General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Republicans on the Committee are very "biased"...
When the mind is closed off to the fact that there may be another possibility, then one would be biased toward one side over the other.
In that context, every single Republican that I have seen today had their minds set before the hearing ever began. They are beyond "bias". They have moved into certainty.
Peter Strzok is the last stand in the Trump defense, that it is all a "hoax' and a "witch-hunt". Jordan is inquiring about the route of the Steele dossier? Did it come from Bruce Ohr to Strzok and then further up?
It is a very fractured hearing.
It is nearing time for the Special Counsel to turn over what he has to the Congress, thru Rod Rosenstein, in my opinion.
But the irony of it all is that every Republican on the Committee has questioned Strzok on his "bias".
unblock
(52,195 posts)and there's nothing particularly wrong with bias in an investigator, particularly against the target of the investigations. this is expected and it's why we try to have juries and judges unbiased. we do not, normally, try to keep investigators and prosecutors unbiased.
we just try to keep them from *acting* out of bias, e.g., to lie or to manufacture evidence. of course they have zero evidence to suggest he did anything of the sort.
But, in the end, it is the facts and the evidence that will determine whether or not the investigation comes to one conclusion over another?
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)underpants
(182,763 posts)The Repubs just repeat what's in Foxworld for two reasons:
They are lazy
They fear their base turning on them more than anything.
MiniMe
(21,714 posts)a chance to answer. When he tries to answer, they cut him off.
janx
(24,128 posts)between bias and opinion.
kskiska
(27,045 posts)when Sandra Day O'Connor was at a party when the returns came in and expressed dismay when it appeared that Al Gore had won? Was that "bias?"