100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: COULD THERE BE ANYMORE OBSTRUCTION? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/steve-bannon-scripted-questions-russia-probe-414755
Former adviser Steve Bannon answered questions about Russian election interference before the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday — but only ones "scripted" for him in advance by White House officials, according to committee members. The ousted former political strategist to President Donald Trump appeared on Capitol Hill after multiple interviews with special counsel Robert Mueller in recent days, according to a source close to Bannon who confirmed an NBC News report. Both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee are investigating whether the Kremlin might have influenced or colluded with Trump's campaign. During a closed-door meeting with the House Intelligence Committee that lasted nearly four hours, Bannon refused to answer any questions beyond 25 that had been pre-screened by the White House, senior Republican and Democratic committee members said. Rep. Adam Schiff, the committee's top Democrat, suggested those questions were so narrowly drawn that they appeared intended to mislead lawmakers. "There were questions along the lines of ‘Did you ever meet with X?’ And because the question had been written by the White House the answer was invariably ‘No,'" Schiff said. "When we asked the question, ‘Did you talk with ‘X?,' the answer was yes." The most reliable politics newsletter. Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning — in your inbox. Your email… Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. But when committee members asked for details, Bannon said the White House instructed him to invoke executive privilege on Trump's behalf. Executive privilege is a legal claim the president can use to protect conversations from scrutiny by other branches of government. That left even senior committee Republicans unhappy. Rep. Mike Conaway of Texas, the Republican who leads the panel's Russia investigation, said he would discuss with House Speaker Paul Ryan whether to seek contempt charges against Bannon, who was Trump's chief strategist until he departed the White House last August. A White House official said the complaints from Republicans and Democrats on the panel ring hollow. The 25 questions that Bannon was authorized to answer, this official said, were the product of weeks of negotiations between White House counsel and House Intelligence Committee staff members both parties. Lawmakers on the panel were aware of, and had agreed to, the parameters of Bannon's testimony, the official said. The official added that the White House would respond if the committee pursues a contempt citation. In a visit to the House panel last month, Bannon made clear he would not discuss his time on the post-election transition team — which investigators are probing for potential contacts between Trump allies and Russian government officials — nor his tenure in the White House, during which Trump took actions that many Democrats believe may constitute obstruction of justice. Conaway described "a little frustration" among committee members and said he intends to review the mechanics of a contempt citation, including whether it will require the committee to vote or can simply be raised on the House floor. "Contempt is a big deal and I don’t have unilateral control over that conversation," he said. Ryan's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Schiff raised what he described as another potential conflict: Bannon's attorney William Burck also represents White House counsel Don McGahn, whose office advised the House on what questions Bannon would be able to answer. He said he has question about "counsel advising one witness based on instructions from another client." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Bring out the Rolling Heads  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't believe people still fall for the liberal lies... But then again, libs aren't the sharpest cookie in the lamp...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/steve-bannon-scripted-questions-russia-probe-414755 Former adviser Steve Bannon answered questions about Russian election interference before the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday — but only ones "scripted" for him in advance by White House officials, according to committee members. The ousted former political strategist to President Donald Trump appeared on Capitol Hill after multiple interviews with special counsel Robert Mueller in recent days, according to a source close to Bannon who confirmed an NBC News report. Both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee are investigating whether the Kremlin might have influenced or colluded with Trump's campaign. During a closed-door meeting with the House Intelligence Committee that lasted nearly four hours, Bannon refused to answer any questions beyond 25 that had been pre-screened by the White House, senior Republican and Democratic committee members said. Rep. Adam Schiff, the committee's top Democrat, suggested those questions were so narrowly drawn that they appeared intended to mislead lawmakers. "There were questions along the lines of ‘Did you ever meet with X?’ And because the question had been written by the White House the answer was invariably ‘No,'" Schiff said. "When we asked the question, ‘Did you talk with ‘X?,' the answer was yes." The most reliable politics newsletter. Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning — in your inbox. Your email… Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. But when committee members asked for details, Bannon said the White House instructed him to invoke executive privilege on Trump's behalf. Executive privilege is a legal claim the president can use to protect conversations from scrutiny by other branches of government. That left even senior committee Republicans unhappy. Rep. Mike Conaway of Texas, the Republican who leads the panel's Russia investigation, said he would discuss with House Speaker Paul Ryan whether to seek contempt charges against Bannon, who was Trump's chief strategist until he departed the White House last August. A White House official said the complaints from Republicans and Democrats on the panel ring hollow. The 25 questions that Bannon was authorized to answer, this official said, were the product of weeks of negotiations between White House counsel and House Intelligence Committee staff members both parties. Lawmakers on the panel were aware of, and had agreed to, the parameters of Bannon's testimony, the official said. The official added that the White House would respond if the committee pursues a contempt citation. In a visit to the House panel last month, Bannon made clear he would not discuss his time on the post-election transition team — which investigators are probing for potential contacts between Trump allies and Russian government officials — nor his tenure in the White House, during which Trump took actions that many Democrats believe may constitute obstruction of justice. Conaway described "a little frustration" among committee members and said he intends to review the mechanics of a contempt citation, including whether it will require the committee to vote or can simply be raised on the House floor. "Contempt is a big deal and I don’t have unilateral control over that conversation," he said. Ryan's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Schiff raised what he described as another potential conflict: Bannon's attorney William Burck also represents White House counsel Don McGahn, whose office advised the House on what questions Bannon would be able to answer. He said he has question about "counsel advising one witness based on instructions from another client." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/steve-bannon-scripted-questions-russia-probe-414755 Former adviser Steve Bannon answered questions about Russian election interference before the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday — but only ones "scripted" for him in advance by White House officials, according to committee members. The ousted former political strategist to President Donald Trump appeared on Capitol Hill after multiple interviews with special counsel Robert Mueller in recent days, according to a source close to Bannon who confirmed an NBC News report. Both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee are investigating whether the Kremlin might have influenced or colluded with Trump's campaign. During a closed-door meeting with the House Intelligence Committee that lasted nearly four hours, Bannon refused to answer any questions beyond 25 that had been pre-screened by the White House, senior Republican and Democratic committee members said. Rep. Adam Schiff, the committee's top Democrat, suggested those questions were so narrowly drawn that they appeared intended to mislead lawmakers. "There were questions along the lines of ‘Did you ever meet with X?’ And because the question had been written by the White House the answer was invariably ‘No,'" Schiff said. "When we asked the question, ‘Did you talk with ‘X?,' the answer was yes." The most reliable politics newsletter. Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning — in your inbox. Your email… Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. But when committee members asked for details, Bannon said the White House instructed him to invoke executive privilege on Trump's behalf. Executive privilege is a legal claim the president can use to protect conversations from scrutiny by other branches of government. That left even senior committee Republicans unhappy. Rep. Mike Conaway of Texas, the Republican who leads the panel's Russia investigation, said he would discuss with House Speaker Paul Ryan whether to seek contempt charges against Bannon, who was Trump's chief strategist until he departed the White House last August. A White House official said the complaints from Republicans and Democrats on the panel ring hollow. The 25 questions that Bannon was authorized to answer, this official said, were the product of weeks of negotiations between White House counsel and House Intelligence Committee staff members both parties. Lawmakers on the panel were aware of, and had agreed to, the parameters of Bannon's testimony, the official said. The official added that the White House would respond if the committee pursues a contempt citation. In a visit to the House panel last month, Bannon made clear he would not discuss his time on the post-election transition team — which investigators are probing for potential contacts between Trump allies and Russian government officials — nor his tenure in the White House, during which Trump took actions that many Democrats believe may constitute obstruction of justice. Conaway described "a little frustration" among committee members and said he intends to review the mechanics of a contempt citation, including whether it will require the committee to vote or can simply be raised on the House floor. "Contempt is a big deal and I don’t have unilateral control over that conversation," he said. Ryan's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Schiff raised what he described as another potential conflict: Bannon's attorney William Burck also represents White House counsel Don McGahn, whose office advised the House on what questions Bannon would be able to answer. He said he has question about "counsel advising one witness based on instructions from another client." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/15/steve-bannon-scripted-questions-russia-probe-414755 Former adviser Steve Bannon answered questions about Russian election interference before the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday — but only ones "scripted" for him in advance by White House officials, according to committee members. The ousted former political strategist to President Donald Trump appeared on Capitol Hill after multiple interviews with special counsel Robert Mueller in recent days, according to a source close to Bannon who confirmed an NBC News report. Both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee are investigating whether the Kremlin might have influenced or colluded with Trump's campaign. During a closed-door meeting with the House Intelligence Committee that lasted nearly four hours, Bannon refused to answer any questions beyond 25 that had been pre-screened by the White House, senior Republican and Democratic committee members said. Rep. Adam Schiff, the committee's top Democrat, suggested those questions were so narrowly drawn that they appeared intended to mislead lawmakers. "There were questions along the lines of ‘Did you ever meet with X?’ And because the question had been written by the White House the answer was invariably ‘No,'" Schiff said. "When we asked the question, ‘Did you talk with ‘X?,' the answer was yes." The most reliable politics newsletter. Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning — in your inbox. Your email… Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. But when committee members asked for details, Bannon said the White House instructed him to invoke executive privilege on Trump's behalf. Executive privilege is a legal claim the president can use to protect conversations from scrutiny by other branches of government. That left even senior committee Republicans unhappy. Rep. Mike Conaway of Texas, the Republican who leads the panel's Russia investigation, said he would discuss with House Speaker Paul Ryan whether to seek contempt charges against Bannon, who was Trump's chief strategist until he departed the White House last August. A White House official said the complaints from Republicans and Democrats on the panel ring hollow. The 25 questions that Bannon was authorized to answer, this official said, were the product of weeks of negotiations between White House counsel and House Intelligence Committee staff members both parties. Lawmakers on the panel were aware of, and had agreed to, the parameters of Bannon's testimony, the official said. The official added that the White House would respond if the committee pursues a contempt citation. In a visit to the House panel last month, Bannon made clear he would not discuss his time on the post-election transition team — which investigators are probing for potential contacts between Trump allies and Russian government officials — nor his tenure in the White House, during which Trump took actions that many Democrats believe may constitute obstruction of justice. Conaway described "a little frustration" among committee members and said he intends to review the mechanics of a contempt citation, including whether it will require the committee to vote or can simply be raised on the House floor. "Contempt is a big deal and I don’t have unilateral control over that conversation," he said. Ryan's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Schiff raised what he described as another potential conflict: Bannon's attorney William Burck also represents White House counsel Don McGahn, whose office advised the House on what questions Bannon would be able to answer. He said he has question about "counsel advising one witness based on instructions from another client." there is a reason so many of HIS OWN CHOICES jump ship after actually working with him .... and intelligence officials PLACED BY HIM believe there was Russian collusion ... just saying. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A well used liberal "Smoke and diversion" tactic. Won't work
because they got nothing else. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so they finally invoked executive priviledge...
that "i do not recall" crap wasn't working anymore...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't believe people still fall for the liberal lies... But then again, libs aren't the sharpest cookie in the lamp... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't believe people still fall for the liberal lies... But then again, libs aren't the sharpest cookie in the lamp... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder how far back it was when Russia started meddling in our elections..Has anyone asked if there were signs of this before Trump..which would mean there was no need to collude with them because they were already involved in meddling .. And why they want to say that Russia was the one who leaked the emails to WikiLeaks..I think I read somewhere ..where it was someone in the DNC who passed those emails on to WikiLeaks because they couldn't stand her.. But let's say they did ..what did we learn of Hillary ..enough about the way she treats classified information that could put American lives at risk..enough to show how she illegaly destroyed emails..would this be someone we would want in office knowing this..I think not... I would not want someone like that in office ..and in turn it appears like what..Russia did us a favor?..  ..Maybe in this case the meddling wasn't a bad thing..Not to mention .Does anyone believe that we don't do our fair share of meddling in one form or another.. I ran across an interesting article..U.S intervention in the middle east ..blood for oil..made for an interesting read.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder how far back it was when Russia started meddling in our elections..Has anyone asked if there were signs of this before Trump..which would mean there was no need to collude with them because they were already involved in meddling .. And why they want to say that Russia was the one who leaked the emails to WikiLeaks..I think I read somewhere ..where it was someone in the DNC who passed those emails on to WikiLeaks because they couldn't stand her.. But let's say they did ..what did we learn of Hillary ..enough about the way she treats classified information that could put American lives at risk..enough to show how she illegaly destroyed emails..would this be someone we would want in office knowing this..I think not... I would not want someone like that in office ..and in turn it appears like what..Russia did us a favor?.. ..Maybe in this case the meddling wasn't a bad thing..Not to mention .Does anyone believe that we don't do our fair share of meddling in one form or another.. I ran across an interesting article..U.S intervention in the middle east ..blood for oil..made for an interesting read.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't believe people still fall for the liberal lies... But then again, libs aren't the sharpest cookie in the lamp... Why thank you..no worries though, no real exercise in being ahead of that foul-mouthed, blame-pointing group :-) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if you ask me there has been obstruction on both sides, so what is it we can do but rely on those who are responsible for bringing forth the truth..only to find their involved in one way or another. Ya know you sit back and listen to "I don't recall" and "I don't remember"..so many times you know they're all full of it..and this is what we call leaders ..makes me sick to hear anything about either one .. Trump appears to have the same problems as Bill and Hillary could care less about the security of Americans while exploiting the women vote. It" hard to say who is honest enough these days to be the leader of our nation.. I still say we should polygraph them both.drug test them as well ..and we should be able to because after all "They work for us"..which makes us their employer..and we should be able to request this being done..and see the results for ourselves.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if you ask me there has been obstruction on both sides, so what is it we can do but rely on those who are responsible for bringing forth the truth..only to find their involved in one way or another. Ya know you sit back and listen to "I don't recall" and "I don't remember"..so many times you know they're all full of it..and this is what we call leaders ..makes me sick to hear anything about either one .. Trump appears to have the same problems as Bill and Hillary could care less about the security of Americans while exploiting the women vote. It" hard to say who is honest enough these days to be the leader of our nation.. I still say we should polygraph them both.drug test them as well ..and we should be able to because after all "They work for us"..which makes us their employer..and we should be able to request this being done..and see the results for ourselves.. I think its gone so far now that people would either believe they knew how to beat the test or that the test was rigged somehow in favor/opposition of their candidate. I do believe Trump has successfully indoctrinated the conspiracist mind full on to pick and choose in their own head which facts are simply facts and which are somehow 'false' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still say we should polygraph them both.drug test them as well ..and we should be able to because after all "They work for us"..which makes us their employer..and we should be able to request this being done..and see the results for ourselves.. polygraph & drug test ??? are you kidding, how about something as easy as releasing tax records ??? Trump is the first one since Nixon to refuse, 40 some years ago "They work for us" keep dreaming about that... Poly for Trump ???? the expense for the broken needles alone would rival the new defense budget...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't believe people still fall for the liberal lies... But then again, libs aren't the sharpest cookie in the lamp... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still say we should polygraph them both.drug test them as well ..and we should be able to because after all "They work for us"..which makes us their employer..and we should be able to request this being done..and see the results for ourselves.. polygraph & drug test ??? are you kidding, how about something as easy as releasing tax records ??? Trump is the first one since Nixon to refuse, 40 some years ago "They work for us" keep dreaming about that... Poly for Trump ???? the expense for the broken needles alone would rival the new defense budget... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still say we should polygraph them both.drug test them as well ..and we should be able to because after all "They work for us"..which makes us their employer..and we should be able to request this being done..and see the results for ourselves.. polygraph & drug test ??? are you kidding, how about something as easy as releasing tax records ??? Trump is the first one since Nixon to refuse, 40 some years ago "They work for us" keep dreaming about that... Poly for Trump ???? the expense for the broken needles alone would rival the new defense budget... Easy as releasing tax returns? The IRS can't even keep up with their e-mails.  and then plead the 5th?
|
|
|
|
|
