goldman asked regarding facts and not evidence leaving but house resolution 660 does not say we are under the federal rules of evidence. it is your position that i should be asserting objections to questions that violate the federal rules of evidence, let me know now because this hearing is going to change significantly. >> as i said mr. ratliff, i will answer the question. >> i think the gentleman has a different question about the rules. what are the rules that's going to govern this? >> i am asking and yielding you for a question to the question that i just asked. >> what purpose do you seek recognition? >> to answer mr. ratliff's question? >> i have answered it. >> you have not answered my question whether or not i should be asserting facts not in evidence or leading objections to questions that are oppoposedm
Related Keywords
Facts , White House , Evidence , Questions , Rules , Goldman , Objections , Position , 660 , Mr , Question , Hearing , Gentleman , Ratliff , Answer , Recognition , It ,
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.