General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums*************Whistle-blower Hearing THREAD 2********************
stupid Repigs they try to act so high and mighty. They are NOT transparent.
https://www.nbcnews.com/video/watch-live-acting-dni-testifies-before-congress-on-trump-ukraine-phone-call-69963333738
TheRealNorth
(9,478 posts)Hold onto your hats, the MAGATS are getting deranged and nasty.
bdamomma
(63,840 posts)and truth
live love laugh
(13,101 posts)Mike 03
(16,616 posts)Soft questioning. He's apologizing to the witness if he feels his honor has been questioned.
unc70
(6,110 posts)BumRushDaShow
(128,894 posts)and know they are up shit's creek.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)than how the laws were violated.
Nunes was really concerned about leaks that made the admin look bad.
WinstonSmith4740
(3,056 posts)Trump's errand boy has a lot of fucking nerve trying to cast aspersions (or asparagus) on anyone's ethics.
dewsgirl
(14,961 posts)BumRushDaShow
(128,894 posts)thecrow
(5,519 posts)Is their a case for impeachment? Absolutely not! There is no high crimes or misdemeanors, no treason, no extortion, no treason. RD Robert Ray, respected
Didnt these people go to grammar school ?
dhol82
(9,353 posts)redstatebluegirl
(12,265 posts)in MAGA hats. Eventually someone came out and told them to remove the hats or leave the parking lot. They were not the sharpest knives in the drawer, got into old beat up pickups with gun racks in the back. That is when I knew what we were dealing with in terms of the deplorables.
Link to tweet
?s=20
BumRushDaShow
(128,894 posts)AND he's suing his fake mom too!
MurrayDelph
(5,294 posts)probably lose both suits.
BumRushDaShow
(128,894 posts)Corgigal
(9,291 posts)was our governments catch and kill AMI person. Worked so well for AMI, guess some fool will accept that job. Crazy.
MaryMagdaline
(6,853 posts)Im stealing that just do you know
happy feet
(869 posts)Im traveling and cant watch or listen
OliverQ
(3,363 posts)are using is focusing on the "I did not have first hand accounts" part, so they're saying this isn't evidence, it's just hearsay.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)Questioning focuses on the chilling effect how this has been handled will have on future whistleblowers.
MaGuire strongly defends whistleblowers.
Sewell: WHen this president called the whistleblower a political hack you remained silent... Can you confirm you have assured this whistleblower can come before congress?
MaGuire: I don't know the identity of the whistleblower...
Sewell: Can you assure us the whistleblower is authorized to speak to us and has full protections.
MaGuire: To the best of my ability I am. I think he can come forward. I'll do everything I can to endeavor to support it.
Freethinker65
(10,012 posts)Takket
(21,563 posts)Warned him to be careful what he says because they will use it against you. Trying to taint the testimony before it even starts.
kacekwl
(7,016 posts)Veiled threat IMO.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)He admits what is described in the transcript is "not okay".
He's going to say it's not as bad as Schiff made it sound. He's going to lie about the contents of the complaint and downplay it and accuse Schiff of exaggerating the importance.
the repigs going over the edge for this POS tRump.
still_one
(92,174 posts)Mike 03
(16,616 posts)Deep state stuff. Accusing the intelligence agencies of "abuse of surveillance."
He's shifting the focus and expressing doubts about the intentions of the intelligence community.
MaGuire is handling it pretty well. He's explaining how high the standards are for a whistleblower complaint to rise to this level. It can't be just any complaint at any level. It has to be critical and of urgent concern to get this far.
SamKnause
(13,101 posts)I am so sick of these people exercising executive privilege to cover for the orange anus.
Stating whether you have spoken to the president about a certain issue should not be
covered by executive privilege.
Giving details about the conversation may well be covered.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)too funny!
was unnecessary and could become the focus of more accusations of fake news leading the narrative. I wish Nunes hadn't done this.
bdamomma
(63,840 posts)Representative Carson is good. Maquire is on record, period.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)Carson: This is unprecedented. Do you know why it's unprecedented? It couldn't be clearer... You SHALL forward this to the Intel committee with in seven days... Isn't that right sir?
