Additional testimonies that are scheduled but the Congress will never hear

[HumblePi]

13 people have already testified before Congress so far, most of them appeared willingly despite being ordered by the State Dept. to refuse to appear.

Four witnesses were scheduled to appear before Congress today, two of which have received subpoenas overnight compelling their testimony, but they will defy Congressional subpoenas and not appear to testify.

These are, John Eisenberg, NSC legal advisor, Michael Ellis, Deputy NSC legal advisor, Robert Blair, Senior Advisor to Mike Mulvaney and Brian McCormack, Office of Management and Budget.

Tomorrow, Wells Griffithand Michael Duffy are scheduled to give deposition.

Wednesday, Russel Vought, T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, Rick Perry and David Hale are scheduled to give deposition.

Thursday, John Bolton is scheduled to appear.

There's 99.9% chance that none of them will appear, despite some of them being issued a Congressional order/subpoena to appear.

Is this the 'transparency' that Trump and his republican sycophants demand? Is this the way a democratic constitution is supposed to proceed? No, it's not. This is a clear case of 'guilty knowledge' and even more obstruction of justice by the White House. The refusals of these witnesses to appear will be more evidence of a cover-up and add to the articles of impeachment -- obstruction of justice.

In the end, Trump is going to be impeached in the House and this stonewalling and obstruction of justice will say in the minds of independents heading to the voting booth next November, and it's going to negatively affect the outcome for Trump.

If Trump is impeached in the Senate also and as happened in the Nixon trials, a bunch of men will have to go to prison. Everyone that lied and protected Nixon ended up serving time. Nixon took the easy exit and resigned rather than go to prison. The Watergate scandal resulted in 69 government officials being charged and 48 being found guilty. In the week before Nixon's resignation, Ehrlichman and Haldeman tried unsuccessfully to get Nixon to grant them pardons—which he had promised them before their April 1973 resignations. You see, when the ship is sinking even the rats can't count on each other.

 

[Mycroft]

13 people have already testified before Congress so far, most of them appeared willingly despite being ordered by the State Dept. to refuse to appear.

Four witnesses were scheduled to appear before Congress today, two of which have received subpoenas overnight compelling their testimony, but they will defy Congressional subpoenas and not appear to testify.

These are, John Eisenberg, NSC legal advisor, Michael Ellis, Deputy NSC legal advisor, Robert Blair, Senior Advisor to Mike Mulvaney and Brian McCormack, Office of Management and Budget.

Tomorrow, Wells Griffithand Michael Duffy are scheduled to give deposition.

Wednesday, Russel Vought, T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, Rick Perry and David Hale are scheduled to give deposition.

Thursday, John Bolton is scheduled to appear.

There's 99.9% chance that none of them will appear, despite some of them being issued a Congressional order/subpoena to appear.

Is this the 'transparency' that Trump and his republican sycophants demand? Is this the way a democratic constitution is supposed to proceed? No, it's not. This is a clear case of 'guilty knowledge' and even more obstruction of justice by the White House. The refusals of these witnesses to appear will be more evidence of a cover-up and add to the articles of impeachment -- obstruction of justice.

In the end, Trump is going to be impeached in the House and this stonewalling and obstruction of justice will say in the minds of independents heading to the voting booth next November, and it's going to negatively affect the outcome for Trump.

If Trump is impeached in the Senate also and as happened in the Nixon trials, a bunch of men will have to go to prison. Everyone that lied and protected Nixon ended up serving time. Nixon took the easy exit and resigned rather than go to prison. The Watergate scandal resulted in 69 government officials being charged and 48 being found guilty. In the week before Nixon's resignation, Ehrlichman and Haldeman tried unsuccessfully to get Nixon to grant them pardons—which he had promised them before their April 1973 resignations. You see, when the ship is sinking even the rats can't count on each other.

How many of those will be open to the public?

I think EVERY closed hearing should be opposed by those asked to appear.

 

[Excast]

Now many of those will be open to the public?

