Brit Hume has been on a roll calling for more transparency from Democrats and the media.
Yeah yeah, we know, same difference.
Like Byron York, Brit is questioning why Democrats won’t release William Taylor’s entire testimony; if it’s as damning as they claim it is you’d think they’d be flaunting it everywhere.
If Amb. Taylor’s opening statement, which immediately leaked, is so explosive, shouldn’t everyone be able to see how well it held up under cross-examination? Republicans say it fell apart, but there’s no way to know because it’s all secret. https://t.co/UIbrSaIOrY
— Brit Hume (@brithume) October 24, 2019
How can POLITICO make this claim without seeing the entire transcript?
From POLITICO:
If I were one of the president’s lawyers, I would counsel him to admit the obvious—essentially to plead guilty and admit this was, in fact, a quid pro quo—and try and convince Congress and the public that it is not as bad as it looks. In my experience, defendants who stubbornly try to deny the obvious in the face of overwhelming evidence rarely convince anyone.
Luckily Renato is not one of the president’s lawyers, just sayin’.
Shades of the Obamacare bill. Does this that is going on with the Dems sound familiar? Pelosi lead the parade on this one.
P.S. “you can keep your doctor “.— Yippyskippy (@urokiamok) October 24, 2019
They have to impeach the president so you can see what was in Taylor’s transcript.
Or something.
If they had a solid case they would be doing this in the open.
— Nick (@NicholasBrodie) October 24, 2019
And they’d be bragging their as*es off about it, yup.
And that’s the bullschiff game being played….
— Michael Burton (@Burtcomma) October 24, 2019
Ooh, bullschiff is a good one.
Secret courts, secret statements, secret witnesses. What happened to America?
— boringfileclerk (@boringfileclerk) October 24, 2019
That’s the whole point Brit. Nothing they’re doing in there holds up, they already knew it wouldn’t hence these tactics. If they truly had something there’s no reason to not just lay it out in front of everyone and say look, impeachable. They won’t do that because there’s nothing
— Apocalypse (@HackandSlash77) October 24, 2019
They got nothin’.
If a witness’s opening statement were all we could see, think how differently we would feel about Bob Mueller’s testimony in July if all we saw was him reading his statement. The Q&A was revealing, indeed some might say devastating.
— Brit Hume (@brithume) October 24, 2019
So why not release the whole thing, right?
We’re pretty sure we know why.
Related:
