Read on Twitter
I specifically decided to ignore the Barr hearings today because, unless @RepKatiePorter or @SenKamalaHarris are questioning at any hearing, they're partisan clown shows where all questioning is performance art rather than attempts to either get answers or underscore problems../1
...the questions need to be short and with purpose to show or establish something, or to get answers, usually through a chain of simple ones that head off talking points. For example:
"Mr. AG, thank you for appearing today. I'm going to ask a number of simple questions, & I ../2
"Mr. AG, thank you for appearing today. I'm going to ask a number of simple questions, & I ../2
...ask that you keep your answers limited to the question asked.
First: Do you believe that the Justice Department is bound by existing laws passed by Congress and signed by the President, or does it have a role in questioning those laws?
(He will have to answer "bound.").../3
First: Do you believe that the Justice Department is bound by existing laws passed by Congress and signed by the President, or does it have a role in questioning those laws?
(He will have to answer "bound.").../3
...b. Is the Department bound by such laws even if the Attorney General or a subsequent president disagrees with them?
(Has to answer bound again - or go an insane direction.)
c. Now, the Special Counsel law says (read the words about established to be independent.) Do you.../4
(Has to answer bound again - or go an insane direction.)
c. Now, the Special Counsel law says (read the words about established to be independent.) Do you.../4
...agree that the words I just read from the law are, in fact, the law?
Yes, but...
"Sir, again, I'm asking simple questions. Let's stay on the question. So, as the law of the land, you are bound by the Special Counsel law, correct?".../5
Yes, but...
"Sir, again, I'm asking simple questions. Let's stay on the question. So, as the law of the land, you are bound by the Special Counsel law, correct?".../5
...he'd once again start to obfuscate, let him and write down his words.
"So, sir, again. Is the Attorney General bound by the words of the law? Just yes or no."
Whatever he answers, move on.
"The duty of the AG under that law is to accept or reject the report. Correct?"../6
"So, sir, again. Is the Attorney General bound by the words of the law? Just yes or no."
Whatever he answers, move on.
"The duty of the AG under that law is to accept or reject the report. Correct?"../6
...he'd meander.
"Again, sir, I am asking simple questions. Even if you think my questions are stupid, even if you think I'm ignorant, please offer the respect to a member of Congress to answer them. Ask again."
.../7
"Again, sir, I am asking simple questions. Even if you think my questions are stupid, even if you think I'm ignorant, please offer the respect to a member of Congress to answer them. Ask again."
.../7
..."Can you point me to a spot in the law where the Attorney General has authority or power to question or attack the findings of the Independent Counsel, with the exception of accepting or rejecting the report?"
Can't.
"Sir, you accepted the Mueller report, correct?".../8
Can't.
"Sir, you accepted the Mueller report, correct?".../8
...yes
"And under law, you had power to reject it, so long as you came to Congress to explain the reasons for your objection, correct?"
yes
"With the Mueller report, you accepted it and then, as shown here today, attacked it, correct?"
...then just keep going down this.../9
"And under law, you had power to reject it, so long as you came to Congress to explain the reasons for your objection, correct?"
yes
"With the Mueller report, you accepted it and then, as shown here today, attacked it, correct?"
...then just keep going down this.../9
...path, digging deeper into his actions, because the questions have exposed him for what he is - a partisan hack who ignores the law.
