Unamerican Secret Trial presided by Democrat Adam Schiff

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Because this is still in the “deposition” stage, and Republicans in the Intelligence Committee are in there as well. The Pubs did exactly the same thing during the Benghazi depositions.
Was Obama the subject of impeachment in those hearings? Was the result of an election in the balance in those hearings?
How many witnesses have Republicans called so far?
 
The only Facebook lie I know of is the endorsement of Trump by Pope Francis. I’ve put all that stuff on ignore since.
 
Was Obama the subject of impeachment in those hearings? Was the result of an election in the balance in those hearings?
I believe the subject was brought up at one of the debates with Romney and Obama stated that he took full responsibility.
 
40.png
JonNC:
Was Obama the subject of impeachment in those hearings? Was the result of an election in the balance in those hearings?
I believe the subject was brought up at one of the debates with Romney and Obama stated that he took full responsibility.
Fine. Was he the subject of impeachment at those hearings?
 
Was Obama the subject of impeachment in those hearings?
There was no formal House resolution on impeachment, but the connection of the investigation to possible impeachment was raised by members of Congress
In May 2013, Republican Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma stated that President Obama could be impeached over what he alleged was a White House cover-up after the deadly attack against two United States government facilities in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012.[12] Inhofe said that “of all the great cover-ups in history—the Pentagon papers, Iran-Contra, Watergate, all the rest of them—this … is going to go down as most egregious cover-up in American history”.[12] Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz of Utah also stated in an interview that impeachment was “within the realm of possibilities” with regard to the September 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi, Libya, later clarifying that “it’s not something I’m seeking” and that “I’m not willing to take that off the table. But that’s certainly not what we’re striving for.”[13]
 
@Jeanne_S . . .
why isn’t our president being allowed to confront his accusers?
Metis1’s response?
Because this is still in the “deposition” stage,
How do you know that Metis1?

Schiff has implied there will be no public hearing.

This suggests that if the Democrats want to push this to a floor vote without transparency they will.

Just this secret trial with selective democrat leaks that sound favorable.

I had no idea Schiff was planning to allow
Republican cross-examination,
transparency of documentation,
public hearings, etc.

Wow!

Would you mind linking to Schiff saying anything like this Metis1 for my benefit?

After all.
If the public is being denied transparency
just because “this is still in the “deposition” stage”,
that suggests AFTER the “deposition stage”
comes full transparency.
At least to me in this context.

So I will await that link and see what Adam says.
Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Here again is
what the Republicans in the House
provided the country
when they impeached Bill Clinton.

(This below is an excellent collection of points by Sean Hannity!)


.

Contrast this to Adam Schiff’s SECRET TRIAL (or hearings or whatever Schiff wants to call it).

The secret trial sham is closer to a Soviet motif than an American way.

Beware of these people.
 
Last edited:
There was no formal House resolution on impeachment, but the connection of the investigation to possible impeachment was raised by members of Congress
You have a good point. There’s no formal House resolution here either. But the intention here, as a continuation of the other attempts, is specifically impeachment.
 
46 Republicans in the House have attended and questioned the witnesses.
That is 1/3 of the GOP caucus.
When the House conducts an investigation, there will be a public hearing.
I am trying to understand the objection
 
Maximus1 . . .
46 Republicans in the House have attended and questioned the witnesses.
I want to see a link so I can read that in context.

Please provide it.

And if they couldn’t have full transparency, would that bother you?

.

Report: Republicans on Intelligence Committee Can Review Transcripts — with a Democrat Staffer Watching​

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Scott Olson/Getty Images

JOEL B. POLLAK

25 Oct 2019 Breitbart News

Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee will only be able to read transcripts of depositions in the “impeachment inquiry” with a Democrat staffer watching them.

In addition, there will only be one copy of each transcript available. No further printed or electronic versions will be provided.

Those are the rules under which Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the committee chair, is proceeding . . .

. . . As of Friday afternoon, a Republican resolution in the Senate disapproving of the House impeachment process had reached 50 co-sponsors (out of 53 GOP members).
 
There are three committed attending. That is the GOP compliment.
They are not permitting transcripts to leave the room. They don’t want furthur witnesses to see them or be prepped on them. The legal term is sequestration.
Once all taken, everyone will see them.
This procedure is standard. It is called," THE RULE" which is invoked by lawyers as a standard.
 
How can Adam Schiff preside over an impeachment trial? Adam Schiff is a member of the House. Impeachment is tried in the Senate.

These talking points and sound bites are at best ignorant, and at worst, dishonest. What the House is doing right now is taking depositions. It is not a hearing, or a trial. They are in the discovery phase. Subpoenas are due process, the only matters of due process at play here. And those (to my knowledge) have been legitimate. Otherwise they would’ve been quashed. Note I did not say ignored or denied. But -quashed-. That is a legal term. And if subpoenas HAVE been quashed, the White House would’ve advertised that as a victory. They haven’t, because, the subpoenas are legitimate.

Nobody is entitled to sit in on closed committee meetings, save members of said committee. If this moves out of depositions into hearings, then, things will be different. You do not have to agree with this, this is the letter of the law. The President doesn’t make the rules here on this matter. The President can howl and cry and throw fits all he wants, but, he has no authority (or knowledge it seems) over how the House conducts its business. And if he truly has done nothing wrong, then that will come to light. Whinging about the process does not indicate an innocent man. Especially when that process has been meticulously documented and followed.
 
Last edited:
While they are at it they might investigate Joe and Hunter Biden’s ties ti Romania Same as in the Ukraine
 
While I am at it, everyone DOES realize that SIX COMMITTEES are investigating and holding depositions, right? It isn’t just Schiff’s Intelligence Committee. Schiff is only one of SIX COMMITTEE CHAIRS overseeing investigations.

Everything about how this argument is framed is meant to muddy the waters and distract from the facts. Be better than this.
 
Last edited:
Everything about how this argument is framed is meant to muddy the waters and distract from the facts. Be better than this.
The facts are very bad. So the desperate storm the process.
 
Last edited:
Their stonewalling and attacks have hurt them, since judges do not look favorably on that kind of obstruction.

U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell:
The White House’s stated policy of non-cooperation with the impeachment inquiry weighs heavily in favor of disclosure. Congress’s need to access grand jury material relevant to potential impeachable conduct by a President is heightened when the Executive Branch willfully obstructs channels for accessing other relevant evidence.
 
Would you mind linking to what you said please?

Here it is again . . .
46 Republicans in the House have attended and questioned the witnesses.
 
Last edited:
JapaneseKappa.

WHO are you replying to??

I’ve never said what Schiff is doing is “illegal”.

I said it’s un-American.

Here it is again . . .
The secret trial sham is closer to a Soviet motif than an American way.
The fact that a judge said this is irrelevant (to this thread. At least from me anyway).

These guys are willing to tear the country apart for power. This is not good.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top