Schiff Rulez

So the two links are what appear to be the proposed street  rules from Pelosi and the Demz in their multi-year attack against the elected president of the United States.

Link 1 from the esteemed New York Times – Impeachment Inquiry Procedures in the Committee on the Judiciary

Link 2 from the also esteemed New York Times – Directing certain committees to continue their on going investigation

Link 3 – How to make Turducken

Very odd rules indeed.  Completely unreasonable in my opinion to use oyster dressing and sausage on anything resembling fowl.

Also unusual is that the ‘Chair’ of the ‘Intelligence’  committee (poorly named) literally has the power to accept or reject even hearing any testimony from the President or his attorneys.   If the house votes that these rulez are good enough, Shiff is basically elected to be god of all things related to Trump.   For instance: (my bold)

F. Should the President unlawfully refuse to make witnesses available for testimony
to , or to produce documents requested by, the investigative committees listed in the first section of H . Res. 660 in furtherance of the investigations described in the first section of H . Res. 660, the chair shall have the discretion to impose appropriate remedies, including by denying specific requests by the President or his counsel under these procedures to call or question witnesses .

So if the President doesn’t produce what the Dem’s want, they can determine it is unlawful and deny any due process.  So let’s say – Tax returns, letters from the president’s wife, people who work under the rules of executive privilege etc…   Anything they want to drag through the gutter, they ask, he doesn’t deliver, if the polls say trash him, they do it.  Extreme lawlessness.

The President s counsel may question any witness called before the Committee, subject to instructions from the chair or presiding member respecting the time, scope and duration of the examination.

So they may question a witness, only in hearing, not in deposition, and only when the top Democrats believe the scope is appropriate among other equally subjective barriers.

(3 To allow for full evaluation of minority witness requests, the ranking minority member may submit to the chair ,in writing,any requests for witness testimony relevant to the investigation described in the first section of this resolution within 72 hours after notice is given for the first hearing designated pursuant to paragraph (1).Any such request shall be accompanied by a detailed written justification of the relevance of the testimony of each requested witness to the investigation described in the first section of this resolution .

Rebuttals to Democrat operative testimony must be requested and the potential impact of the testimony detailed prior to democrat acceptance and prior to notice of the first hearing.   If they don’t accept, the minority is invited to let the majority controlled committee to vote on whether the committee chair person is actually on the same political side as the balance of the committee.   Very Mao like.

(4 )(A ) The ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee is authorized , with the concurrence of the chair , to require, as deemed necessary to the investigation

(i ) by subpoena or otherwise( ) attendance and testimony of any person (including at a taking of a deposition) ; and
(II) the production of ,records, correspondence, memoranda,
papers, and documents; and
(ii) by interrogatory, the furnishing of
information .)

So the defendants are allowed to call witnesses and request depositions as long as the prosecutor/judge/jury agrees that their witnesses are “necessary”.  Fortunately, a remedy is specified if the prosecutor/Judge/Jury doesn’t agree.  They are entitled to a full vote from the prosecutor/Judge/Jury controlled committee to determine whether prosecutor/Judge/Jury agrees with the goals of the prosecutor/Judge/Jury controlled committee.

In the case that the chair declines to concur in a proposed action of the ranking minority member pursuant to subparagraph (A , the ranking minority member shall have the right to refer to the committee for the question whether such
authority shall be so exercised and the chair shall convene the committee promptly to render that decision, subject to the notice procedures for a committee meeting under clause 2 (g)(3)(A ) and (B ) of
rule XI.

Sounds very positive in my opinion .

This one is very cute:

The chair is authorized to make publicly available in electronic form the transcripts of depositions conducted by the Permanent Select Committee in furtherance of the investigation described in the first section of this resolution with appropriate
redactions for classified and other sensitive information

In case this isn’t clear to you.  Basically this is the posthumous green light for all of the leaking by the democrats of literally anything that sounded negative from the previous sham court they put on.  Also, when read carefully, they are implicitly not required to release anything else from their previous work product – unless they deem it worthy.

There is so much of this nonsense to parse.

On and on and on.   Garbage food for the uninformed masses, fed with a shovel and closed eyes to the consequences.

So for extra points:

Turducken creative thinking:

If a turkey is moving along at 10Mph, a duck is moving at 20 mph in the same direction, and after initial contact with the duck, a 30 mph chicken traveling on the same normalized vector impacts the turkey/duck genetic meld, at what speed does the final impact occur?

10 thoughts on “Schiff Rulez

  1. It looks like they are going to leave all the veto powers in place during their vote today. I’m curious if they adjusted any of this nonsense to be more fair.

  2. The redactions for “other sensitive information.” is the loophole that I think will be exploited the most often. We have seen in other areas of the government that there have been redactions where the redacted text showed the various agencies in poor light. I would think that anything which doesn’t promote the narrative that the Chairman wants is likely to be redacted.

  3. Tom,

    Your observation certainly is the least controversial version of censorship. Could absolutely be the main use. The dems have infinite power, judge in regards to what is admissible, jury in regards to the final decision, council in regards as to what is allowed, executioner in regards to the important bits.

  4. I can’t afford to lose any more brain cells by reading the impeachment rules, but does it still allow shiff to tell witnesses to refuse answering Republican questions?

    1. The President s counsel may question any witness called before the Committee, subject to instructions from the chair or presiding member respecting the time, scope and duration of the examination.

  5. “Garbage food for the uninformed masses, fed with a shovel and closed eyes to the consequences”
    I realize that there are a lot of people in America that only watch ABCNBCCBSMSLSDCNNDNC and they literally know nothing.
    And of course there is a large part of our nation that are completely mentally ill with TDS and would support anything to remove the President, but if you even legitimately trying to remove a duly elected President, shouldn’t that be the most open and public process ever?

  6. Checking out the turkeyduckchicken recipe, I like how it STARTS with birds already being boned and that allows the prep time is “only” 1 hour !!!
    I would not put oyster/sausage stuffing in a bird, but it is a great change from the standard dressing.
    My mom used to make it with bits of the turkey giblets and I always hated that !

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s