Schiff wasn't in his lane - 2 transcripts released

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,338
59
48
Before they even started Yovanocitch, Republicans ask Schiff what gives him the authority. He didn't answer and moved on.

MR. ZELDIN: Yesterday, Ranking Member McCaul sent a letter to Chairman Engel consistent with what Mr. Jordan was just referencing on the record, calling on the chair to honor the bipartisan Rodino Hyde precedence that governed both the Nixon and Clinton impeachment inquires, which guaranteed the President's counsel the right to participate in these proceedings, and allowed the minority to exercise coequal subpoena authority.

Moving on. The question is, what specific provision of House rules gives the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence the jurisdiction and authority to convene an investigative inquiry of a State Department diplomat regarding the conduct of U.5. foreign policy toward Ukraine? That is clearly the jurisdiction of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and to date, the House has not voted to give the Intel Committee any additional authority to conduct an impeachment inquiry outside of its jurisdictional lane, which concerns intelligence- related activities. Can you please point us to anything in the House rules that gives you this authority?

THE CHAIRMAN: We're going to move forward with the deposition rather than address the mischaracterizations of both impeachment history and inquiries and process. I would now recognize Mr. Goldman.

MR. MEADOWS: Mr . Chairman, point of order. Point of order.

THE CHAIRMAN: My colleague, we're not going to allow

MR. MEADOWS: Well, you can't not allow -- I'm here to tell you, Mr. Schjff --

THE CHAIRMAN: We're not going to allow any dilatory

MR. MEADOWS: -- you know the House rules allows for point of order in any

THE CHAIRMAN: State your point of order.

MR. MEADOWS: The point of order is the rules of the House are very clear. The gentleman raised a valid point that there are no rules that would give the authority of you to actually depose this witness. And so, under what authority I would say you're out of order.

THE CHAIRMAN: I appreciate your opinion, but the House deposition rules say otherwise. So, Mr. Goldman, you are recognized .

MR. ZELDIN: Point of order, though, we are asking what that rule is that gives you the authority to conduct today's deposition.

MR. MEADOWS: Rule 11 doesn't outline anything.

THE CHAIRMAN: We won't allow any further dilatory motions. Mr . Goldman, you' re recognized.

MR. ZELDIN: We're asking a simple question.

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D003.pdf
 

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,863
284
83
Before they even started Yovanocitch, Republicans ask Schiff what gives him the authority. He didn't answer and moved on.

MR. ZELDIN: Yesterday, Ranking Member McCaul sent a letter to Chairman Engel consistent with what Mr. Jordan was just referencing on the record, calling on the chair to honor the bipartisan Rodino Hyde precedence that governed both the Nixon and Clinton impeachment inquires, which guaranteed the President's counsel the right to participate in these proceedings, and allowed the minority to exercise coequal subpoena authority.

Moving on. The question is, what specific provision of House rules gives the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence the jurisdiction and authority to convene an investigative inquiry of a State Department diplomat regarding the conduct of U.5. foreign policy toward Ukraine? That is clearly the jurisdiction of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and to date, the House has not voted to give the Intel Committee any additional authority to conduct an impeachment inquiry outside of its jurisdictional lane, which concerns intelligence- related activities. Can you please point us to anything in the House rules that gives you this authority?

THE CHAIRMAN: We're going to move forward with the deposition rather than address the mischaracterizations of both impeachment history and inquiries and process. I would now recognize Mr. Goldman.

MR. MEADOWS: Mr . Chairman, point of order. Point of order.

THE CHAIRMAN: My colleague, we're not going to allow

MR. MEADOWS: Well, you can't not allow -- I'm here to tell you, Mr. Schjff --

THE CHAIRMAN: We're not going to allow any dilatory

MR. MEADOWS: -- you know the House rules allows for point of order in any

THE CHAIRMAN: State your point of order.

MR. MEADOWS: The point of order is the rules of the House are very clear. The gentleman raised a valid point that there are no rules that would give the authority of you to actually depose this witness. And so, under what authority I would say you're out of order.

THE CHAIRMAN: I appreciate your opinion, but the House deposition rules say otherwise. So, Mr. Goldman, you are recognized .

MR. ZELDIN: Point of order, though, we are asking what that rule is that gives you the authority to conduct today's deposition.

MR. MEADOWS: Rule 11 doesn't outline anything.

THE CHAIRMAN: We won't allow any further dilatory motions. Mr . Goldman, you' re recognized.

MR. ZELDIN: We're asking a simple question.

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D003.pdf
To which Schiff says suck it and sit down clown.
 

Mntneer

Sophomore
Oct 7, 2001
10,192
196
0
Now we see why they wanted the hearing to not be televised and public.
 

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,338
59
48
THE CHAIRMAN: You know, based On what you've learned from colleagues, what you've learned in the press, what is your best understanding of why Lutsenko was trying to push you out of Ukraine?

Objection, stupidity on display
 

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,338
59
48
MS. YOVANOVITCH: Maybe. Maybe. I mean , he clearly wanted to work around the system where I think there's less transparency, there are more opportunities to, you know, kind of fiddle the system, shall we say.

