world

Hicks rebuffs questions on Trump White House

24 Comments
By MARY CLARE JALONICK and LAURIE KELLMAN

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.


24 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

That's the sound of Donny trying to flush our democratic norms down the toilet.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Isn’t ordering people not to testify an obstruction of justice?

5 ( +8 / -3 )

WH lawyers won't let her even answer the question of where her office in the WH was, claiming total immunity from questions about her service once Trump was inaugurated.

There is no such immunity, and nothing would apply to the location of her office - no court would recognize it, and they know it - it's just delay.

This is impeachable obstruction in real time

Stop the closed door hearings! Just stop. Citizens need to hear this. Otherwise this is all flushed down a he said/she said fake news hole. 

Make these hearings public..

7 ( +9 / -2 )

There is a difference between White House orders (advisers, lawyers) and the President.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

There is a difference between White House orders (advisers, lawyers) and the President.

No, there is not. Every order issued from the WH is backed by the authority of the president.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Didn’t Obama invoke executive privilege? It’s not as if this is anything new The Congress and the Executive are coequal branches of government. Go pound sand Nadler.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

Executive privilege.

Dems seemed to love these type of privileges when Comey and Strzok were not allowed by their lawyers to answer anything.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Wasn’t this a closed door session? Why are Dems tweeting it out and talking to the media during breaks in the testimony?

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Calling Hicks to testify itself was a joke. Take the gloves off, first order of business is to call Allen Weisselberg. I'm not up to the procedures and laws, but I'm assuming he's a witness at SDNY. I guess he can't discuss an on going case? Just wondering out loud...

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I'm sure we've not heard the last from Hicks. The Dems now need to grill her out in the open like a burger.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Executive privilege. 

Dems seemed to love these type of privileges when Comey and Strzok were not allowed by their lawyers to answer anything.

I agree. Democrats always have short memories.

President Obama on Wednesday asserted executive privilege over documents sought by a House panel ahead of its vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress. It's the first time Obama has used executive privilege since taking office. A White House aide said the president had gone longer without asserting the privilege in a congressional dispute than any other president in the last three decades. 

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/233745-obama-asserts-executive-privilege-in-effort-to-thwart-contempt-vote

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

Wasn’t this a closed door session?

Why are you upset that it wasn't? Don't want to hear what she has to say?

Democrats always have short memories.

Funny, Trump can't even remember which country his father is from. Not to mention things he said less than a year ago.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

CrazyJoe - WH lawyers won't let her even answer the question of where her office in the WH was, claiming total immunity from questions about her service once Trump was inaugurated.

There is no such immunity, and nothing would apply to the location of her office - no court would recognize it, and they know it - it's just delay.

This is impeachable obstruction in real time

Stop the closed door hearings! Just stop. Citizens need to hear this. Otherwise this is all flushed down a he said/she said fake news hole. 

Make these hearings public..

All of the hearings, especially those hearings as they relate to the illegal actions of Comey, and Strzok, and Page, and Mueller, and all of the others who are currently targeted by Barr's investigation of the investigators. Time is running out for the Democrats. Nadler's fishing expedition into Hicks activities seems to be no more effective than Mueller's endless quest for collusion. Tick tock.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Melania, Ivanka, Hope, blah! The invasion of the Barbie Dolls.

2020 can't come soon enough to take out this trash.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

dimming Democrats' chances of obtaining new or substantive information about President Donald Trump as part of their investigation into obstruction of justice.

Democrats are still beating that dead horse instead of funding proper border security for the American people.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Democrats are still beating that dead horse instead of funding proper border security for the American people.

Nah, Repubs killed proper border security in 2013. It's simply manufactured outrage now. TEE HEE! HAR! Oh my!

4 ( +6 / -2 )

If I worked with criminals and had first-hand knowledge of their criminal acts, and possibly turned a blind eye or withheld information, I'd stay quiet, too.

But thankfully I'm not that kind of person.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

us__reamer: The Dems now need to grill her out in the open like a burger.

Uh oh - misogyny much?

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

It's like they pretend they are for fiscal responsibility.

Yep. Neither political party is capable of seeing beyond the next election. Republicans claim to be upset about deficits and debt but are no better than Obama in curtailing entitlements and changing course away from the coming debt debacle. It’s like Dems pretending to care for black people and children while promoting abortions up to and after a failed abortion attempt late in the third trimester all while ignoring that 50% of abortions are of black babies.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Misogyny schmisogyny! If instead of milquetoast Mueller's 400-page softball, the CIA had given the whole Trump crime family of cry-babies a taste of their "strictly by the book" enhanced interrogation we would today be much closer to the truth.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Wasn’t this a closed door session? Why are Dems tweeting it out and talking to the media during breaks in the testimony?

Hilarious. Trumpsters were so happy when Clinton's emails were hacked, but now you demand privacy? Not happening. Get over it.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

"She's objecting to stuff that's already in the public record," 

Considering that she worked for the dumbest President ever, no surprise.

Hicks said she hadn't thought those contacts were "relevant."

And proving that she isn't the brightest of the bulbs either.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Then schedule a PUBLIC hearing. Why do I have to hear leaks of closed door testimony through the viewpoint of partisan Democrats? Let them people hear it themselves.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Then schedule a PUBLIC hearing. Why do I have to hear leaks of closed door testimony through the viewpoint of partisan Democrats? Let them people hear it themselves.

Prolly cuz the little princess is too much of a coward to sit for a public hearing.

You claim you want transparent, well what's changed?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites