It’s about time the Republicans took some kind of action against this lying piece of … *ahem* … ‘work’.
Right… ‘work’. Let’s go with that.
In the ‘better late than never’ category, the Republicans are showing up late to the Dems’ bogus impeachment party. For one thing, they have charged full ahead into a so-called ‘formal inquiry’ (as opposed to the Constitutional method of proceeding into Impeachment territory) and they are making up the rules as they go.
Here’s what we mean by ‘making up the rules as they go’.
If his OPENING statements were based on an outright and obvious lie (or ‘parody’) how seriously and soberly should we really treat this farce?
Democrat staff on HPSCI informed the Foreign Affairs Committee that only one Republican staff member would be allowed to attend the transcribed interview of Kurt Volker, the former State Department Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, and would not be allowed to participate in questioning. However, under House Rule X, “Relations of the United States with foreign nations” is the jurisdiction of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
In the letter, McCaul wrote: “I was alarmed to learn – less than 24 hours before the first interview is scheduled to start – that it will be led by the Intelligence Committee and that questioning will be done solely by their staff. Also we were told that only a single Republican professional staffer from the Foreign Affairs Committee will be allowed to attend while the majority will have two. These constraints on committee and Republican participation are unacceptable and at odds with House Rules and general fairness. …We demand equal representation and participation in this inquiry, there is too much at stake for America and Congress.”
Furthermore, contrary to statements made by Speaker Pelosi and other Democrats, there is not a “House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry.” Official impeachment inquiries are initiated by the adoption of a House resolution empowering or creating a committee or task force to undertake such activities.
McCaul continued, “Individual committees may conduct oversight and investigations only pursuant to their general jurisdiction and authority under House Rules X and XI. … Put simply, Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff lacks the jurisdiction to investigate the Department of State’s conduct of United States foreign policy toward Ukraine. That prerogative belongs to our Members.”
Should we really have expected anything less from a party building its platform around literal opposition to the Rule of Law? Why would such a party feel at all constrained by some trivialities like Constitutional authority?
They have pens and phones, dammit, and they’ve learned how to use them!
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., added his name to a resolution Wednesday that would censure House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff for reading a “parody” version of President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during a hearing last week.
McCarthy is now the most high-profile Republican to sign on to the resolution to censure Schiff that was introduced last Friday by Rep. Andy Biggs, the Arizona Republican who chairs the conservative House Freedom Caucus.
“Chairman Adam Schiff has been lying to the American people for years,” McCarthy said in a tweet. “Now he is so desperate to damage the president that he literally made up a false version of a phone call. Enough is enough.” — Source: FoxNews
He wasn’t the only one. Rep. Andy Biggs had some strong words, too.
Biggs argued that anyone “taking a fair look” at Schiff’s actions over the past two years must conclude that he is “unfit to lead the Democrats’ never-ending pursuit of the impeachment of duly elected President of the United States.”
He said that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has “done Schiff no favor by giving [Schiff] the high-profile assignment of spearheading the Democrats’ anti-Trump crusade” and that House Judiciary Chairman Jerrod Nadler, D-N.Y., would be more qualified.
According to Biggs, Schiff has “repeatedly shown incredibly poor judgment” and “consistently demonstrated bias and animus against Trump.” He wrote that it was obvious the Democrats are “so invested with the notion” of impeachment, that they will “not abide by the formalities of process and clearly established precedent.”
“This leads us to the inevitable conclusion that the impeachment inquiry will be unfair, without due process, and presided over by an individual who is so biased that he has made impeachment his No.1 goal,” Biggs concluded.
“I think there’s a chance that we could get Mr. Schiff properly and appropriately censured,” Schiff told Hemmer. “If not, maybe Nancy Pelosi will reconsider making him the lead. Because he’s certainly is not qualified, not demonstrated the fealty to due process. He’s not demonstrated this gravitas that’s necessary. He’s kind of made it into a comedic thing in some instances.”
As did Rep Waltz and Rep Jim Jordan.
Florida Republican Rep. Michael Waltz said on Wednesday that the appointment of Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., to lead the impeachment inquiry on President Trump should be called into question.
“We have huge issues that we should be dealing with within the intelligence community and we’re not because it’s [House Intelligence Committee] essentially become the impeachment committee,” Waltz told “America’s Newsroom.”
Waltz said that Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, should be looking into “China stealing our secrets.”
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said Tuesday on “Hannity” that Schiff is too “biased” to lead a Trump impeachment inquiry.
They’re basing everything in this impeachment process on a so-called whistleblower report, but even that process is fatally flawed, and proceeding out of order. It’s the hard-charging agenda of a few members of ONE party rather than the proper method that involves the sober consideration of both parties working together.
As a quick recap, here are some broad strokes of the Schiff Timeline:
- Aug. 12: Whistleblower files the complaint
- Aug 24-31: Schiff Staffer visits Ukraine. Meets former Prime Minister, sponsored ‘Atlantic Council’ (both of which raise red flags)
- Aug. 28: Schiff Tweets about Ukraine military aid
- Sept 9: Orders probe before the release of IG letters
- Sept 15: implies he does not know subject matter
- Sept 17: “We have not spoken directly”
- Sept. 19: Atkinson briefs lawmakers
It raises the question of whether any of this ‘inquiry’ is even valid, or whether the Senate could laugh at them if impeachment is filed and tell them to go back and actually follow the proper Constitutional steps for impeachment before kicking it to the Senate for a show trial.