bdamomma
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 12:59 PM
Original message |
*******OFFICIAL THREAD NO 6 SAMPSON TRIAL********** |
|
Edited on Thu Mar-29-07 01:03 PM by alyce douglas
|
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:01 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I wish they could bring up Rove's strategy for 2008 |
|
and his list of swing states.
|
gumby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
"Sen. Kennedy (D-MA) makes a very good point. The prosecutor firings and replacements just happen to be in all the key 2008 swing states, and not in any states that are safe for either party -- with the exception of California, where the Lam -Cunningham investigation is. Why do you think that would be?"
Kennedy up now.
|
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:07 PM
Original message |
*gasp* Kennedy asking about Griffin now! n/t |
Raven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:02 PM
Response to Original message |
2. you are very brave to take this on! n/t |
ShortnFiery
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
10. Samson is repeating "I don't remember" and "I don't Know" ad nausea |
|
damn, he's claming up again. :grr:
|
quiet.american
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
22. I hear you -- we can expect all of 'em to take this route. n/t |
quiet.american
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
26. Finally, he remembered something! (That Harriet Miers was at a meeting.) n/t |
Javaman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
122. She's an easy one to throw under the bus. LOL nt |
Raven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
13. Sampson is talking too much... |
Cameron27
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:03 PM
Response to Original message |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:04 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Going over the Arizona case with Arizona Kahl Republican |
kerry-is-my-prez
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:05 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Kennedy up now - Go Teddy! |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:05 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Not a very good file and I don't where the file is?
|
bdamomma
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:05 PM
Response to Original message |
8. these guys at lunch now? |
quiet.american
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:05 PM
Response to Original message |
9. Ted Kennedy asking about the "drop file" -- do you still have it? |
Cameron27
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:06 PM
Response to Original message |
|
The Justice Dept. has admitted it was wrong about Rove being involved with Feb 23 letter, were you aware...
I'm not sure, I was focused on AG's interim appointment.
|
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:07 PM
Response to Original message |
12. I think he is going to drop a bomb Kennedy just talked to staff |
jumpoffdaplanet
(676 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:07 PM
Response to Original message |
14. I've never wanted to waterboard a person... |
|
the way I want to waterboard this guy.
It is so frustating to hear this little creep lie about not remembering.
|
underpants
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:08 PM
Response to Original message |
15. Is there a LINK other than C-Span? |
|
C-Span? isn't working for me right now
|
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
|
the Senate Judiciary Committee site.
|
helderheid
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
Cameron27
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:10 PM
Response to Original message |
18. To the best of my knowledge |
|
I don't remember Karl Rove talking to me in person or on the phone.
Kenndy: Do you know why you would mention that it was important to Harriet and Karl in your email?
Kennedy: Now that the Justice Dept. has said it was inaccurate do you agree?
I'm not aware of that.
I'd need to see the dept's letter.
|
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:10 PM
Response to Original message |
19. "I don't remember Karl Rove talking to me in person or on the phone..." |
|
but what about email and blackberry discussions, Mr. Sampson? Hmmmm????
|
BuyingThyme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:11 PM
Response to Original message |
20. A new letter from the justice dept today stating that |
|
Rove was interested in Griffin,
|
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
24. Ooops! Sampson sees the bus coming and takes a big gulp! n/t |
eleny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:11 PM
Response to Original message |
21. His tapping the table for emphasis is starting to annoy me more than impress me with "honesty" |
|
Somebody ought to have told Sampson at lunch that it's being overused.
Maybe he's banging out an SOS? Or perhaps it's "SOL"?
|
Jack Rabbit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:12 PM
Response to Original message |
23. I think Teddy tripped him up |
|
Sampson is a liar. When he said "Karl", he meant Karl.
|
seemslikeadream
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:12 PM
Response to Original message |
25. Sanchez, Hills plead not guilty |
bobthedrummer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
32. Frederick Black and, of course, the WH Abramoff network are a major linchpin n/t |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:12 PM
Response to Original message |
27. Meeting with Harriet Miers and Bill Kelly |
|
many meetings on attorney firings.
|
Raven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:14 PM
Response to Original message |
29. I'll bet this guy Sampson is shitty to his secretaries and |
|
other employees...I'll just bet!
|
Gregorian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:15 PM
Response to Original message |
30. It's not about firing attorneys. It's about obstructing prosecution. |
|
As if we all don't know that by now.
