Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Getting the facts straight
456 views
Skip to first unread message
micky
Oct 24, 2019, 11:25:16 PM10/24/19
to
OT, Getting the facts straight
According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
Republicans these days, there is no one cross examining witnesses in the
closed door House hearings on impeachment, but in fact there are plenty
of Repubicans in these hearings asking plenty of questions, members of
the committees that are holding the hearings.
And they keep complaining that the hearings are private, comparing them
with the Clinton impreachment, but for Clinton, there had already been a
closed door investigation conducted by Kenneth Starr. These hearings
are investigative, the equivalent of the Ken Starr investigatinons
When they are done with this stage, they will have public hearings, at
which the same witnesses will appear. If any of you remember the
Watergate hearings, they were first closed-door and then public and of
course only the public ones were on the news, and you might have noticed
that the ones asking the questions knew what the answers woudl be,
because they had been though things once already, during the
investigative stage.
Stumpie is a liar, and some of his supporters are willing to cooperate
with the lying. And the lying permeates everything Stumpie does or
says. That alone is impeachable afaic.
According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
Republicans these days, there is no one cross examining witnesses in the
closed door House hearings on impeachment, but in fact there are plenty
of Repubicans in these hearings asking plenty of questions, members of
the committees that are holding the hearings.
And they keep complaining that the hearings are private, comparing them
with the Clinton impreachment, but for Clinton, there had already been a
closed door investigation conducted by Kenneth Starr. These hearings
are investigative, the equivalent of the Ken Starr investigatinons
When they are done with this stage, they will have public hearings, at
which the same witnesses will appear. If any of you remember the
Watergate hearings, they were first closed-door and then public and of
course only the public ones were on the news, and you might have noticed
that the ones asking the questions knew what the answers woudl be,
because they had been though things once already, during the
investigative stage.
Stumpie is a liar, and some of his supporters are willing to cooperate
with the lying. And the lying permeates everything Stumpie does or
says. That alone is impeachable afaic.
Cindy Hamilton
Oct 25, 2019, 6:12:28 AM10/25/19
to
so their constituents will think they're doing something.
Cindy Hamilton
Bod
Oct 25, 2019, 8:21:19 AM10/25/19
to
--
Bod
trader_4
Oct 25, 2019, 9:40:33 AM10/25/19
to
On Thursday, October 24, 2019 at 11:25:16 PM UTC-4, micky wrote:
> OT, Getting the facts straight
>
> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
> Republicans these days, there is no one cross examining witnesses in the
> closed door House hearings on impeachment, but in fact there are plenty
> of Repubicans in these hearings asking plenty of questions, members of
> the committees that are holding the hearings.
>
> And they keep complaining that the hearings are private, comparing them
> with the Clinton impreachment, but for Clinton, there had already been a
> closed door investigation conducted by Kenneth Starr. These hearings
> are investigative, the equivalent of the Ken Starr investigatinons
Always an excuse for Democrats, always. What valid reason is there for
>
> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
> Republicans these days, there is no one cross examining witnesses in the
> closed door House hearings on impeachment, but in fact there are plenty
> of Repubicans in these hearings asking plenty of questions, members of
> the committees that are holding the hearings.
>
> And they keep complaining that the hearings are private, comparing them
> with the Clinton impreachment, but for Clinton, there had already been a
> closed door investigation conducted by Kenneth Starr. These hearings
> are investigative, the equivalent of the Ken Starr investigatinons
not having the whole thing in open session, with only exceptions for
the few things that involve national security? Of course if this was
reversed, the Republicans were doing it, then being the big hypocrite
partisan hack, you'd be here screaming your head off about how wrong it is.
>
> When they are done with this stage, they will have public hearings, at
> which the same witnesses will appear. If any of you remember the
> Watergate hearings, they were first closed-door and then public and of
> course only the public ones were on the news, and you might have noticed
> that the ones asking the questions knew what the answers woudl be,
> because they had been though things once already, during the
> investigative stage.
We watched it all play out, including the famous moments when John Dean
testifies, Butterfield revealed the tapes. All that testimony didn't
happen in secret behind closed doors and then 6 months or a year later
get replayed in public.
>
> Stumpie is a liar, and some of his supporters are willing to cooperate
> with the lying. And the lying permeates everything Stumpie does or
> says. That alone is impeachable afaic.
compelling need for these hearings to be in secret? And why isn't the lib
media, that is also being denied access, not howling? Of course they would
be, if the Republicans were doing it to a Democrat president.
rbowman
Oct 25, 2019, 10:04:17 AM10/25/19
to
what this Congress has accomplished.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acts_of_the_116th_United_States_Congress#Public_laws
Other than extending money spending schemes they peaked out by making
Bob Dole an honorary colonel and renaming a post office in Lame Duck Texas.
