• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Pre-Impeachment Hearings June 7-8

1) They are tied up in this mess.
2) They are being pressured from the executive.
3) They are covering their asses.
 
"In the three-plus years that I have been director of the National Security Agency, I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate and to the best of my recollection during that same period of service I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so," Rogers said.

I think he forgot to add "until now".
 
As long as they can't refuse Mueller.
 
Comey: He [Trump] said he would do that and added, “Because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know.” I did not reply or ask him what he meant by “that thing.”

Any guesses, what is that thing?
 
Comey: He [Trump] said he would do that and added, “Because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know.” I did not reply or ask him what he meant by “that thing.”

Any guesses, what is that thing?

Considering the weirdness of his request to have 'alone-time' with Comey and the fact that it happened on Valentines Day, coupled with the fact that Comey's reaction was that he never wanted to be alone with Trump in the future - perhaps we're all better off not knowing...
 
I watched the hearing in its entirety, live. I watched the commentary afterwards on MSNBC, CNN, and Fox. This is my takeaway:

The hearing was about article 704 (702?.. whatever)... Senate requested input on the value of intelligence gained by the law (which is expiring and needs Senate support to renew). Testimony about the use, utility, and controls over of the powers granted to the Intelligence community by this law was given. Most senate members chose to ask questions about Trump allegedly asking them to influence the FBI director to lay off the Russiagate investigation. They all responded that they never "felt pressure". They refused to answer the (multiple, direct, repeated, clarified and restated..) question of IF Trump asked them.. (multiple Senators pointed out that their "feelings" about it were irrelevant - but did it happen at all). Refusal to answer. When pushed on the topic of WHY they would not answer, they could site to legal reason (such as Executive privilege or any other reason).

What was not well covered, in my opinion, is that one of the 4 testifying did make one statement of fact that they could not answer that question because there was an ongoing CRIMINAL investigation on that topic. So, they are not answering so as not to potentially impact the quality of that investigation... it seemed to go right over the media's head.

Further, they stated that they WOULD answer the questions in full, in a closed hearing, due to the sensitive nature of the situation. Nothing is being hidden from Senate, the committee, or any other authoritative entity... just not in front of a room full of journalists.
 
I watched the hearing in its entirety, live. I watched the commentary afterwards on MSNBC, CNN, and Fox. This is my takeaway:

The hearing was about article 704 (702?.. whatever)... Senate requested input on the value of intelligence gained by the law (which is expiring and needs Senate support to renew). Testimony about the use, utility, and controls over of the powers granted to the Intelligence community by this law was given. Most senate members chose to ask questions about Trump allegedly asking them to influence the FBI director to lay off the Russiagate investigation. They all responded that they never "felt pressure". They refused to answer the (multiple, direct, repeated, clarified and restated..) question of IF Trump asked them.. (multiple Senators pointed out that their "feelings" about it were irrelevant - but did it happen at all). Refusal to answer. When pushed on the topic of WHY they would not answer, they could site to legal reason (such as Executive privilege or any other reason).

What was not well covered, in my opinion, is that one of the 4 testifying did make one statement of fact that they could not answer that question because there was an ongoing CRIMINAL investigation on that topic. So, they are not answering so as not to potentially impact the quality of that investigation... it seemed to go right over the media's head.

I'm glad someone was paying attention. I was gobsmacked that none of the commentary touched on that.

Further, they stated that they WOULD answer the questions in full, in a closed hearing, due to the sensitive nature of the situation. Nothing is being hidden from Senate, the committee, or any other authoritative entity... just not in front of a room full of journalists.

I only saw one of them (Coats?) say that, and was wondering why the Senators didn't press each of them individually to make the same statement. Guess I missed it?
 
I only saw one of them (Coats?) say that, and was wondering why the Senators didn't press each of them individually to make the same statement. Guess I missed it?

I forget which one said that (Coats sounds right), and I was wondering the same thing. I don't think you missed anything... the media and other Senators did, though.
 
If nothing else, the Comey hearing proved it's time for McCain to resign.
 
Back
Top Bottom