And This is How Civil Wars Begin....

[26 Inf]

With Schiff's shenanigans of hiding his non-classified impeachment hearings in the Congressional SCIF, I'm surprised we didn't have fisticuffs today! So far the entire sham can be summed up in two words: Schrödinger's Cat

https://thenationalsentinel.com/2019...t-depositions/
:

I agree that the hearings should be public, unsure if there is law to back up that belief, though.

What everyone seems to forget is that there are 45 Republican members of the 3 committees involved in the hearing, of course there are more Democrats as they have a majority in the House of Representatives.

[flenna]

I recently heard a plausible explanation for why the ComDems did not want an impeachment vote, other than to protect other ComDems in swing states. Without the impeachment vote Shifty Schiff and his band of outlaws can operate under the oversight committee rules. This means no cross examination of witnesses by opposing party members, no counsel for the President if he is called, no subpoenas required to call "witnesses" and the ability and excuse to hold the "investigation" in secrecy .

[glocktogo]

I agree that the hearings should be public, unsure if there is law to back up that belief, though.

What everyone seems to forget is that there are 45 Republican members of the 3 committees involved in the hearing, of course there are more Democrats as they have a majority in the House of Representatives.

I recently heard a plausible explanation for why the ComDems did not want an impeachment vote, other than to protect other ComDems in swing states. Without the impeachment vote Shifty Schiff and his band of outlaws can operate under the oversight committee rules. This means no cross examination of witnesses by opposing party members, no counsel for the President if he is called, no subpoenas required to call "witnesses" and the ability and excuse to hold the "investigation" in secrecy .

That was my point, it's Schrödinger's Cat in political form. Until you open the sealed box, you can't say what it is or isn't. Every last "witness" they interview will have to be re-interviewed publicly, with that testimony compared directly to what was stated in secret. If the Dems try to impeach on the House floor based on secret evidence, it's a kangaroo court. If the Dems don't allow Republicans to openly question every witness they interviewed and see every document they saw in secret, it's a kangaroo court. If the Dems don't hand over exculpatory evidence, it's a kangaroo court.

Look we all know this isn't a fair inquiry. You'll NEVER see Schiff or Pelosi come to the lectern and say that president Trump has been investigated and found no evidence of impeachable conduct or offences. The Dems aren't fair and impartial arbiters here. They want to impeach Trump and they'll never stop until it's done. Which brings me to my theory on why they're hiding the proceedings.

They can't impeach him and they know it. They'll have their secret committees issue one sided votes to recommend impeachment. They will control that process and rely on secret evidence to impeach. They'll fail and forever claim they had the evidence but those evil Republicans wouldn't do their duty. They'll continue to make claims of evidence that proves Trump violated the office, without ever letting said "evidence" see the light of day or exposing it to scrutiny.

They're so desperate to hide the evil deeds committed by Obama officials in service to electing Hillary, they're willing to destroy the process and forever taint the election system to prove Trump is actually guilty of all the tings they've done. This is what peak chutzpah looks like.

[RobertTheTexan]

As usual with the left, this makes no sense. In N Out Burger has 347 locations, almost all of which are in Southern CA. If someone wanted to protest burgers, why no go to Mickey D's with 37,855 restaurants worldwide. I had McDonalds in Morocco. These people are idiots in every way.

Maybe because In-N-Out is aligned more closely with Chick Fil A than CrapDonald’s. Morally speaking, obviously not menu-wise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fledge]

On impeachment hearings, I see it as the same as Mueller. It has nothing to with findings. It has to do with hanging suspicion over the election cycle. That’s the only way they had any chance to flip Congress. And they were rewarded for it.

[Averageman]

I recently heard a plausible explanation for why the ComDems did not want an impeachment vote, other than to protect other ComDems in swing states. Without the impeachment vote Shifty Schiff and his band of outlaws can operate under the oversight committee rules. This means no cross examination of witnesses by opposing party members, no counsel for the President if he is called, no subpoenas required to call "witnesses" and the ability and excuse to hold the "investigation" in secrecy .

