my heart is with jason. but i believe democrats should go the pelosi route and follow by other means. to continue the investigations. hope that the courts are still funking despite being packed with mcconnell judges. and as the court did today, rule in favor of subpoenas and witnesses showing up. so that these investigation hearings proceed and they can be televised. tom was making the point, with he no he had these televised impeachment hearings to educate the public. but there is nothing that says, you re very influential. msnbc wouldn t be covering the oversight hearings. well, i think part of it is the question of, who is actually compelled to testify in a reasonable am of time? which is separate from whether
strange, right? i mean, there will be in that hearing room, we expect, democratic senators asking questions of brett kavanagh and christine blasey ford. and then when it s the republican senators time, they will not say anything and instead they will defer to this pinch hitter, this outside counsel who has come in. that does not happen in confirmation hearings. we think that it hasn t happened in decades, if at all, in modern times. that announcement that they were going to do that over the objections of one of the two witnesses at the hearing, and then the announcement that they had hired somebody but we re not allowed to know who it is, it s all so weird. you know, i m ready to stand corrected by a senate historian, but i believe there has never been, never been outside counsel asking questions in a confirmation hearing. only in the major and unusual and special investigation hearings like watergate have they done that. so it s beyond unusual. i believe in confirmation hearings.
attorney during the past six months lois lerner has met privately with the investigators from the department of justice and apparently has not pleaded the fifth in those investigation hearings or committee conversations. and yet she will not speak to the american people. she wouldn t speak to their elected representative in congress but she will speak privately to the justice department. what does that tell us about the justice department investigation? she is more afraid of congress than she is the people who could indict her? but would she say, cleta, that this is a bipartisan witch hunt from the folks at the doj, and she is going to be doing an honest probe of the matter. i think that is the question, are they really doing an honest probe if they re doing a probe. i actually met with the representative, they notified me two days before i testified when i was getting ready to testify that i thought their investigation was a sham.
attorney during the past six months lois lerner has met privately with the investigators from the department of justice and apparently has not pleaded the fifth in those investigation hearings or committee conversations. and yet she will not speak to the american people. she wouldn t speak to their elected representative in congress but she will speak privately to the justice department. what does that tell us about the justice department investigation? she is more afraid of congress than she is the people who could indict her? but would she say, cleta, that this is a bipartisan witch hunt from the folks at the doj, and she is going to be doing an honest probe of the matter. i think that is the question, are they really doing an honest probe if they re doing a probe. i actually met with the representative, they notified me two days before i testified when i was getting ready to testify that i thought their investigation was a sham.
instead they will defer to this pinch hitter, this outside counsel who has come in. that does not happen in confirmation hearings. we think that it hasn t happened in decades, if at all, in modern times. that announcement that they were going to do that over the objections of one of the two witnesses at the hearing, and then the announcement that they had hired somebody but we re not allowed to know who it is, it s all so weird. you know, i m ready to stand corrected by a senate historian, but i believe there has never been, never been outside counsel asking questions in a confirmation hearing. only in the major and unusual and special investigation hearings like watergate have they done that. so it s beyond unusual. i believe in confirmation hearings. it s never been done. if it is going to be done, why the identity of the counsel has to be secret until the very last second? yeah. is it i don t know. the next few days are going to be weird. the only reason you d be