Why do members of Congress in committee hearings ask witnesses the same question multiple times?How is Russia...
Word or phrase for showing great skill at something without formal training in it
Why did other German political parties disband so fast when Hitler was appointed chancellor?
Explain the objections to these measures against human trafficking
Am I a Rude Number?
Why don't American passenger airlines operate dedicated cargo flights any more?
Can an insurance company drop you after receiving a bill and refusing to pay?
How would a Dictatorship make a country more successful?
Dilemma of explaining to interviewer that he is the reason for declining second interview
Are there neural networks with very few nodes that decently solve non-trivial problems?
Groups acting on trees
What's a good word to describe a public place that looks like it wouldn't be rough?
Can we use the stored gravitational potential energy of a building to produce power?
Does Improved Divine Smite trigger when a paladin makes an unarmed strike?
Broken patches on a road
We are very unlucky in my court
How to explain planetary rings pulsating?
How do I say "Brexit" in Latin?
Can a hotel cancel a confirmed reservation?
Every character has a name - does this lead to too many named characters?
Why zero tolerance on nudity in space?
Can you earn endless XP using a Flameskull and its self-revival feature?
What's the most convenient time of year to end the world?
How to avoid being sexist when trying to employ someone to function in a very sexist environment?
Slow moving projectiles from a hand-held weapon - how do they reach the target?
Why do members of Congress in committee hearings ask witnesses the same question multiple times?
How is Russia planning to question former US ambassador McFaul?How are Donald Trump's recent comments about Muslim immigrants unconstitutional?All time highest net worth of a Presidential cabinet in constant dollars?What is the expectation that the US intelligence community must answer questions posed in congressional hearings?What can happen to President Trump in light of Comey's hearing?What exactly is “collusion”? What is Robert Mueller expected to prove?Did Anthony Scaramucci receive a certificate of divestiture in 2017?Is there any provision for Non-Disclosure for Congressmen demanding temporary documents of an ongoing investigation?How would Donald Trump benefit from a commuted sentence for Rod Blagojevich?Why would the Attorney General not just wait to be fired?How Could Michael Cohen Stand to Benefit by Lying to Congress Again
I must've seen at least 3 Congressmen ask Michael Cohen, President Trump's former personal attorney, who Individual 1 was, despite the fact that in the beginning he had already said it was Donald Trump, and despite the fact that previous members had already asked him that question, as well.
What is the reason for this? What benefit does it have when the statement is already in the record?
united-states congress
add a comment |
I must've seen at least 3 Congressmen ask Michael Cohen, President Trump's former personal attorney, who Individual 1 was, despite the fact that in the beginning he had already said it was Donald Trump, and despite the fact that previous members had already asked him that question, as well.
What is the reason for this? What benefit does it have when the statement is already in the record?
united-states congress
1
I don't think this is worth an answer but I would like to ask you to look at this differently. Why do prosecutors in a trial ask the same question multiple times? Why do police ask a suspect the same question multiple times?
– Joe
9 hours ago
@Joe: I mean I because they have reason to believe the answer may have been misheard or an outright lie. But in this case it's nothing like that...
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
add a comment |
I must've seen at least 3 Congressmen ask Michael Cohen, President Trump's former personal attorney, who Individual 1 was, despite the fact that in the beginning he had already said it was Donald Trump, and despite the fact that previous members had already asked him that question, as well.
What is the reason for this? What benefit does it have when the statement is already in the record?
united-states congress
I must've seen at least 3 Congressmen ask Michael Cohen, President Trump's former personal attorney, who Individual 1 was, despite the fact that in the beginning he had already said it was Donald Trump, and despite the fact that previous members had already asked him that question, as well.
What is the reason for this? What benefit does it have when the statement is already in the record?
united-states congress
united-states congress
edited 21 hours ago
Martin Schröder
1,0371930
1,0371930
asked yesterday
MehrdadMehrdad
634716
634716
1
I don't think this is worth an answer but I would like to ask you to look at this differently. Why do prosecutors in a trial ask the same question multiple times? Why do police ask a suspect the same question multiple times?
– Joe
9 hours ago
@Joe: I mean I because they have reason to believe the answer may have been misheard or an outright lie. But in this case it's nothing like that...
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
add a comment |
1
I don't think this is worth an answer but I would like to ask you to look at this differently. Why do prosecutors in a trial ask the same question multiple times? Why do police ask a suspect the same question multiple times?
