Posted on 11/06/2019 12:29:32 PM PST by Jacquerie
And the headline is false. One committee member said on TV that Schiff should answer questions under oath and the headline writer changed it to:
HUGE: House Intel Committee Members Call on Schiff to Answer Questions Under Oath
Which sounds like it was a group effort which it wasn’t.
Clickbait is getting worse and worse.
No way will the Dems vote to make him testify.
if he doesn’t testify doj needs criminal investigation owb for false statement on complaint..
we need to make enough noise schiff has to testify or be replaced.
start making questions now
gay?
standard hotel
buck
ukraine funds
hey dems made no limit on the impeachment inquiry so everything is open..
Thank you, that’s interesting. I think even some conventional GOPers are realizing that this is about more than Trump personally and is about the very legitimacy of a party or government other than the Dems. And no matter how conciliatory, these GOPers in the crosshairs too.
I don’t know why you say for the first time. You must have her confused with somebody else.
She was the one who got Comey to admit that he didn’t notify the Gang of 8 about the FBI investigation into Trump.
I guess I look at her thru the prism of local reports, she represents the district just North of me.
lol
“Nice but one Congressman saying something reasonable is not “HUGE”
“HUGE” would be if a Senate committee actually subpoenaed Schiff to testify.”
There could be a double edged legal sword with that at this point. To do this would immediately make the Senate partial. And if it goes to the Senate from the house for trial, they can no longer claim to be an impartial jury. For this reason it could work against Trump if they did this. I don’t know, but I wonder what the legal ramifications might be in this situation? Could it cause a legitimate vote issue in the Senate if they are viewed as impartial jurors?
Have you NOT been around the past bunch of years? :)
There is NEVER a penalty or penal phase for dems.
Some here are actually beginning there are more than just a few Rs who aren’t in the deep state’s pocket and naively think the senate is Trump’s protection.
Read Mitch’s response to the impeachment question yesterday.
He basically said “give us a little more to go on dems so we can oust him because I dont want my wife’s china dealings to come under scrutiny?
Their first mistake is referring to this guy as “whistleblower”. The need to call him what he is, i.e., a “leaker”. Don’t give Schiff that win by buying in to that whistleblower farce.
Sorry I meant “viewed as “partial” jurors” not impartial.
I agree with your analysis. I’m not advocating that the Senate do that. Though they might want to do it in the trial stage if the House impeaches.
I’m just pointing out that I’m sick of headlines that start with HUGE when it’s barely even news, and I really detest headlines with outright lies to exaggerate.
Does this “demand” come with a SUBPOENA to SchiffHead compelling him to testify UNDER OATH as a Fact Witness?
This article doesn't make mention of it, but Fox (anonymous source) is reporting that the Republicans (plural) on the Intel Committee will call Schiff.
“No one will ever prosecute him”.
If he embarrasses the Dims, they will eat him alive.
Enough already, instead send a Letter to AG Barr and ask him if it is Normal Procedure for a Member of Congress to conspire with someone divulging Classified Information before going to the ICIG to actually file a complaint??
Wouldn’t this be a Conspiracy to Commit Espionage and also a Seditious COnspiracy to Overthrow the United States Government.
He could lose his Chuck-E-Cheese card or worse yet AARP benefits.
lol, I agree, “sensationalism” is rampant lately. I think you are right, as soon as it gets to the Senate then maybe they can do something in that direction. But until then I think even the separation of powers might prevent anything like this until it does. And at this point it’s not even a legitimate official and lawful investigation in the house.
What sucks is I think that if it does get to the Senate the House Democrats are who get to come over to the Senate and be the prosecutors for the Senate trial. The members of the Senate are nothing more than jurors. I might be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure this is how it works. It really is one sided leaning to more power for the house.
I agree. But, she’s also standing up for the process itself. Because this sort of thing can not continue regardless of who is POTUS. .
It may not be “huge”, but so far, so good.
So far, 100% of the energy behind this House impeachment farce is coming from Democrat leadership, and they don’t even seem capable of masking the naked partisanship that drives them.
If Republicans continue to be solid when there is an opportunity to vote against something impeachment related, as they have so far, this farce is going nowhere. If the Republicans continue to speak out against the process when asked, the Democrats will be exposed as the political hack that they are.
The American people won’t support removal based on party politics - and the Senate knows this - the House Democrat leadership is really blowing it here - they will be putting their Democrat colleagues in the Senate in the awkward position of having to side with the Republicans.
If the House impeachment ever comes to a vote, I bet there will be a significant number of Democrats who vote against it in order to avoid the embarrassment of being discredited when the Senate dismisses it overwhelmingly in bipartisan vote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.