But Grassley said it, and it is a succinct way of stating the issue.
|
BuyingThyme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Original message |
Gregorian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message |
48. Yep. And then they shut the hearing down. |
BuyingThyme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #48 |
91. Ya think that was the reason? |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:15 PM
Response to Original message |
31. Now Senator Grassley (r) |
|
going over the president's right to fire attorneys but conflicting information given by Justice
|
Cameron27
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:16 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Republicans who've objected to the rules of this committee...what? He didn't finish or I missed it.
|
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
35. WTF? adjourned??? until when??? |
helderheid
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
36. The Republicans don't want the truth to come out and are scared shitless. |
steve2470
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
39. wtf ??? repugs objected ????? nt |
Hepburn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Original message |
Whoa....does THAT look like a cover up! |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:16 PM
Response to Original message |
34. Republicains shut down Hearings |
ClayZ
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Original message |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:18 PM
Response to Original message |
52. They used a Senate Rule |
|
I don't know what is happening.
|
napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
41. I don't understand? What does that mean???? n.t |
Ediacara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #41 |
50. Leahy interupted Grassley and said that the GOP has objected and they're taking a recess |
Ediacara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
|
It's been going on all day, and they choose to shut them down in the middle of Grassley's shpeel?
|
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
46. WTF is that??? Standing in recess |
|
Going to check on CSPAN2 for fireworks. Something's up!
|
bobthedrummer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message |
37. NOT POLITICAL!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!! |
Gregorian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message |
38. Republicans have protested the meeting? It's in recess! |
|
What the...
Things are hotting up, as they say in the Tour De France.
|
MaineDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message |
40. WTF?...GOP objects to these hearings??? nt |
Raven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message |
|
we must be getting close to the truth. Repubs have objected to this hearing????
|
Oilwellian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #43 |
MadJohnShaft
(267 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message |
44. I got CSPAN2 on the TV - they've been on a Qurom call, working on stopping this? |
Buttercup McToots
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #44 |
|
just got here... what's going on...?
|
Oilwellian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message |
|
so much for our transparent government.
|
Lint Head
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Original message |
|
It's in their nature.:dem:
|
eleny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #45 |
60. Gee, and Grassley was just in mid point about how happy he is with transparency |
quiet.american
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message |
47. What?! How do they have that power -- and why didn't Dems use it when they were the minority? n/t |
lisa58
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #47 |
64. republicans never had a hearing |
quiet.american
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #64 |
112. True -- I'd thought about that, too. n/t |
HCE SuiGeneris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #64 |
113. lol -- good point, there was no oversight |
Jack Rabbit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message |
|
"Rupublicans" are objecting to the hearing? So it is adjourned?
|
eleny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #49 |
68. Recessed - not adjourned |
Jack Rabbit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #68 |
|
OK, that's a little less sinister sounding.
I'm too used to the way the GOP does business to stop inconvenient truths from coming out.
|
gumby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:18 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Don't understand what just happened??????
|
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:18 PM
Response to Original message |
53. sounded like they are on recess until the other business of the senate |
|
closes
didn't he say they will come back and start with grassley?
|
napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #53 |
62. Yes he did. Said they would resume after the Senat ends the day. |
|
I don't understand this whole thing though????
|
BuyingThyme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:18 PM
Response to Original message |
55. What the fuck is going on, ya Mooks? |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #55 |
72. Leahy is speaking but we can hardly hear on why...Anyone? |
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:18 PM
Response to Original message |
56. sounded like they are on recess until the other business of the senate |
|
closes
didn't he say they will come back and start with grassley?
|
vanboggie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Original message |
57. I came in late - question |
|
Did any Senator bring up the possibility that these replacements may be for the purpose of helping Rove rig the 08 election?
|
Spazito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Original message |
58. When Leahy said the hearing was in recess until the Senate |
|
recessed and then Senator Grassley could continue his questions if he wished, am I correct in my take that the hearing will be on again once the Senate recesses for the day, meaning the hearing will be on again later today?
|
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #58 |
69. that's what i get out of it. they are in recess...n/t |
sinkingfeeling
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #58 |
74. That's the way I understood it too. |
Solly Mack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #58 |
76. Oh, OK! Thanks. Just tuned back in and was all lost :) |
Duer 157099
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #58 |
yodermon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Original message |
59. Leahy said something about "under senate rules" |
|
the repubs are entitled, but they'll be right back.
