Posted on 12/18/2017 1:57:58 PM PST by CivilWarBrewing
The former associate DOJ deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr did NOT testify today as scheduled!
I might be one of only a handful of FReepers who has actually given testimony before a Congressional subcommittee in Executive Session.
IT is not announced to the public.
The room is “secure”.
You were only given a few days notice to appear (so that, in my case, I could gather together documents I would need to support my testimony).
You have, in my case, a Senator as the subcommittee chairman.
The General Counsel, who does the greater part of the questioning, actually runs the hearing.
Staff investigators/analysts are there if they are involved in the subject of the hearing/s.
There was a stenographer present who would transcript the testimony. They then send you a rough galley of it for corrections and omissions (hmm’s, uh’s, things like that).
Corrections included the proper spelling of names, the provision of dates for events discussed, names sanitized for security reasons or as irrelevant to the subject matter, the marking of Exhibit documents and where they were in the testimony, the addition of information relevant to what was mentioned in the hearing but which was not immediately available for the hearing, etc.
Then, in my case, it was returned to the Subcommittee’s counsel and placed under an Security Embargo. Then close to the public release of the testimony, it was placed under a media embargo.
During this time, I had been interviewed by a major US magazine about two weeks before publication time, which would coincide with the official release of the testimony.
My story was one of the cover page features of this magazine, plus I appeared in two other major magazines because of something else I was involved in. And I was interviewed the day before the release by a supposedly competent reporter/later Asst editor of a major newspaper for the story to come out the next day (He screwed it up and I had to threaten to sue the newspaper before they ran a half-assed second story. It was that event that got me into journalism since I figured that if this highly regarded man couldn’t get my published quotes correctly, then I would tell my own story, and did.
The major US magazine quoted me completely and accurately. I spent 5 hours with the senior diplomatic correspondent going through my whole story. He picked out the key points and observations/quotes I had focused on, and did a good job of putting my work into the larger context of a major national story. He was a real professional.
So that’s how an Executive Session works as well as news embargos too.
Yes, Executive Sessions, if you’ve ever read them, are the most revealing of all congressional testimonies. A smart journalist doesn’t just read the open session hearings/reports, but also goes for the Executive Session hearings/reports when they are released. They help to fill out the story as best allowed (high security information is often redacted or left out of even the ES printed hearings).
Welcome to my world, JohnG45. It is stranger than you think, but extremely exciting. I learned that in Nam.
Congressional investigations are supposed to expose wrong doing.
The DOJ is supposed to prosecute it.
It's the latter that's not doing its job.
You are well insulated in your cynicism as nobody can provide you closed door testimony on this forum.
Say what? I was reading through the thread. Posters were making (appropriate) comments about what a waste of time Congressional hearings are because of pontificating, posturing Congresspeople, lack of holding witnesses in Contempt etc.. You made a comment about Congress finally getting to the bottom of the Special Counsel fiasco by going into closed session for the upcoming witnesses. I doubted that and asked: how you knew what is going on beyond those closed doors.
You immediately get bent out of shape by my simple question. You call me a jerk. You relate a story about someone who was in one of those meeting relating from notes about what went on in one specific case. I responded that since what actually went on was relayed to you than what that person said to you was hearsay. Let me repeat: Everything that person said to you was hearsay. The simple fact remains; you were not present at that meeting.
You then send me a link to Wikipedia. Wikipedia? Wikipedia as a reference? Wikipedia where anyone can add an unedited, unverified comment anytime to what is written there? I questioned your source but the fact of the matter remains: you were not in attendance at that (or any closed-door Congressional hearing) and therefore everything relayed to you is hearsay.
Does this sound familiar? If not, simply go back and read the series of exchanges.
See post #198 and #203.
lol
Of late dropping a heavy bar bell on your neck is the way to go.
You have to share your opinion? Oh, okay, that is what Free Republic is all about. But at least get your facts straight before you opine. And, I’ll have a question for you at the end.
Here are the sum of my posts to G Larry - #6, #29, #160, #168 and #203. Go back and read them. Or make it easy on yourself and simply search my User Name (JohnG45) in the top right corner of FR’s thread page and you will see the exchange in a nice neat row.
Some background: So many FReepers seem to place great faith in Congressional closed hearings. I do not! Transparency is the name of the game. I understand secrecy is necessary in cases of military or intelligence testimony but I do not believe secrecy should apply to testimony regarding the operation of our DOJ and the FBI. Secrecy here leads to whitewash and coverup.
So I start reading this thread. Early on, (Post #2) FReeper PGR88 opines, “Congressional hearings are the most useless of endeavors. Full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.” I wholeheartedly agree but post nothing. Moments later (Post #4) G Larry responds, “Not so on the closed door sessions.” With this comment I do not agree because I believe DC to be a cesspool and any Congressperson who stays (and 99% of them try to) become part and parcel of that swamp. So I ask (Post #6) a simple question of G Larry, “And you know this how?”
G Larry responds with a non sequitur (Post #19) about some women sitting in jail over a corrupt Boeing contract. But he never answered my simple question about how he knew what went on in these closed-door sessions. After all, you would have to be in there to really know what went on. So I ask G Larry (Post #29), Were you in that closed session?
G Larry responds in Post #102 gratuitously calling me a “jerk” for asking a very obvious question. He continues by describing a friend of a friend (or some such) was involved in a certain case, blah, blah, blah. So G Larry only got his information anecdotally and that means it is nothing more than hearsay. If you are on the outside and someone tells you what went on inside it is pure hearsay. So I respond (Post #160) and remind him that what he presenting as evidence is hearsay. He presents WikiPedia as a source.
WikiPedia? Puhleese! The only way you know what goes on in a closed hearing is if you are actually in there and experience it yourself. And let me repeat, I do not trust closed door sessions for stuff like this.
So now you know the facts and can read them for yourself.
So I leave you with this very obvious question: Where in God’s name did you get this information, “You’re the one who rather arrogantly picked a fight over something rather innocuous which he had said. You kind of parade yourself as the expert because you were in an executive session once. (bully for you!) Anyone who has listened to Congressional testimony has heard a witness defer to closed session for the sharing of classified information. You seem to suggest that closed session is hardly that significant. When Larry suggests otherwise, you seem to say, “I know better than you because I have actually been in one.””
What were you reading? I have never been to a closed-door session and never stated nor implied I had been in any of my posts to G Larry or any other FReeper on this thread. What were you reading or mis-reading?
Please respond.
Ohr: Cant help it! Must go to Fort Marcy Park....
McCabe: Brucey don’t open up that can of Uncle Billie’s Brand Arkanocide!!
ok, that was funny!
The optics of this are so bad.
They are hanging themselves and it's so much fun to watch.
John,
My apologies. I misread #201 which was ADDRESSED to you, not sourced by you.
Flagrant Contempt of Congress,.....when are these people going to bear the force of law!
Thank you.
And thanks for taking the time to read that lengthy response to your post.
I’m used to posting comments that are no longer than one or two sentences at most.
Thanks again.
JohnG
This is a flagrant defiance of Congressional authority....people have to start point to prison.....as it is the globalist insurrection against the duly elected President remain impervious to censure.....
.....there is a war going on for the sovereignty of the United States, are they American people and the statutes of the US to never be defended by Attorney General?
Fire Sessions if he won’t do his job, send him home in disgrace!
Thanks for the correction.
Thanks for taking the time to type the synopsis of how it works. Most folks don’t know the details but it sure helps to know how it really works. Appreciate your effort.
Maybe they are too busy burning papers, smashing i-phones and computers under advise of attorney?
are you forgetting Loretta Lynch and all the other “Cabinet Officials”?
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.