For the life of me I do not understand why Nadler is making deals.
Closed door session?
On what basis does she get these special conditions?
Nadler: Will the witness provide her name for the record.
White House Counsel: Mr Chairman, the White House is claiming executive privilege over that information, and pursuant to that, I am instructing the witness not to answer
Nadler: oh. Okay.
Given that there’s another thread running at the same time about sex-starved males in Congress, not sure it’s a great idea for Hope to be doing anything behind closed doors there.
Because it allows things to be more free, that there’s not a camera capturing every little word and gesture to tear apart on the evening news.
And also means less grand-standing and bullshit from the Congresscritters, as they’re not playing monologues for b-reels on local television back home.
You can actually get things done there.
Just a comment about so many stories all over the country…why is it that so many reporters say that so-and-so did not “immediately” return a request for comment? Why is “immediately” relevant, and what does it really even mean in this context? Why not just say the request for comment hasn’t been returned? No big deal, just an odd thing that happens a lot.
well. maybe Jerry’s plan is to get Hicks in front of a closed session, have her claim executive privilege, then call the Sargeant-at-Arms to detain her while the committee passes a contempt resolution, and brings her in front of the full House for a hearing on inherent contempt charges, where she will be found guilty, and forced to sit in a hotel room with only 750 thread count sheets, and supplied only with Mabelline or Cover Girl cosmetics, until she agrees to testify.
or maybe he’s just keeping nancy happy…
To give a hint about the timeline. There’s a difference between a late-breaking story (thus no “immediate” comment), and a long-running investigative story where the person has declined multiple times to answer.
The first just says they didn’t pick up the phone today. The latter implies they’re hiding things and trying to avoid talking to the reporter.
Who’s Lurch? Is that Trump’s 15 grand a month ex bodyguard and procurer Kieth Schiller?
that’s true, if you have a witness who wants to cooperate.
But if the witness does not want to cooperate, it simply makes the cover-up much more, um, covered up.
Hope Hicks To Testify Before Closed-Door House Judiciary Session
Um, shouldn’t that be “Behind” Closed-Door session, or “In”???
If she’s testifying before the session, why do we care about the session being closed door after her testimony? Or is she going to be testifying standing in front of the closed door while the members are in session on the other side of said closed door?
The grandstanding is an issue, but as with Cohen’s hearings, some of the freshman( freshwomen to be exact) reps like Ocasio-Cortez and Pressley shined with specific, targeted and hard questions. Or maybe that’s why some of the older reps want closed doors.
It could get quite steamy.
She may have to remove her false eyelashes. They are so huge, one can hardly see her eyes. Questioners must be able to look into her eyes to judge her veracity.
I think that she realizes the serious shit storm she inhabits and wants to be able to work somewhere/anywhere again. As I recall, she worked for Ivanka and moved up Daddy’s trousers. She may have seen and done more than she even understood at the time to be potentially problematic.
She may give us the best anecdotal evidence upon which the committee can construct a stronger case.
Of course, she has to come clean.
I’m reminded of a reverse movie theme, of the beauty taking off her makeup, pulling back her hair and putting on her horn rimmed glasses.
Probably not going to happen, but it might actually help with some on the committee.
Looks like him to me, as well.
She’ll have an attorney with her. Stop with all of this closed door bullshit already. After all, as I remember a prominent Rethugliklan saying, “If they’re innocent they have nothing to hide.”