It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Judiciary Committee hearing on IG report - Wray and Rosenstein - 6/28 live feed

page: 7
22
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Agit8dChop

You guys must be watching another fantasy version of the hearings. Tell me sweet thang what did Rosenstein give them besides the finger?


grounds for impeachment




posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Rosenstein has a different definition of 'threat', so, of course, his answer was that he did not.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Yes, Jordan said that he believes his trusted staffers who were in the room at the time over RR's claim that he did not threaten anyone, since RR has been caught hiding information from them. He all but called him a liar.

You will probably see that exchange in the highlights. Members were shouting each other down. Disorder in the court! HIgh drama.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
I especially liked the part where they were asked about the thirteen democrats leading the investigation. And how hard they had to try to keep from laughing.


Here's a list of the "Mueller Team" from CNN (with pictures !!) 🤧

Meet the Mueller team



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

AAG Rosenstein did take the accusation that he was "hiding" material from Congress personally and rightfully so.

You're merely giving your opinion as unimpeachable fact.

No, the only reason to redact a document is not to hide "inappropriate" contact -- how absurd would that be to send to a bloodthirsty Congress?

I am not disparaging your experience or your opinion, but you tend to reprsent both here as fact ... and that's just not always accurate.

edit on 28-6-2018 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Agit8dChop

You guys must be watching another fantasy version of the hearings. Tell me sweet thang what did Rosenstein give them besides the finger?


grounds for impeachment


... and there we come to the real intention for the sideshow and the attack dogs ...



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   
LOL looks like that House "Resolution" might pass !!!!!

😃💥



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: The GUT

So just out of curiosity. What would you consider a win here??? Lol


Because I can already tell you the out come..

The same outcome as the IG report and every other GOP led investigation..

They will come out and say things that sound concerning, but won’t take action against anyone since that would require actual evidence and proving it in court.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

No more absurd than redacting info for the sole purpose of hiding embarrassment by the FBI.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: The GUT

So just out of curiosity. What would you consider a win here??? Lol


Because I can already tell you the out come..

The same outcome as the IG report and every other GOP led investigation..

They will come out and say things that sound concerning, but won’t take action against anyone since that would require actual evidence and proving it in court.



Ding ding. No political posturing ... this is like a convention of carnival barkers.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Gryphon66

No more absurd than redacting info for the sole purpose of hiding embarrassment by the FBI.


Hmmm ... did I say absurd?
edit on 28-6-2018 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Lol is there one conservative in this site that doesn’t do that??

Lol..



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I think it interesting and highly enlightening when Rosenstein quickly jumped in with, "I'm not the one doing the redacting..." as if to distance himself from that process as much as possible.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

To see if adequate notice of this hearing was given is the big one?
Lol
Ok.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Gryphon66

Lol is there one conservative in this site that doesn’t do that??

Lol..



I hesitate to classify anything as "all conservatives" anymore ... but I will hazard a guess that some folks here (XCathra) do actually have the knowledge they claim to while others ... obviously do not.

But, that's true of all "sides" eh?



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

So is the hearing over? Are they not re-convening after the vote? If it isn't over does anyone have a livestream link?



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Gryphon66

No more absurd than redacting info for the sole purpose of hiding embarrassment by the FBI.


Hmmm ... did I say absurd?


Yes -

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Xcathdra

AAG Rosenstein did take the accusation that he was "hiding" material from Congress personally and rightfully so.

You're merely giving your opinion as unimpeachable fact.

No, the only reason to redact a document is not to hide "inappropriate" contact -- how absurd would that be to send to a bloodthirsty Congress?

I am not disparaging your experience or your opinion, but you tend to reprsent both here as fact ... and that's just not always accurate.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Xcathdra

I think it interesting and highly enlightening when Rosenstein quickly jumped in with, "I'm not the one doing the redacting..." as if to distance himself from that process as much as possible.


These guys get so fired up that they miss answers like these, which should've led to the question of who does the redacting(unless i missed the followup)



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: EchoesInTime

So put them under oath and ask them.
Oh no I trust them. Meanwhile Rosenstein is under oath but his word is questioned. Jordan knew he lost that match.



posted on Jun, 28 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: JoshuaCox

So is the hearing over? Are they not re-convening after the vote? If it isn't over does anyone have a livestream link?


Its not over. They are in recess for a few minutes while the vote is wrapping up.




top topics



 
22
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join