Replies

https://www.c-span.org/video/?459449-1/house-judiciary-committee-hearing-mueller-report ….
******

Thanks go to Tracybeanz
*****

Nadler giving opening statement asking for full report and stating it is law. (It isn’t)

***
Stating they will issue suboenas — Stating that House supports the subpoenas- authorizes for documents and testimony for former WH employees. They want the documents they received from the WH before testifying- stating no privilege for POTUS since he provided it to outside coun

****
Nadler talking about Trumps tweets on Nadler- Saying that he is wrong about his points on the Starr report. Stating that it wasn’t about congress receiving information and the debate was about the public release of the information.

****
Nadler stating that POTUS abused his office- “We must make it harder for future presidents to behave this way”

***
Collins up- Talking about the crisis on the southern border, and saying they are starting the session off wrong- subpoena for evidence is wrong- Starr and Mueller were different. Asking AG to break the law. Forbidden to release, different regulations for Starr and Mueller

***
Collins- pushing back against the left and stating that the release of the information is illegal- Nadler demands our AG to break the law and regulations. AG is doing exactly what he said under regulations written by Reno and other dems- he doesnt have to but will

***
Collins- Why are we doing this?? What is the rush? Subpoenas are misguided- to the wrong people- two are cooperating and have provided over 8k pages of docs. They are announcing this without letting people know.
****
(He talks really fast) If you cooperate, subpoena, if you ignore subpoena, talking about how Whitaker gave a subpoena for no reason- wanna use subpoena because it sounds good- this is all preemptive- 5 people listed for subpoena have cooperated.

***
“I cant find anything so I am just going to blow everything up until I do” At the end of the day this president- no collusion, no obstruction.

***
Collins- At the end of the day the POTUS is still the POTUS- AG doing exactly what regs say, and for that congrats you get a subpoena.
***
Nadler offering an amendment- they wouldnt let them read it— objecting- they wouldnt let them read the damn amendment!

***
Amendment is that upon the adoption, the chairman is authorized to issue subpoenas for final report. pursuant to 39152017 and any accompanying docs- underlying evidence, and at his discretion he can offer subpoenas to: McGann, Bannon, Hicks, Priebus, Donaldson (who took notes)
***
Comparing to Starr- Starr was an independent counsel, the dems changed the rules about this afterward because of how intrusive it was- Mueller was under Special Counsel rules that were changed BECAUSE they didnt like it.

***
Nadler is obtuse, and holding up books about the evidence turned over to committee on Starr and Watergate— not the same.

***
Collins again: Cant say Starr and Mueller— they are not the same. As long as we perpetrate the fraud of that, we will continue down process as we are. He is mentioned independent counsel vs. Meuller SC regs—

***
Has used two precedents- both are impeachment- If chairman wanted this, he should open the impeachment inquiry- if this is simply about the report I could understand this, but we havent even gotten it yet.

***
Another problem- Lets take a look at names- all of them have responded to initial letters, they are close to potus, and then the press writes about it- political theater and trashing the president.

***
Nadler addressing law- the fact is true that they operate under different laws but we have same committee rules and rights to fulfill their duty.

***
Buck: new laws strike a balance between disclosure and protected information- will set precedent and have unintended consequences- will cause political repercussions- chilling future investigation by releasing (because people will be afraid to respond and will comp sources/meth.)
***
Talking about Rule 6E- GJ information- please do not undermine the GJ for politics- the amendment modifies so that they can not subpoena for GJ testimony. (He doesnt want to weaponize a GJ- totally understandable)

***
Nadler in opposition to the amendment- Again going to past instances for GJ- Nadler is completely dense. Not only would providing GJ to congress cause ridiculous leaks, who would feel safe going before a GJ after that***
They want to indict the president, where the damn report says clearly he did not commit any crimes- in other words, they are not going to abide by Muellers report and conclusion. This is sick

***
Sensenbrenner— Nadler putting the cart before the horse- Saying that congress should go to court to get teeth behind. Otherwise, DOJ will go to court and it will be held up for decades because it is dispute between legislative and executive.

***
Sensenbrenner- we all want to get to the bottom of this, ,but the law requires things to come first, like going to court to get an order for the DOJ to release the material. Otherwise, the DOJ puts themselves in the position of committing a crime-
***
Nadler- We will as appropriate go to court, but we need a subpoena first- Sensenbrenner reclaims- thing is Starr and WW got appropriate order without Judiciary Committee being on their back- in both cases were articles of impeachment (no impeachment here)
***
Jackson Lee: underlying reasons why we need to move forward on subpoena- in letter on 3/24 AG says he will summarize conclusions - countering the obstruction decision. AG attempted to “swat away” russian coordination, focusing on “no underlying crime”
***
Jackson Lee: going over subpoena’s issued in the past. Stating that they haven’t really issued any subpoena’s in a long time- bringing up Gowdy and Benghazi- she believes they are being fair and balanced- yielding.
****
Point is there is a history of subpoenas being offered in other committees, and they havent used them, and in this instance the committee is being fair in offering a subpoena.
***
Biggs: Entering Wittes article into record. Talking about how there are connections to Nadler. Yielded to Buck, who is quoting why it would be unfair to release GJ testimony—

****
Buck stating again Nadlers own words on the IC back in the day. He has contradicted himself (shocker). GJ testimony may not even be true- the R’s are fighting to protect the GJ not because they want to save Trump, but to protect a GJ

NIKK..Thanks go to Tracybeanz
********
Back to Biggs- Supports the amendment to stop GJ info - normal process is to go to court and ask for the info and then issue subpoena- they aren’t doing that this time. They are trying to put the cart before the horse. Resolution will go forward regardless of what Barr provides
****
(eyeroll) it’s Cicilline-stating that IC in the past went to congress first to seek permission to release the information. He is saying AG hasnt done that, while not pointing out that it wasnt the AG in those cases who went to court for permission to release, it was the SC

****

Nadler stating that the same argument he made back then stands now. I think what the problem is here, is that we all know the second these dems get the information they are going to leak it. That was never such a big issue before. Dems=public, no doubt.
******************

Tracybeanz..I just apologized for quick typing making sure you guys are understanding what I am trying to say- not my normal tweeting but this hearing is moving REALLY fast. Tweet disappeared.
********

Ratcliffe talking about Schiff not caring about classified information, stating that he can’t believe the chairman of the Judiciary committee stating he doesn’t care about the law and regulations- Law and Order is basically gone- which is worse?

******

Ratcliffe- haven’t heard anything about laws- where does it say that the AG must turn over an unredacted full report- the AG is going above and beyond, but it will never be good enough- here because some of dems promised the people evidence that never existed.
*******
Some screamed fire and there was none- now they wont accept the results of the man they protected, and he said no collusion, “protect Mueller” has become “forget Mueller” Mueller has provided his findings to the AG who has accurately summarized them. Mueller said no collusion.
******
Let’s issue a subpoena to Mueller— (interrupted by dems) lets ask what he thinks about disclosing the entire report without any redactions, etc- he may have questioned his actions but not his integrity. Wants to subpoena Mueller.
*****

Now they are questioning whether or not Barr lied about what was in the report-
******
GOHMERT IS UP! Being sarcastic about Nadler in his typical fashion, quoting his comments from 98. Nadler didn’t know what was in the report then when he said that and doesn’t know what is in this one either-
*****
Gohmert- stating that there was collusion, to try to bring down a candidate and a POTUS, but it was FBI, DOJ, a former MI6 intelligence officer who was discredited, but they colluded with him. Enough is enough. At some point we have to say what will be written in the annals of
****
history about a real coup that failed- talking about the real story now- “For us to continue this outrageous assault on the office of the POTUS even after the truth has come out that there was no conspiracy with Russia-
*****

to continue to push- we cant stand the facts show it was the dems” There was a time I stood by the chairman and his desire to protect privacy rights and hold back the oreweillian bounds, the only thing he got wrong is the year-

*****
Gohmert- its time to clean this up. Cummings is yielding to Jackson Lee who is reading into the record something about Gowdy sending marshalls to witnesses home in Benghazi.
******

Lesko- Democrats are asking Barr to violate the law- it would be criminal to disclose GJ material without a court order. Obvious this is a continuation to attempt to undermine pres. For 2 years the left has said there was collusion, but as revealed in the summary, not true.
****

Lesko- obvious in every committee there is an obvious effort to undermine the POTUS. Yielding to Jordan- off we go!
*******
We are here because Mueller report isnt what the dems thought it would be. No new indictments or sealed indictments etc. (laughing at questions) What is the basis for no obstruction? On question of collusion, very clear- multiple times they could have collude and didnt
******
Gaetz up- American people are witnessing the death rattle of the Russian collusion hoax lie- we observe now our colleagues moving through the stages of grief.
*****
Now we are in denial- there must be more, this cant be true, etc- baseball— like saying we lost the game bbut we have to squeeze through the box score to see if we won the 3rd inning-
****
Dems trying to bargain away their own statements— (This is great) quoting Nadler about releasing documents (FISA) - Nadler doing what he accused them of doing- now it is OK because they are grasping at straws- as we proceed now-
****
Gaetz hopes that the American people remember that the dems said there was collusion, and lets have honesty and that you were not telling the truth and that you can not be trusted. Will not do a roll call on the amendment.

*****
now* do a roll call.
**************
Clerk states 16 Aye, 24 No. Amendment aout GJ does not pass.

*********
Another amendment being offered- McClintock- I called for a SC because I believed he was innocent, and now it is proven. I too want to see the report to expose the people behind the lie and who was responsible for using it to tear the country apart. I do not want to release information that could impede ongoing investigations into the corruption behind this. Inconceivable that Mueller didnt look into the dossier- the premature release of any information would be obstruction of justice.
*******************************

Another roll call. All of a sudden there are a ton of new people in the room voting.

*********************************

Amendment for Subpoenas is passed. Off we go ...