– Joe
9 hours ago
@Joe: I mean I because they have reason to believe the answer may have been misheard or an outright lie. But in this case it's nothing like that...
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
1
1
I don't think this is worth an answer but I would like to ask you to look at this differently. Why do prosecutors in a trial ask the same question multiple times? Why do police ask a suspect the same question multiple times?
– Joe
9 hours ago
I don't think this is worth an answer but I would like to ask you to look at this differently. Why do prosecutors in a trial ask the same question multiple times? Why do police ask a suspect the same question multiple times?
– Joe
9 hours ago
@Joe: I mean I because they have reason to believe the answer may have been misheard or an outright lie. But in this case it's nothing like that...
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
@Joe: I mean I because they have reason to believe the answer may have been misheard or an outright lie. But in this case it's nothing like that...
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
You're assuming that the questions are asked solely for the public record.
Here's another reason...
Members of Congress want video of themselves asking good questions that will be broadcast by their local news media and / or used in campaign commercials.
And another...
Often times you'll notice that committee seats are empty during hearings. That's because members come and go during the hearing. It's possible that one member asks a question that was asked by another member earlier in the day before the first member arrived. (Although I don't think that was the case in the Cohen hearing, as the entire committee seemed to be present for the duration.)
15
I'm going to +1 this because I think it's true, or at least an extremely plausible reason to invalidate OP's assumptions. It's too bad there probably aren't many Congressmen that just straight up admit this, though.
– zibadawa timmy
yesterday
5
Asking the same question in a hearing where everybody knows it's been asked before is admission enough. They don't care about the people in that room (politically speaking). They answer to their constituents and they want their sound bite.
– Michael_B
yesterday
2
@Mehrdad That's getting into the internal motivations of people which isn't really on topic here. Arguably the same can be said of the original question itself, but the question as-worded doesn't specifically focus on motivations and seems open to the idea of there being procedural rules, or explanations directly from congressmen (or staff), etc. that are of a factual nature. So even though the answer may be little more than internal motivations of people, that doesn't seem to be a fault of the question itself.
– zibadawa timmy
21 hours ago
1
Great answer. I would add a nuance to the photo-op opportunity. It is that the average viewer thinks of this as a trial (So many comments elsewhere mention evidence and other courtroom jargon). It is not, no one is on trial here and there is no deposition so the rules are completely political (and mostly un-written). Basically it is about coloring the situation with as much emotion as possible.
– Frank Cedeno
15 hours ago
1
I'm not sure the first reason makes sense in this case, though, because we always knew that "individual 1" was Trump and nobody ever tried to hide it. Cohen's charging document literally says "[...] individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States" in the second paragraph.
– Kevin
10 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
Members of Congress may not fully trust the witness. This is especially the case with Michael Cohen, who has been convicted of lying to Congress. Asking a witness about the same thing multiple times makes them more likely to contradict themselves (or their written testimony) if they're lying.
Witnesses sometimes dodge questions or give incomplete answers. Members that aren't satisfied may ask again to press for more information. Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) specifically gave this as a reason for one of his questions during Cohen's recent hearing.
I'm going to give you another opportunity to respond what you brushed off earlier regarding your own statement during this testimony...
Grandstanding. The members may be looking to create clips and soundbites of themselves that can be politically beneficial in the future. On the flip side, when the witness is themselves a politician, opponents who sit on the committee can use the hearing as an opportunity to politically damage the witness.
7
Members repeat questions because they are not satisfied with the answer. That's a great one! Missed that in my answer. +1
– Michael_B
16 hours ago
But they even say "I know you said this but..." which feels like a strange thing to say if you're hoping they will contradict themselves.
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
@Michael_B Or when they simply didn't like the complete answer already given before (potentially several times,) though this also falls into the grandstanding category. For example, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings when they kept asking Kavanaugh to ask for an FBI investigation, even though he had already (repeatedly) answered that question by saying he was leaving that call up to the Committee, whose job it was to make it.
– reirab
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Public Congressional hearings are nothing but spectacles for voters masked as a serious inquiry. Nothing ever comes out of them besides hours of video footage, as Congressmen don't need these hearings to arrive to any important decisions. At best, these hearings serve to justify a proposed law that's already been decided upon by one of the parties. At worst it's just a waste of taxpayer money and a way for individual Congressmen to show off how tough and inquisitive they are.
In this context it becomes clear that Congressmen only ask questions which make them look good on TV. And if one Congressmen finds a question that sounds good to the average Joe in their state, there's a high chance others would copycat them. It could also be explained by laziness - since Congressmen don't really care about what's being said at the hearing, they're likewise too lazy to bother to follow what's been asked before. Sure, a few people would laugh at their supposed ignorance, but most voters won't notice that something's amiss.
1
This is really the best answer, IMHO. It explains other things, like asking questions they know the answers to, or feigning ignorange. I found it particularly disingenuous that GOP questioners acted like they'd never heard of people insinuating instructions to subordinates instead of stating them overtly.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
@Barmar also see this related question
– JonathanReez
6 hours ago
add a comment |
It’s because it’s understood that people under questioning may stall for time by giving the evasive answers.
So to ask the same question is to show the person under investigation that the panel is not fooled. It also gives them a chance for them to come clean and make a confession.
This will depend on what they already know, and what they have surmised about the situation, and of course the truth about the situation at hand.
2
"people under questioning may stall for time by giving the same answer" - how does that explain the people doing the questioning giving the same question?
– npostavs
9 hours ago
@npostava: Good question, I’d misread the question as saying the same answer had been given. Anyway, easily fixed. Thanks for pointing this out.
– Mozibur Ullah
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39129%2fwhy-do-members-of-congress-in-committee-hearings-ask-witnesses-the-same-question%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You're assuming that the questions are asked solely for the public record.
Here's another reason...
Members of Congress want video of themselves asking good questions that will be broadcast by their local news media and / or used in campaign commercials.
And another...
Often times you'll notice that committee seats are empty during hearings. That's because members come and go during the hearing. It's possible that one member asks a question that was asked by another member earlier in the day before the first member arrived. (Although I don't think that was the case in the Cohen hearing, as the entire committee seemed to be present for the duration.)
15
I'm going to +1 this because I think it's true, or at least an extremely plausible reason to invalidate OP's assumptions. It's too bad there probably aren't many Congressmen that just straight up admit this, though.
– zibadawa timmy
yesterday
5
Asking the same question in a hearing where everybody knows it's been asked before is admission enough. They don't care about the people in that room (politically speaking). They answer to their constituents and they want their sound bite.
– Michael_B
yesterday
2
@Mehrdad That's getting into the internal motivations of people which isn't really on topic here. Arguably the same can be said of the original question itself, but the question as-worded doesn't specifically focus on motivations and seems open to the idea of there being procedural rules, or explanations directly from congressmen (or staff), etc. that are of a factual nature. So even though the answer may be little more than internal motivations of people, that doesn't seem to be a fault of the question itself.
– zibadawa timmy
21 hours ago
1
Great answer. I would add a nuance to the photo-op opportunity. It is that the average viewer thinks of this as a trial (So many comments elsewhere mention evidence and other courtroom jargon). It is not, no one is on trial here and there is no deposition so the rules are completely political (and mostly un-written). Basically it is about coloring the situation with as much emotion as possible.
– Frank Cedeno
15 hours ago
1
I'm not sure the first reason makes sense in this case, though, because we always knew that "individual 1" was Trump and nobody ever tried to hide it. Cohen's charging document literally says "[...] individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States" in the second paragraph.
– Kevin
10 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
You're assuming that the questions are asked solely for the public record.
Here's another reason...
Members of Congress want video of themselves asking good questions that will be broadcast by their local news media and / or used in campaign commercials.
And another...
Often times you'll notice that committee seats are empty during hearings. That's because members come and go during the hearing. It's possible that one member asks a question that was asked by another member earlier in the day before the first member arrived. (Although I don't think that was the case in the Cohen hearing, as the entire committee seemed to be present for the duration.)
15
I'm going to +1 this because I think it's true, or at least an extremely plausible reason to invalidate OP's assumptions. It's too bad there probably aren't many Congressmen that just straight up admit this, though.
– zibadawa timmy
yesterday
5
Asking the same question in a hearing where everybody knows it's been asked before is admission enough. They don't care about the people in that room (politically speaking). They answer to their constituents and they want their sound bite.
– Michael_B
yesterday
2
@Mehrdad That's getting into the internal motivations of people which isn't really on topic here. Arguably the same can be said of the original question itself, but the question as-worded doesn't specifically focus on motivations and seems open to the idea of there being procedural rules, or explanations directly from congressmen (or staff), etc. that are of a factual nature. So even though the answer may be little more than internal motivations of people, that doesn't seem to be a fault of the question itself.
