Welcome to Thursday, October 24th, apples and oranges...

This is the reason we created the issue "Congressional Shenanigans"

Led by Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, a group of two-dozen Republican members of Congress crashed a closed-door hearing where Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Laura Cooper was set to testify as part of the House's impeachment probe.

"Behind those doors, they intend to overturn the results of an American presidential election," Gaetz said moments before disrupting the hearing. "We're going to try to go in there ... on behalf of the millions of Americans that we represent that want to see this Congress working for them, and not obsessed with attacking a president who we believe has not done anything to deserve impeachment."

The area is designated a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), and, as such, all electronics are banned inside.

Lawyers have said bringing phones into the SCIF was a potential felony, and Gaetz later tweeted his earlier message was "sent by staff."

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) criticized his Republican colleagues, labelling them "nuts" to make a "run on the SCIF."

"That's not the way to do it," Graham said.

Do you support the House Republicans' protest?

On the Radar

Censuring Censure Bill

The House of Representatives voted Monday along party-lines 218-185 to table a Republican-sponsored resolution on that would have condemned and censured Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) for misleading the American public in a variety of ways, most notably Schiff’s “parody” of President Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The censure resolution faulted Schiff for delivering an “egregiously false and fabricated retelling [which] had no relationship to the call itself” during his opening statement of a committee hearing on the Trump-Ukraine call, which Schiff later claimed was meant as “parody”. It also condemned Schiff for claiming that he had “more than circumstantial evidence” of collusion between Trump and Russia which wasn’t borne out by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report; concealing his dealings with Ukraine whistleblower from the committee and the public; and for negotiating with Russian comedians who claimed to have damaging materials on Trump during a prank call.

Should Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) be censured for misleading conduct?

Envoy Says Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Investigations

Bill Taylor, the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, told House investigators Tuesday that Trump tied the release of military aid to Kiev on its willingness to investigate Biden and alleged interference in the 2016 election.

Taylor’s testimony undermines Trump and his allies’ main defense that there was no “quid pro quo," drawing a direct line from congressionally approved military aid to Ukraine to Zelensky launching an investigation into Trump’s political opponents.

Taylor testified that he and Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, met with a senior adviser to Zelensky on September 1, informing him that “the security assistance money would not come until President Zelensky committed to pursue the Burisma investigation.” Burisma was the Ukrainian gas company employing Hunter Biden.

“When a businessman is about to sign a check to someone who owes him something,” Taylor quoted Sondland as saying, “the businessman asks that person to pay up before signing the check.” Sondland told Taylor that he coached Zelenskiy to tell Trump he would “leave no stone unturned” in pursuit of Trump’s political opponents.

It's now been a month since the impeachment inquiry began...

Have your thoughts on impeachment changed in the past 30 days?

Under the Radar

Should Social Networks Ban Political Ads?

Facebook will allow political ads—and not ban politicians from lying in them.

On Wednesday, Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, appeared on Capitol Hill. A week earlier, the social media outlet announced it changed its advertising policies to exempt politicians, and political factions, from rules banning misinformation.

“We don’t believe…that it’s an appropriate role for us to referee political debates and prevent a politician’s speech from reaching its audience and being subject to public debate and scrutiny,” wrote Facebook’s VP of Policy Nick Clegg.

Last week, Zuckerberg told a crowd at Georgetown University that he considered banning political ads from his outlet but decided against it.

“Given the sensitivity around political ads, I’ve considered whether we should stop allowing them altogether,” Zuckerberg said. “From a business perspective the controversy is not worth the very small part of the business that they make up.”

President Trump ran a video ad on Facebook accusing former Vice President Joe Biden of promising Ukraine money in exchange for firing a prosecutor investigating Burisma, a gas company employing his son, Hunter. Note: This is the debunked conspiracy at the center of the House’s impeachment inquiry.

Facebook rejected a request from Biden’s presidential campaign to remove the ad, telling them that despite the ad’s false claims, it didn’t violate Facebook policy.

Should Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube ban political ads?

What You're Saying

Here's how you're answering Should Federal Funding for DNA Evidence Testing be Reauthorized?