Because he didn't get a response from your office in over a year, wench. Sit down.
 

tjebarr

Senior
Feb 3, 2007
25,122
917
0
THE CHAIRMAN: You know, based On what you've learned from colleagues, what you've learned in the press, what is your best understanding of why Lutsenko was trying to push you out of Ukraine?

Objection, stupidity on display

You are so f ucked

 

WVUCOOPER

Redshirt
Dec 10, 2002
55,556
40
31
Now we see why they wanted the hearing to not be televised and public.
lolwut? It's being released and then the next stage will be televised. Are you one that thinks investigations should be in public? Why is Barr and Durham not televising their investigation?
 

Mntneer

Sophomore
Oct 7, 2001
10,192
196
0
lolwut? It's being released and then the next stage will be televised.

Audio and Video plays drastically different than transcripts.

Are you one that thinks investigations should be in public? Why is Barr and Durham not televising their investigation?

The House is NOT the DOJ. The House... the "people's" House... should be open. Baring sensitive information that relates to national security, no HOUSE investigation should require secrecy.

You are attempting to equate an Apple to an Orange.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,602
821
113
lolwut? It's being released and then the next stage will be televised. Are you one that thinks investigations should be in public? Why is Barr and Durham not televising their investigation?
Is that even a serious queation? Comparing the house of representatives elected by the people to the DOJ and a criminal investigation?
 

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,863
284
83
Audio and Video plays drastically different than transcripts.



The House is NOT the DOJ. The House... the "people's" House... should be open. Baring sensitive information that relates to national security, no HOUSE investigation should require secrecy.

You are attempting to equate an Apple to an Orange.
The first phase was more like grand jury testimony which is not open to the public.
 

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,338
59
48
Wench refused to answer whether she'd given intelligence information to WaPo before they started the testimony. So yes, she did.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,602
821
113
The first phase was more like grand jury testimony which is not open to the public.
They keep saying that but Congress isnt a court and if people were leaking testimony from a grand jury like Congress was leaking from their initial phase people would got to prison.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,602
821
113
There's nothing here. This transcript is worse than the Mueller crap.
Vinkman accidently told the truth and effectively ended this when he said that he was worried and came forward because the President was undermining US Foreign policy.
 

WVUCOOPER

Redshirt
Dec 10, 2002
55,556
40
31
Audio and Video plays drastically different than transcripts.



The House is NOT the DOJ. The House... the "people's" House... should be open. Baring sensitive information that relates to national security, no HOUSE investigation should require secrecy.

You are attempting to equate an Apple to an Orange.
It is open. Hence the transcripts and upcoming public hearings. Depositions are never public. Investigators, of any kind, don't like witnesses giving each other answers. Public depositions have never happened in any past House investigations, why now? That's apple to apple.
 
Last edited:

WVUCOOPER

Redshirt
Dec 10, 2002
55,556
40
31
Actually, we have the first hand accounts that all of the fact witnesses the left is trotting our seem to be lacking.
"we" lmao.

What? The best hand witness is the "memo" Trump released where he asked a foreign government to investigate a US citizen and then later asked China to do the same.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,251
3,328
113
"we" lmao.

What? The best hand witness is the "memo" Trump released where he asked a foreign government to investigate a US citizen and then later asked China to do the same.
But the charge is a quid pro quo? And according to you, the illegal withholding of funds that literally no one else is talking about.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,602
821
113
"we" lmao.

What? The best hand witness is the "memo" Trump released where he asked a foreign government to investigate a US citizen and then later asked China to do the same.
Poot TDSCoop repeating the CNN party line.
 

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,338
59
48
All they have is process whines. It's so great.

Because there is nothing that is first hand testimony and illegal in the transcripts. There is nothing to defend. We can talk about Dems totally making a circus of the process, until they actually come up with something of substance.
 

WVUCOOPER

Redshirt
Dec 10, 2002
55,556
40
31
And you have what..... "Oh mean Mr Orange Bad Man asked Ukraine to 'look into it'...."

Give me a break. Talk about being hung up on process.
Yes, I am upset the President of the United States asked a foreign government to investigate a US citizen. Give me a break, libertarian. That's not a process.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,251
3,328
113
Yes, I am upset the President of the United States asked a foreign government to investigate a US citizen. Give me a break, libertarian. That's not a process.
It’s like there was a treaty signed by Clinton with the Ukraine for that very thing.
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,602
821
113
LOL! No it wasn't. You're mad because your stupidity has been exposed again.
Yeah, thats it. What wasnt public about the Benghazi investigation? How is an investigation by a select committee anything similar to this? Its not moron.
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
How is an investigation by a select committee anything similar to this? Its not moron.

It's exactly the same. The House could have set up a select committee or they could have done the inquiry themselves, which they obviously did. Witnesses do not give public depositions (you know, that thing you tried to argue for two weeks wasn't happening). LMAO!
 

79eer

Junior
Oct 4, 2008
8,544
394
83
When you folks figure it out let us know. Whole topic is about as relevant as fart in a Windstorm to 99.9999999% of Americans.