• Light/Dark

House Republicans storm impeachment inquiry, shut down testimony

Jersey_Tom

Jersey_Tom

Banned
Dec 2, 2017
4,764
E_i said:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


So things in general are working out then.

According to Chad Pergram of Fox News the GOP Reps were asking to be arrested. It's clear they wanted to make a show and potential get video of themselves being led out in cuffs to help push this narrative of Dems holding super secret hearings and trying to keep Republicans out.

Now this could potentially backfire with these guys potentially losing clearances? Sounds good to me.
 
dabig2

dabig2

Member
Oct 29, 2017
5,116
Censure for all, fines for those who entered and obstructed, and loss of clearances for those who brought in their phones and/or coordinated the embarrassment. And obviously that means removal from any committees they're on.

And obviously deserving of its own impeachment article considering Trump knew and encouraged said embarrassment for the sole purpose of his benefit. He surely wasn't doing this in service of the country, another destruction of the oath he pretended to swear.
 
SaintBowWow

SaintBowWow

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,148
Surfinn said:

giphy.gif
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Why is it that purple get so annoyed with the Left calling people fascists and Nazis when Republicans throw around socialist, communist,Marxist, Soviet, etc. like confetti? It's especially hypocritical given that it's usually randomly on Twitter throwing Nazi around but that type of rhetoric on the Right comes from sitting members of Congress and the President constantly.
 
Hawkster

Hawkster

Alt account
Banned
Mar 23, 2019
2,626
Let's be real, the most they'll get is a slap on the wrist and stern warning

Laws mean nothing
 
Stinkles

Stinkles

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,459
Jersey_Tom said:
So things in general are working out then.

According to Chad Pergram of Fox News the GOP Reps were asking to be arrested. It's clear they wanted to make a show and potential get video of themselves being led out in cuffs to help push this narrative of Dems holding super secret hearings and trying to keep Republicans out.

Now this could potentially backfire with these guys potentially losing clearances? Sounds good to me.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Lol

whatcha gonna do ARREST ME?!
 
Stinkles

Stinkles

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,459
RagnarokX said:
This reminds me of this:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


I sometimes watch this when I think the world's gone topsy turvy. And it helps.


peppermints said:
For some reason this is making my blood boil more than most of the fuckery they partake in. Like, I'm used to POTUS getting away with everything at this point.. but imagine if you or I waltzed into this hearing with our phones out.

I know I would be spending the evening in a jail cell.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Anything with "positional physics hero" Steve Scalise adds to my blood pressure. Dude chose being shot by a loon to make sure he wouldn't be the last adult or child to enjoy that privilege.
 
Addie

Addie

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,954
E_i said:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


NH Apache said:
Edit: Wow, Mark Zaid also appears to be the lawyer representing the whistleblower.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah, he is. Also a very credible source on all things involving this matter (Brad Moss too) and, more generally, on those involving administrative procedures involving security clearance revocation proceedings. I say that based upon personal knowledge.

Setting that aside, I almost can't believe the GOP contingent was stupid enough to bring their cellphones into the SCIF. Willfully bringing electronic devices into a secure environment takes things to the next level.
 

Deleted member 9135

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
5,435
Can someone summarize?

There was a disposition today (now delayed?). What is the spin from these GOP as to why they were barging in and entitled to be there? Why couldnt they be there?
 

Deleted member 2533

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,325
Bruh...


13 of the 41 Republican lawmakers who stormed a closed-door hearing Wednesday to protest an alleged lack of transparency in the impeachment inquiry sit on committees with the power to question witnesses and review documents.

Details: The Republican lawmakers who participated in the protest and sit on relevant committees include...

