• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Dishonest Is Adam Schiff?

Lutherf

Lutherf

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
49,568
Reaction score
55,193
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This is how dishonest -

Here's his letter to the HPSCI minority - https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191112_-_hpsci_chm_memo_to_members_on_open_hearings.pdf

Here is the first paragraph of the 4th page of that memo -
As explained in my November 9, 2019,response to the Ranking Member, it is important to underscore that the House’s impeachment inquiry, and the Committee, will not serve as venues for any Member to further the same sham investigations into the Bidens or into debunked conspiracies about 2016 U.S. election interference that President Trump pressed Ukraine to undertake for his personal political benefit. Nor will the Committee facilitate any efforts by President Trump or his allies to threaten, intimidate,or retaliate against the whistleblower who courageously and lawfully raised concerns about the President’s conduct.
Click to expand...

Notice the line about "debunked conspiracies about 2016 election interference...".

Those "conspiracies" are not "debunked". In fact, those "conspiracies" are under investigation by US Attorney, John Durham and a few weeks ago it was announced that those investigations had become criminal rather than administrative.

Schiff has now explicitly prohibited questioning of witnesses in regard to the 2016 election even though that is the basis for Trump's "ask" AND he has stated as the reason for the prohibition that the line of questioning is in regard to a "debunked" theory that is actually under a current investigation.

That is how dishonest Adam Schiff is.
 
Lutherf said:
This is how dishonest -

Here's his letter to the HPSCI minority - https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191112_-_hpsci_chm_memo_to_members_on_open_hearings.pdf

Here is the first paragraph of the 4th page of that memo -


Notice the line about "debunked conspiracies about 2016 election interference...".

Those "conspiracies" are not "debunked". In fact, those "conspiracies" are under investigation by US Attorney, John Durham and a few weeks ago it was announced that those investigations had become criminal rather than administrative.

Schiff has now explicitly prohibited questioning of witnesses in regard to the 2016 election even though that is the basis for Trump's "ask" AND he has stated as the reason for the prohibition that the line of questioning is in regard to a "debunked" theory that is actually under a current investigation.

That is how dishonest Adam Schiff is.
Click to expand...

Schiff has diluted the entire idea of impeachment as a solemn bi partisan way to address a crooked president. Now, it is no better than the Kavenaugh hearings, where America learned that impeachment is just one more ordinary weapon that will be used over an over by the House in a split government by the minority party who cannot take a stand on any majority legislation, and chooses this tactic to fill the talking head space.
 
So-and-so is dishonest, says man who spent 2.5 years insisting that Mueller and his team were all Obama deep state plants who were going to frame Trump for something he wasn't even being investigated for ("collusion")....

...but then when the report came down that only cleared him of criminal conspiracy, laid out 10+ instances of obstruction, explained that Trump was NOT exonerated on obstruction AND that he could not indict Trump or even say he was guilty....

...who responded to that by insisting that the report completely cleared Trump and it was all a hoax to smear him, all without addressing how his new story completely contradicted his past story in light of what the report said.

The same person whose every post about revelations about Trump pontificates that actually, it's someone somewhere fabricating another hoax. That when Trump admits doing what was said to be fabricated, yet again changes his tune to some version of "so what" without addressing prior lies.



Yeah, OK, Lutherf.

At this point I'd listen to Alex Jones blab about 9/11 before I'd listen to you blab about anything related to Trump.
 
Lutherf said:
This is how dishonest -

Here's his letter to the HPSCI minority - https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191112_-_hpsci_chm_memo_to_members_on_open_hearings.pdf

Here is the first paragraph of the 4th page of that memo -


Notice the line about "debunked conspiracies about 2016 election interference...".

Those "conspiracies" are not "debunked". In fact, those "conspiracies" are under investigation by US Attorney, John Durham and a few weeks ago it was announced that those investigations had become criminal rather than administrative.

Schiff has now explicitly prohibited questioning of witnesses in regard to the 2016 election even though that is the basis for Trump's "ask" AND he has stated as the reason for the prohibition that the line of questioning is in regard to a "debunked" theory that is actually under a current investigation.

That is how dishonest Adam Schiff is.
Click to expand...

I’ll see your conspiracy theory, and raise you one set of Mueller Report hearings with all witneesses on hand!
 
Mr Person said:
So-and-so is dishonest, says man who spent 2.5 years insisting that Mueller and his team were all Obama deep state plants who were going to frame Trump for something he wasn't even being investigated for ("collusion")....

