“If you watched the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, you saw the utmost in partisan gamesmanship and disrespect.”
The hearing was supposed to be regarding the surveillance program, commonly called “Section 702” but Democrats immediately made clear on Wednesday that they intended to use the surveillance hearing to press the assembled witnesses about the Russia investigation and the Trump administration’s reported attempts to interfere with it.
If you watched the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, you saw the utmost in partisan gamesmanship and disrespect. In just one of several verbal encounters throughout the hearings, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) asked NSA Chief Admiral Rogers if, in his experience, it was normal for a president to ask questions, or bring up an ongoing FBI investigation that he is the subject of, to intelligence officials.
Admiral Michael Rogers, director of the National Security Agency, said on Wednesday that he has never felt pressure to do something illegal during the three-plus years he has served in that role.
“In the three-plus years that I have been the director of National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical, or inappropriate, and to the best of my recollection, during that same period of service, I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so,”said Rogers.
Warner followed up by asking Rogers if President Trump has asked him in any way to back off the Russian investigation.
“I’m not going to discuss the specifics of conversations with the president of the United States, but I stand by the comment I just made to you, sir,” Rogers responded.
Later in the hearings, it got even worse. Sen. Kamala Harris (D, CA) then began a sharp exchange with Director Admiral Michael Rogers on why he has spoken publicly about some of his conversations with Trump and not others.
“You can keep trying to trip me up–” Rogers protested, as she interrupted. “Senator, if you could, could I get to respond, please, ma’am?” “No, no,” Harris replied, before continuing with her question.
At that point Committee Chair Richard Burr (R-NC) spoke up to chastise her, urging her and other members to “provide the witnesses the courtesy, which has not been extended, fully across, for questions to get answered.”
When Harris tried to argue again, this time with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein noting that earlier in the hearing a male senator had accused Rosenstein of filibustering, Burr cut her off again, instructing the witness to answer if he wanted to. Harris sighed and became silent.
Rosenstein asserted that he “had a lot of experience with these issues and could speak to you for a very long time about it,” but declined to do so in open session. Her time for questions having expired, Harris left the room shortly after without hearing the rest of the testimony.
It was painfully clear if some Senators did not get the answer they wanted, even when the speakers fully answered questions, they badgered the witnesses and pontificated their partisan position. In regards to Kamala Harris, she openly told the witness he could not answer her question. So why is she even there? She doesn’t want answers; she only wants to spout her party line.
It was sickening to watch. This was politics at its worst.
