Schiff needs to run point, not Nadler

Forums:

Not even close

... even with getting over a cold

Schiff is falling on his face in this hearing.  He isn't getting what he wants out of Maguire and has started berating him in a pathetic attempt to get his talking points across.  Not a good look.

>>> Not a good look <<<

 

Maguire got smacked around harder than you do around here Thom, and that’s saying something.

I caught a bit of this on NPR driving into work today.   While I strongly disagree with his assessment of underlying merits of the investigation, Thom does have a point about how the questioning is being handled.  Its not really questioning for the most part, but is instead the congress people just grandstanding for cameras and berating the guy.   There was one congresswoman who asked the guy three separate questions and when he started to answer the first one, she cut him off and started declaring what she thought of the situation.   Poor form, but its what I have come to expect from these high profile committee hearings.

So just to be clear.....

The guy who has to, literally, fabricate a conversation between Trump and Zelensky is the guy that you want running the show? 

And when called on it, he says that it was meant as a parody.  In a Congressional Hearing. You really can't make this stuff up.

Hint:  if you have to make it up as a "parody", you've got nothing.

You. Got. Nothing.

 

Oh, and let's not forget this gem....

Pranksters Fooled Adam Schiff With Offer Of Donald Trump Kompromat

The top Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence fell for a prank phone call in which two Russian comedians claimed to have compromising information on President Donald Trump, including recordings of discussions about naked photos.

The lawmaker, California Rep. Adam Schiff, also had members of his staff follow up to obtain the dirt on Trump, The Daily Mail reports.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/02/06/adam-schiff-pranked/

Wow.  Just wow.

Yeah thommy has a point, on the top of his head. You should have caught the entire thing ken. Schiff was a master at getting Maguire to admit what he didn't want to admit. Maguire was sticking to his script, refusing to say whether the whistleblowers concerns warrant further investigation.m -- which would be contrary to chump's chumps in rhe DOJ , who want to kill clumps latest constitutional crisis.  He finally admitted it did. He didn't want to. I'm sure he was instructed not to. But he did. Schiff got him to.

Sly fox that Schiff. Cool as a cucumber as the other guy's sweating in his seat. 

https://youtu.be/X5ThccaxWmk

You don't have to have a point to have a point.

Well, it sounds like both sides of the aisle like having Schiff in charge...

Like Schiff or not, he got the answers.

 

Never heard Thom complain about Jim Jordan or Mark Meadows badgering witnesses. 

Thom does have a point about how the questioning is being handled.  Its not really questioning for the most part, but is instead the congress people just grandstanding for cameras and berating the guy<<<

I didn't see Schiff's engagements as berating Maguire, but do agree that many, if not most, members of Congress regularly engage in grandstanding and has been a major liability for them.  If they all need to get their 15 minutes of fame, this is not going to go as well as it might otherwise.  As much as I believe it is the duty of the members of Congress to participate directly in the process, I think it would behoove Dems to look more to professional attorneys for questioning. 

Having said that, Schiff mostly sticks to the core substance of matters I and don't blame him at all for pressing Maguire about his apparent deference to the unitary executive in so far as how he perceived his responsibilities - even when the POTUS is the subject of a whistleblower complaint.    Ad hominem attacks on Schiff are nothing more than HS lunch room antics.

So just to be clear.....

The guy who has to, literally, fabricate a conversation between Trump and Zelensky is the guy that you want running the show? 

And when called on it, he says that it was meant as a parody.  In a Congressional Hearing. You really can't make this stuff up.

Hint:  if you have to make it up as a "parody", you've got nothing.

You. Got. Nothing<<<

 

So, I actually missed seeing Schiff's opening statement, but just saw now.

Talk about "if you have to's"!

Have you ever even considered the possibility that people are 100% right about Trump being a master at the use of "coded language"?

By denying this distinct possibility and digging in further, you're essentially betting your life by adding another card to the house of cards that will come collapsing down; but not before pitting our nation on a collision course with itself.

So Schiff is using his "decoder ring" to translate to the public.  If you ask me, it's about time someone attempted to flush out the essence of what's going in such a way so as the populace can more easily understand what's going on.

Bump for Schiff fans

You

are

nothing

 

hi!!