...but then when the report came down that only cleared him of criminal conspiracy, laid out 10+ instances of obstruction, explained that Trump was NOT exonerated on obstruction AND that he could not indict Trump or even say he was guilty....

...who responded to that by insisting that the report completely cleared Trump and it was all a hoax to smear him, all without addressing how his new story completely contradicted his past story in light of what the report said.

The same person whose every post about revelations about Trump pontificates that actually, it's someone somewhere fabricating another hoax. That when Trump admits doing what was said to be fabricated, yet again changes his tune to some version of "so what" without addressing prior lies.



Yeah, OK, Lutherf.

At this point I'd listen to Alex Jones blab about 9/11 before I'd listen to you blab about anything related to Trump.
Click to expand...

If Trump obstructed justice with regard to the Mueller investigation then THAT is what he should be impeached on. You might notice, however, that isn't what Schiff is going after and I figure you're smart enough to know why he's not going after that.
 
Lutherf said:
If Trump obstructed justice with regard to the Mueller investigation then THAT is what he should be impeached on. You might notice, however, that isn't what Schiff is going after and I figure you're smart enough to know why he's not going after that.
Click to expand...

Oh he should be impeached on that too. I'm annoyed with the Dems for not including it. But it's also superfluous at this point given his corruption in seeking to retain office, which despite RW lies is the actual definition at the founding era of high crimes and misdemeanors: corrupt acts (not tied to the U.S. code) in attaining or exercising office.

And maybe the Dems have a point. Include everything, and you lot tie everything up in side-shows on every front. Just like you're trying to tie up the impeachment hearing with witnesses about Biden, nevermind that that whole thing was debunked and reported on at length years ago. Just like you're ignoring the fact that what Biden Sr. did was remove a prosecutor who was refusing to investigate Bursima, which anyone willing to say honest words would recognize as having the effect of increasing Biden Jr.'s risk were he to be guilty rather than protecting him as Trump's conspiracy theory asserts. Just like...oh, everything.

Smoke screen after smoke screen. You backed a bad horse. At least admit as much, as I did after voting Obama a second time in 2012, particularly after the NSA revelations.






I do note that you never addressed your culpability in telling and endless series of self-contradictory stories over time in defense of Trump, but whatever.

:roll:
 
Debunked.
Like all your posts and those liking your posts.

Facts matter.
 
Lutherf said:
This is how dishonest -

Here's his letter to the HPSCI minority - https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191112_-_hpsci_chm_memo_to_members_on_open_hearings.pdf

Here is the first paragraph of the 4th page of that memo -


Notice the line about "debunked conspiracies about 2016 election interference...".

Those "conspiracies" are not "debunked". In fact, those "conspiracies" are under investigation by US Attorney, John Durham and a few weeks ago it was announced that those investigations had become criminal rather than administrative.

Schiff has now explicitly prohibited questioning of witnesses in regard to the 2016 election even though that is the basis for Trump's "ask" AND he has stated as the reason for the prohibition that the line of questioning is in regard to a "debunked" theory that is actually under a current investigation.

That is how dishonest Adam Schiff is.
Click to expand...

Luther - I'll give the President the presumption of innocence here. Let's say he was operating with firm evidence of a conspiracy or corruption on the part of the Bidens when he made the July 25 phone call. Okay, fine... so why doesn't he put it out there, then? This whole matter can simply go away if he can present a case for why he took the actions he took. He's got the Bully Pulpit. He's got Twitter. Hell, all he's got to do is step out his front door, and he's on live TV all over the world. So nobody is stopping him from making his case.

We're not interested in more bizarre conspiracy theories, though. It's time to put up or shut up. This is where the rubber meets the road.
 
Cordelier said:
Luther - I'll give the President the presumption of innocence here. Let's say he was operating with firm evidence of a conspiracy or corruption on the part of the Bidens when he made the July 25 phone call. Okay, fine... so why doesn't he put it out there, then? This whole matter can simply go away if he can present a case for why he took the actions he took. He's got the Bully Pulpit. He's got Twitter. Hell, all he's got to do is step out his front door, and he's on live TV all over the world. So nobody is stopping him from making his case.

We're not interested in more bizarre conspiracy theories, though. It's time to put up or shut up. This is where the rubber meets the road.
Click to expand...

Why didn't he take his case to the authorities? Why didn't he tell anyone? Why did he choose to single-handedly pursue international justice in an obviously corrupt manner?

He just had to save us? No matter what, and he couldn't afford to tell anyone. That's what I'm supposed to believe, even after knowing the whole Biden thing is BS.