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 10:13:44 AM10/25/19
to
On 10/25/2019 6:40 AM, trader_4 wrote:
> On Thursday, October 24, 2019 at 11:25:16 PM UTC-4, micky wrote:
>> OT, Getting the facts straight
>>
>> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
>> Republicans these days, there is no one cross examining witnesses in the
>> closed door House hearings on impeachment, but in fact there are plenty
>> of Repubicans in these hearings asking plenty of questions, members of
>> the committees that are holding the hearings.
>>
>> And they keep complaining that the hearings are private, comparing them
>> with the Clinton impreachment, but for Clinton, there had already been a
>> closed door investigation conducted by Kenneth Starr. These hearings
>> are investigative, the equivalent of the Ken Starr investigatinons
>
> Always an excuse for Democrats, always. What valid reason is there for
> not having the whole thing in open session, with only exceptions for
> the few things that involve national security? Of course if this was
> reversed, the Republicans were doing it, then being the big hypocrite
> partisan hack, you'd be here screaming your head off about how wrong it is.
>
They are following the house rules created by the Repubs for the Clinton
> On Thursday, October 24, 2019 at 11:25:16 PM UTC-4, micky wrote:
>> OT, Getting the facts straight
>>
>> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
>> Republicans these days, there is no one cross examining witnesses in the
>> closed door House hearings on impeachment, but in fact there are plenty
>> of Repubicans in these hearings asking plenty of questions, members of
>> the committees that are holding the hearings.
>>
>> And they keep complaining that the hearings are private, comparing them
>> with the Clinton impreachment, but for Clinton, there had already been a
>> closed door investigation conducted by Kenneth Starr. These hearings
>> are investigative, the equivalent of the Ken Starr investigatinons
>
> Always an excuse for Democrats, always. What valid reason is there for
> not having the whole thing in open session, with only exceptions for
> the few things that involve national security? Of course if this was
> reversed, the Republicans were doing it, then being the big hypocrite
> partisan hack, you'd be here screaming your head off about how wrong it is.
>
Bengazi investigations. Did you have a problem with them then?
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 10:14:10 AM10/25/19
to
Cindy Hamilton
Oct 25, 2019, 10:29:44 AM10/25/19
to
compromise is for, they have barely been able to function.
Cindy Hamilton
trader_4
Oct 25, 2019, 10:40:21 AM10/25/19
to
Benghazi, it's the impeachment of a president. They should have looked
to the examples of Clinton and Nixon. And with regard to Benghazi,
I don't recall how much was public, how much was private. I certainly
do recall Hillary testifying in public, saying "with all due respect,
what difference does it make". I recall that moron that was responsible
for security there testifying in public that she still believed the
security was adequate for the conditions at the time. Did Hillary fire
her? Why, no, of course not. So a good part of it was public.
And again, I'm always in favor of making as much open as possible.
I'm not a partisan hack, like you.
trader_4
Oct 25, 2019, 10:41:06 AM10/25/19
to
devnull
Oct 25, 2019, 10:56:14 AM10/25/19
to
On 10/25/19 6:12 AM, Cindy_4 wrote:
> Quite a bit of what the Republicans are doing is kabuki for the cameras,
> so their constituents will think they're doing something.
>
> Cindy_4
> Quite a bit of what the Republicans are doing is kabuki for the cameras,
> so their constituents will think they're doing something.
>
And what exactly have the democrats done in the last few years besides heave buckets of mud at President Trump?
What has your girl Rashida done that is beneficial?
Cindy Hamilton
Oct 25, 2019, 11:24:03 AM10/25/19
to
a special prosecutor (Archibald Cox and Ken Starr). Trump's
Justice Department hasn't seen fit to assign a special prosecutor so
the House is doing the investigation themselves.
The actual hearings were public for Nixon and Clinton, as they will
be (should we get that far) for Trump.
Cindy Hamilton
trader_4
Oct 25, 2019, 11:38:12 AM10/25/19
to
in Congress started it's hearings. And we just had the Mueller investigation,
which amounted to the same thing, we have the convictions of Flynn, Manafort,
Gates, etc. And regardless of any of that, what is the valid reason for
holding hearings in secret? The people have a right to see and hear for
themselves, not have in spun and dribbled out in leaks.
