Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums'That will not stand': Democrats plan next steps after ex-Trump aide Hope Hicks didn't answer key qu
WASHINGTON Democratic lawmakers accused President Donald Trump's former aide Hope Hicks of rejecting questions about her time in the White House during a marathon hearing on Wednesday.
While Democrats aimed to unearth new aspects of Hicks' role in the White House, which spanned some of the most controversial moments of Trump's presidency, both sides of the aisle seemed to agree that very little, if anything, was learned from the all-day testimony. But despite the roadblock, Democrats vowed that their fight was only beginning, one that would likely go to court, so key officials may testify before lawmakers.
.....................................................
Congressional Democrats on the committee said Hicks appearance amounted to her not complying with the subpoena. They claimed she did not answer questions about her time in the White House or the findings outlined in the Mueller report. Lawyers for the administration, who were at Hicks' side during her testimony, objected to question after question, claiming she was immune from answering anything related to her time in the White House, Democrats said.
While Democrats aimed to unearth new aspects of Hicks' role in the White House, which spanned some of the most controversial moments of Trump's presidency, both sides of the aisle seemed to agree that very little, if anything, was learned from the all-day testimony. But despite the roadblock, Democrats vowed that their fight was only beginning, one that would likely go to court, so key officials may testify before lawmakers.
.....................................................
Congressional Democrats on the committee said Hicks appearance amounted to her not complying with the subpoena. They claimed she did not answer questions about her time in the White House or the findings outlined in the Mueller report. Lawyers for the administration, who were at Hicks' side during her testimony, objected to question after question, claiming she was immune from answering anything related to her time in the White House, Democrats said.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/19/hope-hicks-testify-congress-robert-muellers-report-trump-administration/1486526001/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
8 replies, 665 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
'That will not stand': Democrats plan next steps after ex-Trump aide Hope Hicks didn't answer key qu (Original Post)
ehrnst
Jun 2019
OP
Response to ehrnst (Original post)
Post removed
spanone
(135,789 posts)2. When do they 'go to court'? Today?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)3. You would have to check with the court, and with the lawyers prepping the case.
Let us know when you find out....
spanone
(135,789 posts)4. Bwahahahahaaa...
kentuck
(111,052 posts)5. Yes, the Congress did look weak...
...and unprepared.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)6. How so? I didn't see the proceedings.
Can you post a link?
But can you tell me what you know that Ted Lieu doesn't? He was there. But what does he know about all this?
Link to tweet
kentuck
(111,052 posts)8. I guess there's no need for any more witnesses until the courts have ruled?
Nadler looked tired. A reporter asked a question and he mumbled something as he was walking away from the microphone. I don't know how much the Courts can help them. There is a balance of powers for a reason.
Bayard
(22,005 posts)7. I decline to answer
On the grounds that it may incriminate me.