GOP getting scared - they just stormed the impeachment hearings.

[Carnal_Flower]

These are the same thugs who are still screaming about HIllary's "mishandling" of classified information . . . storming into a Skif with their cell phones.

Also the same thugs who took endless BENGHAZI depositions in the very same Skif. Under the same circumstances.

It seems like an ideologue would jump on that blatant, in your face hypocrisy.

 

[KeithD]

These are the same thugs who are still screaming about HIllary's "mishandling" of classified information . . . storming into a Skif with their cell phones.

Also the same thugs who took endless BENGHAZI depositions in the very same Skif. Under the same circumstances.

It seems like an ideologue would jump on that blatant, in your face hypocrisy.

Yep, the same ones. The Trumpettes here are same, same regardless of the dire circumstances for "their man," as well. They've gotten more testy, though, as he sinks deeper and deeper into the shit all by himself with his big mouth and his tiny brain (oh, look, we've come full circle around to the board Trumpettes again. )

 

[doowdniw]

I'm just glad that wall in COLORADO is finally getting built.
Bwahahahahaha

 

[BotanyBoy]

These are the same thugs who are still screaming about HIllary's "mishandling" of classified information . . . storming into a Skif with their cell phones.

Also the same thugs who took endless BENGHAZI depositions in the very same Skif. Under the same circumstances.

It seems like an ideologue would jump on that blatant, in your face hypocrisy.

What hypocrisy???

The FBI caught all those republicans stealing classified information???

 

[Carnal_Flower]

How a Partisan Hack tries to get himself out of a jam when his beloved Rs are caught redhanded

What hypocrisy???

The FBI caught all those republicans stealing classified information???

 

[coati]

Let the Deplorables storm...

Pelosi and Schiff need to keep enforcing their rules and keep pressuring the bullies. This is a long-needed situation of reversing the tables.

The more pressure exerted, the more mistakes that will be made by the Deplorables in trying to keep their stories straight. Just look at how their talking points have changed and shifted daily since this pressure started.

Trump and the Deplorables have gotten by so far with brute force and by creating/defending their chaos. They are not used to what Pelosi and Schiff are doing right now, and they are freaking out.

We see this taking place all the way down to this porn board forum.

 

[Conager]

Who came up with this idiotic notion that investigations must be public exercises? Is there an FBI tv channel I’ve been missing out on all these years?

Who came up with this idiotic notion that you loudly proclaim what the results of your "investigation" are going to be before you've done your investigation?

Who came up with the idiotic idea that you can withhold exculpatory evidence while leaking prejudicial evidence?

Who came up with the idiotic idea that instead of just walking back the idiotic idea that you had anything worthy of a impeachment inquiry that if you simply started calling it an investigation and drawing comparisons to Grand Jury it would hide your ignominious shame at having followed Schoff down yet another Schiffhole?

 

[HisArpy]

Post counts - again?

When you got nuthin' you revert back to taking baby steps. Although in rorbags' case, it never went beyond baby steps and dirty diapers anyway.

 

[Gypsytag]

Looks like the little fairy tranny is all triggered again.

Life sure must suck for a short and whiny sissy.

I feel sorry for her children.

 

[Adre]

Blah, blah, blah, blah, fucking blah...

Watch as he is impeached. The majority of Americans do not approve of Presidential extortion, bribery, and needing foreign help to get re-elected. We find it pathetic and beneath contempt. Sorta like you.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Who came up with this idiotic notion that you loudly proclaim what the results of your "investigation" are going to be before you've done your investigation?

Who came up with the idiotic idea that you can withhold exculpatory evidence while leaking prejudicial evidence?

Who came up with the idiotic idea that instead of just walking back the idiotic idea that you had anything worthy of a impeachment inquiry that if you simply started calling it an investigation and drawing comparisons to Grand Jury it would hide your ignominious shame at having followed Schoff down yet another Schiffhole?

John Boehner.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/napolit...chment-process-schiff-is-following-the-rules/

Napolitano went on to say that Democrats are operating under rules signed into law by former House Speaker John Boehner under a Republican majority. While he said that he’s “dying” to watch these hearings, Napolitano reaffirmed that “the rules say this level of inquiry, this initial level of inquiry, can be done in secret.”

These are not the impeachment hearings,” Napolitano explained. “The impeachment hearings have to be held in public by the House Judiciary Committee. This is the initial interview of witnesses to see what they have to say.”

“Yes. That’s what police and prosecutors do,” Napolitano replied. “They come to a conclusion that the person is probably guilty, and then they look for evidence to support or negate that. That’s what Congressman Schiff is doing, and he’s following the rules, as frustrating as those rules are.”

Furthermore


https://www.newsweek.com/fox-news-judge-shuts-down-republicans-impeachment-complaint-1465960

But Napolitano emphasized that these complaints are unfounded. "Republicans are complaining: Why are these interrogations taking place in secret and why isn't a transcript being revealed?" the former judge said during a segment of the Fox News morning show Fox & Friends on Thursday.

We have a mindset that this is a trial, and a trial is public, and the defendant is there, and the defendant has his or her lawyers and they are challenging what the government is doing. This is not a trial," asserted Napolitano, who previously served as a New Jersey Superior Court judge. "This is the prosecutors interviewing their witnesses, and that procedure never takes place in public because you want privacy and you want candor."