MaGuire: Yes but this one is different because it didn't meet all the criteria. (the whistleblower not being in the intelligence chain?)
Carson is upset it was withheld and his questioning so far focuses on that.
MaGuire: THe White House and Office of Legal Counsel did NOT urge me to withhold this complaint... It was referred to the FBI for further investigation (during the 7 day waiting period). We were not stonewalling, just complying with the law the way it is written.
Backseat Driver
(4,390 posts)"shall" to Congress? Clear stonewalling - there is no executive privilege for committing a crime, regardless of the opinion that sitting POTUS might, in this case, did, though cannot be indicted! Impeachment alone IS the remedy and needs be "shall" be submitted without intervening submission to the perp's branch, to Legal, nor to Intelligence for evaluation -
bdamomma
(63,840 posts)is upholding the tRump loyal creed, don't go to Congress period, and don't give them information. Schiff get the hook.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)Schiff: Since you were not urged to withhold the complaint from us by the WH, you exercised your own discretion and failed to provide it to us?? Providing the document is the unbroken tradition, are you aware of that? We're talking about Urgent Concern here... The past practice has always been to provide it to this committee.
M: I admit this has never happened it before, this is a unique situation, unprecedented...
Schiff: You made the decision to withhold it for a month when the WH made no claim of executive privilege or asked you otherwise to not provide it.
M: It was referred to the FBI for investigation. I could not forward it to you without the issue of executive privilege being addressed. It took longer than I would have liked, that's for sure... When there was no longer an issue of executive privilege I was free to give it to you. There was no (bad faith) involved.
bdamomma
(63,840 posts)they always down play the truth and facts. Fictional my ass. I will not listen to this jerk.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)again, worried about the optics of how it plays in the media.
bdamomma
(63,840 posts)how repigs downplay the truth and facts and if they (repigs) imply that the american people do not care I will do this.
shanti
(21,675 posts)Ugh
Roland99
(53,342 posts)Mike 03
(16,616 posts)He's slightly feisty.
Focussing on the president's latitude to conduct foreign affairs. He needs flexibility to negotiate. He's throwing shade on Obama. Now we're back to executive privilege. The president has a right to withhold his communications from congress.
Wenstrup's core argument is that such communications should be privileged. And MaGuire's doing a poor job of explaining how this situation is different.
BumRushDaShow
(128,894 posts)Bringing up the other server!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)Roland99
(53,342 posts)why the call transcripts/recordings were moved.
Maguire initially demurring...
Roland99
(53,342 posts)Speier interjecting that the ICIG report deemed the complaint credible
Mike Niendorff
(3,460 posts)"Does executive privilege cover criminal activity? Can the executive branch assert executive privilege to silence a witness to a crime?"
Because that is -- specifically -- what is at issue here.
MDN
brooklynite
(94,508 posts)The issue here is the specific charges.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)She's asking about the repository where the communications were stowed when WH officials realized they were unethical and problematic.
Maguire reminds her the whistleblower didn't have first hand knowledge.
Speier: Do you believe the whistleblower was spying on this president?
Maguire: No and he complied with the law...
Speier: WHy didn't you defend him...
Maguire: I was just trying to follow the law.
Speier: Do you believe the whistleblower is on our side (a patriot) or against us?
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Great Job So Far. Thank You U.S. House Intelligence Committee!
MrsCoffee
(5,801 posts)And instantly cuts him off his first answer. And then tried to cut him off his second answer.
I love it.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)He's defending MaGuire against insinuations against his honorable character.
Not sure, it sounds like he's attacking other Republicans who have accused him of partisanship.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)Saying its horrible for anyone who hasnt served to impugn Maguires honor
Roland99
(53,342 posts)Link to tweet
Seth Abramson
✔
@SethAbramson
No.
Not when the DNI had prima facie criminal evidence; not when privilege resided in the complaint's subject; not when the statute is mandatory; not when the ICIG had ruled the whistleblower compliant; not when privilege wasn't raised; not when even DOJ gave the DNI discretion.
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)Because he's One Of Us. Or some such horeseshit.
nolabear
(41,959 posts)FFS, can they actually talk about the complaint?
