Posted on 01/30/2020 9:15:53 AM PST by Jim Robinson
And by comparison is insulting snakes.
Someone should ask if there was any exculpatory information in the Atkinson deposition. I assume some repubs know that answer and can say yes or no without revealing confidential info. Assuming that Schiff would either not answer or say there is none.
Why can Schiff grandstand on something other than the question? Our side does not take their five minutes. They should use all five and do the same.
Agreed. Would love to see it.
Getting tired of pencil neck being able to expand his remarks to previous Q&A, they are not supposed to be allowed rebuttals. He always gets away with slipping in ‘let me just add to so and so’s previous statement.
That also happened to me so you were not alone :)
This opens the door to more witnesses. Shut this down and get the Senate to investigate.... Ugh, lots of luck on that too.
The question should simply be.."Who is Eric Ciaramella?" This doesn't identify him as anything other than someone who is being asked about.
My question is not about a "whistleblower" as I have no independent information on his identity. My question is about the actions of known Obama partisans within the NSC and House staff and how they are reported to have conspired before impeachment proceedings had even begun.
The demonrats have their slides prepared again. And they have their questions right and ready.
Come on, Republican Senators - step up to the plate too. We are all pulling for you!
Hey sniveling Schiff, the lesson here for you is don’t bring frivolous investigations or impeachments.
The evidence that witnesses could bring is better served in another venue. What Bolton had whatever it is was not to work.
Interesting thing. ...if no one knows who the whistleblower is, why did Roberts reject the question? Does that mean Roberts knows the whistleblower?
Schiffty is not mentioning that they could go to court to compel the subpoena.
Yes, I agree. I want to know EXACTLY why his name legally protected or not protected
It may go a bit deeper than just attention for himself. If the whistle blower’s name makes it into the hearing would it not then be quoted in the press? Open’s a whole can of worms, or maybe can of snakes.
That question should have been read. Roberts is NOT fair.
Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if their precious “whistleblower” was attending the hearing today
I don’t understand why the Pubs keep giving the Rats time to bloviate upon the Pub questions?
My question today is about whether or not individuals who were holdovers from the Obama National Security Council and Democrat partisans conspired with Schiff staffers to plot impeaching the President before there were formal House impeachment proceedings.
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.