Senators try to quiet Harris, but she doesn't back down
Source: CNN
By Jeremy Herb, CNN
Updated 4:51 PM ET, Wed June 7, 2017
Story highlights
Sen. Kamala Harris grilled deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein at a hearing Wednesday
The exchange prompted Republican senators to stop interrupting
(CNN)Senate intelligence committee Chairman Richard Burr shut down a line of questioning from California Sen. Kamala Harris at Wednesday's high-profile hearing, admonishing her and other Democrats to stop cutting off witnesses.
The move rankled some on Twitter who argued the North Carolina Republican was singling out Harris, one of three women on the intelligence panel, during Wednesday's contentious hearing.
Harris was pressing Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein over whether he would sign a letter to give Special Counsel Robert Mueller full independence from the Justice Department in his probe, which would have the same effect as a letter issued for then-Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald in the investigation into the 2003 leaking of then-covert CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity.
RELATED: Kamala Harris rips up the script
"Senator, I'm very sensitive about time and I'd like to have a very lengthy conversation and explain that all to you," Rosenstein told Harris.
"Can you give me a 'yes or no' answer?" Harris responded.
"It's not a short answer, senator," Rosenstein said...........................
Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/politics/kamala-harris-senate-intelligence-hearing/index.html?sr=twpol060717kamala-harris-senate-intelligence-hearing0945PMVODtopLink&linkId=38465739
There is a video clip at the link.
Bravo to both of these women.
Link to tweet
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)who respects the law and country and constitution.
Republicans are the opposite, all of them.
Lyricalinklines
(367 posts)I'm sure we are in agreement.
I do see a difference when the focus is on their actions and not excusing them because she's at disadvantage.
They are lying. They are covering up for each other. We can see that and yet having no absolute "smoking gun" we fall into habit of existing their actions.
Diligence in this will turn the tide, so to speak. It will focus attention on their actions.
Otherwise, we're simply enabling them with our speech.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)modern day repubs will destroy this country if we let them, while we are telling ourselves "well I know they are assholes but they wouldnt do that"
Whatever "that" it like privatizing ATC, national parks, destroying Medicare and SS, they are going to do all that.
Cha
(297,271 posts)DK504
(3,847 posts)Wanna be Skeleton seems to have forgotten she was AG of California. What an asshole.
BumRushDaShow
(129,053 posts)but Burr walked the hell all over Kamala.
She persisted. Her ending comment - "So I guess that is a no?"
ancianita
(36,060 posts)high level FBI investigations are historically not subject to the politics she insists are a potential derailment of it all.
Rosenstein explained why the hierarchal structure of his and Mueller's positions won't be used as a political tool.
still_one
(92,204 posts)regarding Sessions, and McConnel thought it was inappropriate because she was impugning the character of , and silenced her?
ancianita
(36,060 posts)still_one
(92,204 posts)one had their allotted time taken away because those in control didn't agree with their presentations.
In Warren's case they felt it "unfairly tarnished Session's reputation", and in the Harris case they felt she was "rude to the person being questioned"
I would argue that both cases represented the double standard that republicans seem to wield about against women who don't "tow the line."
I think we are all aware of the 11-hour harassment that Hillary went through by republicans in Congress on Benghazi, and there sure wasn't any concern regarding their "rudeness" toward her.
There is a pattern of behavior here. In fact, subsequent aggressive questions by male Democrats who followed did not get reprimand, or their time taken away for questioning.
Today there will be questioning of Comey by Congress, and I suspect there will be rudeness toward Comey by some republicans that exceed what Senator Harris did, and if that occurs then we will get a front row see to the double standard I am referring to
ancianita
(36,060 posts)The stupidity of the chair's reprimand simply compounded any public confusion about the purpose of Harris' questioning -- contentious without needing to be -- because she assumed that the structure of the FBI is as political -- and Mueller's position thereby as vulnerable -- as are the structures and positions she's worked in.
Pointing out the default sexism revealed by the chair's treatment of Harris over King is fine, but it's not as important as the point debated about the structural stability of the Independent Investigator Mueller in relation to his bosses.
My takeaway: rudeness can't take precedence over the content of an investigation. Attention only to style and tone clouds the clarity of the content.
Today, everyone watching will be more aware that a chair's moderating any member's speech is inappropriate and unprofessional, and so yesterday's point about Harris is well taken.
But yesterday's points on double standards must not be the guiding frame for understanding today's exchange between Comey and any questioners.
I'm over that. I'm trying to see how clearly Comey lays out the obstruction of justice evidence.
still_one
(92,204 posts)I understand your point regarding Harris, and the specifics relating to pushing so hard that it defeats the purpose of what she was trying to do.
ancianita
(36,060 posts)I hate that party-over-country political bullshit. I wouldn't have expected it from Graham, which means, probably, that McCain probably thinks the same thing.
Stupidity will never be an excuse for a president.
Not to be cynical or vindictive, but if stupidity wasn't an excuse over a blowjob impeachment, it sure as hell isn't any excuse about Agent Orange's multiple attempts to "talk" law enforcement out of doing their job.
still_one
(92,204 posts)determines what constitutes obstructions
ancianita
(36,060 posts)We know how we'll have to fight the whole series of arguments that they use from this point forward.
It's put out there to solidify the base believing what it wants beyond all evidence.
vkkv
(3,384 posts)"Kamala" is also the name of the courtesan who taught Siddhartha the art of love in the Herman Hesse book.. a name to remember!
still_one
(92,204 posts)stuffmatters
(2,574 posts)She even described how the witness was going to evade answering before he, in fact, did!