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), Foreign Affairs
Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), Oversight
Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.), Oversight
Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.), Oversight
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Oversight
Rep. Fred Keller (R-Penn.), Oversight
Rep. Carol Miller (R-W.Va.), Oversight
Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), Oversight
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), Oversight
Rep. Scott Perry (R-Penn.), Foreign Affairs
Rep. Steve Watkins (R-Kansas), Foreign Affairs
Rep. Ron Wright (R-Texas), Foreign Affairs
Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), Foreign Affairs
 
Commedieu

Commedieu

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
15,025
Somewhatgroovy said:
Can someone summarize?

There was a disposition today (now delayed?). What is the spin from these GOP as to why they were barging in and entitled to be there? Why couldnt they be there?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It was a publicity stunt. Law doesn't apply to old white men still. They had pizza and bounced.

The testimony happened and was a confirmation of everything even more so.
 
BlackNMild2k1

BlackNMild2k1

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,340
Bay Area, CA
Somewhatgroovy said:
Can someone summarize?

There was a disposition today (now delayed?). What is the spin from these GOP as to why they were barging in and entitled to be there? Why couldnt they be there?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

GOP met with Trump yesterday and shared a plan to disrupt todays testimony. Trump liked and encouraged it.
GOP barged in and stalled the testimony
they hung out and ate snacks, like pizza, while filming, tweeting, and texting from inside and outside the SCIF
They eventually got escorted out peacefully, and the room got swept for bugs twice
the testimony then carried on as planned - further confirming everything we already heard about
There were now calls for punishment for all those that purposely broke rules in protest of legal inquiry proceedings

....we now wait to see if anything actually happens
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 9135

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
5,435
Commedieu said:
It was a publicity stunt. Law doesn't apply to old white men still. They had pizza and bounced.

The testimony happened and was a confirmation of everything even more so.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
BlackNMild2k1 said:
GOP met with Trump yesterday and shared a plan to disrupt todays testimony. Trump liked and encouraged it.
GOP barged in and stalled the testimony
they hung out and ate snacks, like pizza, while filming, tweeting, and texting from inside and outside the SCIF
They eventually got escorted out peacefully, and the room got swept for bugs twice
the testimony then carried on as planned - further confirming everything we already heard about
There were now calls for punishment for all those that purposely broke rules in protest of legal inquiry proceedings

....we now wait to see if anything actually happens
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

thanks, all
 
cameron

cameron

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
24,445






Chad Pergram @ChadPergram

6) Fox is told there was never any chance mbrs who barged into SCIF would be arrested by USCP wBut some mbrs members asked to be arrested. They wanted the optic of being frog marched out of the SCIF in front of TV cameras. That would help w/GOP narrative of Dem process abuse

9:05 PM - Oct 23, 2019



Chad Pergram @ChadPergram

10) From one GOPer who barged into the SCIF, then relented later so DoD official Laura Cooper could be deposted: "We made our point."

9:10 PM - Oct 23, 2019



Chad Pergram @ChadPergram

11) Once mbrs who barged into SCIF surrendered phones, it was swept for electronic devices. However, Fox is told at least one mbr did not yield device. Room then had to be "scrubbed." Process consumed about 2 hours

9:11 PM - Oct 23, 2019
 
adj_noun

adj_noun

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
18,829


If nothing else, the Trump era has been wildly successful at showing just how effective the honor system is.
 
NihonTiger

NihonTiger

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,608
Dr.Acula said:
Bruh...


13 of the 41 Republican lawmakers who stormed a closed-door hearing Wednesday to protest an alleged lack of transparency in the impeachment inquiry sit on committees with the power to question witnesses and review documents.

Details: The Republican lawmakers who participated in the protest and sit on relevant committees include...

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), Foreign Affairs
Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), Oversight
Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.), Oversight
Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.), Oversight
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Oversight
Rep. Fred Keller (R-Penn.), Oversight
Rep. Carol Miller (R-W.Va.), Oversight
Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), Oversight
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), Oversight
Rep. Scott Perry (R-Penn.), Foreign Affairs
Rep. Steve Watkins (R-Kansas), Foreign Affairs
Rep. Ron Wright (R-Texas), Foreign Affairs
Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), Foreign Affairs
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

My rep was one of these dunces and we can't get rid of him because gerrymandering.
 

