'It's a farce': Dems livid as Hope Hicks dodges questions
Source: Politico
Democrats erupted Wednesday at what they said was the White Houses repeated interference in their interview with Hope Hicks, a longtime confidant of President Donald Trump who was a central witness in special counsel Robert Muellers obstruction of justice probe.
Three House Judiciary Committee lawmakers exiting the closed-door interview said a White House lawyer repeatedly claimed Hicks had blanket immunity from discussing her time in the White House. They said she wouldnt answer questions as basic as where she sat in the West Wing or whether she told the truth to Mueller.
Its a farce, said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who said Hicks at one point tried to answer a question about an episode involving former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski only to be cut off by counsel.
Were watching obstruction of justice in action, said Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.).
Read more: https://www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/06/19/hope-hicks-testimony-trump-oversight-1368164?__twitter_impression=true
notdarkyet
(2,226 posts)olegramps
(8,200 posts)They are the greatest enemy that we face. They far surpass the ability of any foreign power to transform the presidency into a virtual dictatorship. They are the enemy within and must be defeated. Just how far will they be allowed to go before the only option is revolt.
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)If she continues to obstruct then lock her up.
FBaggins
(26,697 posts)They could make a referral to the DOJ.
HopeAgain
(4,407 posts)DOJ is corrupted.
UpInArms
(51,253 posts)Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Doug Jones (D-Ala.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) split with most in their party to back Barr. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was the only Republican to oppose Barrs nomination, citing his record on privacy issues.
KPN
(15,587 posts)Ds if they dont vote with the Party on key issues/appointments? Meanwhile, Bernie Danders is vilified because he had principles but no D. All of that nonsense is bullshit that put us right where we are today. Its all about controlling the House and r the Senate and has been for the past 40 years. Yeah, it worked on social issues ... as long as we ignored the economic ones. A lower tide affects all boats.
And before anyone responds w/ rationale, forget about it. I just want and need to rant.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)And every Dem in the Senate puts us one vote closer to getting a majority. We're lucky Manchin got elected in W VA -- Trump carried that state with the greatest margin of all the states. The reason Manchin got elected was because he was a popular Governor before becoming Senator.
KPN
(15,587 posts)Blue Dogs have actually been losing seats to Rs overall in the past several elections. While many hang on to the illusion that we're better off with them until we can actually elect progressives, blue dogs actually hold us back as a party long term because we ultimately fail at delivering. However misinformed at times, people want and vote for results. ... So sorry, I respectfully disagree. They need to be primaried. There';s no such thing as a viable middle in the midst of ideological warfare.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)No good at all. And yet you say you're concerned with our majority.
I don't know how you think we can carry out any agenda from the perspective of a minority.
KPN
(15,587 posts)elected in those states is to run progressives. The only way progressive goals will ever appeal to voters in those states is if they hear about them and how they would affect their personal lives consistently over time. The only way that will happen is if progressives run first in primaries and then in elections. It cant and wont happen without that.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)a strong progressive elected there. As it is, Manchin votes with us 60% of the time, versus R's who vote with us about 10% of the time. We're lucky to have him there.
RVN VET71
(2,686 posts)Manchin is a DINO, almost of necessity, because he represents a constituency of closed-minded coal miners and others connected to that dying industry. He really has only limited choices if he doesn't want to lose his Senate seat.
Jones squeaked by in his campaign against a goddam pedophile! and most likely would be sure to lose re-election if he acted like a Democrat -- he's likely to lose anyway because Alabama.
And Sinema, same deal: she beat out a fascist liar (who is now running for the other Senate seat from Arizona) and may have convinced herself that Barr would be an upright man of honor and integrity and not a corrupt, venal blob whose answer to questions about his ruined "legacy" because of his kissing of Trump's posterior was "well, everybody's gonna die."
Of the three, I can give Manchin a pass -- the Dems need his seat, dammit, and if he's primaried, who is going to take his place? -- and beat a Republican?
Jones has to please Alabamans, but if he's the only Democrat who can hold that seat, let's keep him and hope that maybe, somehow, he can guide Alabaman voters to rejoin the human race and stop backing people like Jeff Sessions.
Sinema, again, beat out a fascist in a very tight race. Don't expect her to be a publicly fierce protector of the Liberal philosophy. Being unashamedly and openly bisexual is enough to give her credit for liberal politics -- so I wouldn't primary her and risk losing her seat to the party of racists because she felt constrained to vote for the first unashamedly and openly nihilistic AG. (Seriously, he said, words to the effect of "hell, I don't care about my legacy because what will it mean to me after I'm dead?"
