Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, October 25, 2019

GOP Senator Lindsey Graham introduced a resolution to condemn how House Democrats have been conducting the impeachment investigation into President Donald Trump.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

So what did the Russians give Trump on Graham? Or did he just get Mitch slapped? I mean that's a flip flop from a couple days ago. Besides if there is a vote, this will all be revealed. It's just the talk track fed to him from the Right wing trolls. The Democrats are following the rules - rules the GOP put in place mind you - for the process.

Closed door testimony is much less political, effective and revealing. People aren't acting out for the camera. Once they decide they have what they need they bring it out of committee and to the floor. The GOP can leak all it wants too - they are in the same room and have equal access to the witnesses and testimony. IF it goes to the Senate for an impeachment TRIAL then it's all laid out.

#1 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-10-25 12:19 PM | Reply

"During a press conference Thursday, Graham, the Senate Judiciary Chairman, called the inquiry "out of bounds" and "inconsistent with due process as we know it," stating that how the inquiry is being conducted is a threat to future presidencies."

How dare those bad Democrats hold hearings that follow the rules written by Republicans?

#2 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-25 12:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Very things in history have been so poorly received as this Resolution...

This is the new standard for the term "Backfired."

#3 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-10-25 02:30 PM | Reply

Lindsay got his resolution. He can return to his fainting couch now.

#4 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-10-25 02:45 PM | Reply

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a close ally of President Donald Trump's on Capitol Hill, announced Friday that a resolution he introduced condemning the House impeachment inquiry process now has 50 co-sponsors in the Senate.

#5 | Posted by homerj at 2019-10-25 05:00 PM | Reply

Sooo ...

The resolution is not "really, really bad news for Trump."

Because it passed. With all but 3 human scum, er, Republican Senators on board.

Hearsay Impeachment *dying* a merciful death.

It's *Aloha Friday*.

www.youtube.com

#6 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-10-25 05:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Looks like Lindsey's Senate stunt might be mooted by the courts declaring the Dems are doing it legally:

U.S. judge orders Mueller grand jury materials released to House Judiciary Committee in impeachment inquiry

A federal judge Friday ordered the Justice Department to release certain grand jury materials from former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III's investigation to the House Judiciary Committee amid its impeachment inquiry. The materials must be disclosed by Wednesday.

In a 75-page opinion, Chief U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell of Washington cited a 1974 federal appeals court decision in Haldeman v. Sirica that upheld that congressional impeachment proceedings are excepted from normal grand jury secrecy rules.

"In carrying out the weighty constitutional duty of determining whether impeachment of the President is warranted, Congress need not redo the nearly two years of effort spent on the Special Counsel's investigation, nor risk being misled by witnesses, who may have provided information to the grand jury and the Special Counsel that varies from what they tell" the House, Howell wrote.

She found that a House impeachment investigation and Senate trial qualify under a grand jury material exemption that permits prosecutors to share information "preliminary to or in connection with a judicial proceeding."

#7 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-10-25 05:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The House "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment," Article I, Section 2 says. That includes the sole power of determining how to proceed with the process. There is no legitimate complaint here.

How many Benghazi hearings were held in closed door sessions?

Remember Benghazi? Republican concerns about "secret" hearings are newfound in the Trump era

Republicans strongly defended closed-door interviews when they led a multi-year crusade on Benghazi during the Obama administration.

"The committee's preference for private interviews over public hearings has been questioned," former Rep. Trey Gowdy's Benghazi committee said in its final report. "Interviews are a more efficient and effective means of discovery. Interviews allow witnesses to be questioned in depth by a highly prepared member or staff person. In a hearing, every member of a committee is recognized " usually for five minutes " a procedure which precludes in-depth in-depth focused questioning. Interviews also allow the committee to safeguard the privacy of witnesses who may fear retaliation for cooperating or whose work requires anonymity, such as intelligence community operatives."

www.salon.com

#8 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-10-25 07:32 PM | Reply

How many Benghazi hearings were held in closed door sessions?

Who cares .. I don't .. I love the avoidance of the real problem....

I have no problem with Private Interviews, I do have problem when both sides of a committee are not present, or invited during private interviews.

