•   
  •   
  •   

Opinion GOP leader of House Judiciary: Articles establish nothing impeachable

19:56  13 december  2019
19:56  13 december  2019 Source:   usatoday.com

Who Are the Legal Experts Testifying in House Judiciary Impeachment Hearings?

  Who Are the Legal Experts Testifying in House Judiciary Impeachment Hearings? Constitutional scholars are expected to testify on the legal case for President Trump’s impeachment.Of particular note will be Article Two, Section Four of the Constitution, which lays out the groundwork for impeachment for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Expect the four witnesses listed below to spend considerable time on that last, hazily defined term — though bribery could make an appearance as well, considering House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s claim that it applies to Trump’s Ukraine scandal, and Republicans’ pushback to that accusation.

Americans are fair minded. They deserve the truth and can spot it when given even half a chance.

Donald Trump standing in front of a crowd: President Donald Trump campaigns  in Hershey, Pennsylvania, on Dec. 10, 2019.© Matt Rourke/AP President Donald Trump campaigns in Hershey, Pennsylvania, on Dec. 10, 2019.

If Tuesday’s Quinnipiac poll is any indicator, many Americans recognize that the path to impeachment was paved with lies. As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., presented articles of impeachment to the American electorate, more than half the country balked.

Apparently, voters understand that the articles — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — establish nothing impeachable and allege no crime. The notion that withholding foreign aid from a historically corrupt country, and releasing the aid after the country’s new administration enacted anti-corruption reform, represents an abuse of power has failed to enrage the taxpayers whose paychecks fund that aid.

10 takeaways from the impeachment hearing: Legal scholars in plain English

  10 takeaways from the impeachment hearing: Legal scholars in plain English Amid talk of King George III, the Secret Treaty of Dover and necromancy, here's what stood out.The three scholars called to testify by Democrats — Pamela Karlan, a professor at Stanford Law School and a former Justice Department official in the Obama administration; Noah Feldman, a professor at Harvard Law School; and Michael Gerhardt, a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law — overwhelmingly concluded that the evidence against Trump showed the president had committed impeachable actions. The one scholar called by Republicans — Jonathan Turley, of the George Washington University School of Law — took issue with the hurried process of the inquiry.

Americans also recognize the lie that President Donald Trump has obstructed a Congress that concluded its impeachment investigation 20 times faster than the investigation that led to the Clinton impeachment.

When the executive and legislative branches disagreed, Schiff refused to allow the courts to weigh in on constitutional questions. Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., declined to call any of the witnesses requested by Republicans, and Schiff withdrew his own subpoena for John Bolton’s deputy.

With inconvenient witnesses ignored and exculpatory evidence dismissed, House Democrats have chronically worked to mislead the public.

Under Pelosi’s unilateral leadership, Schiff replaced Nadler as Democrats’ impeachment Sherpa. What Schiff’s case lacked in direct evidence and eyewitness testimony, he made up for in literary license.

Democrats consider bribery, obstruction for impeachment articles against Trump

  Democrats consider bribery, obstruction for impeachment articles against Trump The looming question is whether the articles will include references to the Mueller report and Russia.

Americans remain unmoved in the wake of Schiff’s Ukraine report not because they are incredulous, but because Schiff is incorrigible. Schiff lied about his committee’s contact with the whistleblower and about whether a statutory right to anonymity shielded the whistleblower from testifying.

Schiff lied about having more than circumstantial evidence that Trump colluded with Russia, and the Mueller report debunked that lie. Schiff told a similar lie this Tuesday when he said the evidence for impeachment was “overwhelming and uncontested,” ignoring the fact that all 17 Judiciary Republicans dispute Schiff’s report.

Schiff also defended the Justice Department’s surveillance of a former Trump campaign aide, even though the department’s inspector general later found 17 errors or omissions in the FBI’s warrant applications. Democrats have been hurtling toward impeachment for years, facts be damned, and Americans are right to suspect Schiff of abusing his power as chairman.

White House tells House Democrats to end impeachment inquiry, less than an hour before deadline for Trump to agree to participate

  White House tells House Democrats to end impeachment inquiry, less than an hour before deadline for Trump to agree to participate The response came as little surprise. Throughout the impeachment proceedings, the White House has blocked witnesses from testifying, declined to provide documents demanded by Democrats and did not send lawyers to the Judiciary Committee’s first impeachment hearing on Wednesday. Instead, the White House has largely looked to the Republican-controlled Senate to wage a full defense of Trump, who is accused of abusing the powers of the presidency when he pressured Ukraine to investigate former vice president Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, as well as an unfounded theory that Kyiv conspired with Democrats to interfere in the 2016 presidenti

Sadly, the Schiff syndrome seems contagious. Democrats lied about the criterion for their own impeachment. Their speaker promised it would be bipartisan, compelling and overwhelming. The only bipartisan stance here is opposition to the inquiry.

Since not even all of Pelosi’s caucus is willing to vote with her, we can hardly grant that her case is compelling, let alone overwhelming. Democrats told America the president is guilty of bribery, but there is no evidence to support such a charge.

The most dangerous lie told by leading Democrats, however, is that the president stands guilty until proven innocent. An extension of that lie made by multiple Democrats is that only a guilty person would resist being railroaded. When Pelosi puts the onus on the president to produce “information that demonstrates his innocence in all of this,” the Speaker of the People’s House is denying an American the presumption of innocence.

Like the people we represent, Republicans are fair minded. We know high crimes and misdemeanors when we see them, and we have not voted to advance this impeachment charade.

Pelosi has championed the political impeachment — divorced from facts and fairness — the Founders warned us against. She hasn’t proved anything impeachable, so she’s shifting the burden of proof to the accused. That may be the most un-American lie our nation’s capital has ever witnessed.

Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., is the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee.


U.S. House begins voting on articles of impeachment against Trump .
USA-TRUMP/IMPEACHMENT-START (URGENT):U.S. House begins voting on articles of impeachment against TrumpThe first vote, scheduled to last 15 minutes, is on abuse of power. Once that concludes, the House will hold a five-minute vote on obstruction of Congress.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 1
This is interesting!