Shades of O'Sullivan.
From Sunny on the UP a small, but invaluable caution. GB needs to heed this pearl of wisdom.
Sunfish - “Glen, I strongly advise you to get advice and coaching on how to present yourself before the Committee. I have never been before one but I am advised that it may not be as simple as it looks, especially if one of the Senators decides to be hostile towards you and your point of view.”
It would be a mistake to assume that the 'milk of human kindness' or even 'parental understanding' will flow in the meeting. It ain't an AOPA gabfest; not by a long shot and there will be sharper minds than Morgan's asking the questions – on the record. Glen has stated that he has a preference for the 'legal' road, believing, as many do, that the Senate Committee has a poor batting average when it comes to the crunch.
This is to be a 'public' hearing – not in camera – every word spoken will be noted and studied for any 'wrinkle' which CASA can and will parley into a weapon, to be ruthlessly used. This before the 'O'Sullivan factor' kicks in. Not overt hostility; but hostility nonetheless; talked over, evidence demanded, talked down to and proof demanded, ignored essential elements of argument and the constant ticking of the clock. 'We ' (PAIN) even attended one where Sterle actually feigned sleep while O'Sullivan dismissed logic, evidence and, essentially consigned the whole matter to the ' trivial waste bin'. Disgusting - No result – so expect the worst, hope for the best and be very, very careful.
Glen has, rightly so, used 'free speech' liberally and effectively; so far so good. Time now to learn the other side of the coin – get some hostile question training and learn to guard not only his rear end, but all ends against the middle. Better yet, have legal advice on tap. P7's favourite caution is highly relevant: “engage brain before opening gob”.
Toot – toot..
P7 addendum:
O'Sofullofit - "[If you've got evidence of what you've just spoken about, you need to particularise it carefully, you need to underpin it with the physical evidence, reference it and get it to the committee]."
From Sunny on the UP a small, but invaluable caution. GB needs to heed this pearl of wisdom.
Sunfish - “Glen, I strongly advise you to get advice and coaching on how to present yourself before the Committee. I have never been before one but I am advised that it may not be as simple as it looks, especially if one of the Senators decides to be hostile towards you and your point of view.”
It would be a mistake to assume that the 'milk of human kindness' or even 'parental understanding' will flow in the meeting. It ain't an AOPA gabfest; not by a long shot and there will be sharper minds than Morgan's asking the questions – on the record. Glen has stated that he has a preference for the 'legal' road, believing, as many do, that the Senate Committee has a poor batting average when it comes to the crunch.
This is to be a 'public' hearing – not in camera – every word spoken will be noted and studied for any 'wrinkle' which CASA can and will parley into a weapon, to be ruthlessly used. This before the 'O'Sullivan factor' kicks in. Not overt hostility; but hostility nonetheless; talked over, evidence demanded, talked down to and proof demanded, ignored essential elements of argument and the constant ticking of the clock. 'We ' (PAIN) even attended one where Sterle actually feigned sleep while O'Sullivan dismissed logic, evidence and, essentially consigned the whole matter to the ' trivial waste bin'. Disgusting - No result – so expect the worst, hope for the best and be very, very careful.
Glen has, rightly so, used 'free speech' liberally and effectively; so far so good. Time now to learn the other side of the coin – get some hostile question training and learn to guard not only his rear end, but all ends against the middle. Better yet, have legal advice on tap. P7's favourite caution is highly relevant: “engage brain before opening gob”.
Toot – toot..
P7 addendum:
O'Sofullofit - "[If you've got evidence of what you've just spoken about, you need to particularise it carefully, you need to underpin it with the physical evidence, reference it and get it to the committee]."