HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Adam Schiff Gives Republi...

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 04:31 PM

Adam Schiff Gives Republicans 72 Hours To Name Witnesses They Want For Public Hearings

https://crooksandliars.com/2019/11/house-inquiry-gives-republicans-72-hours?utm_source=social&utm_medium=facebook&utm_content=23171


11/08/19 9:21am
Adam Schiff Gives Republicans 72 Hours To Name Witnesses They Want For Public Hearings
In a letter issued on Wednesday morning, House Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff wrote to unabashed Trump defender Rep. Devin Nunes to make it clear that if the Republicans have any witnesses they want to appear, they had 72 hours to put their names on the list.
By Mark Sumner


Democrats are moving fast on the impeachment inquiry—and demanding the same of Republicans. In a letter issued on Wednesday morning, House Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff wrote to unabashed Trump defender Rep. Devin Nunes to make it clear that if the Republicans have any witnesses they want to appear, they had 72 hours to put their names on the list. And the clock is ticking.

Schiff’s letter makes it clear that Democrats don’t intend to call every witness who appeared for a closed-door deposition during the public sessions, but Republicans are free to do so if they wish. However, despite all the complaints that Republicans have made about having exactly the kind of hearings that the rules they set out demanded, and demanding that witnesses appear in public, no one expects them to go through the list of recent witnesses to make sure they all take the stand in front of cameras.

Earlier reporting suggested that Republicans intend to fill the hearings with dozens of witnesses who have no knowledge of any actions connected to the impeachment, but who would repeat conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton, the DNC, the whistleblower, and others for the purpose of filling both the air time and congressional record with nonsense. However, the rules for the upcoming round of public hearings require witnesses to be named in advance, and the purpose of each witness needs to be justified. So if Nunes wants to have anyone come for noise-making purposes, he has to lay out the who and why. And Schiff’s letter indicates that the reason provided needs to address one of the three narrow areas on which inquiry is based.

Did Trump request that Ukraine open an investigation designed to manufacture evidence against a candidate in the 2020 election?

Did Trump, or people working for Trump, apply pressure to Ukraine to advance Trump’s political interests?

Did Trump, or people working from Trump, attempt to obstruct the impeachment inquiry?


If a potential witness can address one of those questions, and Nunes gets their name to Schiff before 11:20 ET on Saturday, Nov. 9, they can join the roster of witnesses to be subpoenaed. And please, put Rudy Giuliani on that list. Or Trump. That really would be a “perfect call.”

6 replies, 715 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Adam Schiff Gives Republicans 72 Hours To Name Witnesses They Want For Public Hearings (Original post)
babylonsister Nov 8 OP
yellowcanine Nov 8 #1
jberryhill Nov 8 #2
Cartoonist Nov 8 #5
maxsolomon Nov 8 #3
IcyPeas Nov 8 #4
BootinUp Nov 8 #6

Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 04:38 PM

1. Goopers would not be nuts enough to put Giuliani on the list.

Even they are not that dense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 04:40 PM

2. You can squeeze a lot of nonsense into those "narrow" questions


Whomever wrote that piece is not a lawyer. And, in case some nitwit alerts on this post, I should probably make it clear that the point here is about what Nunes and crew could do in order to argue their witlesses should be heard.

"Did Trump request that Ukraine open an investigation designed to manufacture evidence against a candidate in the 2020 election?"

- We have X, Y and Z who will testify that the investigation was not "designed to manufacture evidence" but instead to confirm evidence of (insert crazy conspiracy theory here)

"Did Trump, or people working for Trump, apply pressure to Ukraine to advance Trump’s political interests?"

- We have X, Y and Z who will testify that Trump applied pressure to advance a legitimate investigation into (insert crazy conspiracy theory here)

They can easily argue that all manner of lunacy can come in within the ambit of those questions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #2)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 04:45 PM

5. It's up to Adam

If he doesn't like the reason, then it's a NO. There is no wiggle room here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 04:44 PM

3. Sadly, this indicates a narrow focus to the Impeachment charges.

We're leaving charges on the table, or off the table.

#1. Campaign violation payoffs to Stormy Daniels at Trump's direction.
#2. Charitable Organization Fraud.
#3. 2016 coordination with Rusher and subsequent Obstruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 04:45 PM

4. just on news: Gym Jordan is going to be one of the questioners

this perv loves the tv camera.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Fri Nov 8, 2019, 05:20 PM

6. Pretty generous. I would have

allowed less than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread