Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 95

Thread: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

  1. #81
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,789

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by dcsports View Post
    I got that you have a low opinion of Nunes. I'm sure he lied at some point - he is a politician. What about Schiff? The rest of the committee?

    Lying about something like that - which has no benefit to him, is easily verifiable, and where dozens of people would call him on it - is extremely unlikey. Mueller asked nicely for the Stone transcript, and it was provided to him. No reason to think he wouldn't do the same with other requests. Note that if the committee balked at all, he could easily issue a subpoena.
    lol remember when he was hyping up his bombshell memo and it turned out to be nothing but a loser ploy to hype up literally nothing? Yeah, he's a lying scumbag
    "I do not claim that every incident in the history of empire can be explained in directly economic terms. Economic interests are filtered through a political process, policies are implemented by a complex state apparatus, and the whole system generates its own momentum."

  2. #82
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    San Diego
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,204

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by dcsports View Post
    Correction - he can't use the transcript as evidence to bring an indictment without a certified copy. All he had to do to obtain one is to ask for it - and he's only asked for one. The committee provided that one within days, and has told him they would provide anything he needs.

    Again, theater.


    So, are you saying that Mr Schiffs statement that, essentially, he was unable to provide precisely that certified copy legally, not until all the seats on the committee that were empty on the R side were filled, you are saying that he was lying, there was no legal (or rule, etc ) basis for this, that he was playing politics ?


    Yes, they were finally filled, but repubs slow walked it, that's the heart of this thing.
    "Character is destiny" -- Heraclitus

  3. #83
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarLevant View Post
    So, are you saying that Mr Schiffs statement that, essentially, he was unable to provide precisely that certified copy legally, not until all the seats on the committee that were empty on the R side were filled, you are saying that he was lying, there was no legal (or rule, etc ) basis for this, that he was playing politics ?


    Yes, they were finally filled, but repubs slow walked it, that's the heart of this thing.
    That's actually a left turn. The 'heart of this thing' is the political theater of providing the official transcripts. Mueller has the transcripts, and he he's only requested one official copy. There's no need for this at all, and certainly no urgency. So yes, this is theater.

    Good to see 'massive delay' has turned into 'slow walk', which is a little closer to the truth. Republicans took 1-2 weeks, depending on how you ask, to appoint the committee members. That's certainly not a notable delay.

  4. #84
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    39,905

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by HumblePi View Post
    Intentionally withholding information from Congress is obstruction of justice.

    Nov. 5th, 2010

    Contempt of Congress Statutory Contempt of Congress Contempt of Congress is punishable by statute and under the inherent powers of Congress.130Congress has not exercised its inherent contempt power for some time.131 The statutory contempt of Congress provision, 2 U.S.C. 192, has been employed only slightly more often and rarely in recent years. Much of what we know of the offense comes from Cold War period court decisions. Parsed to its elements, 192 states that;

    I. Every person
    II. summoned as a witness
    III. by the authority of either House of Congress
    IV. to A. give testimony, or B. to produce papers
    V. upon any matter under inquiry
    VI. before A. either House, B. any joint committee, C. any committee of either House
    VII. who willfully A. makes default, or B. refuses 1. to answer any question 2. pertinent to the matter under inquiry shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 or less than $100 and imprisonment in a common jail for not less than one month nor more than twelve months.
    again only since 2016 has this been an issue for democrats. amazing how that works isn't it.

  5. #85
    Sage TU Curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lower Mainland of BC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    9,535

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by dcsports View Post
    He simply can't file the transcript as evidence without a certified copy. He has access to the transcripts, and I'm sure has reviewed them. When he is ready to file charges, he can request the official copy.
    Which is what I said - isn't it?

    Quote Originally Posted by dcsports View Post
    There's really shouldn't be any debate on this - they already followed the process with Stone.
    Of course there SHOULDN'T be.

    That, however, doesn't mean that there WILL NOT be. After all, you do have to remember the legal maxim "Quod differt !!!".

  6. #86
    Sage TU Curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lower Mainland of BC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    9,535

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarLevant View Post
    So, are you saying that Mr Schiffs statement that, essentially, he was unable to provide precisely that certified copy legally, not until all the seats on the committee that were empty on the R side were filled, you are saying that he was lying, there was no legal (or rule, etc ) basis for this, that he was playing politics ?


