Call Nadler
I asked why they aren't using more muscle...isn't it time to put the screws to these people. Can Hicks be held in contempt, fined or spend some time in a cell? Or is this another one that has to go to the courts.
Washington DC Office
2132 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-5635
= new reply since forum marked as read
all the judicial committee staffers, but they have to be over their eyebrows in work these days. Polls and direct messages keep whoever's assigned to monitoring that updated on how we're feeling. And if they needed us to tell them what to do, oh boy would we have the wrong people there.
Pressure they have. What they need is more time and ammo, and people solidly behind them who are also determined to win this thing. I am.
our betraying Republican officeholders, and I sometimes even send them snail mail on patriotic stationary to open. Effectively worthless in Georgia, would be even for Republicans, but we don't mind bothering their clerks, who should all go find honest, honorable work.
I'd prefer these hearings weren't secret. But the difference between me and a lot of others is that I'm pretty sure they would like them open also and therefore that they must have good reasons. Trusting that there are always reasons for decisions, I'm mildly curious about it, but not enough to pass on by the chattering industry (since educating us is not their job, complaining that hearings are secret is because it sells) to seek out honorable experts providing knowledgeable speculation.
To be represented by Judiciary Chair Nadler, he has always been a most excellent Rep.
I also Trust Nancy Pelosi and will continue to do so. I read an interesting bit about MLKjr. & LBJ which I mentioned in another thread. The story goes MLKjr. was pushing LBJ on civil rights and LBJ's response was 'make me'. This was him urging Martin to work the situation and build up public support until LBJ had no choice but to put through/work for civil rights legislation. I believe that is what we are seeing from Speaker Pelosi.
As to the so-called pundits, I find myself turning the channel more and more. In fact, I'm fed up with most of them. Their complaints don't help and will aid the re-election of that mess in the WH if they're not careful, which is what they did in in '16 though you'd never get them to admit it. Plus, they aren't anywhere as smart as they think they are. The Chris Hayes/Howard Dean interview the other night is an eye-opening example of that fact.
The one thing I think is really important is transparency. It's different acting like a Hope Hicks obstructionist in private and quite another for her to face the world at large.
for the above and all your posts!
I was really alarmed when Nadler fainted, whereas I'd be quite satisfied if ours dropped dead before he could do more harm. He's the ranking member on judiciary, so Nadler knows him quite well.
That Nancy and company are actually pursuing a "make me" build-up sounds entirely credible, even though she seemed to be trying to turn down the burner a bit. I'm sure they all can take the heat in the kitchen.
Hicks would draw a very satisfying audience, me among them. She was in the middle of a great deal, mentioned close to 200 times in Mueller's report (!), and reportedly the committee Democrats were not happy with her, so perhaps we'll be seeing her later. Watergate produced something like 68 indictments. This is much bigger and we're only somewhere in the mid 30s.
Same to you, Me. I always read when I see your name.
before calling in to the first one and having every suspicion confirmed. He's dug himself deeper ever since. Not the most extreme, but dangerous to democracy anyway. I'm so proud.
Very interesting about Hicks, thanks. I like Wallace's show but have taken a bit of a break from all of them recently.
Btw, just saw O'Donnell for first time in a while. Jennifer Palmieri of Obama WH and Hillary's campaign agrees with you. She believes that Nancy is orchestrating the building of a head of steam over the summer, but not actually starting hearings so that they would have to just hang through the August recess, but rather to start in perhaps October, which was when Clinton's impeachment proceedings began.
Also O'Donnell pointed out that normally a "leadership player," close to the leadership as Rep Schakowsky is known to be, would not announce she was for impeachment as she did if she didn't have the leadership's secret blessing. And that if Nancy wanted her to delay, he believed she would have.
Haven't been watching him lately as he too seemed a foot stomper for impeachment lately
but what I like him especially for is those 25 years he spent as a senior senate staffer. 