– zibadawa timmy
21 hours ago
1
Great answer. I would add a nuance to the photo-op opportunity. It is that the average viewer thinks of this as a trial (So many comments elsewhere mention evidence and other courtroom jargon). It is not, no one is on trial here and there is no deposition so the rules are completely political (and mostly un-written). Basically it is about coloring the situation with as much emotion as possible.
– Frank Cedeno
15 hours ago
1
I'm not sure the first reason makes sense in this case, though, because we always knew that "individual 1" was Trump and nobody ever tried to hide it. Cohen's charging document literally says "[...] individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States" in the second paragraph.
– Kevin
10 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
You're assuming that the questions are asked solely for the public record.
Here's another reason...
Members of Congress want video of themselves asking good questions that will be broadcast by their local news media and / or used in campaign commercials.
And another...
Often times you'll notice that committee seats are empty during hearings. That's because members come and go during the hearing. It's possible that one member asks a question that was asked by another member earlier in the day before the first member arrived. (Although I don't think that was the case in the Cohen hearing, as the entire committee seemed to be present for the duration.)
You're assuming that the questions are asked solely for the public record.
Here's another reason...
Members of Congress want video of themselves asking good questions that will be broadcast by their local news media and / or used in campaign commercials.
And another...
Often times you'll notice that committee seats are empty during hearings. That's because members come and go during the hearing. It's possible that one member asks a question that was asked by another member earlier in the day before the first member arrived. (Although I don't think that was the case in the Cohen hearing, as the entire committee seemed to be present for the duration.)
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
Michael_BMichael_B
7,54242229
7,54242229
15
I'm going to +1 this because I think it's true, or at least an extremely plausible reason to invalidate OP's assumptions. It's too bad there probably aren't many Congressmen that just straight up admit this, though.
– zibadawa timmy
yesterday
5
Asking the same question in a hearing where everybody knows it's been asked before is admission enough. They don't care about the people in that room (politically speaking). They answer to their constituents and they want their sound bite.
– Michael_B
yesterday
2
@Mehrdad That's getting into the internal motivations of people which isn't really on topic here. Arguably the same can be said of the original question itself, but the question as-worded doesn't specifically focus on motivations and seems open to the idea of there being procedural rules, or explanations directly from congressmen (or staff), etc. that are of a factual nature. So even though the answer may be little more than internal motivations of people, that doesn't seem to be a fault of the question itself.
– zibadawa timmy
21 hours ago
1
Great answer. I would add a nuance to the photo-op opportunity. It is that the average viewer thinks of this as a trial (So many comments elsewhere mention evidence and other courtroom jargon). It is not, no one is on trial here and there is no deposition so the rules are completely political (and mostly un-written). Basically it is about coloring the situation with as much emotion as possible.
– Frank Cedeno
15 hours ago
1
I'm not sure the first reason makes sense in this case, though, because we always knew that "individual 1" was Trump and nobody ever tried to hide it. Cohen's charging document literally says "[...] individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States" in the second paragraph.
– Kevin
10 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
15
I'm going to +1 this because I think it's true, or at least an extremely plausible reason to invalidate OP's assumptions. It's too bad there probably aren't many Congressmen that just straight up admit this, though.
– zibadawa timmy
yesterday
5
Asking the same question in a hearing where everybody knows it's been asked before is admission enough. They don't care about the people in that room (politically speaking). They answer to their constituents and they want their sound bite.
– Michael_B
yesterday
2
@Mehrdad That's getting into the internal motivations of people which isn't really on topic here. Arguably the same can be said of the original question itself, but the question as-worded doesn't specifically focus on motivations and seems open to the idea of there being procedural rules, or explanations directly from congressmen (or staff), etc. that are of a factual nature. So even though the answer may be little more than internal motivations of people, that doesn't seem to be a fault of the question itself.
– zibadawa timmy
21 hours ago
1
Great answer. I would add a nuance to the photo-op opportunity. It is that the average viewer thinks of this as a trial (So many comments elsewhere mention evidence and other courtroom jargon). It is not, no one is on trial here and there is no deposition so the rules are completely political (and mostly un-written). Basically it is about coloring the situation with as much emotion as possible.
– Frank Cedeno
15 hours ago
1
I'm not sure the first reason makes sense in this case, though, because we always knew that "individual 1" was Trump and nobody ever tried to hide it. Cohen's charging document literally says "[...] individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States" in the second paragraph.
– Kevin
10 hours ago
15
15
I'm going to +1 this because I think it's true, or at least an extremely plausible reason to invalidate OP's assumptions. It's too bad there probably aren't many Congressmen that just straight up admit this, though.