RJeddy

Member
Dec 4, 2017
735
Cooper still testified after the GOP kiddies got their pizza, yeah? Am I just looking in the wrong places or is there no reporting of reaction like with Taylor's testimony?
 
Jersey_Tom

Jersey_Tom

Banned
Dec 2, 2017
4,764
loltna said:
Cooper still testified after the GOP kiddies got their pizza, yeah? Am I just looking in the wrong places or is there no reporting of reaction like with Taylor's testimony?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Cooper's testimony largely dealt with clarifying the appropriate procedures regarding foreign aide as well as the particular importance of this aide being given to the Ukraine.

This was less about exposing the conspiracy and moreso about establishing the baseline of how under normal circumstances things should have happened but didn't.

What she had to say wasn't surprising or breaking new ground. Rather it's going to be used more as a companion piece to Taylor's testimony as a corroborating witness. Which makes it even more confusing why the GOP reps chose this testimony to disrupt. It was largely more a formality as opposed to being anything particularly damaging.
 
Last edited:
Surfinn

Surfinn

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
28,590
USA
So what the fuck are the consequences? Or have republicans just learned that they can do this whenever they want, bring in personal electronic devices into secure locations, no problem.
 
weekev

weekev

Is this a test?
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,251
I don't get why the folks that already had access to the depositions thought it was a good idea to be part of this. Like JFC how dumb do you need to be to believe in this Soviet style interrogation bullshit? I realise there is a significant portion of the population who do but it scares the shit out of me that I know something as dumb as this will actually be somewhat effective.
 
Jintor

Jintor

Saw the truth behind the copied door
Member
Oct 25, 2017
33,383
wow so many rando twitter accounts are experts at security clearance stuff and how the dems don't really need it because uhhhhhh reasons. truly amazing. ya love to see it
 
SamAlbro

SamAlbro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,528
If there was any intelligent purpose to this, it was likely to create a big enough shit show to knock Tuesday's incredibly damaging testimony out of the news cycle. It may come back on the Sunday shows, but the nightly news will now move on to the next story.
 
Trup1aya

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,839
Somewhatgroovy said:
Can someone summarize?

There was a disposition today (now delayed?). What is the spin from these GOP as to why they were barging in and entitled to be there? Why couldnt they be there?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Basically, the Republicans are running a distraction and disinformation campaign to discredit the impeachment inquiry.

Since they failed to block government employees from adhering to their subpoenas, and they can't counter the damaging testimony being provided, they now want to convince the public that the current process is unlawful. Its perfectly lawful.

The Republicans chief argument is that the president is being denied due process because the depositions are private and limited to pertinent committees. They argue that the president's council should have the right to cross examine witnesses during these hearings and question his accusers . The problem is, the president isn't actually on trial yet - the house is merely gathering information so that they can decide whether or not the case will go to trial, much like a grand jury. If this actually goes to trial, the Republicans will get all of the transparency and access to witnesses they claim is being withheld.

Why weren't they allowed in? Most of them weren't on pertinent committees (Oversight, Intelligence, Foreign Affairs). Several of them were actually always allowed in, but figured the optics of pretending that there was no republican access was better for their false narrative.

TLDR: since they can't counter the damaging substance of these depositions, the Republicans want the public to believe the process is sham, so they are putting on a big show based on misinformation about the impeachment process.
 
Cow Mengde

Cow Mengde

Member
Oct 26, 2017
13,127
Surfinn said:
So what the fuck are the consequences? Or have republicans just learned that they can do this whenever they want, bring in personal electronic devices into secure locations, no problem.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You know the answer to that. Just watch, give it a few months and they'll have manage to changed the narrative and be in control of it.
 
Narroo

Narroo

Banned
Feb 27, 2018
1,819
adj_noun said:


If nothing else, the Trump era has been wildly successful at showing just how effective the honor system is.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Imagine that there are era member's here who think the honor system and "social expectations" should replace the legal system completely.

But that's just an aside. Why don't the Democrats just have the Sargent at Arm arrest them. I know that Democrats are afraid of making them look like Martyrs, but they're always going to be martyrs to some block of crazed Republicans; just look at the Civil War Trump loons. My though is that they should go on the offensive.
 

Deleted member 9135

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
5,435
Trup1aya said:
Basically, the Republicans are running a distraction and disinformation campaign to discredit the impeachment inquiry.

Since they failed to block government employees from adhering to their subpoenas, and they can't counter the damaging testimony being provided, they now want to convince the public that the current process is unlawful. Its perfectly lawful.

The Republicans chief argument is that the president is being denied due process because the depositions are private and limited to pertinent committees. They argue that the president's council should have the right to cross examine witnesses during these hearings and question his accusers . The problem is, the president isn't actually on trial yet - the house is merely gathering information so that they can decide whether or not the case will go to trial, much like a grand jury. If this actually goes to trial, the Republicans will get all of the transparency and access to witnesses they claim is being withheld.

Why weren't they allowed in? Most of them weren't on pertinent committees (Oversight, Intelligence, Foreign Affairs). Several of them were actually always allowed in, but figured the optics of pretending that there was no republican access was better for their false narrative.

TLDR: since they can't counter the damaging substance of these depositions, the Republicans want the public to believe the process is sham, so they are putting on a big show based on misinformation about the impeachment process.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

this is what i was looking for thanks so much
 
Parthenios

Parthenios

The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
13,798
Jersey_Tom said:
So things in general are working out then.

According to Chad Pergram of Fox News the GOP Reps were asking to be arrested. It's clear they wanted to make a show and potential get video of themselves being led out in cuffs to help push this narrative of Dems holding super secret hearings and trying to keep Republicans out.

Now this could potentially backfire with these guys potentially losing clearances? Sounds good to me.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, trying to get a photo op of being arrested was always the obvious intent here. It's the point of most civil disobedience.

But they didn't cross their ts and dot their is on the plan (because they are imbeciles) and didn't account for how breaking into a SCIF changed it into something that should carry significant punishments.
 
mrchad

mrchad

Member
Oct 27, 2017
772
Somewhatgroovy said:
this is what i was looking for thanks so much
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Also keep in mind that these committees conducting the depositions are bipartisan, even if they are chaired by the majority party (the Democrats). Republicans continue to lie about not having access to the witnesses at this stage, even though they are represented in the committees.
 
cameron

cameron

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
24,445




​
Bobby Lewis@revrrlewis

Andrew Napolitano: "As frustrating as it may be to have these hearings going on behind closed doors ... they are consistent with the rules. ... When were the rules written last? In January of 2015. And who signed them? John Boehner. And who enacted them? A Republican majority."

Andrew Napolitano demolishes Fox's talking point that Dems need transparency: "These are not the impeachment hearings. The impeachment hearings have to be held in public by the House Judiciary Committee. This is the initial interview of witnesses. ... He's following the rules."​

8:13 AM - Oct 24, 2019

In the second video, Fox News dude, after complaining about the lack of transparency, says the Democrats are going to open the hearing in mid November because they're losing (he says this as a response to Napolitano explaining that information will eventually be public, which is standard procedure).

Also in the second video, Fox News woman says the Democrats are just going to keep digging as a response to Napolitano explaining the investigation inquiry comes first and then the impeachment hearing.









And then:


​
Bobby Lewis@revrrlewis

Minutes after Andrew Napolitano demolished Trump-defending talking points, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) goes on Fox & Friends to say that Napolitano is "in error." 'Journalist' Ed Henry then pivots to the complementary narrative of Dems' 'secrecy,' suggesting Biggs is on to something.​

8:38 AM - Oct 24, 2019

 
You must log in or register to reply here.