Midnight Writer
(21,548 posts)These should be our absolute priority. Nothing else can be achieved if this does not happen. And we have to make it happen.
Should I now support Rand Paul because he opposed Barr?
FBaggins
(26,697 posts)Some seem to think that it does.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)It is how an authoritarian dictatorship works.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)While Democrats aimed to unearth new aspects of Hicks' role in the White House, which spanned some of the most controversial moments of Trump's presidency, both sides of the aisle seemed to agree that very little, if anything, was learned from the all-day testimony. But despite the roadblock, Democrats vowed that their fight was only beginning, one that would likely go to court, so key officials may testify before lawmakers.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/19/hope-hicks-testify-congress-robert-muellers-report-trump-administration/1486526001/
Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)They really arent paying attention.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Cracklin Charlie
(12,904 posts)Why would they feel a need to comply?
shanny
(6,709 posts)COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Idiot of the Year Award. Why did anyone over 14 believe that there was going to be any result other than the one they saw this morning? Instead, the papers trumpeted that "Hicks breaks with Trump", lauding her appearance to the skies. And we agreed to all the conditions that let her get away with this farce. Testify behind closed doors (so the public can't see the charade)? Sure. Let her bring a lawyer from the Justice Department to be sure that she never admits to even being called Hope Hicks? No problem.
It's just mind boggling. We are enabling the Apricot Hellbeast to (correctly) let his followers laugh at us all the way to the polls in 2020.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)No impeachment because Fox News will get mad, and get Trumps hard core 30% even madder. And all the carefully nurtured Never Trumpers and those that regretted voting for the Don will suddenly reverse their opinion on him and join in with the Deplorables. People with be shocked....SHOCKED I tell ya, that Democrats would do what the majority wants and start impeachment.
No, the best way to win in 2020 is to look weak and ineffectual, with Trump's crime family laughing at us. Never showing up, and only on their strict conditions. When one falls through like that, we do nothing to enforce it, just move on to making a blistering speech about it and then send out another polite invitation to the next Trump crony, and cross your fingers. That'll show em!.
certainot
(9,090 posts)pack of dittoheads following 300 coordinated ignorant racist bleating blowhards on the radio and some fox blockheads doing the cartoon cliff notes version, with some kremlin trolls piggybacking the whole thing. most of the 'base' is a large swath of too-busy, lazy, apathetic, and ignorant americans who absorb that ubiquitous buzz from the radio while trying to get a traffic or weather or news report, or from their coworker, bar friend, or maga uncle/father/grandfather.
the tragic part is the only reason the right can convince media, analysts, and dem politicians that the paper tiger is fearsome is the left/dems/liberals continue to ignore rw talk radio, the only medium capable of the unchallenged repetition needed to establish that alternate reality buzz over 40 states with 80 senators.
the majority of the 'base' will fall apart when democrats start protesting/boycotting those stations, which are the closest thing to a local republican power center, and protesting the 88 universities that support 260 limbaugh stations.
i imagine though that dems will just continue to ignore talk radio and call their reps cowards while letting the local chickenhawks take free potshots at them all day and lie us into another war.
or maybe we'll get lucky and talk radio will get noticed when we find out one of the mueller spinoffs is about long term russian use of talk radio going back to using limbaugh to push palin on mcain, using limbaugh and wikileaks to sell 'climategate', use limbaugh to create the tea party, push debt default, etc. or something.
greymattermom
(5,751 posts)that POC will be watching them at the polls.
certainot
(9,090 posts)but no one's heard it...
all it takes is for a dem congresscritter to ask hope hicks about the trump team use of talk radio, prefacing it with the fact that sam nunberg said he "listened to 1000's of hours of talk radio " in 2014 - was she around (pre-white house) when that happened or when they were talked about it and where the nunberg reports went, etc? did they talk about trump's relationship with limbaugh? did trump and others there listen to limbaugh? etc .
just asking the questions would start something. dems need to ask those questions.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)It would be very hard to turn back the clock now though. And Republicans know it. Lord help any politician that dares to try and dictate how and what a private run news talk station can play. The Fairness Doctrine is long gone. I think Dem inaction on this isn't so much ignorance but that even they are confused as to how to proceed combating it.
You're right that there'd have to be a major Rush Limpball scandal where some secret tapes or papers are revealed to show some concrete collusion with an enemy. Him or Hannity. The chances of that are slim.
They need to tackle it differently than another FD that will never pass. When Democrats finally (I'm perpetually hoping) get all three branches themselves, pass a law about truthfulness on the air for all public media. Because RW hosts lie continually. So create a law whereby if enough provable lies are promoted on a show, it gets penalized first, then given its marching papers. And this would apply to TV networks as well. Some idea that the brainwashed cannot argue (much) with. Because they also scream "LIES!" all the time about Democrats. Fox News shouts about how every other network news are lying liberals. So create a law based on verifying indisputable facts. Any RW media org that has been screaming how slanted most media are to liberal lies would have a hard time defending a decision to fight untruthfulness on the air.
Many average Republicans have already moved on to a post-fact world where alternative facts are just as good as real facts to them. So it might be too late, but I think it would help if they could
Of course all hell would break loose in the RW media world. And they'd start demonizing any entity that was charged with sifting out the fact from fiction.
joost5
(421 posts)Many average Republicans have already moved on to a post-fact world where alternative facts are just as good as real facts to them.
This sadly is true. The only way we can reverse the symptoms of the cancer-in-chief is to #VoteBlueNoMatterWho because we cannot get anything accomplished without a House and Senate majority.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)I agree.
certainot
(9,090 posts)artificial intelligence-enhanced transcription now makes it inevitable that talk radio will be digitized so it can finally be analyzed - it needs to happen now and the dem party and left orgs have no excuse. i don't think legislation is possible even with 3 majorities - the trolls, radio stations, and naive democrats will scream "free speech!"
boycotts of any advertiser on any rw radio station/show and protests at stations and the 88 universities that support 260 limbaugh stations will send advertisers running and will force the ad industry to ask advertisers if they really support trump and global warming denial. and when universities start looking for apolitical alternatives to broadcast sports on many of those stations will be forced to go to other programming.
it's enjoyed a 20-1 monopoly and invisibility from those it trashes and attacks but it won't survive if the ad industry is forced to apply market demand for the hate and lies.
and talk about messaging - i'd love to see democrats and media start replying to the republican liars and repeaters by prefacing their replies with "that's what limbaugh keeps saying, but..."
for americans to despair over the rise of fascism while doing NOTHING about rw talk radio is very sad, especially going into this election and facing global warming acceleration - it's the biggest political mistake in history.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)You really have to wonder just why they continue to be so.
Botany
(70,291 posts)So start the impeachment (or whatever you want to call it) already. If we don't stop
'em now then our democracy might be dead. From Trump to Pence to McConnell to
Kushner to Kavanaugh to Fox News to the MAGA morons to ... we have persons and
organizations working to finish off the idea called America.
Laurence Tribe, "Trump says he free to violate campaign law and the Hatch act, all as
his DoJ is filing a saying congress has no power to investigate his law breaking. This is
how democracies die and dictatorships arise.
Brainfodder
(6,423 posts)n/t
Watchfoxheadexplodes
(3,496 posts)Again the trump administration plays catch us if you can.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)Maybe she'll be more forthcoming...or, not.
Bonhomme Richard
(8,992 posts)trumps Lucy. They look like fools and to continue to play his (and McConnells) game does nothing but cause despair among those that know what is happening to the country. That will be deadly to the nation.
For Gods sake...they are not even bringing a knife to a gunfight.
kacekwl
(6,994 posts)Cut the crap and start handing out subpoenas like mints. And oh yea open impeachment hearings yesterday.
Mike Niendorff
(3,447 posts)The clock is ticking. GET ON IT.
Impeachment is LONG overdue.
MDN
Merlot
(9,696 posts)50 Shades Of Blue
(9,777 posts)Achilleaze
(15,543 posts)and will be long remembered for their dishonesty
DavidDvorkin
(19,406 posts)Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)Put up or shut up......
DavidDvorkin
(19,406 posts)Looking weaker and sillier all the time.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)"writing a strongly worded letter."
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)orangecrush
(19,237 posts)will certainly hsve SOMETHING to say about this!
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)bsiebs
(681 posts)orangecrush
(19,237 posts)to think of the verbosity!
Eyeball_Kid
(7,410 posts)Daily fines until she answers questions. Start sucking the blood out of her.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)Do you understand what has happened?
Jeeze, I sound snooty.. don;t mean to be..
But, we're fucked...
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)She might not be the best person to do this with, because she might be perceived as a sympathetic person, but Congress has a power it hasn't used yet.
https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/fines-jail-time-democrats-leave-options-table-enforcing-subpoenas
Each chamber has the authority to unilaterally exercise that power by adopting a resolution authorizing its sergeant-at-arms to execute an arrest warrant against an official who refuses to comply with Congress.
Once in sergeant-at-arms custody, the official would be brought before the chamber for a hearing or trial. If the body finds them guilty of contempt of Congress, it can direct them to be detained or imprisoned until they comply.
It does not appear that either house has exercised its inherent contempt power to enforce subpoenas or to remove any other obstruction to the exercise of the legislative power since the 1930s, the Congressional Research Service found in a report last month. Even so, the mere threat of arrest and detention by the sergeant-at-arms can be used to encourage compliance with congressional demands.
Democrats believe they can also use their inherent contempt power to impose a fine rather than pursue jail time, though they were careful to leave both options on the table.
LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,539 posts)ass.
Rhiannon12866
(203,036 posts)What was her excuse? Did she "take the 5th??"
LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,539 posts)If Fat Donnie doesn't like the laws, he makes up ones he likes. Executive privilege is not absolute -- it can't be used to cover up criminal activities, for example -- but claiming executive immunity is a novel legal theory that will have to go through the entire court process -- ending at the SCOTUS -- to determine whether it even exists, and its limits. And remember, Kavanaugh has already stated that the president can do no wrong. Meanwhile the November election comes and goes, without a word of testimony about his criminal actions, nor access to his tax returns, etc.
For all his faults -- and you could fill the entire Wikipedia with them -- Trump is a survivor.
Baitball Blogger
(46,576 posts)Start the fucking lawsuits. There is no time to waste.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Now they can take her to court, and level another obstruction charge against DT.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/19/hope-hicks-testify-congress-robert-muellers-report-trump-administration/1486526001/
watoos
(7,142 posts)When Dems let the lawyer in the room this result was obvious.
msongs
(67,199 posts)maxsolomon
(32,992 posts)the plan is 100% non-cooperation. fight at every turn. expose the powerlessness of Congress to compel testimony.
there is no choice but an impeachment inquiry now. subpoena Mueller. let President Asshole try to claim executive privilege over that.
jalan48
(13,798 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)muntrv
(14,505 posts)etc should pull the same stunt.
SayItLoud
(1,696 posts)idiot. Once it was announced that a WH counsel was joining her it was clear that she wouldn't answer anything. Agreeing to "behind closed doors testimony or non testimony" just makes the success of the ORAL OFFICE all the more of a win. She didn't even have to look foolish in front of America. All done behind closed doors. If the Dems don't up their game and start playing hardball with tRUMP crime family including the kids....then we will get more of the same and deserve it.
KPN
(15,587 posts)Do something.
Cognitive_Resonance
(1,546 posts)DallasNE
(7,392 posts)This morning before the proceeding started.
Volaris
(10,260 posts)Did she commit a crime?
KPN
(15,587 posts)immunity usually means protection from future prosecution as a result of one's testimony -- part of a deal offered by prosecutors -- not proclaimed by attorneys serving the lynch-pin!!
Geezuz frigging C -- order the Sergeant of Arms to remove the two WH attorneys from the House! Get rid of their asses! Otherwise, THIS is a blatant coup of Congress and Congressional powers by the orange Moron!
Volaris
(10,260 posts)wtf is the counsels office rep in there for?
No reason for them to be afaic. If I'm incorrect, someone enlighten me.
yaesu
(8,020 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,284 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(56,897 posts)It's worth noting that no legal authority is provided for the preposterous claim that there is a "long-standing" principle that senior advisors are "absolutely immune" from testifying.
Link to tweet
rainin
(3,010 posts)mn9driver
(4,412 posts)As long as that continues, these witnesses will fail to appear or will simply refuse to answer questions if they do appear. The House does not have their own police force or prosecutors. The DOJ has those things. It will not use them to enforce anything the House does.
The ONLY tool the House has is the Judiciary. Its not a reliable tool or a fast tool. And it becomes more unreliable and slower with each new Trump appointment. The clock is ticking, and the American Experiment in democracy is almost out of time.
Vinca
(50,170 posts)these people to testify or give it up as a waste of time. Someone said today they were trying to invoke something called "pre-executive privilege." Take that to court. Now. Today. This is bullshit.
Turin_C3PO
(13,650 posts)I dont know what else they expected.