As of June 20, 2015, the Committee had conducted three hearings and interviewed 29 witnesses, substantially fewer than previous investigations such as that of the Iran-Contra scandal, which held 40 days of public hearings with 500 witness interviews over 10 1/2 months.
observer.com

The Select Committee has spent 17 months and $4.7 million of taxpayer money. We have held four hearings and conducted 54 interviews and depositions. Yes, we have received some new e-mails from Secretary Clinton, Ambassador Stevens and others. And yes, we have conducted some new interviews.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/22/transcript-clinton-testifies-before- house-committee-on-benghazi/

Benghazi investigation, the full committees were present during the private interviews.

Absolute rubbish of a thread.

#9 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-10-25 07:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

The hypocrisy of Lindsey the southern belle and his political party of Anti-American Putin Puppets knows no bounds. He and they would rather be Russian than American.

#10 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-10-25 07:56 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

I do have problem when both sides of a committee are not present, or invited during private interviews.

Yo moron, 47 House Republicans are able to attend each and every deposition held in the SCIF. Every Republican there has equal time and rights to question any and all witnesses.

Are you really this ignorant and go around proudly showing it over and over again?

There have been multiple threads about these facts. At least 12 of the reps in the Pizza Riot were already allowed to be inside the room.

Please educate yourself. This is embarrassing even for you.

#11 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-10-25 08:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Facts are not friends of (R)tards.
They dumb!

#12 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-10-25 08:12 PM | Reply

Benghazi investigation, the full committees were present during the private interviews.

Absolute rubbish of a thread.

#9 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Do you have any proof that repubs are being held out of these interviews?

The whole point of the stunt this week is to make it seem like repubs are being shut out of the process. It's working. Fox viewers think that's true. But they also think obama was a secret gay kenyan muslim.

The committees are nearly half republican. Some of the repubs who "stormed the hearing" demanding to be let in were ACTUALLY ON THE COMMITTEE. But dont let reality get in the way of a good republican victimhood narrative.

#13 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-10-25 08:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Republicans also believe Obama for starting the Iraq War.

#14 | Posted by hamburglar at 2019-10-26 06:47 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

*Blame

#15 | Posted by hamburglar at 2019-10-26 07:27 AM | Reply

"The whole point of the stunt this week is to make it seem like repubs are being shut out of the process. It's working. Fox viewers think that's true."

Studies have found that Fox News viewers know less about current events than people who watch no news at all. The slogan for most Fox News viewers is "We're proud to be dumb!"

#16 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-26 10:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

what studies?

#17 | Posted by Maverick at 2019-10-26 05:55 PM | Reply

and, define "current events" pop culture, sports, music, etc...

#18 | Posted by Maverick at 2019-10-26 06:01 PM | Reply

#16 | POSTED BY DANNI

I think Maverick just proved your point.

#19 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2019-10-26 06:19 PM | Reply

GOP=Hypocrites.
I guess you can only get an impeachment going anymore if you are getting BJ's in the white house?
Well, we know TRump is not getting any of that fun from his wife who looks like she has a bad case of gas whenever he is hovering around her and Ivanka will not give it to him anymore so, I guess no impeachments in the near future...that is unless the brothers TRump Jr. and that other ugly MOF get caught doing each other reach arounds in the oval office.

#20 | Posted by tknees at 2019-10-26 06:59 PM | Reply

This narrative is so stupid. Let's compare the Impeachment process to normal criminal proceedings.

Impeachment Inquiry = criminal investigation/Grand Jury/Preliminary Hearing

Articles of Impeachment = Criminal Indictment (the arguments before the vote sort of correlate to a Preliminary Hearing)

The trial in Senate = Criminal trial

Now ask yourself what part of the criminal process does the defendant have the right to question witnesses. The defendant's lawyer does not get equal time during the investigation or the Grand Jury. f there is a preliminary trial instead of a Grand Jury the defendant's lawyer can question witnesses. In this case, the impeachment inquiry acts as an investigation, a Grand Jury, and later on when there are public hearings, a preliminary hearing. Republicans are involved in the closed-door hearings, and the President's team will have a say during the public hearings and the arguments before the vote of the Articles of Impeachment. Finally, the real-time period when a defendant has the right to face their accusers and ask questions of witnesses is during a trial. That will happen in the Senate trial.

#21 | Posted by Jasper at 2019-10-27 11:05 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#21 | Posted by Jasper

I couldn't agree more but it's amazing how many people (right wingers) fall for it.

#22 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-10-28 09:23 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort