Replies

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.