It’s important. We’re on the verge of something truly awful in our country and it must be stopped. If we lose our legal system, our system of checks and balances, we lose fairness.
Background: A Congressional subpoena is a merely a request to appear, and has no enforcement mechanism. There is no penalty for not showing up as long as there is merely an “inquiry” in the House. The push for the House vote “resolution” is a legal trick, way out on a limb in a gray area of the law, to give the House “judicial authority” or the ability to subpoena, demand testimony of witnesses and documents… without giving the other side the ability to defend themselves. In other words, the Legislative Branch wants to become the Judiciary……….. because they don’t like the President.
It’s a weird place we’re in. The logic is flawed and strange to regular Americans. It’s “if you have nothing to hide, why not allow me to do an anal probe of your family, your business, your… everything.” Well, one might think, first, there better be a damn good reason for that kind of intrusion. Does a bureaucrat have the right to give ME an anal probe because I was selected as a cheerleader in high school and they weren’t, or because I had a party and didn’t invite them, …….. or because I won the 2016 election and beat them?
If the House actually believed the President sold out our national interest for a “favor” in the 2020 campaign, which constituted a campaign contribution from a foreign power, the criminal referral would go to the DOJ…….. Well, it did go to the DOJ, and it’s already been rejected… using Mueller’s own words. AND the DOJ has issued a letter to strongly admonish the ICIG for ever allowing the issue to rise to the level of “urgent concern”…. which is why we see Adam Schiff backtracking from all things concerning the whistleblower and the President’s phone call with Zelinsky.
…. This left radical elements within the House frustrated in their efforts to impeach the President. Thus, Nancy Pelosi announced an “impeachment inquiry”, which means she and the media can use the word “impeachment” without all the normal accoutrements which go along with an official impeachment, as in the President and Republicans get to defend themselves. Still, the House has no reason for the anal probe. There is no crime nor mention of a crime. There has been no independent counsel, now referred to as a Special Counsel, which has referred a crime to Congress. Yet, this is the logic Pelosi is using. In other words, “Sit still Mr. President, while I give you this anal probe.”
Enter Judge Howell. – Beryl A. Howell worked for Senator Leahy on the Judiciary Committee and was the primary staffer when Leahy was drafting legislation to create the Homeland Security Agency after 9/11. Staffers remember Howell. ” According to one “she showed up at meetings wearing a Mao green military hat and sometimes in full Mao military fatigues” and was “a total socialist left winger.” Howell also authored articles on expanding the understanding of obstruction of justice……. with…… Andrew Weissman …… throughout the years, and Howell also gave a speech in honor of Loretta Lynch at a tribute dinner in 2016. http://conservativehq.com/article/26233-deep-state%E2%80%99s-kangaroo-court
Judge Howell, DC Federal Court, Obama appointee, made a crazy ruling (effectively determining the House process “legal” AND allowing the House to pierce the veil of Grand Jury testimony) which set this whole thing in motion in the House = the vote on “impeachment inquiry” versus the legal precedent of “impeachment investigation”. It’s an important distinction which could affect the future of all rights of ALL Americans.
Here is the 75 page ruling from Judge Howell: https://www.scribd.com/document/432058248/House-Judiciary-Committee-v-DOJ-Mueller-Grand-Jury-Material
The confusion between “inquiry” and “investigation” from Pelosi/Schiff/Lawfare is intentional and designed to mislead the public, giving the impression of more openness in the House, and twisted for effect by a compliant media. No, the President and minority will still have NO RIGHTS to defend themselves, and the Judiciary Committee will gain further power…… corrupting the protection for innocent people involved in grand jury testimony…… forevermore. It’s a HORRIBLE precedent to set.
Nancy Pelosi is attempting to present to the public the idea that her “resolution” is normal course of business, or “the next step” in impeachment. No, it is a vial and corrupt twisting of our system where the legislative branch becomes the DOJ — but only for Democrats.
Sidenote: Howell was the judge presiding over the grand jury for Mueller’s Special Counsel http://conservativehq.com/article/26233-deep-state%E2%80%99s-kangaroo-court . She should have immediately recused from this case for a blatant conflict. Her reaction (found in her ruling) to the President’s Counsel Cipollone letter of justification (why the WH refused to cooperate outside of established procedure) indicates Howell’s reaction was CLEARLY political and her motivation is HIGHLY suspect. It’s alarming…. coming from a Judge.
The importance of privacy within a Grand Jury: This cannot be stressed enough. The privacy of a Grand Jury is sacrosanct. The system is structured so it cannot be invaded, even by mistake. There are no transcripts of the proceedings. Disclosure of Grand Jury Testimony by anybody, any time, is a felony. So, to have a COURT grant permission, to a non-judicial body, in this case a partisan House Committee, a partisan faction of a Congressional Committee, is tantamount to overturning black letter criminal law dating from Medieval English Common Law. The Grand Jury system is the replacement for the heinous Star Chamber system and the Schiff led Democrats are, in essence, recreating a Star Chamber, to their eternal shame and certain demise.Big T, verbatim, October 29, 2019
To give an example of what would happen if the Grand Jury is cracked: Let’s say I am indicted for murder. A prosecutor goes before the Grand Jury and presents evidence of my guilt AND is allowed to withhold anything adversarial to his side of the story. The Grand Jury hands down an indictment. I am arrested and hire F. Lee Bailey. The pissant prosecutor, scared by my legal counsel, and knowing it is a weak case, orchestrates a leak of selective evidence put forth during the Grand Jury to infect the potential jury pool.