I think EVERY closed hearing should be opposed by those asked to appear.

Why are you people so determined to pretend you don't know how depositions work and that their public testimonies would come later?

 

[Superfly]

I think that every single person who defies a congressional subpoena should be visited by the Sergeant at Arms and a few of his friends.

 

[Mycroft]

Why are you people so determined to pretend you don't know how depositions work and that their public testimonies would come later?

Because I don't believe there'll be any "public testimonies". I want to hear what they have to say now...without the biased filter from Schifftileaks.

 

[HumblePi]

How many of those will be open to the public?

I think EVERY closed hearing should be opposed by those asked to appear.

What the **** does it matter if the deposition phase is open or closed if these men refuse to appear? Those that HAVE already given sworn deposition will have their depositions made public starting this week. That's just how the process goes whether you like it or not and it's just too damned bad if you disagree with the constitutional process and don't like how it's being done which is according to law. So go cry some more snowflake tears, see who cares that you do.

 

[BlueTex]

How many of those will be open to the public?

I think EVERY closed hearing should be opposed by those asked to appear.

Do you think every deposition in a criminal case should be open to the public?

 

[jnug]

How many of those will be open to the public?

I think EVERY closed hearing should be opposed by those asked to appear.

Hearings should be open unless they are a Classified Session. Depositions NOT! But of course words, definitions, descriptions mean nothing to Trumpettes.

 

[TomFitz]

13 people have already testified before Congress so far, most of them appeared willingly despite being ordered by the State Dept. to refuse to appear.

Four witnesses were scheduled to appear before Congress today, two of which have received subpoenas overnight compelling their testimony, but they will defy Congressional subpoenas and not appear to testify.

These are, John Eisenberg, NSC legal advisor, Michael Ellis, Deputy NSC legal advisor, Robert Blair, Senior Advisor to Mike Mulvaney and Brian McCormack, Office of Management and Budget.

Tomorrow, Wells Griffithand Michael Duffy are scheduled to give deposition.

Wednesday, Russel Vought, T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, Rick Perry and David Hale are scheduled to give deposition.

Thursday, John Bolton is scheduled to appear.

There's 99.9% chance that none of them will appear, despite some of them being issued a Congressional order/subpoena to appear.

Is this the 'transparency' that Trump and his republican sycophants demand? Is this the way a democratic constitution is supposed to proceed? No, it's not. This is a clear case of 'guilty knowledge' and even more obstruction of justice by the White House. The refusals of these witnesses to appear will be more evidence of a cover-up and add to the articles of impeachment -- obstruction of justice.

In the end, Trump is going to be impeached in the House and this stonewalling and obstruction of justice will say in the minds of independents heading to the voting booth next November, and it's going to negatively affect the outcome for Trump.

If Trump is impeached in the Senate also and as happened in the Nixon trials, a bunch of men will have to go to prison. Everyone that lied and protected Nixon ended up serving time. Nixon took the easy exit and resigned rather than go to prison. The Watergate scandal resulted in 69 government officials being charged and 48 being found guilty. In the week before Nixon's resignation, Ehrlichman and Haldeman tried unsuccessfully to get Nixon to grant them pardons—which he had promised them before their April 1973 resignations. You see, when the ship is sinking even the rats can't count on each other.

The courts will weigh in on the legality of the State Department and White House orders for witnesses not to appear to answer lawful subpoenas.

You will almost certainly be hearing from most of these people in due course.

Only, instead of in the “star chamber” of Sham Hammity’s fevered imagination, it will be across the street in the Rayburn Building before a national television audience, or upstairs in the well of Congress.

 

[jnug]

Do you think every deposition in a criminal case should be open to the public?

Beat me to it. Didn't mean to post atop your post. Just didn't see it in time.

 

[TomFitz]

Why are you people so determined to pretend you don't know how depositions work and that their public testimonies would come later?

I was about to ask that same question.

But then, I remembered the Trump supporters aren’t actually even trying to make fact based arguments anymore.

