RE: 2019-10-22
There are REPUBLICANS sitting in those SCIF meetings.
It is standard procedure for the Congressional Committees to hold closed-door-meetings. Most Congressional Committees hold closed-door-meetings on a regular basis.
Neither Republicans nor Democrats who do not serve on the committees conducting the impeachment inquiry are allowed in the room during closed door hearings.
Republican members on those committees are allowed equal time to their Democratic counterparts to question witnesses.
This has been practiced countless times since the creation of Congress, most notably and recently, in the Benghazi hearings.
Trey Gowdy, the former [REPUBLICAN] South Carolina congressman who headed the Benghazi hearings in the House, once said: “The private ones [hearings] always produce better results.”
Democrats deny that Republicans are being treated unfairly, noting they have had equal time to question witnesses and full access to the meetings.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., criticized his Republican colleagues for the tactic, calling them “nuts” to make a “run on the SCIF.”
“That’s not the way to do it,” he said.
House Republicans disrupted the testimony of Pentagon official Laura Cooper on Wednesday by storming into a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) and insisting that the ongoing impeachment proceedings take place in public.
Reports on Republicans’ unprecedented actions are somewhat incomplete at the moment, but it’s likely they have violated House rules and perhaps federal law.
Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz may have been tweeting from inside SCIF, which could be an offense. Electronic devices are banned in the SCIF.
You need to keep in mind that globalists are destroying things since at least 1871.
You need to keep in mind that "globalists" are in BOTH PARTIES.
They play this endless game of RED-HERRING with democrats demonizing republicans and republicans demonizing democrats.
They're actually on the exact-same-team. They are simply trying to distract you.
Whoever can say the scariest thing the loudest wins the LIAR'S-DIVIDEND.
Liar’s dividend explained: Exposing lies can have an unsettling backlash, writes Kelly McBride.
“Debunking fake or manipulated material like videos, audios or documents ultimately could stoke belief in the fakery,” she writes, making it harder for the public to trust the media. Collaboration by media could help. LIAR'S DIVIDEND
Yes, globalists infiltrated political and educational systems since, like I said already, at least 1871, specifically, and also prior to that as well in other ways. I've been researching the federalists who were around especially in the 1700's around the rise of the United States Republic. However, in some ways, some might argue that globalists infiltrated the federalists in some ways as they were for centralization. For example, they were trying to get and maintain a central bank in America. Then we had the other party, the democratic republicans. We had that guy named Webster who was helping with the educational system in the 1800's. The bad guys are on the same team. However, too often, people conflate the good guys with the bad guys. There are good people within the republican party. However, yes, globalists and others have been infiltrating that and other things as well in a variety of ways.
By "good" do you mean "non-globalists" or "anti-globalists" or "isolationists"?
Please explain who you think the "good people" are exactly?
Good means anything that helps families, local communities, to do what they want to do on their private property, to the extent it does not conflict with the rights of others, and to perhaps trade with others if they wish. It is all about freedom over alleged safety. It is all about promoting independence for individuals to do what they want to the extent they are not interfering with the rights of other people, well that is without consent, that is outside of contracts, agreements.
Who, in your opinion, is promoting these values?
The better question would be who aint. Are you not promoting freedom over safety? Do you prefer bigger government, more taxes, more regulations, a global government, etc, instead? I just want to help people make choices in their own lives to do whatever they want to do, good or bad.
Zero government = lord of the flies.
Lord of the flies =/= freedom.
Corporations will not protect your individual rights.
Your neighbors will not protect your individual rights.
A corrupt government will not protect your individual rights.
How do you propose we maximize "freedom"?