Transparency in an actual impeachment proceeding is one thing but in what world would an investigation into wrong doing be open to anyone and everyone to see? Should grand juries be live streamed?
Oh my hell, @treco…
I can’t speak for everyone else…but I have not even implied that you should do that.
You can think of Trump and of DEMS whatever you wish.
So you are implying closed meetings so that the entire House (excluding committee) is excluded from full testimony is okay. But leaking one sided account daily is just life, nothing can be done.
Haha okay, not duplicitous.
Is the implication the WH isn’t getting access to the full transcripts from the testimony? Or is it just that the testimony can’t be witnessed live by the correct Republicans?
Can the other side not explain things the same way? It’s not like they don’t know how to pull that move. They just can’t figure out the emailing system.
Leaks happen. Doesn’t make it right but the rules are the rules and the Dems are not breaking them.
Let me stop you there - then what’s the issue?
Right now, the investigation is being controlled in a tight manner, but it’s just factfinding at this point. Let’s be honest - Republicans aren’t suddenly concerned about procedural fairness, they could give a shit (I.e., I don’t see them calling for the executive branch to better cooperate on subpoeanas, etc.). Their endgame is to try an preemptively taint any fact findings that come from the investigation.
And doesn’t it concern you that a President didn’t understand that on the front end?
This is the real whine. But the WH is being investigated - you don’t have a right to defend yourself during an investigative phase. Republicans will try to confuse the public on this- claiming it’s so unfair. Well, it’s not. While impeachment isn’t a criminal process, procedurally it’s akin to one in that the investigators don’t have to alert the suspect as to what they are learning prior to a charge.
But think about that for a second - even when criminal liability - the most serious thing a person can face - is a possibility, cops don’t have to give you any information they are gathering on you prior to an official charge.
But Republicans would have you believe that here, you have to.
WTF?
2 Likes
I didn’t mention WH. Reasonable that all Dems have an interest in what is one the most disruptive activiites a government engages in also.
To you and @zecarlo, do you think GOP is leaking all bad news to bring down ratings ahead of actual impeachment? Or does it make more sense Dems are?
I presume there is no concrete answer since the leaks are anonymous, but one seems more likely to me.
@thunderbolt23 l agree with your middle statements - politics.
You love to couch statements into yes/no questions. Unfortunately for you, l transacted many millions of $ of business and recognize the attempt. So - doesn’t it bother you that leaks occur, politics is played to the detriment of functional governance, or that it’s ok for one side but not the other.
Your last statement is typical example of your parsing and conjecture, after reading my words
Ok
Go Astros
Have a good one
2 Likes
Attempt at what? Clarifying what people think? So dastardly!
Oh no, but I never said that. It’s not good, but I’m consistent at least - whereas Trumpkins whine about Democrats engaging in sharp tactics (like leaking) but love Trump’s hardball, screw the rules and norms, take no prisoners approach.
The leaking isn’t good, but if Trump is going to try and manage the news cycle with shady tactics, so can the Dems.
Go back and read what I wrote - it was a follow up question, not a “parsing” or “conjecture”. You said Trump’s Doral self-dealing was sketchy and I agree - and then I asked you isn’t a problem that we have a President that didn’t know that was a problem on the front end?
Someone in that job should know that as common sense. Shouldn’t be worried he didn’t?
1 Like
Leaks, whether good or bad, don’t change the facts in an investigation. They don’t prove innocence or guilt.
I’m a Royals fan so always rooting for the small markets even though it wouldn’t pain me to see the Nats get one I’d just rather it was against a big market AL team.
1 Like
Fair enough. He’s adopted the policy of the rest of the government.
You missed the behave accordingly part.
BTW I was joking about Houston being small market since they spent like they were small for quite a while. They have made a nice comeback here.
1 Like
Former Republican Congressman Trey “The Benghazi Screamer” Gowdy, has been enlisted to join President Trump’s legal defense team to counter the impeachment inquiry.
You can’t make this stuff up…and it gets better by the day.
Is there something new after this?
No…it appears to be more of Trump talking before he thinks.
I am unsure whether to put this here of the Syria thread, but my conjecture is very Trump oriented, so I will post in the third year.
Might Trump have had intelligence such that he could in the near future knock off Al-Baghdadi, and that was a lot of his decision to split from most of Syria? A lot of the criticism of his move in the first place was how much it would empower ISIS.
The Kurds are blaming the Turks for the Baghdadi raid being a few weeks late. Maybe Trump planned to kill baghdadi THEN leave Syrria. The Russians are all butt hurt claiming they killed him in 2017.