They’re just parroting the current Fox talking point while trying to work in the latest Trump schoolyard taunt.

Why anyone would believe for a minute that most of these people won’t be appearing before the Commitee, or before the Judiciary Committee on live national television is beyond me.

It makes no sense. But Trumpster spin lines seldom do.

Anyone who has studied the past impeachments at all know that this is inevitable.

But pretending that some unspecified alternative reality is going to happen is all Trumpsters can do.

Just ignore it. It’s ridiculous!

 

[HumblePi]

The courts will weigh in on the legality of the State Department and White House orders for witnesses not to appear to answer lawful subpoenas.

You will almost certainly be hearing from most of these people in due course.

Only, instead of in the “star chamber” of Sham Hammity’s fevered imagination, it will be across the street in the Rayburn Building before a national television audience, or upstairs in the well of Congress.

This obstruction of justice will most certainly be decided in favor of Congress in federal courts, then the Trump administration will take it to the Supreme Court. The White House is counting on their Supreme Court judges to weigh in their favor but there's no guarantee that the SC will even agree to hearing these cases and may defer to the lower courts. But if they agree to hear these appeals, they will uphold the lower courts because it's clearly defined in the constitution that these people must appear to give testimony, particularly those who have defied subpoenas. It's pretty clear that those that are defying a subpoena to appear have the most damaging information to give.

This is a Trump obstruction strategy that's gong to blow up in the faces of the GOP because once it's been delayed in such a way, it's going to end up being ruled on by the courts during the election cycle in 2020. Putting this showdown closer to the election and having the courts compel these people to appear to give testimony is going to be very damaging for Trump's reelection and also for every one of those GOP Senators up for reelection.

 

[Mycroft]

What the **** does it matter if the deposition phase is open or closed if these men refuse to appear? Those that HAVE already given sworn deposition will have their depositions made public starting this week. That's just how the process goes whether you like it or not and it's just too damned bad if you disagree with the constitutional process and don't like how it's being done which is according to law. So go cry some more snowflake tears, see who cares that you do.

Let me know when the hearing transcripts are released. Until then, I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Mycroft]

Do you think every deposition in a criminal case should be open to the public?

We aren't talking about a "criminal case".

 

[HumblePi]

Let me know when the hearing transcripts are released. Until then, I'll believe it when I see it.

Well, the Congressmen that were not in those hearings are going in as we speak to review all of those that are being released today. Why don't you ask one of them to share his take-aways? You won't have to wait long to review them yourself, but the question is will you read them? They will start being released this week to the public. Of course you read the entire Mueller report like I have, right? You read the entire whistleblower transcript too, correct? So I assume you're going to pour over every released transcript and read every word of all of them.

Rep. Speier: Transcripts will ‘probably’ be released in next 5 days - POLITICO

Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) set a five-day timeline on Sunday for the release of deposition transcripts that are part of the House's impeachment probe into President Donald Trump.

"I think you're going to see all of the transcripts that are going to be released probably within the next five days," Speier, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

"I don't know if they're all going to be released on the same day, but they're going to be very telling to the American people," she added. "There is no question now whether there was a quid pro quo, and now the question the Republicans are trying to throw out is, 'Well, was there corrupt intent?'"

Speier added that the transcripts will give the American people "an eye on exactly what we have heard, and what we have heard is growing evidence of grounds for impeachment."

 

[Airyaman]

Let me know when the hearing transcripts are released. Until then, I'll believe it when I see it.

Curious...have you wondered why nothing has been leaked from these hearings by Republicans? Do you believe it's because they are just so honest and honorable? Or could it be that nothing in any of the hearings actually is good for the president?

 

[Mycroft]

Curious...have you wondered why nothing has been leaked from these hearings by Republicans? Do you believe it's because they are just so honest and honorable? Or could it be that nothing in any of the hearings actually is good for the president?

LOL!!

Compare Schifftileaks with ANY Republican Congressman...and that Republican smells like a rose.

Anyway, Rep Congressmen have "characterized" testimony often...without actually leaking testimony. Can't say the same about Schiffty.

 

[Condor060]

What the **** does it matter if the deposition phase is open or closed if these men refuse to appear? Those that HAVE already given sworn deposition will have their depositions made public starting this week. That's just how the process goes whether you like it or not and it's just too damned bad if you disagree with the constitutional process and don't like how it's being done which is according to law. So go cry some more snowflake tears, see who cares that you do.

Give us a heads up when you have an actual Impeachment Inquiry vote in the house and allow the accused to be properly represented, cross examine witnesses, call their own witnesses, and have public hearings. Until then this is nothing but a one way street with Schiff leaking what he wants. Nobody is going to participate in these Democrats wanting to have it their way.

You can pout about it all day long but this is nothing but a soviet style lynching. You want to Impeach a sitting president in secret hearings and expect the county to follow along? You expect us to take Schiff's word for what is being testified too after his sopranos version of Trumps call? You really are desperate.

 

[HumblePi]

Give us a heads up when you have an actual Impeachment Inquiry vote in the house and allow the accused to be properly represented, cross examine witnesses, call their own witnesses, and have public hearings. Until then this is nothing but a one way street with Schiff leaking what he wants. Nobody is going to participate in these Democrats wanting to have it their way.

You can pout about it all day long but this is nothing but a soviet style lynching. You want to Impeach a sitting president in secret hearings and expect the county to follow along? You expect us to take Schiff's word for what is being testified too after his sopranos version of Trumps call? You really are desperate.

No, this is all blatant and illegal refusal of Trump's men to give testimony under oath because it will be severely damaging of Trump and they're all protecting him, if they weren't they'd be willing to raise their hand in front of Congress and take an oath to tell the truth. These men that refused to comply today are all paid by U.S. taxpayers and they're paid to uphold the laws of the US, they're all in defiance of their oaths to protect and serve this country. In my opinion, they're all traitors to this country.

 

[ocean515]

13 people have already testified before Congress so far, most of them appeared willingly despite being ordered by the State Dept. to refuse to appear.

Four witnesses were scheduled to appear before Congress today, two of which have received subpoenas overnight compelling their testimony, but they will defy Congressional subpoenas and not appear to testify.

These are, John Eisenberg, NSC legal advisor, Michael Ellis, Deputy NSC legal advisor, Robert Blair, Senior Advisor to Mike Mulvaney and Brian McCormack, Office of Management and Budget.

Tomorrow, Wells Griffithand Michael Duffy are scheduled to give deposition.

Wednesday, Russel Vought, T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, Rick Perry and David Hale are scheduled to give deposition.

Thursday, John Bolton is scheduled to appear.

There's 99.9% chance that none of them will appear, despite some of them being issued a Congressional order/subpoena to appear.

Is this the 'transparency' that Trump and his republican sycophants demand? Is this the way a democratic constitution is supposed to proceed? No, it's not. This is a clear case of 'guilty knowledge' and even more obstruction of justice by the White House. The refusals of these witnesses to appear will be more evidence of a cover-up and add to the articles of impeachment -- obstruction of justice.

In the end, Trump is going to be impeached in the House and this stonewalling and obstruction of justice will say in the minds of independents heading to the voting booth next November, and it's going to negatively affect the outcome for Trump.

If Trump is impeached in the Senate also and as happened in the Nixon trials, a bunch of men will have to go to prison. Everyone that lied and protected Nixon ended up serving time. Nixon took the easy exit and resigned rather than go to prison. The Watergate scandal resulted in 69 government officials being charged and 48 being found guilty. In the week before Nixon's resignation, Ehrlichman and Haldeman tried unsuccessfully to get Nixon to grant them pardons—which he had promised them before their April 1973 resignations. You see, when the ship is sinking even the rats can't count on each other.

The Founding Fathers were brilliant.

The Constitution is a fundamental element of our Republic and a protector of due process, and the separation of powers.

 

[GDViking]

13 people have already testified before Congress so far, most of them appeared willingly despite being ordered by the State Dept. to refuse to appear.

Four witnesses were scheduled to appear before Congress today, two of which have received subpoenas overnight compelling their testimony, but they will defy Congressional subpoenas and not appear to testify.

These are, John Eisenberg, NSC legal advisor, Michael Ellis, Deputy NSC legal advisor, Robert Blair, Senior Advisor to Mike Mulvaney and Brian McCormack, Office of Management and Budget.

Tomorrow, Wells Griffithand Michael Duffy are scheduled to give deposition.

Wednesday, Russel Vought, T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, Rick Perry and David Hale are scheduled to give deposition.

Thursday, John Bolton is scheduled to appear.

There's 99.9% chance that none of them will appear, despite some of them being issued a Congressional order/subpoena to appear.

Is this the 'transparency' that Trump and his republican sycophants demand? Is this the way a democratic constitution is supposed to proceed? No, it's not. This is a clear case of 'guilty knowledge' and even more obstruction of justice by the White House. The refusals of these witnesses to appear will be more evidence of a cover-up and add to the articles of impeachment -- obstruction of justice.

In the end, Trump is going to be impeached in the House and this stonewalling and obstruction of justice will say in the minds of independents heading to the voting booth next November, and it's going to negatively affect the outcome for Trump.

If Trump is impeached in the Senate also and as happened in the Nixon trials, a bunch of men will have to go to prison. Everyone that lied and protected Nixon ended up serving time. Nixon took the easy exit and resigned rather than go to prison. The Watergate scandal resulted in 69 government officials being charged and 48 being found guilty. In the week before Nixon's resignation, Ehrlichman and Haldeman tried unsuccessfully to get Nixon to grant them pardons—which he had promised them before their April 1973 resignations. You see, when the ship is sinking even the rats can't count on each other.

Wow if only Clinton had ordered Monica to ignore Congress he could have saved himself a d tbe country a lot of bull****...

 

[GDViking]

How many of those will be open to the public?

I think EVERY closed hearing should be opposed by those asked to appear.

I think if I race a cop home and beat him to my driveway he should not be able to give me a ticket.

But just as your example that is it how the law works and our opinions are irrelevant...

 

[GDViking]

I think that every single person who defies a congressional subpoena should be visited by the Sergeant at Arms and a few of his friends.

FBI it is after all a federal offense.

If they subpoenaed me I just RSVPED will not attend, how far do think that would fly???

 

[What if...?]

Give us a heads up when you have an actual Impeachment Inquiry vote in the house and allow the accused to be properly represented, cross examine witnesses, call their own witnesses, and have public hearings. Until then this is nothing but a one way street with Schiff leaking what he wants. Nobody is going to participate in these Democrats wanting to have it their way.

You can pout about it all day long but this is nothing but a soviet style lynching. You want to Impeach a sitting president in secret hearings and expect the county to follow along? You expect us to take Schiff's word for what is being testified too after his sopranos version of Trumps call? You really are desperate.

That will be in the senate.

 

[Condor060]

No, this is all blatant and illegal refusal of Trump's men to give testimony under oath because it will be severely damaging of Trump and they're all protecting him, if they weren't they'd be willing to raise their hand in front of Congress and take an oath to tell the truth. These men that refused to comply today are all paid by U.S. taxpayers and they're paid to uphold the laws of the US, they're all in defiance of their oaths to protect and serve this country. In my opinion, they're all traitors to this country.

Yeah, I know. You want your way. You don't care how its done, you just want your way. You don't care that Schiff knowingly lied about knowing who this WB is, you don't care about how they are orchestrating this, you don't care about Schiffs BS rendition of Trumps call, you don't care about Schiff leaking his own version of whats being said,
you just want your way.

Too bad. When the Democrat party starts acting like adults, then they will get responses like adults but no one in this administration is going to let Schiff make up the rules as he goes.