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.

 

House Republicans Storm Secret Impeachment Hearing Today

page: 9
72
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

You were the one saying no one consults with those under investigation. As no Republicans are allowed to take serious and official part in this inquiry, what are we to conclude?

They must be under suspicion too.

Schiff is more or less trying to whole party.




posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Scepticaldem

It's closed because for one it involves sensitive national security Issues and information that doesn't need to be made public yet. That's also why it's in a secure room where electronics are not allowed.

Another, I would imagine, is so witnesses aren't privy to previous testimony, which future witnesses could use to shape their own testimony.


I think if you are "openly" going investigate the president they should have to vote. That is just my opinion.


You're welcome to your opinion. As are we all.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

I suppose you could say that it's being done this way to prevent leaks, but it's funny how the Democrats run right out to leak things in the most damaging way possible isn't it?

Since the Democrats are making the rules up as they go, I have a pretty good guess as to why Republicans aren't saying anything too. If they do, they get blocked, possibly jailed, for "leaking" sensitive, national security information.

edit on 23-10-2019 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Gaetz is not on the Intelligence Committee. Nor are any of the other 30 members. It's a publicity stunt.

Schiff merely suspended the meeting and left the room until the agitators desisted.

The House rules allow the Committee's to hold closed door meetings.

Do I detect an air of desperation on the part of Trump devotees?


The intelligence committee shouldn't be handling this in the first place. This is the very first time in history.

Do I sense an air of desperation in the never Trumpers?


The reason is specifically so they can do this behind closed doors, and collude with anyone they need to, "witnesses and whistleblowers" and foreign agents alike, to get the desired result.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Where does the vote on the Articles of Impeachment take place?

Where does the trial based on thaose articles take place?



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:41 PM
link   
All the democrats are doing is setting the precedent for the Republicans to return the favor sometime down the road.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko



I suppose you could say that it's being done this way to prevent leaks,


I said to prevent sensitive (national security) information from being released to the public.


how the Democrats run right out to leak things


Example?


Since the Democrats are making the rules up as they go


Which ones are those?
edit on 23-10-2019 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:51 PM
link   
It all means nothing they are just killing time. Leaks and more leaks get used to it for the next year.




posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Where does the vote on the Articles of Impeachment take place?

Where does the trial based on thaose articles take place?


Where is the game planning for impeachment currently taking place?
edit on 23-10-2019 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Oh, right...

So two wrongs make a right, is it??

This is precisely the problem that needs to be dealt with. Blind, stupid staring party politics. They did it, so it's OK for us to do it right back.

Stupid is the only word I can come up with to describe that attitude. That won't get me banned, anyway...



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 06:37 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 06:56 PM
link   
How come our judicial system is not telling the Democratic Congressmen that they are breaking the law with their actions?



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Rep. Bennie Thompson, Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, has sent a letter to the House Sergeant at Arms regarding the security breach at a House SCIF: "I am requesting you take action with respect to the Members involved in the breach."


Letter



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: RexKramerPRT

So everyone gets a small smack on the hand and maybe a tiny fine. I kinda wish that our political business was conducted in a fashion like other countries, outright brawls. I want to see some of these people square off against one another, would make for great viewing, maybe even a few side bets on who would win.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Hypntick

Maybe but then democracy dies, IMO.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
How come our judicial system is not telling the Democratic Congressmen that they are breaking the law with their actions?


Because they aren't.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

200 ft beneath Dealey Plaza.



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
How come our judicial system is not telling the Democratic Congressmen that they are breaking the law with their actions?


Lots of people believe The House Rules "of engagement" are unConstitutional 😎

There must be some court cases somewhere 😎



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 08:08 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 23 2019 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018
POST REMOVED BY STAFF


How would you know, Mr. I'veBeenHere10YearsandOnlyMade805Posts? Where do you think the "sane" people went to? The way I see it, a few trolls hung around and a few anti-Trumpers because the rest of them don't understand how to debate with different opinions. Their only defense is resorting to calling us any name ending with "ist". Good luck out there in your world where everybody hates Trump and his rallies are really only 10's of people, not 25,000+.

We know because Republicans are on EVERY SINGLE COMMITTEE that is tasked with the investigation!

Read that again to give it a chance to sink in:

Republicans are on EVERY SINGLE COMMITTEE that is tasked with the investigation!

This was a CLOSED MEETING for a deposition interview in a secure meeting room (SKIF) - these meetings happen all the time in both the House and Senate and whether or not the majority is Democrat or Republican. There were legitimate Republican committee members that could have been in that room - I don't know if they took advantage of that or not, in light of the preplanned invasion by their non-committee brethern.The folks who crashed the meeting destroying the integrity of the SCIF (and thus endangering the security of the United States) were NOT members of the legitimate committee doing its legitimate business.

They should be sanctioned as strongly as they can possibly be. At the very least they should lose the security status they privileged to hold. That SCIF now has to be sanitized, at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars to the taxpayer.

Republicans absolutely do get EQUAL TIME at committee meetings to question the people who are invited to testify.

The Republicans on the committee use their first opportunity to ask questions to instead rant and rave about the process, then they get up and walk out the door. So much for their desire to be involved - they abandon any chance of involvement the first chance they get.

They have no desire to find out the facts because the facts are not on their side.

They have no desire to expose flaws in the testimony because there are none they can use to their advantage.

They have no desire to argue the law, because the law is not on their side.

According to Carl Sandberg:

“If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell”


edit on 23/10/2019 by rnaa because: (no reason given)

edit on 23/10/2019 by rnaa because: lost text, spelling

edit on Wed Oct 23 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
72
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join