This is the way I understand it. Essentially this allows Schiff to pick and choose the evidence presented, the witnesses and no cross examination.
Imagine how that bias applies and tarnishes anything and anyone presented.

[glocktogo]

On impeachment hearings, I see it as the same as Mueller. It has nothing to with findings. It has to do with hanging suspicion over the election cycle. That’s the only way they had any chance to flip Congress. And they were rewarded for it.

This is the way I understand it. Essentially this allows Schiff to pick and choose the evidence presented, the witnesses and no cross examination.
Imagine how that bias applies and tarnishes anything and anyone presented.

The presspaganda™ outlets today are doing overtime, verifying Bill Taylor's testimony (which they didn't hear) as proof of a quid pro quo impeachable offense. Yesterday House Minority Leader McCarthy stated that Rep. John Ratcliffe "destroyed" key components of Taylor's testimony in "90 seconds". Who do you believe?

Well I just finished reading all 15 pages of the opening statement Taylor himself released. After careful reflection, he should be unceremoniously fired. It appears he works for Ukraine rather than the US. He's too close with the subject to be impartial. He can't separate policy from politics. I can see why the Senate refused to reconfirm him.

I can't assess from a mere written statement whether he's incredibly naïve or just pretending to be. He obviously has a myopic view of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 US election. he also doesn't seem to understand that DoS has a very efficient backchannel system in operation. Considering that one of the agencies complicit in the 2016 Ukrainian interference in the US election was DoS, a man as well qualified and intelligent as he is should be able to parse those facts.

One thing that's plainly evident near the end of his statement, is that he actively interfered with the express guidance and direction of the executive branch. He was upset that he was "out of the loop" on executive decision making and sought to undermine it as a result. He directly counseled a foreign official to ignore the interests of the US because he thought he knew better. That's not his call to make. His written opening statement is an admission that he defied orders and interfered in international relations between the Trump Administration and Ukraine.

No wonder Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said that Rep. John Ratcliffe "destroyed" key parts of Taylor's testimony in 90 seconds. It's because Taylor himself undermined his own credibility.

That's my take but you should read his statement yourselves, because you may have different takeaways. I loathe using this link because I don't want to give them the clicks, but they have the entire statement within the body of their article, which I haven't yet found elsewhere.

https://time.com/5707713/bill-taylor...hment-inquiry/

[Bulletdog]

Maybe because In-N-Out is aligned more closely with Chick Fil A than CrapDonald’s. Morally speaking, obviously not menu-wise.

Ahh... Good point. Never thought of it from that perspective. That would explain it too.

[26 Inf]

Maybe because In-N-Out is aligned more closely with Chick Fil A than CrapDonald’s. Morally speaking, obviously not menu-wise.

I just read the company's history on their webpage, what a great family.

[RobertTheTexan]

I just read the company's history on their webpage, what a great family.

Indeed. It’s a great story and a great burger. Of course today I had a cheat day and went to Crow’s Burgers in Belton. The literal incarnation of a classic “burger joint”, and aside from my fancy burgers I grill, like my chipotle blue cheese crumble burgers, they make the best burger you can find in most parts of Texas. The ONE exception IS this burger joint that was across from my dad’s muffler and speed shop. He had to write me up because I’d slip into the cash drawer and grab a few bucks for a burger or two. I did that 1-2 times before lunch (unbeknownst to him) and then eat two at lunch and hit it a couple more times in the afternoon. That was just before I enlisted and I was 6’1 and about 147 lbs. Told me I had a tape worm and I believed him. But man O’ man, to this day I have no idea how the old man “Pops” made his burgers but decades (and #%{>* decades) later I still remember them as the absolute best burger I’ve ever had the pleasure to eat. I mean 6-8 burgers a day does say something. I’m sure it wasn’t hash because I was welding all day and rebuilding engines etc. and was very good at what I did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk