ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

Rep. Ilhan Omar clashed with newly minted Venezuela Envoy Elliott Abrams during a Wednesday hearing in front of the House Foreign Relations Committee discussing the role of the US military in Central America. I submit the following two lines of questions and answers:

"Mr. Abrams, in 1991 you pleaded guilty to two counts of withholding information from Congress regarding your involvement in the Iran-Contra affair, for which you were later pardoned by president George H.W. Bush," began Omar. "I fail to understand why members of this committee or the American people should find any testimony that you give today to be t***hful."

"If I could respond to that..." interjected Abrams.

"It was not a question," shot back Omar.

and.....

Omar: "On February 8, 1982, you testified before the Senate foreign relations committee about US policy in El Salvador. In that hearing you dismissed as c*******t propaganda, a report about the massacre of El Mozote in which more than 800 civilians - including children as young as two-years old - were brutally murdered by US-trained troops. During that massacre, some of those troops bragged about raping 12-year-old girls before they k**led them. You later said that the US policy in El Salvador was a "fabulous achievement."

"Yes or no - do you still think so?" asked Omar.

Abrams replied: "From, the day that Duarte was elected in a free e******n, to this day, El Salvador has been a democracy. That's a fabulous achievement."

Omar shot back: "Yes or no, do you think that massacre was a fabulous achievement that happened under our watch?"

Abrams protested: "That is a ridiculous question---

to which Omar shot back, "Yes or no," cutting him off.

"No!" exclaimed Abrams, who added "I am not going to respond to that kind of personal attack - which is not a question."

Omar pushed back: "Yes or no, would you support an armed faction within Venezuela that engages in war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide, if you believe they were serving US interests as you did in Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua?"

"I am not going to respond to that question, I'm sorry. I don't think this entire line of questioning is meant to be real questions, and so I will not reply." said Abrams.

Questions, Comments OPPer's ?????

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

In my opinion she should have been chastised and removed from the hearing...
That sort of bias and the outright personal attacks should not be tolerated...
There are simple, civil ways that she could have posed her questions (attacks) that would have required complicated and telling answers...
Who was chairing the committee that they allowed this?

rebob14

Pay back time for the white descendants of colonial Europe. What government in history has not suffered this fate? This republic is being brought down exactly as predicted.

ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

CD, read this article about Elliot Abrams and see if your opinion on the hearing has changed in any way?
Question 1: Does she has a point in her question on "why members of this committee or the American people should find any testimony that you give today to be t***hful." https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/01/no_author/trumps-axis-of-evil-pompeo-bolton-abrams/

Question 2: Given his track record of government service with the atrocities that occurred under his watch in El Salvatore, covert financing of rebels in Nicaragua, and presumed role in the abortive c**p in 2002 against the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, would it not be appropriate to raise the questions she raised in Wednesday's committee hearing?

ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

Same questions to you that I raised with CD.

RT friend Loc: Kangaroo valley NSW Australia

My guess is Abrams is in a much weaker position than when Pres Bush was alive, Trump is a mug for trying it on, Abrams will get throttled this time round, take Brazil, can you honestly believe Germany can sell stuff in Brazil cheaper than China, a lot of things like that means Abrams is a wet dream when Trump wakes up he'll need a bath.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

She has every right to ask the questions...
But should do so civily and with proper decorum...
Her method was wrong...

Kevyn

The question to ask Abrams is why should we be focused on Venezuela instead of Nicaragua where similar abuses of the rights of its citizens.

ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

Putting aside for the moment the issue of civility and decorum, was she correct in pointing out that Abrams had plead guilty "to two counts of withholding information from Congress" in the past, and raising the issue of his current credibility in that context? (Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice, shame on me).

Explain to me if you were Rep. Omar, how would you have gone about doing what you suggested?

ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

You are aware that he has been appointed as Envoy to Venezuela, and was in the Bush White House at the time of the abortive c**p in 2002 against the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, correct?

Your point on Nicaragua is relevant. Perhaps that should have also been raised, but members of congress are limited in their time to question people appearing before the committees, so perhaps that became an issue.

zombinis3 Loc: Southwest

I have to agree she does have the right, on the other hand there are times when after setting up your foundation for the question a yes or no answer is the only one needed. Life is made up of grey areas if you are good and practiced you can hide your real reasons why something was done. The main idea was to find out if he is willing to follow the same procedures as before for the same reasons.

ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

Politicians lies and equivocate.... they are very good at that. You notice that he refused to answer the question, because there really was no good answer that he could have given. The real question is why someone with that track record was appointed in the first place.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Here we are in agreement...

He should not have been appointed...

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

When a President, regardless of party affiliation, nominates people who support a dangerous agenda, such as Bolton the war monger and this dude, it is imperative that the Congress do it's job of oversight.

buffalo Loc: Texas

To answer that question honestly would reveal the REAL reason the US has been interfering with Venezuela'a internal affairs for decades. Like every where else the US has interefered and lied about the reasons, it is all for the benefit of corporate interests...

US C**p in Venezuela Motivated by Oil and Corporate Interests – Militarist John Bolton Spills the Beans

In an interview on Fox Business, Trump’s hyper-militaristic National Security Adviser John Bolton admitted the US-led c**p in Venezuela is motivated by oil and corporate interests.
By Ben Norton

US President Donald Trump’s hyper-militaristic National Security Adviser John Bolton spilled the beans in an interview on Fox Business, admitting that the United States government is working with corporations to target Venezuela’s massive oil reserves.

“We’re looking at the oil assets,” Bolton said. “That’s the single most important income stream to the government of Venezuela. We’re looking at what to do to that.”

“We’re in conversation with major American companies now,” he continued. “I think we’re trying to get to the same end result here.”

“It will make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies really invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela,” Bolton admitted.

On January 23, the US government initiated a political c**p attempt in Venezuela, seeking to replace the government of socialist President Nicolás Maduro with Juan Guaidó and a neoliberal capitalist opposition that has pledged to privatize state assets and welcome in corporate partnerships.

Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world, and the democratically elected l*****t government of former President Hugo Chávez kicked out US oil corporations and used his nation’s natural resources to fund social services for poor and working-class Venezuelans.

The Trump administration has seized control of Venezuelan state assets in the US and given them to supposed “interim president” Juan Guaidó, in a bid to fund his c**p regime. On January 28, the US also imposed sanctions on Venezuela’s state oil company, PDVSA, in an attempt to t***sfer control to the right-wing opposition.

Transcript
A full transcript of Bolton’s exchange with Fox Business host Trish Regan on January 24 follows below:

JOHN BOLTON: “We’re looking at the oil assets. That’s the single most important income stream to the government of Venezuela. We’re looking at what to do to that.

We want everybody to know, we’re looking at all this seriously. We don’t want any American businesses or investors caught by surprise. They can see what President Trump did yesterday. We’re following through on it.”

TRISH REGAN: “So if you think of a company like Citgo, which is owned by PDVSA, which is the state-run oil company there in Venezuela, we have a lot of those Citgo assets right here in the US. Is that something, for example sir, that you are looking at?”

JOHN BOLTON: “Yeah look, we’re in conversation with major American companies now that are either in Venezuela, or in the case of Citgo here in the United States. I think we’re trying to get to the same end result here.

Venezuela is one of the three countries I called the ‘Troika of Tyranny.’

It will make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies really invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela.

It would be good for Venezuela; it would be good for the people of the United States. We both have a lot at stake here making this come out the right way.”

http://grayzoneproject.com/2019/01/29/us-c**p-venezuela-oil-corporate-john-bolton/