Cindy Hamilton
Oct 25, 2019, 12:52:27 PM10/25/19
to
which was the precipitating condition for the House investigation.
The House has always done a lot of stuff behind closed doors, even when
national security is not involved.
Cindy Hamilton
Clare Snyder
Oct 25, 2019, 3:24:28 PM10/25/19
to
Kabuki (???) is a classical Japanese dance-drama. Kabuki theatre is
known for the stylization of its drama and for the elaborate make-up
worn by some of its performers. In 2005, the Kabuki theatre was
proclaimed by UNESCO as an intangible heritage possessing outstanding
universal value.
trader_4
Oct 25, 2019, 4:30:21 PM10/25/19
to
started after a criminal investigation was completed. In Watergate,
the Watergate Committee started their investigation at the same time
that the special prosecutor was appointed. They ran simultaneously.
>
> The House has always done a lot of stuff behind closed doors, even when
> national security is not involved.
>
> Cindy Hamilton
to further divide the country. It gives Trump and his trumpets something
big and valid to complain about, rile up his base about, complain that
there is yet another conspiracy against him, etc.
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 5:32:53 PM10/25/19
to
has not ignored.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/449780-a-list-of-the-democratic-legislative-priorities-being-held-up-in-the-senate
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 5:34:34 PM10/25/19
to
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 5:42:01 PM10/25/19
to
Should they always change the rules before doing anything new.
This is the investigation - you know - the one Barr refused to do.
Everything will be wonderfully open to full public sight when we get to
the trial where the defense will be welcome to present their case.
That's the way it works. For Nixon and Clinton, the justice department
actually did their job and appointed special prosecutor or grand jury.
trumps toddy Barr chose not to do his job.
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 5:43:57 PM10/25/19
to
Ed Pawlowski
Oct 25, 2019, 6:49:59 PM10/25/19
to
Roger Blake
Oct 25, 2019, 7:30:22 PM10/25/19
to
On 2019-10-25, micky <NONONOa...@rushpost.com> wrote:
> OT, Getting the facts straight
>
> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
> Republicans these days...
> OT, Getting the facts straight
>
> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
When it comes to lying, it's hard to beat the DemocRATs. For starters...
"The Social Security number will never become a national ID number."
"The income tax will never affect working people, it's just a nuisance
tax for the very rich."
"The Federal Reserve will put an end to the boom/bust cycle (recessions
and depressions)."
"If you like your plan and your doctor you can keep them."
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.)
NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
Don't talk to cops! -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com
Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
trader_4
Oct 25, 2019, 7:41:23 PM10/25/19
to
trader_4
Oct 25, 2019, 7:46:24 PM10/25/19
to
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 8:42:14 PM10/25/19
to
them up for discussion.
It's not the Democrats in the House that are the do-nothings, It is the
Republicans in the Senate.
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 8:43:41 PM10/25/19
to
those cases.
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 8:45:39 PM10/25/19
to
hear it.
Bob F
Oct 25, 2019, 10:27:25 PM10/25/19
to
On 10/25/2019 4:30 PM, Roger Blake wrote:
> On 2019-10-25, micky <NONONOa...@rushpost.com> wrote:
>> OT, Getting the facts straight
>>
>> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
>> Republicans these days...
>
> When it comes to lying, it's hard to beat the DemocRATs. For starters...
>
> "The Social Security number will never become a national ID number."
>
> "The income tax will never affect working people, it's just a nuisance
> tax for the very rich."
>
> "The Federal Reserve will put an end to the boom/bust cycle (recessions
> and depressions)."
>
> "If you like your plan and your doctor you can keep them."
>
And then there's the Republicans
> On 2019-10-25, micky <NONONOa...@rushpost.com> wrote:
>> OT, Getting the facts straight
>>
>> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
>> Republicans these days...
>
> When it comes to lying, it's hard to beat the DemocRATs. For starters...
>
> "The Social Security number will never become a national ID number."
>
> "The income tax will never affect working people, it's just a nuisance
> tax for the very rich."
>
> "The Federal Reserve will put an end to the boom/bust cycle (recessions
> and depressions)."
>
> "If you like your plan and your doctor you can keep them."
>
"No one will lose coverage. There will be insurance for everybody.
Healthcare will be a “lot less expensive” for everyone — the government,
consumers, providers. "
“We’re going to have insurance for everybody,” Trump said in an
interview with The Washington Post. “There was a philosophy in some
circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going
to happen with us.”
