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













25















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?










share|improve this question




















  • 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
















25















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?










share|improve this question




















  • 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














25












25








25


3






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?










share|improve this question
















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






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








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














  • 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










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















63














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.)






share|improve this answer





















  • 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





















31















  • 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.







share|improve this answer



















  • 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



















0














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.






share|improve this answer





















  • 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














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.






share|improve this answer





















  • 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











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
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















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









63














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.)






share|improve this answer





















  • 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


















63














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.)






share|improve this answer





















  • 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
















63












63








63







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.)






share|improve this answer















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.)







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








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
















  • 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













31















  • 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.







share|improve this answer



















  • 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
















31















  • 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.







share|improve this answer



















  • 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














31












31








31








  • 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.







share|improve this answer














  • 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.








share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










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














  • 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











0














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.






share|improve this answer





















  • 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
















0














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.






share|improve this answer





















  • 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














0












0








0







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.






share|improve this answer















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.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








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














  • 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











-1














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.






share|improve this answer





















  • 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
















-1














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.






share|improve this answer





















  • 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














-1












-1








-1







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.






share|improve this answer















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.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








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














  • 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


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































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.




draft saved


draft discarded














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





















































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







Popular posts from this blog

Fairchild Swearingen Metro Inhaltsverzeichnis Geschichte | Innenausstattung | Nutzung | Zwischenfälle...

Pilgersdorf Inhaltsverzeichnis Geografie | Geschichte | Bevölkerungsentwicklung | Politik | Kultur...

Marineschifffahrtleitung Inhaltsverzeichnis Geschichte | Heutige Organisation der NATO | Nationale und...