Roland99
(53,342 posts)Because its making them look bad.
Celerity
(43,333 posts)the one on the right
his neck beard is FLESH and FAT
Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Waiting to happen. Someone should tell him.
OneBlueDotBama
(1,384 posts)Mike 03
(16,616 posts)Now he's attacking whoever leaked this information to the press. He's asking MaGuire to investigate the leaks or suggesting he should.
"Good luck convincing the American people that this is a dishonorable man."
I don't know who he's attacking? Oh, it might be the Democrats. Adam Schiff responds.
(I thought the Republicans were attacking MaGuire!)
WHenever Adam Schiff responds, it settles the matter. He knows how to whack these moles.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)BumRushDaShow
(128,894 posts)bdamomma
(63,840 posts)can someone carry on with starting new threads.
WinstonSmith4740
(3,056 posts)I tried watching. Really. If I keep watching, I'm going to end up destroying my TV by throwing stuff at it.
I used to be able to watch these things...Republicans are flat out infuriating.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)MaGuire stifles a laugh and says he can't get into particulars.
"I know what the allegations are. I'm not saying whether the allegations are true."
Quigley wants to dig down on Giuliani. Doubt he'll get very far on this.
But good for him for trying!
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)MaGuire: I only know what I've read in the complaint.
Quigley reads from the complaint. "Your reaction to that."
M: Ask the white house about that. I have no authority or responsibility over the white house.
Q: This complaint doesn't concern you??
M: There's a lot that concerns me. I'm the DNI. How the president wants to conduct diplomacy is his business, it's not about whether I approve or disapprove.
M didn't want to touch the Giuliani line of questioning. But he really did laugh the moment the name came up.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)She's going to emphasize that the whistleblower was not a direct witness to events. "THis seems to me to be important."
MaGuire defends the IG. He did exactly what his job is. "I do know that michael atkinson did in fact discuss this with the whistleblower and found him to be credible" He may well have spoken to others, I'm just not aware.
underpants
(182,785 posts)My wife and I both rolled our eyes. Ive read the complaint this morning- they corroborated with a lot of people who were there or know of what happened
BeyondGeography
(39,370 posts)Nailing Maguire on going to the WH before Congress.
oasis
(49,378 posts)with Maguire's tap dance routine.
BeyondGeography
(39,370 posts)Roland99
(53,342 posts)oasis
(49,378 posts)Mike 03
(16,616 posts)He's interested, again, in why MaGuire took the complaint to the white house and DOJ.
Maguire: We consulted and decided to go to the office of legal counsel.
Swalwell is arguing that this became an intelligence issue when the communications were moved into the secret intelligence system database. (Good argument).
So he's arguing that this complaint does fall under the responsibility of the DNI and is not an extraneous complaint that falls under any other rules.
S: are you responsible for preventing foreign election interference?
M: (stumbling)
S: Is it your priority?
M: Yes it is.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)Mike 03
(16,616 posts)amb123
(1,581 posts)Translation: "You (Acting DNI) said just what I wanted to hear, never mind whether it's the true or not. Thanks Pal!"
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)but safeguarding the integrity of our elections.
M talks about cyberthreat.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)SharonClark
(10,014 posts)uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... robbing banks, where in the hell does he think that's OK.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)And whats this 11 page opinion that required him not to follow the law?
bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)Roland99
(53,342 posts)Do they get points for saying bs talking point terms?
mikeysnot
(4,756 posts)they edit this all together to distract.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)Ended saying that most of us know right from wrong.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)Explaining very patiently that sending the complaint to DOJ when Barr was mentioned in the complaint was wrong.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)Nice chitchat with Maquire about how long he's been on the job.
Questions Maquire about taking the whistle blowers complaint to the DOJ when Barr was listed in the complaint. Maloney said his judgement was bad.
Maquire, again, stated 'executive privilege' and said he works for the POTUS said his conversation with POTUS is privileged and confidential.
Schiff tried to give Maquire an out but he rufused to take it.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)Asked Maquire about the importance of Ukraine to US security.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)Maguire keeps saying he won't divulge the content and that he has many conversations.