As his run for president took shape, candidate Trump boasted via
Twitter, “I was the first & only potential GOP candidate to state there
will be no cuts to Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid”
Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway made a promise that almost certainly
can’t be met with the House bill: “We don't want anyone who currently
has insurance to not have insurance.”
As he campaigned for the White House that he declared in an interview
with CBS’ “60 Minutes”: “I am going to take care of everybody …
Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken
care of now.” More recently, Trump has promised that repeal will end
with “a beautiful picture.”
"And Mexico will pay for it."
.............
rbowman
Oct 25, 2019, 10:50:13 PM10/25/19
to
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That
whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is
the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new
Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its
powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their
Safety and Happiness."
Bunch of treasonous bastards back then... Given the clown shows in the
UK and Israel the parliamentary system isn't functional either.
rbowman
Oct 25, 2019, 10:51:03 PM10/25/19
to
rbowman
Oct 25, 2019, 10:53:06 PM10/25/19
to
their duly elected representatives are really up to.
micky
Oct 26, 2019, 4:24:09 AM10/26/19
to
In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 25 Oct 2019 18:49:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski
And of course, tweeking is what normally happens when the second chamber
of Congress looks at a bill the first has passed. They pass a different
or slightly different version, then they get together and agree on one
version. But not with McConnell, who should be ashamed of himself.
of Congress looks at a bill the first has passed. They pass a different
or slightly different version, then they get together and agree on one
version. But not with McConnell, who should be ashamed of himself.
micky
Oct 26, 2019, 5:00:45 AM10/26/19
to
In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 25 Oct 2019 17:45:32 -0700, Bob F
"ABC News’s Terry Moran reminded him that during Watergate, lawmakers
took depositions behind closed doors before there was an impeachment
resolution, just as the House is doing now.
Graham did not dispute this.
CNN’s Ted Barrett reminded him that during the Clinton impeachment,
House Republicans took private depositions before public hearings. “Why
was it okay then and not now?”
“The inquiry itself became very public,” Graham replied."
Even Stumpie's poodle admits that there were closed door depositions
before the public ones during Watergate and Clinton.
>>>>>> Stumpie is a liar, and some of his supporters are willing to cooperate
>>>>>> with the lying. And the lying permeates everything Stumpie does or
>>>>>> says. That alone is impeachable afaic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> How poignant. Two partisan hacks agreeing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> How poignant, a partisan political hack calling us that.
>>
>> Now that's a stupid and obvious lie. I've criticized both Republicans and Democrats when they are wrong. I've said Trump should be impeached. You on the other hand are like Micky, a total partisan hack who has never criticized or found anything wrong that a Democrat has ever done. You're just the mirror image of the blind trumptards.
>>
>
>Wrong. I have criticized Democrats often. You just haven't been there to
>hear it.
And even if you were totally partisan, that wouldn't affect your
accurate criticism of the proceedings against Stumpie. It's a red
herring. He can't find something to criticize in what you said so he
criticizes you. Oh, I guess that makes it ad hominem too and, very
importantly, nothing more than that.
<bobn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 10/25/2019 4:46 PM, trader_4 wrote:
>> On Friday, October 25, 2019 at 5:43:57 PM UTC-4, Bob F wrote:
>>> On 10/25/2019 7:41 AM, trader_4 wrote:
>>>> On Friday, October 25, 2019 at 10:14:10 AM UTC-4, Bob F wrote:
>>>>> On 10/24/2019 8:25 PM, micky wrote:
>>>>>> OT, Getting the facts straight
>>>>>>
>>>>>> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
>>>>>> Republicans these days, there is no one cross examining witnesses in the
>>>>>> closed door House hearings on impeachment, but in fact there are plenty
>>>>>> of Repubicans in these hearings asking plenty of questions, members of
>>>>>> the committees that are holding the hearings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And they keep complaining that the hearings are private, comparing them
>>>>>> with the Clinton impreachment, but for Clinton, there had already been a
>>>>>> closed door investigation conducted by Kenneth Starr. These hearings
>>>>>> are investigative, the equivalent of the Ken Starr investigatinons
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When they are done with this stage, they will have public hearings, at
>>>>>> which the same witnesses will appear. If any of you remember the
>>>>>> Watergate hearings, they were first closed-door and then public and of
>>>>>> course only the public ones were on the news, and you might have noticed
