• 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!

WATCH: Rep. Elise Stefanik questions Amb. Yovanovitch about Burisma

Tanngrisnir said:
Court-ordered, completely legal electronic surveillance of Russians is not 'spying on the twump campaign', no matter how many times you shout that from the rooftops.

There's that pesky old reality again, coming in to spoil all the fun.
Click to expand...

All the people in the FBI that stood by those court orders and applied for them are now ex-FBI. It was spying.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
LOL! And the chairman running the inquiry has the right to stop the committee's time being wasted by partisan twump fellatrixes trotting out debunked conspiracy theories that their god still clings to in order to fundraise in their own districts and to be noticed by him.

See? There's your denial of reality, right on time.
Click to expand...

The Chairman running the inquiry is supposed to be about fact finding, not limiting cross examination from the minority party because he can. Again, not House rules, Adam Schiff's rules.
 
Moot said:
The Trump campaign was not spied on. There is no evidence that the Trump campaign was spied on. I am sorry that FoxNews has misled and fed you lies...but that's your problem, not mine and I see no need to keep feeding your delusions.
Click to expand...

There is tons of evidence of exactly that.
 
Moot said:
The minority has the same amount of time to question the witnesses as the majority. If by freely you mean they aren't allowed to pose questions that might out the WB...then you'd be right. Boo hoo.

Again...The Intel and the Oversight committees are conducting the inquiry...and when they are done, they will send a report to the judiciary committee where they will deliberate all the evidence and write up the Articles for Impeachment.

I am not arguing they can make whatever rules they please. I am arguing the facts. If a minority member disagrees with a rule he/she can call for a committee vote on that rule.

This is the second time I've had to repeat that for you and I hope it will be the last...but knowing you, it probably won't be.
Click to expand...

False, majority members are allowed to make inquiries, only a single member of the minority party is allowed to conduct questions, and cannot yield his time to other members. This is contrary to House rules.
 
OpportunityCost said:
All the people in the FBI that stood by those court orders and applied for them are now ex-FBI. It was spying.
Click to expand...

See? There's your fantasy narrative on full display. You simply have no grasp of reality. And, no, not all of those people are no ex-FBI, nor can you demonstrate otherwise.

Enjoy that magical thinking!
 
OpportunityCost said:
False, majority members are allowed to make inquiries, only a single member of the minority party is allowed to conduct questions, and cannot yield his time to other members. This is contrary to House rules.
Click to expand...

<sigh> The same rules apply to both sides. It goes like this...

Majority leader gavels in the session

Majority leader gives opening statement

Minority leader gives opening statement

Witness(s) gives opening statement

Then the questioning begins with alternating rounds of 45 minutes for each side. During this phase, only the majority and minority leaders are allowed to question the witnesses, but they may yield their time to a committee lawyer. Neither side is allowed to yield their time to another party member.

Once that round of questioning is over, then the committee returns to the usual House hearing format, with each side getting five minutes of questioning, alternating between parties.


If you still don't get it, then I don't know what to tell you except to read and re-read the article until you do.


Factbox: What rules will the House use in televised impeachment hearings? - Reuters
 
Last edited:
OpportunityCost said:
The Chairman running the inquiry is supposed to be about fact finding, not limiting cross examination from the minority party because he can. Again, not House rules, Adam Schiff's rules.
Click to expand...

And that's what the chairman is doing. He's not tolerating people going down conspiracy whackadoodle rabbit holes to purposefully waste time and play to their bases. They can still ask relevant questions, no matter how upset that makes you.
 
bubbabgone said:
If House impeachment rules were the same as regular House Committee rules there wouldn't have been different practices undertaken for past House impeachments.

What Schiff is doing is particularly despicable.
He forbids publicly talking about private testimony but he's not stopping leaks.
He released transcripts of some of the private testimony but so far he hasn't released transcripts of upcoming witnesses making preparation for public Q&A impossible if no one is allowed to use their private testimony.
He lied about not knowing who the SCWB is.
He never told the minority that his staff colluded with the SCWB.
He lied on the very 1st day of his "inquiry".
He facilitated what he claimed was going to intimidate a witness.