Can Congress be held in contempt of itself? ;)
|
helderheid
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #59 |
66. TURN ON THE MICS CSPAN!! |
Ediacara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #66 |
83. The mics are still on |
|
They're just standing away from them, I could hear mumbling, but nothing clear.
|
Lint Head
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:20 PM
Original message |
Yes! We are the majority now. |
|
The worm has turned and so have the aspens:dem:
|
Hepburn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #59 |
81. Leahy kind of blew it off, IMO... |
|
...and said that Sen Grassley could finish asking his questions when they got back.
OK....up date: Announcer on CSpan saying that Sen rules do not permit committee meetings while the Senate is in session. Repukes objected on this rule.
|
SaveAmerica
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Original message |
63. Someone who is watching on tv and has DVR/Tivo please rewind |
|
and tell us what exactly was said. Why did they do that?
|
mikelgb
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:19 PM
Response to Original message |
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #65 |
80. CSPAN radio still airing |
|
Can hear Leahy speaking but it so far away from the mics can't hear what is being said.
Op---now it's gone.
|
Ediacara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #65 |
90. I'm still getting video feed |
|
maybe try reloading the page?
|
Buttercup McToots
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #65 |
103. They think we all will get tired and go away... |
|
They know the country is listening to this...
|
kestrel91316
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:20 PM
Response to Original message |
67. Trial? I thought this was a hearing before Congress. |
|
Sheesh, look what I miss by turning my back for a couple of days...........
|
OmmmSweetOmmm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:20 PM
Response to Original message |
70. My guess, the Republicans called a Quorum and Leahy thinks they are doing this to interfere |
|
Edited on Thu Mar-29-07 01:22 PM by OmmmSweetOmmm
with the hearing.
On edit...if the Republicans are protesting, doesn't it seem odd that Grassley didn't know about it?
|
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #70 |
93. Yup!!!! Sounds like Karl was watching Kenneday Q&A, got on the horn |
|
and told them to shut it down now of he'd personally fuck every one of them!
Procedural tactics by Cons.
|
originalpckelly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Original message |
So that's what happened. I knew there was something up... |
|
I think it must be because Grassley voted for the subpoenas and is usually very anti-corruption, even with the GOP. He just took down the head of the Smithsonian for corruption.
Was Grassley questioning the witness in a hard way, or were the only questions being asked suck-up questions?
|
Breeze54
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #70 |
101. This was a calculated move, imho! |
|
Edited on Thu Mar-29-07 01:25 PM by Breeze54
They didn't stop it this morning! Never mentioned this rule!
|
Solly Mack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:20 PM
Response to Original message |
71. What the heck happened? |
buzzard
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #71 |
79. Waiting till the Senate session closes then it will resume. |
Solly Mack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #79 |
86. Thanks! Just tuned back in and "all hell done broke loose" |
napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #71 |
92. The cspan announcer just saidsome rules of the Senate prohibit |
|
hearings from taking place while the Senate is in session. I guess they pulled THAT rabbit out of the hat, so Leahy will resume the hearings when the Senate adjourns for the day!
|
Solly Mack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #92 |
110. Amazing how the rules must be used when they don't like |
|
what is happening...but how those rules go out the window when it is them.
|
Gregorian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:21 PM
Response to Original message |
73. Now they're all standing and discussing the situation. |
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:21 PM
Response to Original message |
75. senate rules preclude a hearing when the senate is in session n/t |
Ediacara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:21 PM
Response to Original message |
77. C-SPAN Announcer says: |
|
They're in recess because the full senate is still in session due to Senate rules, replaying Sampson's opening statements, will cut in when committee resumes.
|
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #77 |
87. glad they are replaying this--i had to leave earlier and i missed part of it n/t |
Cameron27
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #77 |
98. I don't remember this ever happening before. |
Ediacara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #98 |
105. They may be having a vote in the full Senate? What's going in the Senate chamber? |
Cameron27
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #105 |
121. Quorum call right now. |
|
Edited on Thu Mar-29-07 01:30 PM by seasonedblue
|
MadJohnShaft
(267 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:21 PM
Response to Original message |
78. Cannot continue while Senate is in Session, so they have to recess |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:22 PM
Original message |
Republicans used this rule to stop the Hearings although they didn't in the |
|
beginning of the hearing.
|
quiet.american
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Response to Original message |
89. Ding, ding, ding. n/t |
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:25 PM
Response to Original message |
100. Amazingly, these actions would have taken place while Kennedy |
|
was questioning him about Rove's involvement in getting Griffin in Arkansas. Grassley had JUST started.