>>>>>> that the ones asking the questions knew what the answers woudl be,
>>>>>> because they had been though things once already, during the
>>>>>> investigative stage
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/24/lickspittle-lindseys-week-walk-backs/
>On 10/25/2019 4:46 PM, trader_4 wrote:
>> On Friday, October 25, 2019 at 5:43:57 PM UTC-4, Bob F wrote:
>>> On 10/25/2019 7:41 AM, trader_4 wrote:
>>>> On Friday, October 25, 2019 at 10:14:10 AM UTC-4, Bob F wrote:
>>>>> On 10/24/2019 8:25 PM, micky wrote:
>>>>>> OT, Getting the facts straight
>>>>>>
>>>>>> According to the misleading, dare I say lying, talking points of
>>>>>> Republicans these days, there is no one cross examining witnesses in the
>>>>>> closed door House hearings on impeachment, but in fact there are plenty
>>>>>> of Repubicans in these hearings asking plenty of questions, members of
>>>>>> the committees that are holding the hearings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And they keep complaining that the hearings are private, comparing them
>>>>>> with the Clinton impreachment, but for Clinton, there had already been a
>>>>>> closed door investigation conducted by Kenneth Starr. These hearings
>>>>>> are investigative, the equivalent of the Ken Starr investigatinons
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When they are done with this stage, they will have public hearings, at
>>>>>> which the same witnesses will appear. If any of you remember the
>>>>>> Watergate hearings, they were first closed-door and then public and of
>>>>>> course only the public ones were on the news, and you might have noticed
>>>>>> that the ones asking the questions knew what the answers woudl be,
>>>>>> because they had been though things once already, during the
>>>>>> investigative stage
"ABC News’s Terry Moran reminded him that during Watergate, lawmakers
took depositions behind closed doors before there was an impeachment
resolution, just as the House is doing now.
Graham did not dispute this.
CNN’s Ted Barrett reminded him that during the Clinton impeachment,
House Republicans took private depositions before public hearings. “Why
was it okay then and not now?”
“The inquiry itself became very public,” Graham replied."
Even Stumpie's poodle admits that there were closed door depositions
before the public ones during Watergate and Clinton.
>>>>>> Stumpie is a liar, and some of his supporters are willing to cooperate
>>>>>> with the lying. And the lying permeates everything Stumpie does or
>>>>>> says. That alone is impeachable afaic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> How poignant. Two partisan hacks agreeing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> How poignant, a partisan political hack calling us that.
>>
>> Now that's a stupid and obvious lie. I've criticized both Republicans and Democrats when they are wrong. I've said Trump should be impeached. You on the other hand are like Micky, a total partisan hack who has never criticized or found anything wrong that a Democrat has ever done. You're just the mirror image of the blind trumptards.
>>
>
>Wrong. I have criticized Democrats often. You just haven't been there to
>hear it.
accurate criticism of the proceedings against Stumpie. It's a red
herring. He can't find something to criticize in what you said so he
criticizes you. Oh, I guess that makes it ad hominem too and, very
importantly, nothing more than that.
trader_4
Oct 26, 2019, 10:47:01 AM10/26/19
to
started it's investigation in May 1973, the same month Archibald Cox was
appointed special prosecutor. Why do you spread the lies of your masters?
trader_4
Oct 26, 2019, 10:48:58 AM10/26/19
to
The Democrats are wrong! They should have already impeached Trump!
You mean like that?
ROFL
trader_4
Oct 26, 2019, 11:00:20 AM10/26/19
to
>
> >>>>>> Stumpie is a liar, and some of his supporters are willing to cooperate
> >>>>>> with the lying. And the lying permeates everything Stumpie does or
> >>>>>> says. That alone is impeachable afaic.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> How poignant. Two partisan hacks agreeing.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> How poignant, a partisan political hack calling us that.
> >>
> >> Now that's a stupid and obvious lie. I've criticized both Republicans and Democrats when they are wrong. I've said Trump should be impeached. You on the other hand are like Micky, a total partisan hack who has never criticized or found anything wrong that a Democrat has ever done. You're just the mirror image of the blind trumptards.
> >>
> >
> >Wrong. I have criticized Democrats often. You just haven't been there to
> >hear it.
>
> And even if you were totally partisan, that wouldn't affect your
> accurate criticism of the proceedings against Stumpie.
It's a red
> herring. He can't find something to criticize in what you said so he
> criticizes you. Oh, I guess that makes it ad hominem too and, very
> importantly, nothing more than that.
doing it in secret? How about explaining to us why, in America, these
hearings to impeach a president should not be PUBLIC so we can all see?
What are you Democrats hiding and what are you afraid the American people
will see? But heh, no time for any of that logical thought process.
Just listen to your master's voice. Just like the trumpets and so on it
goes.
0 new messages