Napolitano explained that the investigation phase is necessary for lawmakers to determine whether there is actually a firm case to bring against the president. The House members also need to decide which information should be brought forward publicly to formally make the case for impeachment at a later time

"So can secret testimony be introduced against the president? Of course not," he said. "But the committee, the Intelligence Committee, can decide in secret what to present in public, and then, in there, it can be challenged."

 

[needit700]

WRONG!!! Finally

the Reps are getting mad and they have a right to be. The dems have turned into commies.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

LMAO!!

Republicans are in the hearings, too, ya know. They're perfectly free to leak exculpatory testimony---um, if there were any.

You did have Kevin M'cCarthy claim on Fox News that John Radcliffe "completely destroyed" the quid pro quo argument (allegedly).

I would say that's "loudly proclaiming" a victory ahead of time. Not based on any evidence though.

Sounds like you're just whining about process since you can't argue the facts.

Who came up with this idiotic notion that you loudly proclaim what the results of your "investigation" are going to be before you've done your investigation?

Who came up with the idiotic idea that you can withhold exculpatory evidence while leaking prejudicial evidence?

Who came up with the idiotic idea that instead of just walking back the idiotic idea that you had anything worthy of a impeachment inquiry that if you simply started calling it an investigation and drawing comparisons to Grand Jury it would hide your ignominious shame at having followed Schoff down yet another Schiffhole?

 

[von_Bismarck]

Sounds like you're just whining about process since you can't argue the facts.

It's all they've got. It's the hill they've collectively decided to die on.

 

[Rightguide]

LMAO!!

Republicans are in the hearings, too, ya know. They're perfectly free to leak exculpatory testimony---um, if there were any.

No they aren't. Schiff would make a criminal referral to the DOJ for any Republican member caught leaking classified material, the meetings are classified, but nobody on that committee has the authority to do the same to him. Characterizing the proceedings in the way Nunes did regarding Ratcliffe destroying Taylor's testimony is not illegal.

 

[Adre]

No they aren't. Schiff would make a criminal referral to the DOJ for any Republican member caught leaking classified material, the meetings are classified, but nobody on that committee has the authority to do the same to him. Characterizing the proceedings in the way Nunes did regarding Ratcliffe destroying Taylor's testimony is not illegal.

Of course it’s not...because you’re on his side!

 

[BotanyBoy]

How a Partisan Hack tries to get himself out of a jam when his beloved Rs are caught redhanded

So you can't actually point to any hypocrisy.

Noted.

 

[Rightguide]

Of course it’s not...because you’re on his side!

My post was tongue in cheek, dope. The real reason for the SCIF is to control the release of information and to deny the use of exculpatory testimony to the President and his defenders.

 

[bigsly]

Objectiveness smiles in absolute delight as the current minority politically partisan party whines so much about how "unfair" the current majority politically partisan party runs things, as if it could possibly play-out any other subjective way when political party partianship is the game.

See, elections do matter, says the current majority partisan party, reverse rubbing-in what the current minority partisan party is infamous for exalting in re to their 2016 presidential partisan win.

Except that elections really don't matter in any honest, objective way when their only result simply enables the same, old, repugnant political party partisan game, where who's the current majority or minority partisan party is simply a rallying trigger for lemming fanboys and girls to keep rah-rahing about.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Uh, no, I listed two examples in post 76, to which you responded with deflection and gibberish.

You are the one who is unable to refute OR own up to your Partisan Hackery

LMAO!!

Republicans are in the hearings, too, ya know. They're perfectly free to leak exculpatory testimony---um, if there were any.

You did have Kevin M'cCarthy claim on Fox News that John Radcliffe "completely destroyed" the quid pro quo argument (allegedly).

I would say that's "loudly proclaiming" a victory ahead of time. Not based on any evidence though.

Sounds like you're just whining about process since you can't argue the facts.

So you can't actually point to any hypocrisy.

Noted.

 

[schism666]

My post was tongue in cheek, dope. The real reason for the SCIF is to control the release of information and to deny the use of exculpatory testimony to the President and his defenders.

there were republicans in the room dope.

 

[Rightguide]

there were republicans in the room dope.

No shit, retard. They can't leak transcripts because they aren't allowed to have them. The Chairman has sole power to leak and to punish unauthorized leaks fo the proceedings.

 

[Aglaopheme]

there were republicans in the room dope.

A large portion of the Republicans that stormed the SCIF serve on committees that give them access to the inquiry.

 

[Adre]

No shit, retard. They can't leak transcripts because they aren't allowed to have them. The Chairman has sole power to leak and to punish unauthorized leaks fo the proceedings.

As your ilk is known to say, elections have consequences. Republicans do the same crap, buttercup.

 

[KeithD]

A large portion of the Republicans that stormed the SCIF serve on committees that give them access to the inquiry.

13 of those pulling the stunt serve on the committees they were pulling the "you're not including us" stunt on and have full rights to sit in on the hearings and ask as many questions they want as any other committee member can.

This isn't how the Republicans did it on the Benghazi hearings held in the very same SCIF when the Republicans held the House.

Two-faced Republicans (and board Trumpettes).