It’s the PRIMARY reason Grand Jury testimony is kept of limits = to NOT sway public opinion.
NOW, with a trial at least 6 months away, I would be faced with swirling media (just like President Trump) attention, and scorn from my neighbors (voters who think Trump is guilty) who have only heard a piece of the evidence. How would I ever get a fair trial? My attorney, being the star he is, while draining my life savings, files a motion for change of venue, arguing I couldn’t get a fair trial, and that the PROSECUTOR is responsible for the Grand Jury leak….. which creates even further public attention. The Trial Judge would order a hearing on my motion, but denies it. You think I exaggerate? Remember the Valerie Plame case? The deck would be stacked against me. When I walk into court, the jurors would sneer at me, already convinced of my guilt.
It’s EXACTLY what Schiff is attempting to do to President Trump, and is succeeding at doing, with the help of a compliant media and a biased judge who would allow such an outlandish ruling.
THIS is WHY the testimony and materials of a Grand Jury must be protected.
After the Howell ruling, which makes the Pelosi process legitimate for now, Lawfare/Pelosi/Schiff are trying to “hurry up”. Pelosi/Schiff/Lawfare are trying to run (before the ruling is appealed), give legitimacy and create the illusion of a “judicial proceeding”, which is a technical term. If the House votes and establishes a “judicial proceeding”, OUTSIDE OF A COURT, it’s still a gray area. The House/Lawfare thinks it will give the judiciary committee ALL OR PARTS OF the grand jury testimony from Mueller’s Special Counsel (millions of documents) + subpoena power + STILL NOT an official impeachment investigation = no rights for the President and Republicans.
Therefore, STILL no power or rights to the minority and no power to the President to defend himself, call witnesses for his side of the story, or have his attorneys question witnesses or object…. like we would normally do for a traffic ticket.
The DOJ (not the President’s team) have requested a “stay”, which means the ruling cannot take effect (blocking the vote in the House) until a decision is reached on appeal. It would be normal to grant the “stay” but when dealing with the emotions of Federal Judges, anything can happen. Here is the Motion from DOJ: https://www.scribd.com/document/432384070/DOJ-s-Motion-to-Stay-10-28-19#from_embed
Overall, the process is WRONG and UNFAIR because the President and his administration cooperated at an extremely high level within the Executive Branch (Mueller + DOJ + White House + Agencies), allowed McGahn and others to testify (over 500 people/2800 subpoenas), produced records and info which normally would be withheld because of Exec privilege. The President also chose to answer questions of the Special Counsel to help the investigation proceed expeditiously, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING his response and supporting docs would be held within the Special Counsel and he did not give up Exec Privilege or a basic right to NOT cooperate under 5th Amendment. The HOUSE is seeking to overturn basic rights of ALL those 500 people including the President of the USA.
See the problem?
Furthermore, if the House is allowed access to “grand jury testimony” by legal trick of claiming a “judicial proceeding” (which it’s not and never has been –>> it’s why we have courts), then the ruling will annihilate the confidential nature of Grand Jury proceedings for us all. Would you, as a well intended citizen EVER give testimony in the future… if you knew your identity and words would be examined forevermore in public…. or could be used against YOU, cherry picked and taken out of context, in a future and unknown case? The threat of future retribution, from a competitor/lover/friend would silence everyone. I’m not sure how you could even carry out a civil proceeding of a divorce trial. Such a precedent would alter our legal system.
Without a doubt, it’s possibly the worst miscarriage of justice we’ve ever seen. There might be another example which is worse, but can YOU think of one? It scares the hell out of me. If our leaders can do this to a Billionaire President of the United States, what would they do to someone small like me?
What American would willingly VOTE for giving away our rights against self-recrimination or to NOT be able to mount a self-defense?
And it’s for the impeachment of a President of the United States.
It’s the kind of thing you don’t even wish on your enemy.
It’s a persecution and not a normal prosecution.
And in no way, EVER, could this farce be construed as a search for the truth. In fact, the Pelosi/Schiff/Lawfare “play” is purposely designed to HIDE THE TRUTH normally allowed to ANY American’s vigorous defense. It’s shocking.
It is correct to say “it’s a gray area” of the constitution.
True. It is.
Just because impeachment proceedings in the House have always been bipartisan, taken seriously, open and above board, does not mean “constitutionally” that they HAVE TO BE.
Legally, the judgements and proceedings COULD BE one sided. We COULD disregard former guidance from our ancestors (the Johnson Impeachment which was seen as political after the Civil War) which cautions against “impeachment for a political end”, and we can throw precedent established for other impeachment hearings (Nixon/Clinton) out the window…. which is what Pelosi is doing.
Does the decision of Pelosi/Schiff/Lawfare go against everything we hold dear about our justice system, our series of checks and balances between legislative, judiciary, and executive branches……….., yeah, it does.
We’re in dangerous territory.
And to EVERYONE who thinks it doesn’t matter……. cuz impeachment will never get through the Senate….. stop right there. Just…….. stop….. and think.
If we allow this precedent to be established in the House, for future impeachment proceedings (along with upending 200+ years of grand jury precedent) who is to say we won’t have a Democrat Senate 20yrs from now? 100 years from now?
What we do today, this decision, these proceedings, will set the course for our future.