RoseMorninStar wrote:There are warnings about this in the bible...
Sadly, true.Griffon64 wrote:RoseMorninStar wrote:There are warnings about this in the bible...
There are indeed, and it would surprise me that the adherents can read around them so thoroughly if it wasn't that that's how this kind of stuff works. There's always a verse to find and bind to what someone wants to be true if the wish is to wield the Bible as a weapon to have their will be done, or an interpretation to make so the Bible speaks with their words instead of God's.
Doh! Yes, thank you.RoseMorninStar wrote:elengil, the House oversight committee (chaired by the late Elijah Cummings) would be the third.
The closest I've come is specific members discussed in news articles, but no compiled list. The one's I have seen mentioned are not on the committees in question, so it may just be a false rumor. Or possibly misinterpretation of news reports which have some Republican comments but not necessarily Republicans who were among those who forced their way in.Voronwë the Faithful wrote:I heard that rumor too, elengil, but I haven't been able to confirm it, nor have I been able to locate a list of the participants in the stunt.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/23/us/p ... e=HomepageChanting “Let us in! Let us in!” about two dozen Republican members of the House pushed past Capitol Police officers to enter the secure rooms of the House Intelligence Committee
Most? So... some were? Very confusing, I wish they'd clarify exactly who was involved and who may have been on said committees.Roughly a quarter of House Republicans are members of the three panels conducting the inquiry, and have been allowed to participate in the private depositions and interviews from the start. But most of the Republicans who rushed the secure rooms on Wednesday morning are not committee members.
Even IF that report is false, the rest are still claiming to be shut-out of a process that many of their fellow Republicans are actively involved in on these committees, even those in the hearing they crashed who were also getting ready to interview the witness! Unbelievable!Democrats noted that some of the protesting lawmakers were on relevant committees — and thus had the right to attend the deposition.
While the Times article quotesDemocrats also pointed to the Benghazi Select Committee run by former Rep. Trey Gowdy, a South Carolina Republican who conducted closed-door hearings in that investigation.
So definitely playing to fears.Representative Earl L. “Buddy” Carter of Georgia issued a dire warning: “If a government can do this to the president of the United States, they can do it to you as well. You need to be scared. You need to be very scared.”
Working on a legal team falls under the heading of lobbying?Voronwë the Faithful wrote:... only to realize that Gowdy couldn't actually do the work that he was hired to do until January because of ethics rules banning former members of Congress from doing any lobbying of current members of Congress for one year ...
Now they are just saying stuff to just say stuff. There isn't even a bad argument that executive privilege would apply to Parnas (or Fruman, though I think it is specifically Parnas that the argument is being made, or at least brought up about). One "amusing" aspect of that article is where the lawyer for Parnas says that his client doesn't work form Mr. Trump, he works for Mr. Giuliani. Yet in reality it is Parnas that has paid Giuliani $500,000, not the other way around. So how is that Parnas works for Giuliani when he is paying Giuliani?RoseMorninStar wrote:Meanwhile, in the weird-news-that-has-become-our-new-normal, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman are rather interesting characters. Evidently Trump doesn't pay Rudi Giuliani, Lev has paid him $500,000 (from his company 'Fraud Guarantee'?) and now Lev is claiming executive privilege. In order to claim executive privilege I believe they would have to say they are working for the government/Trump and that they had sensitive information. Parnas has had ties to the Trump organization for decades.
Voronwë the Faithful wrote:One "amusing" aspect of that article is where the lawyer for Parnas says that his client doesn't work form Mr. Trump, he works for Mr. Giuliani. Yet in reality it is Parnas that has paid Giuliani $500,000, not the other way around. So how is that Parnas works for Giuliani when he is paying Giuliani?
Asked whether Giuliani remained his personal attorney, Trump said: “I don’t know.”yovargas wrote: The same part of the article stood out to me, and it made me think, is Giuliani even an official part of the White House? Isn't he just Trump's personal lawyer or somesuch?
Yes. Manipulation. Trump is marketing the impeachment inquiry as something being done to 'us' (meaning his base) not something that he brought on himself due to his own actions and that he is accountable for. He's setting this up as grounds for turning Americans against one another.. a civil war.elengil wrote:While the Times article quotesSo definitely playing to fears.Representative Earl L. “Buddy” Carter of Georgia issued a dire warning: “If a government can do this to the president of the United States, they can do it to you as well. You need to be scared. You need to be very scared.”
Was just coming here to post this - unfortunately I'm not sure what the source of the original statement is,but apparently this was the Republican's justifications for closed-door secret interviews during Benghazi?RoseMorninStar wrote: Republicans thought holding closed door interviews were the right thing during the Benghazi crusade. They're pulling stunts because they know what Trump did is indefensible and that there is a lot of evidence of what he did.
