you and the rest going to STFU?

This thread is triggering nicely.

 

[coati]

This thread is triggering nicely.

^^^The performance artist rubs his hands together with a sly smile.

 

[schism666]

This thread is triggering nicely.

the ambulance chaser is having technical difficulties

 

[HisArpy]

This thread is triggering nicely.

Wassamatta rorags, you run out of viable debate responses and/or deflections so you have to resort to pist counting again?

You poor triggered lil' feller...

 

[KeithD]

Is Harpy still lying about House rules being broken? Tsk, tsk.

 

[HisArpy]

Already answered that question. I don't agree that rules have been violated. Sue or STFU.

Same for the Dems if they disagree with the Senate proceedings.

Lol. Truth over facts, right?

 

[HisArpy]

Is Harpy still lying about House rules being broken? Tsk, tsk.

Not my fault you can't keep up with the rest of the class.

 

[jomar]

Really?

That's one violation of the rules.

That's 2 violations.

That's 3 violations right there.

So, tell us again how the House is "following the rules" when it's CLEAR they aren't.

Hi Luk, imaging stepping in you again here.

Articles of impeachment haven’t been drawn up yet. They are gathering information.

Why don’t republicans challenge the meat of the depositions rather than the process, including a silly and embarrassing storming of the castle they already had access to? Because...preaching to the base who don’t know no better!

ETA: You cited some 2009 rule. Like I said, Schiff and co. are following 2015 rules created by Republicans and signed in by Boehner. Also, caveats like normally and modern trends don’t equate to violations of procedures if things are done differently within procedural guidelines.

 

[someoneyouknow]

So, tell us again how the House is "following the rules" when it's CLEAR they aren't.

Why don't you tell Judge Napolitano he's wrong:

“I read the House rules, and as frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors, the hearings for which Congressman Schiff is presiding, they are consistent with the rules,” Napolitano said.
. . .
The judge noted that the “initial level of inquiry” in the impeachment questioning can be “done in secret,” like the witness interviews during President Nixon’s and President Clinton’s impeachment proceedings.​

In other words, we haven't reached the impeachment phase yet so whatever you cited is irrelevant. This is the evidence gathering phase. And why aren't we in the impeachment phase yet?

* The Supreme Court decision in Francisco et al. vs. House of Representatives (GR No. 160261, 10 November 2003), states that Impeachment proceedings are initiated upon filing of the complaint and/or resolution and its referral to the Committee on Justice.​

Has the Committee on Justice been given a complaint and/or resolution? No. Therefore, you're wrong. Again.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/467337-fox-news-napolitano-republicans-are-protesting-their-own-rules-for-impeachment

https://www.lawphil.net/congress/house/impeachment_2010.html

 

[Gypsytag]

Really?




That's one violation of the rules.



That's 2 violations.



That's 3 violations right there.

So, tell us again how the House is "following the rules" when it's CLEAR they aren't.







Hi Luk, imaging stepping in you again here.

Sorry timmy, not luk.

You are chalk full of wrong these days. Imaging that. Lol

 

[cowslinger64]

Really?




That's one violation of the rules.



That's 2 violations.



That's 3 violations right there.

So, tell us again how the House is "following the rules" when it's CLEAR they aren't.







Hi Luk, imaging stepping in you again here.

Once again, it's so easy to see why you have trouble paying your bills and have so much free time to be here looking the fool, counselor...

Even the fox news judge quoted above says you're absolutely full of it.

 

[jaF0]

The Despicables haven't figured out that the proceedings haven't started yet. So far it's only the bit about getting the ducks lined up.

 

[doowdniw]

The Benghazi hearings were, for the most part, public hearings. They only went behind closed doors is when they were dealing with issues of national security.

It's ironic that the left can't differentiate between a hearing and an impeachment process. Impeachment should be out in the open for all america to see. Republicans are for open hearings it's the democrats that want everything done behind closed doors.

It's ironic that some people can't tell the difference between an investigation and a trial. Trey Goudy thinks a lot more gets done behind closed doors. And he says the vast majority of witness interviews in the Benghazi hearings took place behind closed doors. He ought to know.

 

[Aglaopheme]

http://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2083504&stc=1&d=1571963403