Posted on 11/22/2019 9:10:32 AM PST by Red Badger
Maybe so, but there is a whole Schiffton of PR value in this. This is how the demons play, about time the reps did the same.
The article says that HR660 does not supercede, or displace, this minority witness rule.
On the other hand, haven't seen where this 'minority witness' rule was brought up. anywhere...
If the pubes do anything, it will lend legitimacy to the whole show trial. The house not even voted on impeachment.
The pubes need to stop playing games and get serious. Fight back damn it!
The problem with calling Republican witnesses in a house committee run by Dems is they will not be allowed to answer the questions. Schiff will rule that questions as to the Bidens corruption are irrelevant and questions to the whistleblower who did not attend the call are hearsay even though they let their witnesses’ hearsay in. Makes more sense that Republican witnesses be called in the senate trial where Republicans will set the rules and allow the questions and make this entire thing about the Bidens and Dem corruption and duplicity and not Trump.
Speaking of McCarthy, there was another one who should be remembered.
Senator Joseph McCarthy TRIED to find and out the agents of what we now know as the DEEP STATE back in the 50s. One World MARXISTS (that’s the watered down, POLITE word for COMMUNISTS) then infested the State Department and other agencies and their numbers have grown with the failure to run them out. For his trouble, McCarthy was vilified, hospitalized and MURDERED. (SOUND FAMILIAR?)
With Trump’s election, every passing day exposes more of them along with evidence of their treasonous treachery.
My favorite bumper sticker for years has been:
“LOOKS LIKE THOSE CRAZY BIRCHERS WERE RIGHT!”
If you’re one who still has his head stuck in his nether region, time to come out while there’s still an AMERICA – the nation AND the IDEA! – to come out to!
The swamp hits Pres.Trump in America and PremierNetanyahu in Israel./p>
I used to use the example of ... two foxes and one chicken voting on what to have for lunch ... as a definiton of democracy. Now I can use the example of the House of Representatives trying to impeach a duly elected President.
Tyranny by the majority is exactly why the USA is a Constitutional Republic, not a "democracy." We must teach this to our younger generations.
So IMHO the Dims are looking for an excuse to end the impeachment circus without a vote. And the minority rule might be the excuse they use to stop it and say, "We tried, but rules kept us form proceeding. Vote for us in 2020."
Since republicans control the Senate, can the Senate call these witnesses?
I recently saw a mash-up of (what appeared to be) about 812 journalists on TV all saying "This is a direct threat to our democracy". Word for word. Over and over and over again. Endlessly. It was very funny.
If they don't get "get Trump" the Democrats are in trouble. Or, in other words, "This is a direct threat to our democracy".
“Demoncrats play hardball. Republicans play by “Roberts Rules of Order”. Until we take the gloves off, we will always lose.”
I can’t add to this. Complete truth encapsulated.
“House Rule XI, Clause 1(a)(1)(A) states that “the Rules of the House are the rules of its committees and subcommittees so far as applicable.””
Nancy will simply “rule” that it is “not applicable”.
Just like Obamacare originated in the senate illegally. If the will of the party is in conflict with some sort of rule, the rule is simply ignored.
> Demoncrats play hardball. Republicans play by “Roberts Rules of Order”. <
That’s true when it comes to impeachment, voter fraud, illegal immigration, etc., etc. That’s why I can’t see the GOP surviving as a national party.
Rule of Law
or
Rule of Men
Government is either Republic or Oligarchy.
We lost our republic a while ago. Rule of Law doesn't matter. The folks in charge do what they want.
bkmk
Ab so damned lutely ... if Yertle Turtle will do it.
Can Republicans start their own hearings independent of the House?
The Republicans should put Eric Ciaramella on the list of witnesses they want. I’d like to hear what he has to say.
Obviously, none of us, including Schiff, Nunes, or anyone else, knows who the whistleblower is, but what does Eric Ciaramella think about all this?
I hope Schiff-for-brains does say no. It will just reinforce the kangaroo court nature of these farcical proceedings, reducing their legitimacy even further (if that’s possible). It will also give House members cover to vote no on impeachment.
Is it even Schiff’s call?
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.