Schiff still trying to get him to answer but Maguire will NOT answer.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)She's softballing for now, setting up our relationship with Ukraine
Maguire spewing right-wing talking point that the US pays more for Ukraine's protection than anyone else.
OMG...he said it again! "If others were willing to step up" (and pay more)...total right wing talking point! Europe contributes billions!
Roland99
(53,342 posts)security assistance was suspended and no one knew why
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)SharonClark
(10,014 posts)Asked if Maquire had discussed Ukraine with Trump. He said in the 6 weeks he's been the acting DNI, he hasn't.
Maquire believes the whistle blower was acting in good faith.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)that the Intel committee is not the place.
Sounds like he got his barking orders from Mark Levin.
The House won't vote on anything until investigations are over and Articles of Impeachment are ready.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)FarPoint
(12,350 posts)Trump cycle....avoid any factual questions, wash, rinse repeat.....
I think I will just focus on the election process....remain a victim of Trump administration...
budkin
(6,700 posts)It's painful to watch.
spooky3
(34,440 posts)Jim__
(14,075 posts)His concern is Trump's opinion, not the security of the country.
Duppers
(28,120 posts)nolabear
(41,959 posts)Brother Buzz
(36,417 posts)ecstatic
(32,688 posts)This guy is so full of crap! His excuses do not make sense!
TheRealNorth
(9,478 posts)Isn't Maguire obliged to turn the complaint over to congress? Just because the WH hasn't decided to invoke executive privilege does not relieve him of his duty to follow the law? Am I missing something?
I would have liked to see them nailing him to the wall on that.
I also wish they would stop asking Maguire his opinion on hypotheticals that are not related to him.
I think the Dems need to bring in some professionals to cross-examine these criminals.
dem4decades
(11,283 posts)Foreign countries are probably jumping for joy.
Nasruddin
(752 posts)My feeling about this guy from seeing him on cspan is that he's just another
Trump admin crook, totally in the bag. Sorry.
Prudence suggests that one shouldn't ascribe to malice what can adequately be
explained by stupidity.
In either case, this guy must go.
dem4decades
(11,283 posts)Mike 03
(16,616 posts)MaGuire is not doing well at all. He's floundering badly, arguing it's not his business to render a judgment as to whether the congress should investigate this complaint, a damned serious charge that the president asked a foreign power to interfere in our election.
Schiff seems to be enjoying himself despite the fact he's not getting answers.
Schiff reads from the complaint and then asks MaGuire: We should pursue this, shouldn't we?
Maguire tries to pass the buck to the ICIG.
S: But you would agree, if this is a credible allegation, that the white house was moving communications into a secret server, that ought to be looked into, wouldn't you agree?
M: (evasive) I just absolutely have no knowledge. It's not under my authority or responsibility.
spooky3
(34,440 posts)Straight answers out of this tool, was to make it clear to everyone watching what a weak, dumb, toady Maguire is.
SaveOurDemocracy
(4,400 posts)flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)Specifically that RG was doing what Mueller deemed "unethical and possibly illegal"
And that Pence postponed his trip until he knew wither Ukraine was going to "play ball"
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)Schiff: Would you agree that to seek foreign assistance this way would be unpatriotic and unethical?
M: I am in no position to criticize the president or comment on what Mr. Giuliani does or doesn't do.
(Pathetic answer).
(This is sad... He refuses to offer an opinion on a black and white moral issue.)
Now Schiff asking about Pence cancelling a trip to Ukraine to put pressure on Ukraine.
Schiff asking about Trump issuing the order to cancel all aid to Ukraine and none of the higher-ups understanding why this suspension occurred. Schiff: Isn't that a little bit suspicious?
M: I don't know. I have no situational awareness... blah blah
Schiff: Well I can tell you, we are going to find out.
Schiff thanks the witness for appearing.
BumRushDaShow
(128,894 posts)flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)in rooting out corruption; that what they are seeing from our POTUS is not democracy, it is the very "negation" of democracy.
We're adjourned!
JPK
(651 posts)The Mexican president has offered to pay for the impeachment.