On May 8, 2014, the U.S. House created a 12 member Select Committee to take evidence, take depositions, issue subpoenas, investigate, and study all things Benghazi. The Select Committee will sit in judgment and issue a final report of its findings to the House.
*H. RES. 567
Providing for the Establishment of the Select Committee on the Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi.
SEC. 4. PROCEDURE.
(3) Pursuant to clause 2(h) of rule XI, two Members of the Select Committee shall constitute a quorum for taking testimony or receiving evidence and one-third of the Members of the Select Committee shall constitute a quorum for taking any action other than one for which the presence of a majority of the Select Committee is required.
(4) The chair of the Select Committee may authorize and issue subpoenas pursuant to clause 2(m) of rule XI in the investigation and study conducted pursuant to section 3 of this resolution, including for the purpose of taking depositions.
(5)(A) The chair of the Select Committee, upon consultation with the ranking minority member, may order the taking of depositions, under oath and pursuant to notice or subpoena, by a Member of the Select Committee or a counsel of the Select Committee*.
doorhinge wrote: You and I are neither judge or jury. (Well maybe we do qualify as a jury.) However, Chairman Gowdy and the other members of the committee are authorized to act as judges.
It’s a response to this claim. Using the nomenclature of the justice system probably isn’t the best strategy to disavow the aspects of the ninth investigation of Benghazi that resemble a trail. Watch your feet closer to avoid tripping over them.
Nomenclature of the justice system? Disavow the aspects of the ninth investigation of Benghazi that resemble a trial? I’m not following your train of thought?
This is the 1st Select Committee to investigate all things Benghazi and has considerably more authority than any of the previous investigations.
Person A: This is a partisan witch hunt and the people in charge of it have used judicial terminology inadvertently displaying their beliefs.
Person B: This isn’t a partisan witch hunt and its existence is all the proof needed. It isn’t a trial either, but to prove that I’ll refer to the investigators as judges.
Person C: Calling those involved judges isn’t a good way to convince anyone that you don’t believe it’s a trial.
Ok, I see where you might be confused. U.S. Congressmen are not necessarily trial judges with those fancy gavels and black dresses. U.S. Congressman can sit in judgment on Select Committees.
I’m not at all confused. Howdy Gowdy put his foot in his mouth by calling it a trial. When you came to his defense by raising objections to various verdicts of posters judging that in error, your appeal contained references that are common in American jurisprudence, making the case for those to whom you had originally objected.
If the various verdicts of posters were in error, where is your injury? Do you have standing to appeal their errors? How do you expect to make them whole? Where were you trained to assume that only trial judges can judge?
If the various verdicts of posters were in error, where is your injury?
They weren’t. They were a direct quote. Defending Gowdy for describing his witch hunt as a trial isn’t easy, but the difficulty is only exacerbated by doubling down on his poor word choice.
You call it a witch hunt. Gowdy calls it a trial. Potato-tomato. The bottom line is that the witch hunt/trial/Select Committee will still be issuing subpoenas, proper answers will still be demanded, and readable documents will be expected. Hopefully, no one will be sent to prison.
Select Committee. Check.
Readable documents when your definition has repeatedly been shown to be out in right field. Check.
Answers to questions that have already been provided in this thread and in numerous previous investigations. Check.
Exhaustion troll is exhausting.
How can that conclusion possibly be wrong? Issa couldn’t close the deal and find out what Obama did wrong, so the call went to the bullpen and a reliever came in the game. The select committee doesn’t have any special powers that Issa didn’t, so the only logical conclusion is that Issa screwed up and got fired.
Nope; I’m correct. Your own words betrayed you. We can all read what you wrote, and further, we understand the context you wrote it in. You lose this one; good luck in the future.
The individual congressional committee, as well as the other investigations, didn’t have the backing of U.S. House resolution that had passed 232-186. This Select Committee is investigative in nature and has the scope and tools necessary to force the Obama White House and ol’ Hillary’s ol’ State Dept to tell the whole truth.
The bottom line is that the witch hunt/trial/Select Committee will still be issuing subpoenas, proper answers will still be demanded, and readable documents will be expected. Hopefully, no one will be sent to prison.