FrumCA

You have rhe narrative down pat. Congrats. We shall see.

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

dakotacheryl Loc: Near Mt Rushmore

This is how all subpoenas are usually handled. In closed door session first. No 5 minute time limit like in public session. The witness answering the question can take as long as he/she needs to ANSWER the question. Not spend the 5 minute limit hemming and hawing and asking to have the question repeated, and then not even answer the question.

FrumCA

Thank you!! This should clear up the poont about grandstanding i tried to make earlier ( but not very well - )

Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.

Of course both sides will trip over their own dicks to get to the mic to spin but if you read rule 15 in the link below you will see the rules are quite clear as to how the questioning and testimony is required to be recorded by a stenographer who certifies the transcript (which will be made available to all parties) is true and correctly recorded. Additionally, all parties have the opportunity to review any formal report for five days prior to release. Biden is allowed two private attorneys to object to any questions (or I would assume assert the 5th if they deem it appropriate). https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/118th-Committee-Rules.pdf

Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.

Your favorite book must be “The Prince” (Machiavelli)

gorgehiker Loc: Lexington, Ky

Uh, less than $1400 a month for three months. Big difference between that and "millions". Oh, by the way, Jared Kushner did actually receive millions from the murderous crowned prince of Saud Arabia.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

So why no a public hearing ??

Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.

He said there will be a public hearing. Probably too much to sift through so they probably want to narrow down the issues and present what they think will be most impactful for the public shit show just like 1/6. Maybe in the closed door hearings they will discover they don’t have the evidence to crucify anyone so they will shut it down before embarrassing themselves publicly. Have some patience and let it play out. What is said in the closed hearing will be a matter of record. We do need to know the truth no matter where it leads (like today when Director Wray admitted they knew the laptop hard drive was veracious before the election).

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

That’s not what I meant sorry.
What’s wrong with just having a public
Hearing ?

dakotacheryl Loc: Near Mt Rushmore

What part of my answer above was confusing?? I repeat:

"This is how all subpoenas are usually handled. In closed door session first. No 5 minute time limit like in public session. The witness answering the question can take as long as he/she needs to ANSWER the question. Not spend the 5 minute limit hemming and hawing and asking to have the question repeated, and then not even answer the question."

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

Ok but who can blame Biden after the way Comer has behaved. Like public ally portraying a car loan payment as evidence of wrngvdoing.

People speak of “ witch hunt “.. this is the epitome of a witch-hunt

But make no bones about it there is no rule supporting a closed hearing versus a public hearing

Here are the house rules

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20060613_RL30539_52b6f2dcc8597e530d6de8e3eb0f1e9dc49d9884.pdf

FrumCA

First - the real issue is where did the money come from!

Second - Evidently you stopped reading when your position was satisfied. As Paul Harvey used to say, "here's the rest of the story". Don't you just hate it when you are corrected??

Closing a Hearing

The vast majority of committee hearings are open to the public, as required
under House rules; but House rules permit committees to close a hearing for specific
reasons, and outline the procedure for doing so (House Rule XI, clauses 2(g)(2) and
2(k)(5)). A hearing may be closed to the public “because disclosure of testimony,
evidence, or other matters to be considered would endanger the national security,
would compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or would violate any law
or rule of the House of Representatives.” In order to close all or part of a hearing, a
committee must vote by roll call in open session and with a majority present. When
a quorum is present for taking testimony, however, a committee may vote to close a
hearing (1) because the anticipated testimony at an investigative hearing “may tend
to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person,”; or (2) solely to discuss whether there
is reason to continue the hearing in closed session.

House rules permit most committees to close a hearing on a specific day and on
one subsequent day of hearings. The Committees on Appropriations, Armed
Services, and Intelligence, however, may vote to close their hearings for five
additional, consecutive days of hearings.

Members of the House generally may attend, but not participate in, hearings of
committees (except the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct) on which they
do not serve. Nevertheless, the House may vote to authorize a committee to use
procedures for closing a hearing to the public to close hearings to Members not on
the committee as well.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

Majority is not all and in this case , given Comers intellectual dishonesty I believe a public hearing is warranted.

Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.

You seem to be suggesting that political bias is novel in any of these so called investigations. Firstly, if the appropriate law enforcement agencies would properly investigate these matters in a timely manner and take the appropriate action in referring them to the attorney general or DA (with jurisdiction if a state case) then it would neuter much of the political nonsense these committees, on both sides, choose to exploit. Secondly, as a demonstration of political noise (and I am not inferring that he isn’t guilty or won’t suffer a conviction) let me ask you. If Trump, after his defeat, would have faded into the sunset, kept his big mouth shut, accepted his “persona non grata” status (which we all know is an impossible ask) do you think he would have been charged in these cases? The answer is probably not. His opposition wants/needs to bloody him up enough to insure he never hold the reins again.