It's impossibly stupid.
 
ecofarm said:
Why didn't he take his case to the authorities? Why didn't he tell anyone? Why did he choose to single-handedly pursue international justice in an obviously corrupt manner?

He just had to save us? No matter what, and he couldn't afford to tell anyone. That's what I'm supposed to believe, even after knowing the whole Biden thing is BS.

It's impossibly stupid.
Click to expand...

Well, I never said the story didn't have to be a good one. He does deserve the presumption of innocence - but that only goes so far.... fact-based investigations still must proceed. And until there are facts to back up the conspiracy theories, then Congress has the obligation to treat them as such.
 
Cordelier said:
Well, I never said the story didn't have to be a good one. He does deserve the presumption of innocence - but that only goes so far.... fact-based investigations still must proceed. And until there are facts to back up the conspiracy theories, then Congress has the obligation to treat them as such.
Click to expand...

For fair minded people, it's over.

No selling the US military to foreign countries for fake news announcements.
 
Lutherf said:
This is how dishonest -

Here's his letter to the HPSCI minority - https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191112_-_hpsci_chm_memo_to_members_on_open_hearings.pdf

Here is the first paragraph of the 4th page of that memo -


Notice the line about "debunked conspiracies about 2016 election interference...".

Those "conspiracies" are not "debunked". In fact, those "conspiracies" are under investigation by US Attorney, John Durham and a few weeks ago it was announced that those investigations had become criminal rather than administrative.

Schiff has now explicitly prohibited questioning of witnesses in regard to the 2016 election even though that is the basis for Trump's "ask" AND he has stated as the reason for the prohibition that the line of questioning is in regard to a "debunked" theory that is actually under a current investigation.

That is how dishonest Adam Schiff is.
Click to expand...

If you are going to accuse someone of being dishonest, you better be accurate in your representation of the facts, or else you can be called out for being a hypocrite.

Adam Schiff was rejecting 6 of Nunes requested witnesses: hunter biden, devon Archer, Alexandra Chalpua, Nellie Ohr, and finally the whistle blower and his/ her sources.

Putting aside biden, archer, and the whistleblower for a moment, let’s look at the reasons Nunes gives for calling Alexandra Chalupa and Nellie Ohr in his letter to Adam Schiff.

3. Alexandra Chalupa, former Democratic National Committee (DNC) staffer. During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Alexandra Chalupa, a former DNC staffer and contractor, worked with the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington, DC. to try and get political dirt on then-candidate Trump’s campaign.10 She has admitted to providing anti Trump dirt to the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign,and to discussing such dirt with then-Ukrainian Ambassador to the United States Valeriy Chaly. Given President Trump’s documented belief that the Ukrainian government meddled in the 2016 election to oppose his candidacy, which forms the basis for a reasonable desire for Ukraine to investigate the circumstances surrounding the election and any potential Ukrainian involvement, Ms. Chalupa is a prime fact witness who can assist Congress and the American public in better understanding the facts and circumstances surrounding Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election.

Nellie 0hr, former contractor for opposition research firm Fusion GPS. In a 2018 interview with the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees, Ms. 0hr stated that, during her work withFusionGPSthatultimatelyassistedintheproductionoftheSteele Dossier—comprising false allegations against then-candidate Trump—Fusion GPS used information from sources in Ukraine, including Serhiy Leshchenko who recently lost his postfromtheUkrainianparliament.“ GivenPresidentTrump’sdocumentedbeliefthat the Ukrainian government meddled in the 2016 election to oppose his candidacy, which forms the basis for a reasonable desire for Ukraine to investigate the circumstances surrounding the election and any potential Ukrainian involvement, Ms. 0hr is a prime fact witness who can assist Congress and the American public in better understanding the facts and circumstances surrounding Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election.
Click to expand...

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-con...11.09.rm_letter_to_chm_re_witness_request.pdf

Let’s see: a former dnc staffer and a former fusion gps contractor, specific mentions of trump’s belief that Ukraine meddled in the 2016 election, mentions the steel dossier— these two witnesses have nothing to do with the whistleblower complaint or the fact that trump asked for a political investigation into one of his political rivals and is pushing a debunked conspiracy of Ukraine meddling.

These two witnesses do not fall within the parameters that Schiff laid out as being relevant.

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-con...ermanent-Select-Committee-on-Intelligence.pdf
 
ecofarm said:
For fair minded people, it's over.

No selling the US military to foreign countries for fake news announcements.
Click to expand...