SHRED
(28,136 posts)SHRED
(28,136 posts)While Democrats aimed to unearth new aspects of Hicks' role in the White House, which spanned some of the most controversial moments of Trump's presidency, both sides of the aisle seemed to agree that very little, if anything, was learned from the all-day testimony. But despite the roadblock, Democrats vowed that their fight was only beginning, one that would likely go to court, so key officials may testify before lawmakers.
.....................................................
Congressional Democrats on the committee said Hicks appearance amounted to her not complying with the subpoena. They claimed she did not answer questions about her time in the White House or the findings outlined in the Mueller report. Lawyers for the administration, who were at Hicks' side during her testimony, objected to question after question, claiming she was immune from answering anything related to her time in the White House, Democrats said.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/19/hope-hicks-testify-congress-robert-muellers-report-trump-administration/1486526001/
rateyes
(17,438 posts)duforsure
(11,882 posts)And goes to prison for conspiring, and obstruction.
old guy
(3,281 posts)Eustace is Useful
(35 posts)prodigitalson
(2,298 posts)gibraltar72
(7,486 posts)LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Of this shit. Take it to the Courts, Force them to testify. Arrest Them if that don't show up to Testify! PERIOD!!!!
Response to brooklynite (Original post)
Post removed
Wuddles440
(1,098 posts)blueinredohio
(6,797 posts)They're going to have to start putting people in jail to let them know they mean business.
Gothmog
(144,005 posts)Link to tweet
There is no such thing as absolute immunity for anybody to appear before Congress, he replied. When the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Nixon case, they absolutely said that there was no absolute privilege, rather it had to be weighed in each instance as to the needs for those who are asking for the information and the person whos resisting giving the information.
Absolute privileges are very rare in the law. And theyre always this balancing process. This total immunity is part of the so-called executive theory of unitary executive theory that will theoretically make the person immune to Congress. And that just doesnt play in our system.
jvill
(182 posts)These stories write themselves.
Until the Dems actually do something, it's just the slow, depressing bleed out of our democracy...
Grasswire2
(13,564 posts)His comments, made walking down the hall, were very weak.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)prodigitalson
(2,298 posts)Ferrets are Cool
(21,063 posts)doing their jobs.
Still In Wisconsin
(4,450 posts)We need to respond to this travesty IMMEDIATELY and in the way we are all accustomed.
cntrfthrs
(252 posts)the dems KNEW she'd refuse to answer certain questions but still they played nice and even allowed a white house lawyer in the meeting. when are the dammed dems going to grow a SPINE and play hardball just like the white house does?!?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)and the public sees that DT is obstructing justice once again.
Mike Niendorff
(3,447 posts)Perhaps a strongly worded letter. Or maybe even a threat of further negotiation.
That ought to fix it.
MDN
UCmeNdc
(9,589 posts)Do not negotiate with them. Play it straight by the law and power given to congress. Stop giving them any latitude to do it their way.
Highway61
(2,568 posts)with the egotism of her former boss. Damn it...she should have left in handcuffs...make-up smeared and hair disheveled!
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)charge in the making. Many in congress are pointing to this as evidence of a coverup in the making.
While Democrats aimed to unearth new aspects of Hicks' role in the White House, which spanned some of the most controversial moments of Trump's presidency, both sides of the aisle seemed to agree that very little, if anything, was learned from the all-day testimony. But despite the roadblock, Democrats vowed that their fight was only beginning, one that would likely go to court, so key officials may testify before lawmakers.
.....................................................
Congressional Democrats on the committee said Hicks appearance amounted to her not complying with the subpoena. They claimed she did not answer questions about her time in the White House or the findings outlined in the Mueller report. Lawyers for the administration, who were at Hicks' side during her testimony, objected to question after question, claiming she was immune from answering anything related to her time in the White House, Democrats said.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/19/hope-hicks-testify-congress-robert-muellers-report-trump-administration/1486526001/
zentrum
(9,865 posts)....YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?
The Dems are just going with running out the clock counting on winning the WH.
But McConnell will still be there and the institutions of government will be forever changed, almsot broken.
Wish they would figure out a bold, out of the box way to make the media report the outrageousness of what's happening instead of just shaking their heads.
Hotler
(11,353 posts)Somewhere in the books is a law or laws that can be used to handicap these fuckers, find it and use it. or stop having the fucking hearings that produce nothing.
BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)Not on your life. The contempt filing should have been ready BEFORE she entered the room. It should have been acted on the minute her testimony was over. If our system of checks and balances can be destroyed this easily - We Are Doomed.
Nuggets
(525 posts)hearings it would be so much better! 😂
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)in the court of public opinion.