Originally Posted by Guest

I wish that they would pass some rules on what these people are allowed to ask and what they are allowed to say. I watched a bit of both Director Comey's supposed testimony and the hearing on Judge Gorsuch.

I heard a lot of speech making and very few relevant questions.

In the Gorsuch hearing, one senator went on for a long time about how President Obama's nominee was not given a hearing and that the republicans now want to ram through the nomination of a nominee by a president who lost the popular vote. What does that have to do with the qualifications of Judge Gorsuch? These hearing have only one purpose and that is to determine whether or not the nominee is qualified for the position. What the republicans did it completely irrellevant. What does the fact that the president did not win the popular vote have to do with anything?

The in the Comey questioning, I heard one guy go on and on about Russia and the republican platform and I don't know what else. Most of it had nothing to do with the subject and worst than that, he never asked a question. Then a woman asked Comey and Mike Rogers two questions, then told them that she disagreed with their opinion on the second one and went on to try to make a case that Secretary of State Tillerson is working on behalf of the Russian Government.

Why bring these people in for questioning if you're not going to ask them pertinent questions? And why when they do answer question would you disagree with them? They are the experts. They are the ones that have information that most in congress don't have. That is why they are brought in.

These hearings have become nothing more then a platform for the two parties to make speeches and to try to make each other look bad.

What a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money. We shouldn't have to tolerate these people running for re-election on our dollar.

I believe that the two examples that I cited were both democrats but the republicans are guilty of it as well.