Acting AG Matthew Whitaker testifies to House Judiciary Committee (1 Viewer)

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
47,874
Reaction score
64,448
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
So the Committee sent letters requesting him to testify, he ignored them. The Committee threatened to subpoena him and he agreed to voluntarily appear if the Committee dropped the subpoena threat. He appeared today and I'm sure his testimony is going to raise questions - it is clear that Matthew Whitaker isn't the brightest bulb on the tree.

I'm not watching it but I'm sure it will be well-covered.

This happened (keep in mind that's the committee chair he's speaking to):

 
Last edited:

farfromsilent

Rookie
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Messages
1,380
Reaction score
818
Offline
So the Committee sent letters requesting him to testify, he ignored them. The Committee threatened to subpoena him and he agreed to voluntarily appear if the Committee dropped the subpoena threat. He appeared today and I'm sure his testimony is going to raise questions - it is clear that Matthew Whitaker isn't the brightest bulb on the tree.

I'm not watching it but I'm sure it will be well-covered.

This happened (keep in mind that's the committee chair he's speaking to):

So the committee chairman is not supposed to adhere to the agreed upon rules?
 

buzd

party lamp
Staff member
Tech-Admin
Joined
Jan 11, 2002
Messages
30,502
Reaction score
21,915
Age
48
Location
Section 537
Online
I've been watching it. It's amazing.

Whitaker is a dunce.

Also, Doug Collins is a toad.
 
OP
OP
superchuck500

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
47,874
Reaction score
64,448
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
So the committee chairman is not supposed to adhere to the agreed upon rules?
Minute counts in congressional hearings are never adhered to strictly - they're guidelines and if someone goes over, they work it out. It certainly isn't a basis to refuse to answer a question. The witness is there, the witness is sworn, the question is relevant and the witness should either answer it or refuse on a legitimate legal grounds. The minute count is not legitimate legal grounds.
 

farfromsilent

Rookie
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Messages
1,380
Reaction score
818
Offline
Minute counts in congressional hearings are never adhered to strictly - they're guidelines and if someone goes over, they work it out. It certainly isn't a basis to refuse to answer a question. The witness is there, the witness is sworn, the question is relevant and the witness should either answer it or refuse on a legitimate legal grounds. The minute count is not legitimate legal grounds.
I've seen committee chairs on both sides of the aisle shut down questions from members in the chamber because they are going over time. Nobody was even challenging him, so how long do you just let the chair, who is the one who is supposed to enforce the rules, just continue with no regards to it?
 
OP
OP
superchuck500

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
47,874
Reaction score
64,448
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
I've seen committee chairs on both sides of the aisle shut down questions from members in the chamber because they are going over time.
That didn't happen here - the witness tried to assert it. And when that does happen, it's usually several minutes over time because, again, it's a guideline not a strict requirement. If it were, a witness could just take his time answering and use up the allotment. When committee chairs do that, it is in the interest of the hearing, allowing others to get their time in, and not keep the witness beyond an appropriate time . . . all entirely reasonable interests of the committee chair. It isn't some dispositive right of the witness.
 

porculator

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 10, 2003
Messages
6,280
Reaction score
7,631
Age
35
Offline
So our attorney general hasn't talked to our president about the Russia investigation?

Ignoring the fact that he's obviously lying, hopefully the follow up questions was "why the fork not?"
 
OP
OP
superchuck500

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
47,874
Reaction score
64,448
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
So our attorney general hasn't talked to our president about the Russia investigation?

Ignoring the fact that he's obviously lying, hopefully the follow up questions was "why the fork not?"
Because the president is a subject of the investigation?

As crazy as it is, that's a legitimate reason.
 

farfromsilent

Rookie
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Messages
1,380
Reaction score
818
Offline
So our attorney general hasn't talked to our president about the Russia investigation?

Ignoring the fact that he's obviously lying, hopefully the follow up questions was "why the fork not?"
Maybe because the President is the subject of that investigation.
 

brandon8283

Probably a drive-by
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
6,478
Reaction score
7,087
Age
36
Offline
I've seen committee chairs on both sides of the aisle shut down questions from members in the chamber because they are going over time. Nobody was even challenging him, so how long do you just let the chair, who is the one who is supposed to enforce the rules, just continue with no regards to it?
"How will we be OWNING THE LIBS today?"

"MINUTE COUNTS!"
 

efil4stnias

one lonely Beastie i be...
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
29,509
Reaction score
26,063
Location
Covington
Offline
I've seen committee chairs on both sides of the aisle shut down questions from members in the chamber because they are going over time. Nobody was even challenging him, so how long do you just let the chair, who is the one who is supposed to enforce the rules, just continue with no regards to it?

you do realize you typed "committee chairs" and not "the witness" , right?
 

efil4stnias

one lonely Beastie i be...
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
29,509
Reaction score
26,063
Location
Covington
Offline
Right...I'm saying the committee chairs should be held to the same standard.
its not a standard rule. its a rule of thumb....if the question is asked PRIOR to the 5 min mark, the question stands.

If you get in a line 5 min before closing, and while in line, the store closes, you still get checked out.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)



Headlines

Top Bottom