Based on the evidence we've seen so far. But we still have to be open-minded enough to allow that the Republicans could produce evidence and/or witnesses to bolster the President's defense.... whatever his defense happens to be.
 
Mr Person said:
So-and-so is dishonest, says man who spent 2.5 years insisting that Mueller and his team were all Obama deep state plants who were going to frame Trump for something he wasn't even being investigated for ("collusion")....

...but then when the report came down that only cleared him of criminal conspiracy, laid out 10+ instances of obstruction, explained that Trump was NOT exonerated on obstruction AND that he could not indict Trump or even say he was guilty....

...who responded to that by insisting that the report completely cleared Trump and it was all a hoax to smear him, all without addressing how his new story completely contradicted his past story in light of what the report said.

The same person whose every post about revelations about Trump pontificates that actually, it's someone somewhere fabricating another hoax. That when Trump admits doing what was said to be fabricated, yet again changes his tune to some version of "so what" without addressing prior lies.



Yeah, OK, Lutherf.

At this point I'd listen to Alex Jones blab about 9/11 before I'd listen to you blab about anything related to Trump.
Click to expand...

I so want to know which of these supporters are christians and which ones go to church and which ones put their hands on the Bible.

...And then come here and post.
 
Mach said:
Debunked.
Like all your posts and those liking your posts.

Facts matter.
Click to expand...

Facts certainly to not matter to some of the most righteous in our country.
 
Cordelier said:
Based on the evidence we've seen so far. But we still have to be open-minded enough to allow that the Republicans could produce evidence and/or witnesses to bolster the President's defense.... whatever his defense happens to be.
Click to expand...

I'm not in a rush but there's no ****ing way he reveals a cape and proves he was acting in the country's interest. That is, in fact, impossible. I'm not some Chavista in Venezuela 20 years ago.
 
ecofarm said:
I'm not in a rush but there's no ****ing way he reveals a cape and proves he was acting in the country's interest. That is, in fact, impossible. I'm not some Chavista in Venezuela 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that.... but there are one or two minor details which are making me question some of the Democrats' actions.
 
Lutherf said:
This is how dishonest -

Here's his letter to the HPSCI minority - https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191112_-_hpsci_chm_memo_to_members_on_open_hearings.pdf

Here is the first paragraph of the 4th page of that memo -


Notice the line about "debunked conspiracies about 2016 election interference...".

Those "conspiracies" are not "debunked". In fact, those "conspiracies" are under investigation by US Attorney, John Durham and a few weeks ago it was announced that those investigations had become criminal rather than administrative.

Schiff has now explicitly prohibited questioning of witnesses in regard to the 2016 election even though that is the basis for Trump's "ask" AND he has stated as the reason for the prohibition that the line of questioning is in regard to a "debunked" theory that is actually under a current investigation.

That is how dishonest Adam Schiff is.
Click to expand...
I hope Republicans bring it to Schiff, go after Biden and mention the phone "whistleblower" name early and often. ALL of them.
I want to see Shiff-for-brain apoplectic.
 
Cordelier said:
I'm not saying that.... but there are one or two minor details which are making me question some of the Democrats' actions.
Click to expand...

The Dems are politicians too. I'm sure they did plenty crooked, but the issue at hand is the US military being sold to foreign governments for fake news announcements.
 
ecofarm said:
The Dems are politicians too. I'm sure they did plenty crooked, but the issue at hand is the US military being sold to foreign governments for fake news announcements.
Click to expand...

I agree... but David Hale (Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs) and Tim Morrison (NSC Staff) are both on the Republican witness list, and both appeared before House investigators, and neither of their depositions have been released yet. I think if we're going to do this fairly, it ought to be done fairly down the line, don't you?
 
Cordelier said:
I agree... but David Hale (Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs) and Tim Morrison (NSC Staff) are both on the Republican witness list, and both appeared before House investigators, and neither of their depositions have been released yet. I think if we're going to do this fairly, it ought to be done fairly down the line, don't you?
Click to expand...

That sounds fine. But we should keep in mind that opposition submissions will not contain exonerating evidence. We know that because if such existed this whole thing would be over. They can only contain obfuscation. But sure, let the Repubs obfuscate.
 
Lutherf, or any Trump supporter for that matter talking about dishonesty.

Bit like Kim Jong Un lecturing someone about human rights.

Like Lindsay Lohan as a Guidance Councillor.

Like Charlie Sheen as a Safe Sex Instructor.

Like John Bolton as head of the Peace Corp.

Like Jeff Sessions as head of the Marijuana Party.

Like... Well you get the picture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom