Why are the RINO's in Congress Allowing This Uncontested Slander Festival?

[munkle]

That's what it is, when you are not allowed to "confront your accuser." You bet it's not a trial. And it is the job of the opposition party to call foul. THEY are the reason this is happening.

It's day after day of what has turned into a perpetual accusation crusade. Yet nobody accused is allowed to speak or even be present.

It violates every tenet of America's legal system, yet they are using subpoena powers and other legal authority.

To those claiming that this is just how congressional hearings and investigations work, that's not true. When congress holds hearings involving companies, those companies are allowed to have representatives of the company present, along with their lawyers. They are also able to refute accusations and offer contrary evidence.

No it is not a trial. But they are using the powers of a trial, which in the English common law legal system come with rights and responsibilities. The power to compel testimony under penalty of perjury is an awesome power. But along with this comes the right to confront the accuser. Right to cross examine. All this hardly even needs to be written down in the law books. This is bedrock, and goes all the way back to the Magna Carta, when kings finally had to admit that subjects have rights. If they can do it to a former US president, who is gettng the worst defense in the world, both from his lawyers and from the RINOs whose job it is to bring this to a screeching halt, then it doesn't look good for the rest of us.

 

[itstony]

Because so many from the right that were subpoenaed refused to testify. All they have to do is show up and answer questions but they won’t.

 

[independentusa]

That's what it is, when you are not allowed to "confront your accuser." You bet it's not a trial. And it is the job of the opposition party to call foul. THEY are the reason this is happening.

It's day after day of what has turned into a perpetual accusation crusade. Yet nobody accused is allowed to speak or even be present.

It violates every tenet of America's legal system, yet they are using subpoena powers and other legal authority.

To those claiming that this is just how congressional hearings and investigations work, that's not true. When congress holds hearings involving companies, those companies are allowed to have representatives of the company present, along with their lawyers. They are also able to refute accusations and offer contrary evidence.

No it is not a trial. But they are using the powers of a trial, which in the English common law legal system come with rights and responsibilities. The power to compel testimony under penalty of perjury is an awesome power. But along with this comes the right to confront the accuser. Right to cross examine. All this hardly even needs to be written down in the law books. This is bedrock, and goes all the way back to the Magna Carta, when kings finally had to admit that subjects have rights. If they can do it to a former US president, who is gettng the worst defense in the world, both from his lawyers and from the RINOs whose job it is to bring this to a screeching halt, then it doesn't look good for the rest of us.

Mainly because all of the witnesses who are testifying are all Republicans who worked for Trump and/or the GOP. Kind of hard to say the committee is being partisan. Also, you and they probably did not complain when they had 8 investigations of Clinton for Benghazi.

 

[Minerva]

Same rules of engagement apply. If tRump or anyone else wants to appear before the committee and make a statement, that can be arranged. Many that are in a position to help tRump have declined or taken the fifth.
tRump is an excellent con man, but the chickens are coming home to roost.

This may clear things up for you.
Types of Congressional Hearings

 

[beefheart]

That's what it is, when you are not allowed to "confront your accuser." You bet it's not a trial. And it is the job of the opposition party to call foul. THEY are the reason this is happening.

It's day after day of what has turned into a perpetual accusation crusade. Yet nobody accused is allowed to speak or even be present.

It violates every tenet of America's legal system, yet they are using subpoena powers and other legal authority.

To those claiming that this is just how congressional hearings and investigations work, that's not true. When congress holds hearings involving companies, those companies are allowed to have representatives of the company present, along with their lawyers. They are also able to refute accusations and offer contrary evidence.

No it is not a trial. But they are using the powers of a trial, which in the English common law legal system come with rights and responsibilities. The power to compel testimony under penalty of perjury is an awesome power. But along with this comes the right to confront the accuser. Right to cross examine. All this hardly even needs to be written down in the law books. This is bedrock, and goes all the way back to the Magna Carta, when kings finally had to admit that subjects have rights. If they can do it to a former US president, who is gettng the worst defense in the world, both from his lawyers and from the RINOs whose job it is to bring this to a screeching halt, then it doesn't look good for the rest of us.

Your fear is just....hilarious.

 

[Demon]

It's day after day of what has turned into a perpetual accusation crusade. Yet nobody accused is allowed to speak or even be present

They have invited those people to come and testify. Sent subpoenas to many of them. Why haven't they wanted to show up and tell their side of things?

 

[Michael Cole]

Your fear is just....hilarious.

pathetic, as well

 

[Michael Cole]

That's what it is, when you are not allowed to "confront your accuser." You bet it's not a trial. And it is the job of the opposition party to call foul. THEY are the reason this is happening.

It's day after day of what has turned into a perpetual accusation crusade. Yet nobody accused is allowed to speak or even be present.

It violates every tenet of America's legal system, yet they are using subpoena powers and other legal authority.

To those claiming that this is just how congressional hearings and investigations work, that's not true. When congress holds hearings involving companies, those companies are allowed to have representatives of the company present, along with their lawyers. They are also able to refute accusations and offer contrary evidence.

No it is not a trial. But they are using the powers of a trial, which in the English common law legal system come with rights and responsibilities. The power to compel testimony under penalty of perjury is an awesome power. But along with this comes the right to confront the accuser. Right to cross examine. All this hardly even needs to be written down in the law books. This is bedrock, and goes all the way back to the Magna Carta, when kings finally had to admit that subjects have rights. If they can do it to a former US president, who is gettng the worst defense in the world, both from his lawyers and from the RINOs whose job it is to bring this to a screeching halt, then it doesn't look good for the rest of us.

 

[BlueTex]

That's what it is, when you are not allowed to "confront your accuser." You bet it's not a trial. And it is the job of the opposition party to call foul. THEY are the reason this is happening.

It's day after day of what has turned into a perpetual accusation crusade. Yet nobody accused is allowed to speak or even be present.

It violates every tenet of America's legal system, yet they are using subpoena powers and other legal authority.

To those claiming that this is just how congressional hearings and investigations work, that's not true. When congress holds hearings involving companies, those companies are allowed to have representatives of the company present, along with their lawyers. They are also able to refute accusations and offer contrary evidence.

No it is not a trial. But they are using the powers of a trial, which in the English common law legal system come with rights and responsibilities. The power to compel testimony under penalty of perjury is an awesome power. But along with this comes the right to confront the accuser. Right to cross examine. All this hardly even needs to be written down in the law books. This is bedrock, and goes all the way back to the Magna Carta, when kings finally had to admit that subjects have rights. If they can do it to a former US president, who is gettng the worst defense in the world, both from his lawyers and from the RINOs whose job it is to bring this to a screeching halt, then it doesn't look good for the rest of us.

LMAO.. Can we get you some cheese with the whine?

Trump is welcome to come testify but appears to be a coward..

 

[RedFishBlueFish]

Why are the RINO's in Congress Allowing This Uncontested Slander Festival?​

I didn't realize that McCarthy and McConnell were RINOs.

They are the ones who prohibited a balanced, non-partisan committee, one in which both sides could ask the witnesses questions.

(BTW, RINOs needs no apostrophe.)

 

[soap box]

That's what it is, when you are not allowed to "confront your accuser." You bet it's not a trial. And it is the job of the opposition party to call foul. THEY are the reason this is happening.

It's day after day of what has turned into a perpetual accusation crusade. Yet nobody accused is allowed to speak or even be present.

It violates every tenet of America's legal system, yet they are using subpoena powers and other legal authority.

To those claiming that this is just how congressional hearings and investigations work, that's not true. When congress holds hearings involving companies, those companies are allowed to have representatives of the company present, along with their lawyers. They are also able to refute accusations and offer contrary evidence.

No it is not a trial. But they are using the powers of a trial, which in the English common law legal system come with rights and responsibilities. The power to compel testimony under penalty of perjury is an awesome power. But along with this comes the right to confront the accuser. Right to cross examine. All this hardly even needs to be written down in the law books. This is bedrock, and goes all the way back to the Magna Carta, when kings finally had to admit that subjects have rights. If they can do it to a former US president, who is gettng the worst defense in the world, both from his lawyers and from the RINOs whose job it is to bring this to a screeching halt, then it doesn't look good for the rest of us.

Andy McCarthy, former asst. US Attorney commented on the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson on FOX . He included the former president's “unfitness,” and that the former president may be “guilty of a crime.” He added, ”no defending what President Trump did“ on Jan. 6, 2021.
He said that after seeing her speak. She changed his mind.

Is Andy McCarthy a Republican? Pence said trump was wrong. Is he a Republican? Christopher Wray, Krebs, Barr , McConnell? Raffensperger, Rosen, Milley, Rusty Bowers and now Hutchinson?

She made it clear to many moderate Republicans, the white house expected violence days in advance. That's made a difference.

 

[munkle]

Mainly because all of the witnesses who are testifying are all Republicans who worked for Trump and/or the GOP. Kind of hard to say the committee is being partisan. Also, you and they probably did not complain when they had 8 investigations of Clinton for Benghazi.

In Benghazi they allowed rebuttal witnesses. Agents Engel and Onato want to testify why won't Cheney let them? Because they would show Hutchinson committed perjury. And that the whole slander-fest should be dissolved.

 

[munkle]

Because so many from the right that were subpoenaed refused to testify. All they have to do is show up and answer questions but they won’t.

The only people who count now are Engels and Onato. They have not been invited.

 

[JMB802]

The only people who count now are Engels and Onato. They have not been invited.

After everything that has been revealed, your biggest concern is if Trump had a tantrum in his SUV? Oy.

 

[Michael Cole]

The only people who count now are Engels and Onato. They have not been invited.

Nobody cares. The man of the hour is Cipollone.

Jan. 6 panel subpoenas counsel who resisted Trump schemes

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection has issued a subpoena to former White House counsel Pat Cipollone.

apnews.com

FILE - White House counsel Pat Cipollone departs the U.S. Capitol following defense arguments in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, in Washington, Saturday, Jan. 25, 2020. The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection has issued a subpoena to Cipollone. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

 

[soap box]

In Benghazi they allowed rebuttal witnesses. Agents Engel and Onato want to testify why won't Cheney let them? Because they would show Hutchinson committed perjury. And that the whole slander-fest should be dissolved.

If the Benghazi hearings are equivalent, that means Clinton herself testified, at length, repeatedly at that time, and if equivalent, that means that trump would step up to the mic now, at this time.

 

[Callen]

The only people who count now are Engels and Onato. They have not been invited.

Yes they have....

 

[jnug]

The only people who count now are Engels and Onato. They have not been invited.

Oh please.....testify to the shiny object you want people to follow? It was hearsay testimony. They may contest Hutchinson's characterization. They may not. Who cares. We already know the meeting took place and we know that Trump had a dispute with the head of his SS detail, Engel regarding Engel wanting to go back to the West wing with Trump and Trump insisting on going on to the Capitol.

Cipolloni is important to get before the Committee and he will have many more important details to testify to than this meeting. Ornato and Engel are at this point a side show.

 

[KingLeo]

Almost all of the witnesses have been Republicans.
And many others were subpoena but have refused to testify.
Others testified behind closed doors and pleaded the 5th multiple times.
If it was indeed a 'slander fest' those with opposing views have had to opportunity to testify and have refused.
Why do you suppose that is?
Because they can not refute the testimony given or their testimony would incriminate themselves.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

That's what it is, when you are not allowed to "confront your accuser." You bet it's not a trial. And it is the job of the opposition party to call foul. THEY are the reason this is happening.

It's day after day of what has turned into a perpetual accusation crusade. Yet nobody accused is allowed to speak or even be present.

It violates every tenet of America's legal system, yet they are using subpoena powers and other legal authority.

To those claiming that this is just how congressional hearings and investigations work, that's not true. When congress holds hearings involving companies, those companies are allowed to have representatives of the company present, along with their lawyers. They are also able to refute accusations and offer contrary evidence.

No it is not a trial. But they are using the powers of a trial, which in the English common law legal system come with rights and responsibilities. The power to compel testimony under penalty of perjury is an awesome power. But along with this comes the right to confront the accuser. Right to cross examine. All this hardly even needs to be written down in the law books. This is bedrock, and goes all the way back to the Magna Carta, when kings finally had to admit that subjects have rights. If they can do it to a former US president, who is gettng the worst defense in the world, both from his lawyers and from the RINOs whose job it is to bring this to a screeching halt, then it doesn't look good for the rest of us.

Do you remember the original plan for the Jan 6 Committee?

 

[BlueTex]

The only people who count now are Engels and Onato. They have not been invited.

Ornato has already testified TWICE to the committee…

 

[jnug]

Ornato has already testified TWICE to the committee…

Testified or interviewed with? I actually do not think either Ornato or Engel have testified under oath as yet.

 

[Callen]

Do you remember the original plan for the Jan 6 Committee?

Not likely

 

[madman]

Why are people still trying to defend trump? I mean, they have such a big hard on for him.
It's just a matter of time.

 

[noonereal]

That's what it is, when you are not allowed to "confront your accuser." You bet it's not a trial. And it is the job of the opposition party to call foul. THEY are the reason this is happening.

It's day after day of what has turned into a perpetual accusation crusade. Yet nobody accused is allowed to speak or even be present.

It violates every tenet of America's legal system, yet they are using subpoena powers and other legal authority.

To those claiming that this is just how congressional hearings and investigations work, that's not true. When congress holds hearings involving companies, those companies are allowed to have representatives of the company present, along with their lawyers. They are also able to refute accusations and offer contrary evidence.

No it is not a trial. But they are using the powers of a trial, which in the English common law legal system come with rights and responsibilities. The power to compel testimony under penalty of perjury is an awesome power. But along with this comes the right to confront the accuser. Right to cross examine. All this hardly even needs to be written down in the law books. This is bedrock, and goes all the way back to the Magna Carta, when kings finally had to admit that subjects have rights. If they can do it to a former US president, who is gettng the worst defense in the world, both from his lawyers and from the RINOs whose job it is to bring this to a screeching halt, then it doesn't look good for the rest of us.

No worries. DOJ will take these folks to court soon.