– zibadawa timmy
yesterday
I'm going to +1 this because I think it's true, or at least an extremely plausible reason to invalidate OP's assumptions. It's too bad there probably aren't many Congressmen that just straight up admit this, though.
– zibadawa timmy
yesterday
5
5
Asking the same question in a hearing where everybody knows it's been asked before is admission enough. They don't care about the people in that room (politically speaking). They answer to their constituents and they want their sound bite.
– Michael_B
yesterday
Asking the same question in a hearing where everybody knows it's been asked before is admission enough. They don't care about the people in that room (politically speaking). They answer to their constituents and they want their sound bite.
– Michael_B
yesterday
2
2
@Mehrdad That's getting into the internal motivations of people which isn't really on topic here. Arguably the same can be said of the original question itself, but the question as-worded doesn't specifically focus on motivations and seems open to the idea of there being procedural rules, or explanations directly from congressmen (or staff), etc. that are of a factual nature. So even though the answer may be little more than internal motivations of people, that doesn't seem to be a fault of the question itself.
– zibadawa timmy
21 hours ago
@Mehrdad That's getting into the internal motivations of people which isn't really on topic here. Arguably the same can be said of the original question itself, but the question as-worded doesn't specifically focus on motivations and seems open to the idea of there being procedural rules, or explanations directly from congressmen (or staff), etc. that are of a factual nature. So even though the answer may be little more than internal motivations of people, that doesn't seem to be a fault of the question itself.
– zibadawa timmy
21 hours ago
1
1
Great answer. I would add a nuance to the photo-op opportunity. It is that the average viewer thinks of this as a trial (So many comments elsewhere mention evidence and other courtroom jargon). It is not, no one is on trial here and there is no deposition so the rules are completely political (and mostly un-written). Basically it is about coloring the situation with as much emotion as possible.
– Frank Cedeno
15 hours ago
Great answer. I would add a nuance to the photo-op opportunity. It is that the average viewer thinks of this as a trial (So many comments elsewhere mention evidence and other courtroom jargon). It is not, no one is on trial here and there is no deposition so the rules are completely political (and mostly un-written). Basically it is about coloring the situation with as much emotion as possible.
– Frank Cedeno
15 hours ago
1
1
I'm not sure the first reason makes sense in this case, though, because we always knew that "individual 1" was Trump and nobody ever tried to hide it. Cohen's charging document literally says "[...] individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States" in the second paragraph.
– Kevin
10 hours ago
I'm not sure the first reason makes sense in this case, though, because we always knew that "individual 1" was Trump and nobody ever tried to hide it. Cohen's charging document literally says "[...] individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States" in the second paragraph.
– Kevin
10 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
Members of Congress may not fully trust the witness. This is especially the case with Michael Cohen, who has been convicted of lying to Congress. Asking a witness about the same thing multiple times makes them more likely to contradict themselves (or their written testimony) if they're lying.
Witnesses sometimes dodge questions or give incomplete answers. Members that aren't satisfied may ask again to press for more information. Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) specifically gave this as a reason for one of his questions during Cohen's recent hearing.
I'm going to give you another opportunity to respond what you brushed off earlier regarding your own statement during this testimony...
Grandstanding. The members may be looking to create clips and soundbites of themselves that can be politically beneficial in the future. On the flip side, when the witness is themselves a politician, opponents who sit on the committee can use the hearing as an opportunity to politically damage the witness.
7
Members repeat questions because they are not satisfied with the answer. That's a great one! Missed that in my answer. +1
– Michael_B
16 hours ago
But they even say "I know you said this but..." which feels like a strange thing to say if you're hoping they will contradict themselves.
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
@Michael_B Or when they simply didn't like the complete answer already given before (potentially several times,) though this also falls into the grandstanding category. For example, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings when they kept asking Kavanaugh to ask for an FBI investigation, even though he had already (repeatedly) answered that question by saying he was leaving that call up to the Committee, whose job it was to make it.
– reirab
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Members of Congress may not fully trust the witness. This is especially the case with Michael Cohen, who has been convicted of lying to Congress. Asking a witness about the same thing multiple times makes them more likely to contradict themselves (or their written testimony) if they're lying.
Witnesses sometimes dodge questions or give incomplete answers. Members that aren't satisfied may ask again to press for more information. Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) specifically gave this as a reason for one of his questions during Cohen's recent hearing.
I'm going to give you another opportunity to respond what you brushed off earlier regarding your own statement during this testimony...
Grandstanding. The members may be looking to create clips and soundbites of themselves that can be politically beneficial in the future. On the flip side, when the witness is themselves a politician, opponents who sit on the committee can use the hearing as an opportunity to politically damage the witness.
7
Members repeat questions because they are not satisfied with the answer. That's a great one! Missed that in my answer. +1
– Michael_B
16 hours ago
But they even say "I know you said this but..." which feels like a strange thing to say if you're hoping they will contradict themselves.
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
@Michael_B Or when they simply didn't like the complete answer already given before (potentially several times,) though this also falls into the grandstanding category. For example, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings when they kept asking Kavanaugh to ask for an FBI investigation, even though he had already (repeatedly) answered that question by saying he was leaving that call up to the Committee, whose job it was to make it.
– reirab
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Members of Congress may not fully trust the witness. This is especially the case with Michael Cohen, who has been convicted of lying to Congress. Asking a witness about the same thing multiple times makes them more likely to contradict themselves (or their written testimony) if they're lying.
Witnesses sometimes dodge questions or give incomplete answers. Members that aren't satisfied may ask again to press for more information. Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) specifically gave this as a reason for one of his questions during Cohen's recent hearing.
I'm going to give you another opportunity to respond what you brushed off earlier regarding your own statement during this testimony...
Grandstanding. The members may be looking to create clips and soundbites of themselves that can be politically beneficial in the future. On the flip side, when the witness is themselves a politician, opponents who sit on the committee can use the hearing as an opportunity to politically damage the witness.
Members of Congress may not fully trust the witness. This is especially the case with Michael Cohen, who has been convicted of lying to Congress. Asking a witness about the same thing multiple times makes them more likely to contradict themselves (or their written testimony) if they're lying.
Witnesses sometimes dodge questions or give incomplete answers. Members that aren't satisfied may ask again to press for more information. Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) specifically gave this as a reason for one of his questions during Cohen's recent hearing.
I'm going to give you another opportunity to respond what you brushed off earlier regarding your own statement during this testimony...
Grandstanding. The members may be looking to create clips and soundbites of themselves that can be politically beneficial in the future. On the flip side, when the witness is themselves a politician, opponents who sit on the committee can use the hearing as an opportunity to politically damage the witness.
answered 20 hours ago
Justin LardinoisJustin Lardinois
35127
35127
7
Members repeat questions because they are not satisfied with the answer. That's a great one! Missed that in my answer. +1
– Michael_B
16 hours ago
But they even say "I know you said this but..." which feels like a strange thing to say if you're hoping they will contradict themselves.
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
@Michael_B Or when they simply didn't like the complete answer already given before (potentially several times,) though this also falls into the grandstanding category. For example, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings when they kept asking Kavanaugh to ask for an FBI investigation, even though he had already (repeatedly) answered that question by saying he was leaving that call up to the Committee, whose job it was to make it.
– reirab
6 hours ago
add a comment |
7
Members repeat questions because they are not satisfied with the answer. That's a great one! Missed that in my answer. +1
– Michael_B
16 hours ago
But they even say "I know you said this but..." which feels like a strange thing to say if you're hoping they will contradict themselves.
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
@Michael_B Or when they simply didn't like the complete answer already given before (potentially several times,) though this also falls into the grandstanding category. For example, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings when they kept asking Kavanaugh to ask for an FBI investigation, even though he had already (repeatedly) answered that question by saying he was leaving that call up to the Committee, whose job it was to make it.
– reirab
6 hours ago
7
7
Members repeat questions because they are not satisfied with the answer. That's a great one! Missed that in my answer. +1
– Michael_B
16 hours ago
Members repeat questions because they are not satisfied with the answer. That's a great one! Missed that in my answer. +1
– Michael_B
16 hours ago
But they even say "I know you said this but..." which feels like a strange thing to say if you're hoping they will contradict themselves.
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
But they even say "I know you said this but..." which feels like a strange thing to say if you're hoping they will contradict themselves.
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago
@Michael_B Or when they simply didn't like the complete answer already given before (potentially several times,) though this also falls into the grandstanding category. For example, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings when they kept asking Kavanaugh to ask for an FBI investigation, even though he had already (repeatedly) answered that question by saying he was leaving that call up to the Committee, whose job it was to make it.
– reirab
6 hours ago
@Michael_B Or when they simply didn't like the complete answer already given before (potentially several times,) though this also falls into the grandstanding category. For example, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings when they kept asking Kavanaugh to ask for an FBI investigation, even though he had already (repeatedly) answered that question by saying he was leaving that call up to the Committee, whose job it was to make it.
– reirab
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Public Congressional hearings are nothing but spectacles for voters masked as a serious inquiry. Nothing ever comes out of them besides hours of video footage, as Congressmen don't need these hearings to arrive to any important decisions. At best, these hearings serve to justify a proposed law that's already been decided upon by one of the parties. At worst it's just a waste of taxpayer money and a way for individual Congressmen to show off how tough and inquisitive they are.
In this context it becomes clear that Congressmen only ask questions which make them look good on TV. And if one Congressmen finds a question that sounds good to the average Joe in their state, there's a high chance others would copycat them. It could also be explained by laziness - since Congressmen don't really care about what's being said at the hearing, they're likewise too lazy to bother to follow what's been asked before. Sure, a few people would laugh at their supposed ignorance, but most voters won't notice that something's amiss.
1
This is really the best answer, IMHO. It explains other things, like asking questions they know the answers to, or feigning ignorange. I found it particularly disingenuous that GOP questioners acted like they'd never heard of people insinuating instructions to subordinates instead of stating them overtly.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
@Barmar also see this related question
– JonathanReez
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Public Congressional hearings are nothing but spectacles for voters masked as a serious inquiry. Nothing ever comes out of them besides hours of video footage, as Congressmen don't need these hearings to arrive to any important decisions. At best, these hearings serve to justify a proposed law that's already been decided upon by one of the parties. At worst it's just a waste of taxpayer money and a way for individual Congressmen to show off how tough and inquisitive they are.
In this context it becomes clear that Congressmen only ask questions which make them look good on TV. And if one Congressmen finds a question that sounds good to the average Joe in their state, there's a high chance others would copycat them. It could also be explained by laziness - since Congressmen don't really care about what's being said at the hearing, they're likewise too lazy to bother to follow what's been asked before. Sure, a few people would laugh at their supposed ignorance, but most voters won't notice that something's amiss.
1
This is really the best answer, IMHO. It explains other things, like asking questions they know the answers to, or feigning ignorange. I found it particularly disingenuous that GOP questioners acted like they'd never heard of people insinuating instructions to subordinates instead of stating them overtly.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
@Barmar also see this related question
– JonathanReez
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Public Congressional hearings are nothing but spectacles for voters masked as a serious inquiry. Nothing ever comes out of them besides hours of video footage, as Congressmen don't need these hearings to arrive to any important decisions. At best, these hearings serve to justify a proposed law that's already been decided upon by one of the parties. At worst it's just a waste of taxpayer money and a way for individual Congressmen to show off how tough and inquisitive they are.
In this context it becomes clear that Congressmen only ask questions which make them look good on TV. And if one Congressmen finds a question that sounds good to the average Joe in their state, there's a high chance others would copycat them. It could also be explained by laziness - since Congressmen don't really care about what's being said at the hearing, they're likewise too lazy to bother to follow what's been asked before. Sure, a few people would laugh at their supposed ignorance, but most voters won't notice that something's amiss.
Public Congressional hearings are nothing but spectacles for voters masked as a serious inquiry. Nothing ever comes out of them besides hours of video footage, as Congressmen don't need these hearings to arrive to any important decisions. At best, these hearings serve to justify a proposed law that's already been decided upon by one of the parties. At worst it's just a waste of taxpayer money and a way for individual Congressmen to show off how tough and inquisitive they are.
In this context it becomes clear that Congressmen only ask questions which make them look good on TV. And if one Congressmen finds a question that sounds good to the average Joe in their state, there's a high chance others would copycat them. It could also be explained by laziness - since Congressmen don't really care about what's being said at the hearing, they're likewise too lazy to bother to follow what's been asked before. Sure, a few people would laugh at their supposed ignorance, but most voters won't notice that something's amiss.
edited 6 hours ago
answered 12 hours ago
JonathanReezJonathanReez
13.9k1579158
13.9k1579158
1
This is really the best answer, IMHO. It explains other things, like asking questions they know the answers to, or feigning ignorange. I found it particularly disingenuous that GOP questioners acted like they'd never heard of people insinuating instructions to subordinates instead of stating them overtly.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
@Barmar also see this related question
– JonathanReez
6 hours ago
add a comment |
1
This is really the best answer, IMHO. It explains other things, like asking questions they know the answers to, or feigning ignorange. I found it particularly disingenuous that GOP questioners acted like they'd never heard of people insinuating instructions to subordinates instead of stating them overtly.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
@Barmar also see this related question
– JonathanReez
6 hours ago
1
1
This is really the best answer, IMHO. It explains other things, like asking questions they know the answers to, or feigning ignorange. I found it particularly disingenuous that GOP questioners acted like they'd never heard of people insinuating instructions to subordinates instead of stating them overtly.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
This is really the best answer, IMHO. It explains other things, like asking questions they know the answers to, or feigning ignorange. I found it particularly disingenuous that GOP questioners acted like they'd never heard of people insinuating instructions to subordinates instead of stating them overtly.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
@Barmar also see this related question
– JonathanReez
6 hours ago
@Barmar also see this related question
– JonathanReez
6 hours ago
add a comment |
It’s because it’s understood that people under questioning may stall for time by giving the evasive answers.
So to ask the same question is to show the person under investigation that the panel is not fooled. It also gives them a chance for them to come clean and make a confession.
This will depend on what they already know, and what they have surmised about the situation, and of course the truth about the situation at hand.
2
"people under questioning may stall for time by giving the same answer" - how does that explain the people doing the questioning giving the same question?
– npostavs
9 hours ago
@npostava: Good question, I’d misread the question as saying the same answer had been given. Anyway, easily fixed. Thanks for pointing this out.
– Mozibur Ullah
9 hours ago
add a comment |
It’s because it’s understood that people under questioning may stall for time by giving the evasive answers.
So to ask the same question is to show the person under investigation that the panel is not fooled. It also gives them a chance for them to come clean and make a confession.
This will depend on what they already know, and what they have surmised about the situation, and of course the truth about the situation at hand.
2
"people under questioning may stall for time by giving the same answer" - how does that explain the people doing the questioning giving the same question?
– npostavs
9 hours ago
@npostava: Good question, I’d misread the question as saying the same answer had been given. Anyway, easily fixed. Thanks for pointing this out.
– Mozibur Ullah
9 hours ago
add a comment |
It’s because it’s understood that people under questioning may stall for time by giving the evasive answers.
So to ask the same question is to show the person under investigation that the panel is not fooled. It also gives them a chance for them to come clean and make a confession.
This will depend on what they already know, and what they have surmised about the situation, and of course the truth about the situation at hand.
It’s because it’s understood that people under questioning may stall for time by giving the evasive answers.
So to ask the same question is to show the person under investigation that the panel is not fooled. It also gives them a chance for them to come clean and make a confession.
This will depend on what they already know, and what they have surmised about the situation, and of course the truth about the situation at hand.
edited 9 hours ago
answered 11 hours ago
Mozibur UllahMozibur Ullah
1,690814
1,690814
2
"people under questioning may stall for time by giving the same answer" - how does that explain the people doing the questioning giving the same question?
– npostavs
9 hours ago
@npostava: Good question, I’d misread the question as saying the same answer had been given. Anyway, easily fixed. Thanks for pointing this out.
– Mozibur Ullah
9 hours ago
add a comment |
2
"people under questioning may stall for time by giving the same answer" - how does that explain the people doing the questioning giving the same question?
– npostavs
9 hours ago
@npostava: Good question, I’d misread the question as saying the same answer had been given. Anyway, easily fixed. Thanks for pointing this out.
– Mozibur Ullah
9 hours ago
2
2
"people under questioning may stall for time by giving the same answer" - how does that explain the people doing the questioning giving the same question?
– npostavs
9 hours ago
"people under questioning may stall for time by giving the same answer" - how does that explain the people doing the questioning giving the same question?
– npostavs
9 hours ago
@npostava: Good question, I’d misread the question as saying the same answer had been given. Anyway, easily fixed. Thanks for pointing this out.
– Mozibur Ullah
9 hours ago
@npostava: Good question, I’d misread the question as saying the same answer had been given. Anyway, easily fixed. Thanks for pointing this out.
– Mozibur Ullah
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39129%2fwhy-do-members-of-congress-in-committee-hearings-ask-witnesses-the-same-question%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
I don't think this is worth an answer but I would like to ask you to look at this differently. Why do prosecutors in a trial ask the same question multiple times? Why do police ask a suspect the same question multiple times?
– Joe
9 hours ago
@Joe: I mean I because they have reason to believe the answer may have been misheard or an outright lie. But in this case it's nothing like that...
– Mehrdad
7 hours ago