    Yes, they were finally filled, but repubs slow walked it, that's the heart of this thing.
    I could well be off base on this, but my understanding is that there is a mandated period by the end of which the seats MUST be filled. As I understand the situation, if seats are not filled by the end of that mandatory period then the committee may proceed without the (unnamed) members and the fact that there are unnamed members will NOT prevent the named members constituting a quorum.

    If I am wrong, I won't take it one bit amiss to have that pointed out (with links/evidence [and not just "That's not true."]).

    PS - The general parliamentary rule is that "Quorum is presumed to be present absent a challenge to quorum being present.", which means that those present can "conduct business legally" and that the decisions of those present are "legally binding". The remedy is NOT to have the business conducted under those conditions "struck down" it is a "motion to reconsider". However if that "motion to reconsider" does not pass then the prior actions remain in full force and effect. This means that, if "your guys" are going to end up being in the minority, it is NOT a "Good Idea" NOT to fill (a minimum of one of the) committee seats.

  7. #87
    Sage TU Curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lower Mainland of BC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    9,535

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    again only since 2016 has this been an issue for democrats. amazing how that works isn't it.
    Did you know that "I don't remember clearly, but, as I recall it now, __[fill in the blank]__.", "I think that __[fill in the blank]__, but I might be wrong.", and the like do not qualify as either "making default" or "refusing" to answer questions?

    PS - I once spent around half an hour asking a witness the same (word for word) question until the witness finally ran out of circumlocutions and actually answered the question that was actually asked. Not once did the witness produce an answer that was not, in some manner, related to the question actually asked, but only once did they actually answer the question. Once was all I needed.

  8. #88
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    39,905

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by TU Curmudgeon View Post
    Did you know that "I don't remember clearly, but, as I recall it now, __[fill in the blank]__.", "I think that __[fill in the blank]__, but I might be wrong.", and the like do not qualify as either "making default" or "refusing" to answer questions?

    PS - I once spent around half an hour asking a witness the same (word for word) question until the witness finally ran out of circumlocutions and actually answered the question that was actually asked. Not once did the witness produce an answer that was not, in some manner, related to the question actually asked, but only once did they actually answer the question. Once was all I needed.
    clinton was pretty good at that.
    again lying to congress and the FBI wasn't an issue till 2016
    for any of these sleeze bags.

  9. #89
    Sage TU Curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lower Mainland of BC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    9,535

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    clinton was pretty good at that.
    again lying to congress and the FBI wasn't an issue till 2016
    for any of these sleeze bags.
    Only really stupid (or arrogant) people actually lie. The smart ones give responses that look enough like answers that the questioners don't realize that they didn't actually get an answer and are "weasel worded" enough so that the MOST you can say is that they weren't as correct as they would have been if the person providing them had had more information or if the question was better put.

    I can recall an occasion when I had to draft some constitutional documents and the body charged with reviewing/approving them asked for an explanation of what one of the key clauses meant. At the end of my explanation their response was "So what you are telling me is that this clause means whatever the people in charge want it to mean at any given time regardless of what they said it meant at some other time, is that correct?". Once I told them that that was EXACTLY what the clause meant AND that was EXACTLY what the clause was INTENDED to mean, the documents were approved without further demur.

  10. #90
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    San Diego
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,204

    Re: House Intel votes to send witness transcripts to Mueller for possible perjury charges

    Quote Originally Posted by dcsports View Post
    That's actually a left turn. The 'heart of this thing' is the political theater of providing the official transcripts. Mueller has the transcripts, and he he's only requested one official copy. There's no need for this at all, and certainly no urgency. So yes, this is theater.

    Good to see 'massive delay' has turned into 'slow walk', which is a little closer to the truth. Republicans took 1-2 weeks, depending on how you ask, to appoint the committee members. That's certainly not a notable delay.

    It was a delay to take as long as possible to prevent Mueller getting a certified copy. The "theatre" is on the right.
    "Character is destiny" -- Heraclitus

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •