Trey Gowdy Benghazi hearings
- Thread starter tjebarr
- Start date
Did they call it an official "Impeachment Inquiry"?
[roll][laughing][roll][laughing][roll][laughing]
[laughing][roll][laughing][roll][laughing][roll]
[roll][laughing][roll][laughing][roll][laughing]
[laughing][roll][laughing][roll][laughing][roll]
[roll][laughing][roll][laughing][roll][laughing]
[laughing][roll][laughing][roll][laughing][roll]
Benghazi committee leaks were attack against Hillary Clinton, Democrats say | Benghazi attack | The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...mmittee-democrats-republicans-hillary-clinton
Were the Slick Willy hearings open to anyone? I don't know. This current path seems prudent (minus the reckless leaks)
The Impeachment Inquiry was approved by House vote about a month prior to the Impeachment vote in the House. The Inquiry used the Starr report as a basis for the Impeachment.
The current path is political. Purely political.
What happened when the 3 other US presidents faced impeachment
https://www.businessinsider.com/nixon-clinton-johnson-impeachment-timelines-history-2019-9
Everyone says apples and the orange one. Witnesses testified under oath in public. But what do I know.
B
The 4 year Star investigation was done in Private. Clinton's testimony was behind closed doors in Grand Jury
The 4 year Star investigation was done in Private. Clinton's testimony was behind closed doors in Grand Jury
Where does the constitution say how the house must conduct Impeachment?
This might help you understand
Judge Andrew Napolitano: Trump says impeachment inquiry is unfair. Is he right? | Fox News
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/judge-andrew-napolitano-is-the-impeachment-process-fair
I remember Hilliary saying in public for all to hear, "at this time, what difference does it make?" Every cop who has to stand trial for killing somebody should just quote Hilliary. It was behind closed doors.
Lol, they got nothing, pathetic actually, never seen such a bunch of un self aware bumbling bozos
Lol, you buffoons remember the question she was asking? Why, you'd think she had ever been president and told a foreign country to disregard the Sate Department and work with her personal lawyer, lol, the jig is almost up.
The Republican intervention today is essentially a publicity stunt. Historically, in this situation, the reactions depend upon whose ox is being gored as to who wants proceedings to be open or closed. Both parties are rather inconsistent about this. For example, during the Benghazi proceedings, behind closed doors, Democrats wanted some transcripts released to the public, while Republicans opposed such a release to the public. Republican stalwart Trey Gowdy sent a letter to Democrat Elijah Cummings and explained:
"Releasing transcripts can impact the recollections of other witnesses, jeopardize the efficacy of the investigation, alert witnesses to lines of inquiry best not made public, and publicize personal information . . ."
At this point in the investigation, i agree with Gowdy’s reasoning on this issue. As a lawyer, in every case, it is a tactical decision regarding the taking of depositions as to who to depose first for this very reason. Hard to feel confident you’re getting completely straight information if previous testimony is floating around out in the open for upcoming witnesses to review before testifying in order to get their stories straight with each other.
As i understand it, both Republicans and Democrats are asking questions of these witnesses during this investigatory stage, so both parties are being represented. It would make for a better investigation if witnesses would comply with subpoenaes and testify. If and when it gets to the Senate for an impeachment trial, the proceedings will be public, both sides will be able to call supporting witnesses, and the trial will be presided over by a judge in the form of the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. There will be due process. Thankfully, we have the US Constitution for that.
"Releasing transcripts can impact the recollections of other witnesses, jeopardize the efficacy of the investigation, alert witnesses to lines of inquiry best not made public, and publicize personal information . . ."
At this point in the investigation, i agree with Gowdy’s reasoning on this issue. As a lawyer, in every case, it is a tactical decision regarding the taking of depositions as to who to depose first for this very reason. Hard to feel confident you’re getting completely straight information if previous testimony is floating around out in the open for upcoming witnesses to review before testifying in order to get their stories straight with each other.
As i understand it, both Republicans and Democrats are asking questions of these witnesses during this investigatory stage, so both parties are being represented. It would make for a better investigation if witnesses would comply with subpoenaes and testify. If and when it gets to the Senate for an impeachment trial, the proceedings will be public, both sides will be able to call supporting witnesses, and the trial will be presided over by a judge in the form of the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. There will be due process. Thankfully, we have the US Constitution for that.
The post was, "it was a closed hearing". It wasn't and I just reminded you of the comment. That's all.
Agreed, if there weren't the daily out of context leaks and releases by a certain party.
The Starr report wasn't political? I mean the lie about the intern had zero to do with the original investigation. This is the nonsense that I can't stand from the right. Everything the dems do is politically motivated but nothing they investigate is....EVER. Gowdy as much as said the Benghazi hearings lasted as long as they did to hurt Hillary's political career. Come on man. Be fair.
I have no idea. But I think this process now is fair. Both Dems and Republicans in the room. The leaks are bothersome.
We disagree but it sure appears that Trump violated the constitution and the inquiry should be held. The house still has to vote and I am sure there will be some sort of public hearing at that time because all members will have to hear the testimonies.....But I am not an expert on this topic
The leaks are well beyond bothersome. They are poisoning the well. If there were leaks from a grand jury investigation, people would be shot. Well, maybe not shot, but prosecuted.
I don't think the well has been poisoned yet because the witnesses thus far have been generally been primary players with first hand accounts. I think though that it can corrupt the process down the line. It needs to stop.
I am not an attorney but if I was advising trump I would tell him to shut up and get off twitter. right now the senate won't convict him but as he continues with his attacks on every witness, he is surely going to get charged by the house with obstruction which may sway enough republican senators. He has already perjured himself but that isn't enough to get him voted out. he commits perjury daily.
Didn't say the Starr report wasn't political. Clinton sealed his fate when he lied under oath on camera. The inquiry process back then though was not handled in the same manner as it's being handled today. Today's "inquiry" is designed to solely damage Trump politically.
He is damaging himself politically. He has attacked every witness and the whistle blower even though all their accounts are relatively the same. He used his personal attorney to run foreign policy. He clearly withheld aid for his political gain (his released transcript of the call).
I think he is doing the damage here
The problem with the Clintons, they are dirty and always have been. The lie about the intern wouldn't have mattered had he not been under a civil suit. He lied in a deposition, that's perjury, he suborned perjury with other people. It's sad that nobody learned from Nixon to just tell the truth. The American people will forgive indiscretions. AS I have said, Clinton should have told the SC to stick it. Let the house proceed with whatever they wanted. He could not have been convicted on perjury if he never testified.
they all are dirty. it isn't limited to one party.
4 house terms and 2 senate terms and get out. that will clean some of it up
The biggest reason it was behind closed doors moron was because of all the highly classified information that was involved in Benghazi. Only certain members on that committee were even allowed to be in there. Nothing in Ukraine is classified.
Last edited:
Therefore he never intended to save our people.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1186804127516332032.html
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1186804127516332032.html
Because the political fallout is far less from thumbing his nose at an obvious political stunt designed to weaken him than it is for the Dems to control the narrative and stack the deck on impeachment through targeted leaks. Make them spend the time taking him to court, just like Hillary and Obama did.
Latest
-
01
WV Sports
Report: Michael Hawkins to start at quarterback for West Virginia
-
02
On3
West Virginia expected to start Michael Hawkins to open 2026 season
-
03
WV Sports
WVSports.com: West Virginia Q&A Mailbag: 8-28
-
04
WV Sports
Warwick: Cam Torbor a natural fit at linebacker
-
05
WV Sports
Amare' Grayson knows exactly what to expect from Rick Trickett