Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
A lot of the clarification that panel will receive will be disclosed in private hearings that are classified.
|
There is no circumstance where those questions will be answered in any hearing - it's not a matter of seeking classified information that you know won't be disclosed in a public setting; that's all well and good. No, she was asking for information that the witnesses cannot
possibly provide under oath. E.g., "isn't it the case that Michael Flynn would have known X", or "If a meeting took place, wouldn't it be fair to assume that Michael Flynn would have said Y". Of
course the only answer you'll ever get to that is "I have no way of knowing what was in Mr. Flynn's head", or "I can't speak to what might have happened in a hypothetical meeting".
I didn't bring up the fact that I'm a lawyer, but since you commented on it, yeah, it's actually that background that makes me wince when I hear questions like that. Like I say, they don't really serve any investigative purpose beyond grandstanding to anyone who might be watching, and I'd prefer the time be better used. Especially since, as you rightly pointed out, the witnesses are being surprisingly forthcoming given that there is (presumedly) an ongoing investigation on much of this stuff. Some of the members are getting a lot of good stuff out of them.