Schiff Refuses To Commit To Testifying If Called By House Or Senate: Schiff Refuses To Commit To Testifying If Called By House Or Senate Alicia Luke Alicia Luke November 24, 2019...

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

Schiff Refuses To Commit To Testifying If Called By House Or Senate
Alicia Luke Alicia Luke November 24, 2019

Schiff Refuses To Commit To Testifying If Called By House Or Senate

On today’s broadcast of CNN’s “State of the Union,” Adam Schiff refused to say he would testify in an impeachment trial of President Donald Trump in the Senate.

When asked if he would be willing to testify in the Senate, Adam Schiff said: “There is nothing to testify about. I think if the president or his allies in the Senate persist, it means they are not serious about what they are doing.”

.@RepAdamSchiff indicates he wouldn’t testify if Republicans subpoena him: “There is nothing to testify about … if they go down this road, it shows a fundamental lack of seriousness. A willingness to try to turn this into a circus.” pic.twitter.com/SiLcUf6a8P

Host Jake Tapper said: “Sorry for interrupting. They would cite David Kendall, President Clinton’s attorney, got to cross-examine Ken Starr. I understand you are not an independent council, but you did lead the investigation.”
Adam Schiff said: “I’m not a special counsel. I don’t work for a separate branch of government. I’m not in the Justice Department. I am more in a position that Henry Hyde was during the impeachment or Peter Rodino or Sam Ervin. They were not fact witnesses. What would I offer in terms of testimony that I heard Dr. Hill in open hearing say such and such? That is not pertinent. The only reason for them to go through with this is to mollify the president, and that is not a good reason to try to call a member of Congress as a witness.”

Jake Tapper asked: “But there are questions you could answer about your staff having been approached by the whistleblower before he filed his complaint and other matters, things that you could shed light on our explain. Would you refuse to go if the Senate wanted you to come as a witness?”

Adam Schiff added: “I don’t want to comment on it except to say that if they go down this road, it shows a fundamental lack of seriousness, a willingness to try to turn this into a circus-like the president would like, and I hope they don’t go there. There are others who are fact witnesses. We didn’t call in Senator Johnson. We’re not calling in Devin Nunes. We didn’t call in Senator Graham. There is a far stronger case for people like Senator Graham than the chairman doing the investigative committee work in the House.”
Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at RepublicanLegion.com.

PeterS

no propaganda please wrote:

Schiff Refuses To Commit To Testifying If Called By House Or Senate
Alicia Luke Alicia Luke November 24, 2019

Schiff Refuses To Commit To Testifying If Called By House Or Senate

On today’s broadcast of CNN’s “State of the Union,” Adam Schiff refused to say he would testify in an impeachment trial of President Donald Trump in the Senate.

When asked if he would be willing to testify in the Senate, Adam Schiff said: “There is nothing to testify about. I think if the president or his allies in the Senate persist, it means they are not serious about what they are doing.”

.@RepAdamSchiff indicates he wouldn’t testify if Republicans subpoena him: “There is nothing to testify about … if they go down this road, it shows a fundamental lack of seriousness. A willingness to try to turn this into a circus.” pic.twitter.com/SiLcUf6a8P

Host Jake Tapper said: “Sorry for interrupting. They would cite David Kendall, President Clinton’s attorney, got to cross-examine Ken Starr. I understand you are not an independent council, but you did lead the investigation.”
Adam Schiff said: “I’m not a special counsel. I don’t work for a separate branch of government. I’m not in the Justice Department. I am more in a position that Henry Hyde was during the impeachment or Peter Rodino or Sam Ervin. They were not fact witnesses. What would I offer in terms of testimony that I heard Dr. Hill in open hearing say such and such? That is not pertinent. The only reason for them to go through with this is to mollify the president, and that is not a good reason to try to call a member of Congress as a witness.”

Jake Tapper asked: “But there are questions you could answer about your staff having been approached by the whistleblower before he filed his complaint and other matters, things that you could shed light on our explain. Would you refuse to go if the Senate wanted you to come as a witness?”