|
Hepburn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #78 |
96. MSNBC....carrying info what is going on. n/t |
WinkyDink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:22 PM
Response to Original message |
82. ETA: okay, I read the post about this being a repeat! |
|
Edited on Thu Mar-29-07 01:24 PM by WinkyDink
|
Ediacara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #82 |
97. They're replaying it while the committee's in recess |
Hubert Flottz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:22 PM
Response to Original message |
OmmmSweetOmmm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:23 PM
Response to Original message |
94. Per cspan2...senate in quorum call and sometimes floor business stops hearings and |
|
after the floor business is done, the hearing can go back on.
|
eleny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:24 PM
Response to Original message |
95. This makes the Republicans look weak |
|
Edited on Thu Mar-29-07 01:25 PM by eleny
The rule is that hearings can only go on so may hours while the Senate is in session. The original intention is so Congress can hear what's going on.
It's rarely invoked. Using Senate procedure to interrupt the proceedings.
This is according to MSNBC right now.
Edit: It's my observation that this makes the Republicans look weak - not the MSNBC reporter's observaton.
|
WinkyDink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #95 |
99. And petty and GUILTY. |
eleny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #99 |
102. Yeah, their grasping at straws and gasping |
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #99 |
111. i'm sure the pukes would like to stop these hearings altogether n/t |
Norquist Nemesis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #95 |
104. Makes the Cons appear to be in further collusion with WH coverup |
Cameron27
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #95 |
106. Leahy made sure that the fact of the Republicans being the ones who objected |
|
Edited on Thu Mar-29-07 01:27 PM by seasonedblue
got into the record.
Good, it makes them look like they're complicit in the WH coverup.
|
eleny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #106 |
123. Oh, that's great! He did look like he was supressing delight |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #95 |
107. Yep, because they didn't use it in the beginning |
|
Damn it was just getting good...Kennedy had a new memo from justice that kicked the shit out of the hearings.
|
napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #95 |
109. I don't know about weak, but they sure look like they're trying to |
|
hide something! I gotta give it to the Pubs! They sure do know how to use all these obscure rules to their advantage!
I think we should hire or train some Dems to be able to do the same!!!!!
|
ProfessorPlum
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #109 |
116. I missed that part exactly |
|
but I know I hadn't heard the name of the USA kennedy brought up before. Can you elaborate just a bit? Thanks,
|
eleny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #109 |
120. We don't ever want to apear scared or hiding something |
|
I think invoking this rule makes them look like obstructionists. Good fodder for talking heads and radio discussions. Yum-yum-yummy.
The fact that it happened right when Grassley was mid sentence about how happy he was to have things discussed in the light of day is a scream. I love the irony and bet that you do, too!
|
flyarm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:26 PM
Response to Original message |
108. ok so DU gets bogged down this morning.,.in NJ and NY tv cspan gets no less than |
|
6 National broadcast interuptions with the national broadcast emergency tests...all when Sampson is replying to questions...and now this...any questions what is going on?????????
fly
|
SaveAmerica
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:28 PM
Response to Original message |
114. Well, isn't that conveeeeenient!! Need a picture of the Church Lady |
DURHAM D
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:28 PM
Response to Original message |
115. I think Hatch shut it down. After the meeting closed |
|
Senators Schumer and Leahy were giving an interview to the press. Hatch stood to the side and listened to the whole thing.
My take - Sampson was talking too much. When Kennedy asked him a question he gave answers that were way too long. Example - When responding to Kennedy's question about who and how many times he met with officials in the WH - Sampson went on and on about the weekly meeting scheduled for 4:00pm on Wednesdays. Then Sampson volunteered that the times would sometimes shift depending on the PRINCIPALS schedules. Kennedy was out of time but the next obvious question is "Who are the principals" he is referring to?
|
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:29 PM
Response to Original message |
117. after they broke i cranked up the volume and heard someone asking |
|
off mike who stopped it?
i didn't hear the answer.
|
Solly Mack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:29 PM
Response to Original message |
118. - I didn't expect to get caught so I obviously made mistakes - |
|
Just my take on his opening statement since it is being replayed
|
bobthedrummer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:29 PM
Response to Original message |
119. Anyone else flash through history to, say, The Weimar Republic? |
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:31 PM
Original message |
how long is the senate going to be in session? (so when are we |
|
getting back to this hearing?)
and what is the senate doing now anyway?
|
Ediacara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Mar-29-07 01:31 PM
Response to Original message |
124. Locking due to length |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 06:51 PM
Response to Original message |