Schiff is an evil uber-partisan.
Click to expand...

This is all your opinion. You have presented NOTHING which can be verified that Schiff is not running things fairly according to the rules of the House.
 
OpportunityCost said:
As I thought, you didn't read the thread. This information is posted and this thread isn't that long so you could gather than information. I am not your damn servant, go read it.
Click to expand...

And you still have nothing.
 
haymarket said:
This is all your opinion. You have presented NOTHING which can be verified that Schiff is not running things fairly according to the rules of the House.
Click to expand...

He has yet to admit he knows who the SCWB is but the rest in all in the public domain.
 
Moot said:
Yet, you can't post even an ounce of evidence.
Click to expand...

You have that video of Barr and Trump taken through a White House window you said you had and that I asked you about?
 
bubbabgone said:
He has yet to admit he knows who the SCWB is but the rest in all in the public domain.
Click to expand...

and still you have nothing to show us Schiff is not running things fairly according to the rules of the House.
 
haymarket said:
and still you have nothing to show us Schiff is not running things fairly according to the rules of the House.
Click to expand...

Do those things I mentioned look like nonpartisan leadership to you?
 
Moot said:
Yet, you can't post even an ounce of evidence.
Click to expand...

^^^ This. And, again, this.

The sure sign of a twump supporter is "OMG THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING TUNE IN TONIGHT ON twump TV WHEN WE REVEAL........."




Absolutely nothing.
 
bubbabgone said:
It was beyond ridiculous to try and turn that incredibly short video of Barr talking into a "heated discussion" with Trump.
Are you sorry you tried to perpetrate such a fraud?
Click to expand...

It proves Trump weighs more than a duck. And yes. We can change the rules of federal evidence whenever Adam says so. If you respond, I'll trigger your shock collar. So there.
 
OpportunityCost said:
"the optics" lol, what a fancy word for ethical lapses. Every single democrat I come up against on this issue immediately asks what laws were broken. Ethical lapses come under impeachment considerations.
Click to expand...

LOL So we should add nepotism to Trump's charges? He has half his family in the Whitehouse .
 
bubbabgone said:
It was beyond ridiculous to try and turn that incredibly short video of Barr talking into a "heated discussion" with Trump.
Are you sorry you tried to perpetrate such a fraud?
Click to expand...

I dunno, the way Barr was punching the air and bobbing his head back and forth like a chicken it looked like he was getting his butt kicked. Of course, we'll never really know.
 
humbolt said:
It proves Trump weighs more than a duck. And yes. We can change the rules of federal evidence whenever Adam says so. If you respond, I'll trigger your shock collar. So there.
Click to expand...

The theory is that Barr is a bulldog but evil incarnate Trump has such mystical control over a subordinate who has been doing this for decades, that he's got Barr completely cowed.
The guy's a real life Thanos.
Thank God we have a legendary heroic pair such as Schiff and Pelosi to make things right and save our Country.
 
bubbabgone said:
The theory is that Barr is a bulldog but evil incarnate Trump has such mystical control over a subordinate who has been doing this for decades, that he's got Barr completely cowed.
The guy's a real life Thanos.
Thank God we have a legendary heroic pair such as Schiff and Pelosi to make things right and save our Country.
Click to expand...

:lol:

....
 
Tanngrisnir said:
And that's what the chairman is doing. He's not tolerating people going down conspiracy whackadoodle rabbit holes to purposefully waste time and play to their bases. They can still ask relevant questions, no matter how upset that makes you.
Click to expand...

No. They are allowing one minority member to ask questions. He is not allowed to yield any of his time. This is all new. I don't know why you aren't understanding this.
 
haymarket said:
And you still have nothing.
Click to expand...

At no point have you attempted to address the topic, I eagerly await you trying to do so. I am not your servant if you want information already provided in this thread, and it has been provided, you can read the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom