The Impeachment Thread

[GVF]

Well, a disagreement would indicate an objection to omitting part of the dialogue. The paticular dialogue which would show the further extent that Trump was encouraging the Ukraine to investigate Bidens. Coincidence?

No. Inconsistency in the absence of a recording. 12 people listen to something and take notes. Get 12 opinions. Nothing consistent. Called a grapevine. Either no one should monitor calls. Or, they should be recorded. But, that's just an opinion. Like Morrison's. Since his doesn't fit the narrative.

 

[1972 Grad]

One of the most accurate note takers on the phone call testified important things were left out.

What makes Vindman "one of the most accurate note takers?"

 

[hog88]

What makes Vindman "one of the most accurate note takers?"

he said "trump is bad".

 

[Mick]

maybe one of our resident lawyers could tell us how often grand jury testimony is given to another entity outside of a prosecutors or law enforcement agency for review?

Usually anytime it is requested by congress and blessed by the AG.

 

[RikidyBones]

What makes Vindman "one of the most accurate note takers?"

His testimony being what the dems want to hear. Come on 72. keep up.

 

[golfballs]

Well, Morrison apparently didn’t think it was illegal, so no problem.

Investigating political corruption is a good thing unless it involves a Democrat

 

[RockyTop85]

What are the rules and law regarding grand jury testimony?

I love how you never answer a direct question.

LOL. That really hurts coming from the guy who just stops responding whenever his arguments are thoroughly discredited.

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) controls grand jury material. It contains the secrecy provisions and the exceptions.

 

[Mick]

What makes Vindman "one of the most accurate note takers?"

His notes were more complete than the note released by the Trump Admin.

 

[tvolsfan]

Whataboutism.

That’s not whataboutism...

 

[Mick]

he said "trump is bad".

Hell, I didn't know you saw the transcripts of his testimony.

 

[GVF]

That’s not whataboutism...

That's just your opinion.

 

[hog88]

Usually anytime it is requested by congress and blessed by the AG.

is that so?

 

[RockyTop85]

Certainly is. Read 4(A) lines 1-3. Also allows Minority to appeal to the full committee if denied by the chair 4(B) lines 14-23.

Hint: how many committees are authorized to participate in the inquiry?

 

[37L1]

Doesn’t say anything about Schiff or Nunes. Why is that?

Come on. Those are the people who hold cited positions in the Intelligence Committee.

The ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee (Intelligence is Nunes), is authorized, with the concurrence of the chair, (which is Schiff), to require as deemed necessary . . .

Are you referencing that the other 4 Committees involved in the "inquiry" (Financial Services, Foreign Affairs, Judiciary, Oversight and Reform, and Ways and Means) as a way to minimize Schiff's influence on the process? If so, why didn't you just say so?

 

[Mick]

is that so?

I will defer to the legal minds in this forum, you should do the same.

 

[37L1]

Oh goody. Now we get to hear again from Nadler, another objective and fair committee head as well as Mad Maxine.

 

[hog88]

LOL. That really hurts coming from the guy who just stops responding whenever his arguments are thoroughly discredited.

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) controls grand jury material. It contains the secrecy provisions and the exceptions.

The argument over McCain is the only one you have ever won. All of the rest you pull this same maneuver, you never answer a question. A simple question.

In this case I can understand, you have no ****ing idea what the answer is yet you just want the rules and law followed. You don't know if they are or not but your still going to whine.

 

[hog88]

I will defer to the legal minds in this forum, you should do the same.

Yeah, we're both going to be waiting awhile because they don't know.

 

[Mick]

Oh goody. Now we get to hear again from Nadler, another objective and fair committee head.

Suck it up.

 

[hog88]

Hell, I didn't know you saw the transcripts of his testimony.

My source showed it to me.

 

[37L1]

Suck it up.

Thought you had me on ignore.

 

[Mick]

My source showed it to me.

Your source had to be a dem then, right?

 

[Stew Cook]

No. Inconsistency in the absence of a recording. 12 people listen to something and take notes. Get 12 opinions. Nothing consistent. Called a grapevine. Either no one should monitor calls. Or, they should be recorded. But, that's just an opinion. Like Morrison's. Since his doesn't fit the narrative.

He will be asked for his recollections about the ommissions, but sure, his opinion is as good as yours or mine on what he thought would be legal.

 

[Orangeburst]

Doesn’t say anything about Schiff or Nunes. Why is that?

The House Intelligence Committee includes 13 dems and 9 repubs. If Schiff says no to any R testimony , it is as he says. He his the de facto decider.

edit: I have not looked at the other committees.

 

[1972 Grad]

His notes were more complete than the note released by the Trump Admin.

Quote from Alex Moe NBC News : "He (Vindman) is not a court stenographer, and he didn't have a recording, just notes that he took." What makes that any more accurate than everybody else?