The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on July 21, 2021, 08:57:29 AM
-
Star Member dsc (50,260 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215644836
If Jim Jordan is permitted on the select committee the rules need to be changed
Currently a member gets x minutes (usually 5) for both questions and answers which gives both the questioner and the answerer an incentive to filibuster and in the case of the answerer not answering what they were asked.
My proposal would be the following.
Members are given x minutes for questions only or a set number of questions. Members can't interrupt answers but the chair can determine an answer isn't germane and stop an answer. First time member interrupts, warning, Second time member interrupts the same witness, they are done for that witness. This would stop the Jordan filibusters and interrupting of witnesses.
Oh, yeah... it would totally stop the opposition from actually taking part in any questioning as the Chair would simply say, "That's not germane to the hearing" and shut the questioner down. Why even pretend to be fair?
Star Member JohnSJ (78,571 posts)
1. Jim Jordan was part of the insurrection, and voted not to certify the election, but even worse comments already made by Jordan and others on that committee blaming Pelosi for the insurrection, along with BLM, and every other distraction unrelated to the storming of the capital on January 6th, are more than enough reasons why they should not be part of the committee.
If Pelosi allows that, it will devolve into an circus with those republicans having no intention to try and discover how things got so out of hand, why the Capital was left unsecured, and why it took so long to have the National Guard employed, etc.
Instead they will interrupt, distract, and do everything to disrupt the proceedings. They have said as much.
It will be a very bad mistake if this is allowed to happen.
:yawn:
Star Member dsc (50,260 posts)
2. that is why the rule against interrupting must be enforced
honestly, I don't see them replacing Jordan with anyone better. So, let him be on it, but have strict rules that are strictly enforced. I can't ban kids who don't like math or school from my classroom but I can have rules and enforce them.
clementine613 (422 posts)
3. Why are we allowing ANY Rethugs on the committee?
They were all complicit in what happened. This is like allowing a murderer who is on trial to serve on his own jury.
:bird:
Star Member Jim__ (12,824 posts)
4. They definitely need new rules to bring back order to hearings.
Members consistently violating rules need to be removed from the session.
At yesterday's Senate hearing with Dr Fauci, even after Rand's time was up and the chair person allowed Dr Fauci to respond, Rand continued to talk over Dr Fauci. The experts responses are being talked over by idiots.
:whatever:
-
Star Fascist dsc (50,260 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215644836
If Jim Jordan is permitted on the select committee the rules need to be changed
Yeppers! Gotta suppress facts Trump-Hating Dems don't want known!
But go ahead! Silence Jordan! Even the MSM won't be able to pretzellate that into a good thing, and some may call out the resulting show trial for what it is.
The First Rule of Holes is that when you find yourself in one, stop digging. The Dems and Prog MSM are digging with an excavator! :rotf: :tongue: :fuelfire:
-
Star Member Jim__ (12,824 posts)
4. They definitely need new rules to bring back order to hearings.
Members consistently violating rules need to be removed from the session.
At yesterday's Senate hearing with Dr Fauci, even after Rand's time was up and the chair person allowed Dr Fauci to respond, Rand continued to talk over Dr Fauci. The experts responses are being talked over by idiots.
Why are you more concerned with Dr. Paul's talking over Fauci than Fauci's dishonesty?
-
clementine613 (422 posts)
3. Why are we allowing ANY Rethugs on the committee?
They were all complicit in what happened. This is like allowing a murderer who is on trial to serve on his own jury.
Did I miss a news headline where the presumption of innocence before being proven guilty is no longer the standard in this Country?
-
clementine613 (422 posts)
3. Why are we allowing ANY Rethugs on the committee?
They were all complicit in what happened. This is like allowing a murderer who is on trial to serve on his own jury.
Hey retard.
Defendants are allowed to cross-examine all witnesses and call their own.
If you intend this to be some sort of verdict-issuing exercise, please note the accuser is not allowed to render judgement.
-
Hey retard.
Defendants are allowed to cross-examine all witnesses and call their own.
If you intend this to be some sort of verdict-issuing exercise, please note the accuser is not allowed to render judgement.
I wonder if that DU poster realizes that the defense does in fact get to participate in jury selection, and ask prospective jurors about possible bias and ability to be fair-minded about the case. Like, I don't know, have the would-be jurors already decided the event in question was caused by Donald Trump, and have they been inundated with news coverage saying as much?
-
Did I miss a news headline where the presumption of innocence before being proven guilty is no longer the standard in this Country?
Yes. When democraps are in charge, it's the seriousness of the accusation that matters. Therefore, Republicans guilty, because, something...all democraps innocent because of Republican lies.
There ya go..
-
Gosh, I wish this DUmmy's rules had been in place when Jayapal was questioning (lecturing) Bill Barr.