Beer Monkey
Member
"She was fired for insubordination, therefore she is not a credible witness"
- various Republican talking heads over the last few weeks
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sally Yates testifies before Senate subcmte re: Flynn/Russ today 2:30EST (livestream)
- Thread starter RustyNails
- Start date
"She was fired for insubordination, therefore she is not a credible witness"
- various Republican talking heads over the last few weeks
victreeb3l
Member
Goddamnit Graham go home
The dems and that one republican of course
Reminds me of https://youtu.be/iZdvlSp7pdM
NullPointer
Member
Yep. A caricature they've already created, and they want some soundbites to justify their construct for the Fox News segments and Breitbart "analysis" articles to come.
GrizzleBoy
Banned
Graham reeeeeeally wants to know where the leak is.
ElRenoRaven
Member
Nothing more then others sadly. A whole lot of I can't answer that followed by Yates setting republicans on fire followed by more why did you not do what Master Trump told you to do. Rinse and repeat.
RiverShell
Member
Agreed, always nice to see someone in(or was) government fighting for the people
They don't want to ask anything related to the actual issue because they love their Trumps but they don't want to skip their questions because that makes it a bit too obvious.
Leaks are in isle 1, across from the fruit.
They are trying to catch her in something because the travel ban is what she supposedly got fired for and they are trying to corner her saying she didn't due her duty (and likewise make her a partisan shill from Obama and thus diminish her testimony in regards to what she was called up for). Its pure character assassination attempt because she happens to be under testimony in front of the Senate Judicial committee.
Fallout-NL
Member
I like that Blumenthal guy.
everyday math
Banned
I could practically hear the teeth grinding from here.
LOL!! Oh my god. At least that version of Trump would be entertaining...
ElRenoRaven
Member
And there is graham talking about the leaks and why are we spying on our citizens, etc. Sigh.
Username1198
Member
Jesus graham still talking about unmasking
Suck a dick Lindsey
Suck a dick Lindsey
plagiarize
Banned
Hey guys. I wasn't watching the whole thing.
Did anyone ask Sally Yates if she leaked the information to the Washington Post?
Did anyone ask Sally Yates if she leaked the information to the Washington Post?
I had the count at four times. Anyone corroborate?
Basically this is what happened:
1) Yates told the White House about the Flynn concerns at least three times
2) GOP does not care what is being leaked, but only about the leaker
3) Reporting unclassified information to the press is, believe it or not, not leaking
4) Ted Cruz got bodied
5) Most of the GOP used this hearing as an opportunity to attack Yates about the travel ban. Only one Republican asked about the Russian influence.
BTW, here's the Yates-Cruz portion (aka Yates devouring Cruz's soul):
4-minute version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sC1dOiCSp0
9-minute version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWLtaOLOTgk
4-minute version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sC1dOiCSp0
9-minute version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWLtaOLOTgk
I don't disagree with them that they should be looking into who leaked classified information, even if the public has undoubtedly benefited from it.
It's the fact they brought it up again and again and again despite being given the answers "If it was an unmasking the collection agency will know" and "If it wasn't an unmasking, the collection agency already unmasked it" to in no half measures say "ASK THE COLLECTION AGENCY, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT" that I take major annoyance with.
It's the fact they brought it up again and again and again despite being given the answers "If it was an unmasking the collection agency will know" and "If it wasn't an unmasking, the collection agency already unmasked it" to in no half measures say "ASK THE COLLECTION AGENCY, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT" that I take major annoyance with.
ElRenoRaven
Member
God I really should not watch Graham speak. Every time he opens his mouth it makes me want to punch him in the face repeatedly nonstop.
Just slightly more relevant than bringing up the Muslim ban EO.
Staying on topic apparently is a challenge.
plagiarize
Banned
Cruz even seemed to go after Clinton's e-mails at one point. In an utterly absurd moment.
Username1198
Member
Jeffrey toobin dropping truth bombs on CNN lol
He said Yates went to the whitehouse 3 times to say Flynn is probably compromised, nothing happens, someone leaks that to Washington post, then Flynn is fired, now republicans focusing on who leaked the story, not that Flynn is a traitor.
He said Yates went to the whitehouse 3 times to say Flynn is probably compromised, nothing happens, someone leaks that to Washington post, then Flynn is fired, now republicans focusing on who leaked the story, not that Flynn is a traitor.
everyday math
Banned
Yates was hard as stone during that session.
BlazinSkatinAxel
Member
They're on the Trumptanic.
Look there's only one Jeffrey you can trust and that's Lord, okay. I'll wait for the real talk thank you very much.
VeryGooster
Banned
WaPo with a recap of sorts https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...se-defenses/?tid=sm_Fb&utm_term=.484d6a1907c0
TheOctodad
Member
Can Yates run for president?
KernelPanic
Member
Fox News is basically RT or Sputnik at this point. State propaganda.
- Clapper confirmed the Guardian's reporting that in 2015 British intelligence turned over information on the Trump campaign's ties to Russia. This undercuts him being quoted ad nauseum by the GOP/Trump saying the opposite.... He's essentially retracted that statement, saying he was speaking from a place of ignorance.
- Everything we feared about Yates informing the WH about Flynn and them doing nothing seems to be confirmed. Her notifying the WH seemingly did nothing to change their standing with Flynn.
- Yates said that Flynn talked to the FBI without a lawyer in the WH and lied.
- The overall partisanship of the questions is disgusting as ever. Bringing up Hillary's e-mails or Yates' authority in refusing to back the illegal Muslim ban is absurd in this context.
Ironically though what was probably one of the biggest and most worrying things to come from this was from questions about the Muslim ban.
Confirmation that the White House instructed people not to tell the DOJ about their EO before it was signed is terrifying. Even if it did end up backfiring on them. They were trying to ignore the courts way earlier than we had confirmation of before.
Also, a correction on your third point. She made pretty blatant that she couldn't comment on the FBI interview with Flynn, not that he lied during that interview. She did confirm that if he had that would be illegal but couldn't comment on what was said in it. Unless I missed something?
VeryGooster
Banned
I'm impressed at their non-subtlety of dragging Huma into that inquiry. but bipartisanship tho!
Has Al Franken's comments been clipped anywhere yet?
Yates is the hero America needs
They kept getting burned by Yates so basically that happened anyway.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
For me, it's more the fact that it was brought up here at all. The leaks have NOTHING to do with Russia's interference at all. If you want some proceedings, start your own damn hearing, but keep this one focused on Russia.
To say nothing of the fact that the Russia threat is about 1000 to 1 versus the threat of leaks.
NullPointer
Member
I'm glad they brought up the EO.
It lays their priorities in this investigation of Russian meddling and collusion bare, and they got their asses handed to them on every angle.