FoxNews.com reports that
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler Thursday accused President Trump of putting his own personal interests above national security and American democracy and charged that Trump is the only president in history to violate his oath of office so flagrantly.
“No president has ever used his office to compel a foreign nation to help him cheat in our elections — prior presidents would be shocked to the core by such conduct and rightly so,” Rep. Nadler, D-N.Y., said in kicking off day two of the House impeachment managers’ opening statements.
“This conduct is not America First,” Nadler said, borrowing Trump’s campaign slogan. “It is Donald Trump first.”
Once Trump was caught pressuring Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 election by seeking investigations into Joe and Hunter Biden, he launched an unprecedented effort to stonewall Congress’ inquiry by denying documents and witnesses, Nadler charged.
“It puts even President Nixon to shame,” Nadler said.
Nadler’s tough talk set the scene for the second of three days of the House managers’ opening arguments against Trump, with a deep dive on the first article of impeachment, abuse of power.
On the first day of the opening arguments, Rep. Adam Schiff and his team used more than seven hours to make their case. That left 16 hours and 42 minutes on the opening statement clock between Thursday and Friday for the House Democrats. Then on Saturday, Trump’s lawyers take the floor.
As the public case continued before the camera, another political campaign was underway behind the scenes over the issue of calling new witnesses. Democrats are seeking four GOP senators to join them in demanding new evidence in the trial, but Republicans are actively trying to avoid any GOP defections. No new witnesses would mean a speedy trial and a quicker vote to acquit the president.
Democrats are demanding the Trump administration cough up documents they’ve withheld related to Ukraine dealings and allow testimony from new witnesses who failed to show in the House inquiry, including former National Security Adviser John Bolton.
They were especially galled that Trump was in Davos, Switzerland, earlier this week and “gloat[ing]” that he as “all the material” and the Democrats don’t, while warning that calling Bolton would be a national security risk.
“It is beyond belief — beyond belief — that the president of United States would even go to Davos in the middle of an impeachment trial, and then make statements like that to intimidate the jury, and to gloat over the fact that he has not turned documents over,” Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., said Thursday.
Some GOP senators have promoted witness reciprocity and called for Hunter Biden to testify about what he was doing on the board of the Ukraine energy company Burisma.
“Hunter Biden is a material witness, and if we’re going to call witnesses, I want to see him on the stand and those questions need to be asked,” Sen. Joshua Hawley, R-Mo., said Thursday.
After opening statements from both sides, there will be another vote on whether to allow for new witnesses and documents in the coming days.
Hawley wouldn’t predict whether there would be GOP defections but said the caucus is in regular talks to keep tabs on where senators stand.
“There’s an ongoing conversation, informal, on what people are thinking. We are spending a lot of time together,” Hawley said of the marathon trial sessions.
This latest Liberal Act of Desperation by Jerry Nadler clearly demonstrates how desperate the Democrat House Managers are to somehow make the Senate Republicans believe that President Donald J. Trump has actually done something impeachable.
For Nadler to state that the nonexistent “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” of President Trump are more Impeachment-worthy than the Break-in at the Watergate Hotel which led to the resulting threatened Impeachment and subsequent resignation of President Richard M. Nixon is not only incredulous…it’s downright idiotic.
As my 12 year old grandson would say,
Early in the morning of June 17, 1972, several burglars were arrested inside the office of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), located in the Watergate building in Washington, D.C. This was no ordinary robbery: The prowlers were connected to President Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign, and they had been caught while attempting to wiretap phones and steal secret documents. While historians are not sure whether Nixon knew about the Watergate espionage operation before it happened, he took steps to cover it up afterwards, raising “hush money” for the burglars, trying to stop the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from investigating the crime, destroying evidence and firing uncooperative staff members. In August 1974, after his role in the Watergate conspiracy had finally come to light, the president resigned. His successor, Gerald Ford, immediately pardoned Nixon for all the crimes he “committed or may have committed” while in office. Although Nixon was never prosecuted, the Watergate scandal changed American politics forever, leading many Americans to question their leadership and think more critically about the presidency. (courtesy of www.history.com)
Actually, Former Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton has more in common with Watergate that President Trump does.
And, her ethics were and are similar to those of the burglars.
In the spring of 1974, Hillary Rodham (Not-yet-Clinton) became a member of the presidential impeachment inquiry staff, advising the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives during the Watergate Scandal. Her boss back then, Jerry Zeifman, now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, tells a very revealing story concerning her work there. According to Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former Yale Law Professor, Burke Marshall, also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the Watergate Investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation. That made the Future First Lady and Secretary of State one of only three people who earned that badge of dishonor in Zeifman’s 17-year career. Why? According to Zeifman,
Because she was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.
Zeifman claims that she was one of several individuals including Marshall, Special Counsel John Doar, and Senior Associate Special Counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum, who plotted to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation.
Zeifman believes that they were deathly afraid of putting the break-in’s mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by Counsel to the President. The reason being, Hunt had the goods regarding some dirty dealings in the Kennedy Administration that would have made Watergate look like a kid busting open his Piggy Bank…dealings which purportedly included Kennedy’s complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.
Hillary and her associates were acting directly against the decision of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, who all believed that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel.
The reason that Hillary and the rest came up with the scheme is because they believed that they could gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon.
In order to pull off this scheme, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception.
Hillary wanted to present in her brief that there was no right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding. Zeifman told Hillary about the case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeachment attempt in 1970….
As soon as the impeachment resolutions were introduced by (then-House Minority Leader Gerald) Ford, and they were referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the first thing Douglas did was hire himself a lawyer.
Douglas was allowed to keep counsel by the Judicial Committee in place at the time, which clearly established a precedent. Zeifman told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files.
That was a mistake, per Zeifman…
Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public.
Hillary then wrote a legal brief which argued that there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding…ignoring the Douglas case completely.
The brief was so laughingly fraudulent, Zeifman believes Hillary would have been disbarred if she had ever actually submitted it to a judge.
Zeifman says that if Hillary and her associates had succeeded, members of the House Judiciary Committee would have also been denied the right to cross-examine witnesses, and denied the opportunity to even be a part of the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.
Wait just a cotton-pickin’ minute…
A bunch of high ranking Democrats, including at least one unethical, dishonest, lying lawyer conspiring to violate the Constitution in order to Impeach and remove a sitting President.
Now, why does that sound familiar?
The names have changed…but the political party and their relative morality and situational ethics remain the same.
Until He Comes,