Adam Schiff added: “I don’t want to comment on it except to say that if they go down this road, it shows a fundamental lack of seriousness, a willingness to try to turn this into a circus-like the president would like, and I hope they don’t go there. There are others who are fact witnesses. We didn’t call in Senator Johnson. We’re not calling in Devin Nunes. We didn’t call in Senator Graham. There is a far stronger case for people like Senator Graham than the chairman doing the investigative committee work in the House.”
Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at RepublicanLegion.com.

Schiff Refuses To Commit To Testifying If Called B... (show quote)

He can't be called by the House and if called by the Senate he can play the same game of contempt that Republicans are playing on the House right now.

Carol Kelly

PeterS wrote:

He can't be called by the House and if called by the Senate he can play the same game of contempt that Republicans are playing on the House right now.

Why? Why can’t he be called? Isn’t he serious about his impeachment business?
Then why wouldn’t the Senate be serious? I hope that this $&#@/& stuff doesn’t make it out of the House. I cannot believe there are enough Liberal Democrats in the House to pull this off. Maybe I have too much faith in my fellow man. From the appearance of the House as I’ve seen it, I’ve lost faith in my fellow women.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

PeterS wrote:

He can't be called by the House and if called by the Senate he can play the same game of contempt that Republicans are playing on the House right now.

Sure he can. Except he can’t claim Executive Privelage. The inquiry in the Senate is a trial. If called and refuses he could be in contempt.he is a fact wittiness also.

Lonewolf

No reason for Democrats to comply with anything Republicans refused to comply with let them stick their subpoenas where the sun don't shine just like the White House did

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Lonewolf wrote:

No reason for Democrats to comply with anything Republicans refused to comply with let them stick their subpoenas where the sun don't shine just like the White House did

Difference is, ignoramus that the Senate proceedings are an actual trial, proceeded over by a Supreme Court Justice. Democrats already look stupid enough. I hope they ignore subpoenas.

Lonewolf

JFlorio wrote:

Difference is, ignoramus that the Senate proceedings are an actual trial, proceeded over by a Supreme Court Justice. Democrats already look stupid enough. I hope they ignore subpoenas.

There is not going to be a trial only a clown show,Republicans are not interested in t***h f they were they would have encouraged the WH to cooperate

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Lonewolf wrote:

There is not going to be a trial only a clown show,Republicans are not interested in t***h f they were they would have encouraged the WH to cooperate

You’re beat and to dumb to know it. But please keep digging. This has been a disaster for the Democrats.

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

JFlorio wrote:

Difference is, ignoramus that the Senate proceedings are an actual trial, proceeded over by a Supreme Court Justice. Democrats already look stupid enough. I hope they ignore subpoenas.

Another difference, democrats do not have Executive Privilege.

Lonewolf

Lt. Rob Polans ret. wrote:

Another difference, democrats do not have Executive Privilege.

don't get excited we got the 5th amendment

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Lonewolf wrote:

don't get excited we got the 5th amendment

Just admit it. Right or wrong this Impeachment hurts the Democrats.

Lonewolf

JFlorio wrote:

Just admit it. Right or wrong this Impeachment hurts the Democrats.

I think at this point its about even but if the democrats don't come up with a smoking gun soon it will hurt them a lot in 2020!

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Lonewolf wrote:

I think at this point its about even but if the democrats don't come up with a smoking gun soon it will hurt them a lot in 2020!

You may be correct. If it’s even that’s a bad sign for the Dems. because a month ago they were quite a bit ahead.

Hadenough

Lonewolf wrote:

I think at this point its about even but if the democrats don't come up with a smoking gun soon it will hurt them a lot in 2020!

Blownwolf,

The only smoking gun the dems have is the one they shot themselves in the foot with.

KAG
God Bless the USA and President Trump

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Hadenough wrote:

Blownwolf,

The only smoking gun the dems have is the one they shot themselves in the foot with.

KAG
God Bless the USA and President Trump

I think that gun had something in it and the Dems have been smoking it.