Counting Coup Is Not The Same As Voting To Impeach
I watched "The Rachel Maddow Show" on October 15th. Ari Melber was hosting. Two of his guests were House members who served on the Intelligence Committee - Jackie Speier and Denny Heck.
These two covered a lot of ground and did an excellent job. They added much needed clarity to the discussion as to what exactly is going on.
When asked why Nancy Pelosi said, at her press conference earlier that day with Adam Schiff, that she would not hold an Impeachment vote ("At this time we will not be having a vote.", N.P.), they both skirted the question by saying they had not been at the Democratic caucus meeting before the press conference.
However, Heck gave the clearest explanation about what is going on that I've heard to date. He said they were not conducting "hearings", they were conducting "depositions". Depositions are usually not open to the public. They are often done before a trial to get a potential witness's sworn testimony and "freeze" it.
It's hard for a witness to change her/his story after a record of it has been made. You can be called on it, in much the same way reporters play clips of something a politician says to show the person being interviewed has changed her/his story. For instance, on 9/24, Pelosi said, "The times have found us today. I'm announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official Impeachment inquiry."
I would say that characterizing what is happening now as an "Official Impeachment Inquiry" does not exactly bring to mind what saying we're holding "depositions" does. Is this a matter of splitting hairs?
Well, Trump's attorneys don't seem to think so. They are arguing that since the House hasn't actually voted to Impeach, what is going on now isn't legitimate. They are saying this in public and in Court to defend against having to answer subpoenas.
On 10/8 the White House sent Pelosi a letter. In it they complain that since the House hasn't taken a formal vote to authorize Impeachment, "...the Executive Branch cannot be expected to participate in it."
The public is already severely misinformed when it comes to Trump. FOX News and other right wing news shows/organizations haven't helped when it comes to giving the public factual information.
Why not hold a vote? Well, Kyle Cheney from Politico was also on the show and he confirmed that the Intelligence Committee is gathering abundant amounts of evidence. He said they could take years to get to the bottom of every lead. He also said, "There are a lot of Democrats in particular who say they've already got enough evidence. They could move to the floor with Articles of Impeachment today if they wanted to."
Meanwhile, Pelsoi's supporters are praising Pelosi for what appears to be "counting coup" on Donald Trump. They seem to value humiliating Trump more than removing him from office.
What would things look like today if the House had acted on "The Mueller Report" back in May and voted to Impeach Trump for the many well documented instances of obstruction of justice contained in it? They could have voted on Impeachment and then started deposing witnesses months ago.
Might we have avoided Trump giving Erdogan the green light, on Putin's birthday, to attack the Kurds in Syria? Might we have avoided the now 200,000 Kurdish refugees fleeing for their lives? Might we have avoided the Russian takeover of our military bases in Syria and our remaining troops being put in jeopardy? Might we have avoided having 50 nuclear bombs held hostage at Incirlik Air Base in Turkey?
Might Hernandez Diaz not have committed suicide this week while being held at the Richwood Correctional Center in Louisiana after he was taken into custody by ICE?
Would the parents of Harry Dunn, a 19 year old who was killed by an American driving on the wrong side of the rode in England, have been spared the extra pain of Trump trying to stage a surprise photo op between them and the woman who killed their son?
How many more people will be allowed to ignore House subpoenas?
How much misery, chaos and death has Trump caused because of the House failing to vote on Impeachment? How much more will he cause before they act?
October 16th, Rachel Maddow opened her show. by reading a statement from Adam Schiff explaining why this Impeachment process is different than it's predecessors.
Adam said that before the House voted to Impeach both Nixon and Clinton, special counsels had already completed an investigation and turned it over to the House.
Well, yes Adam, Jaworski completed an investigation of Nixon and Starr completed one on Clinton, but what about that guy in the middle - you know, the guy you all like to pretend doesn't exist?
Robert Mueller also completed a full investigation. It spoke about Russia and obstruction of justice. Why didn't the House take a vote to Impeach after that?
Both you and Nadler eventually interviewed him despite the fact that he made it clear his testimony would be his report. When he testified before your committee, he made it clear that Russia was a serious national security threat.
Had the House voted to Impeach last May, you all could have conducted months of investigations into what happened. The House had the obstruction handed to it on a silver platter.
It had Russia too. All you had to do was start subpoenaing and questioning all those people who lied and refused to cooperate with Mueller. Had you done that, you would have been looking at exactly what you are looking at now.
I suspect the truth is that Pelosi didn't want to Impeach Trump from the gitgo and that after the House's epic cold shoulder and blind eye treatment of Mueller, people within our government had to come forward at undue risk to themselves and basically make an offer you couldn't ignore.
So who's leading in the Democratic polls these days? I wonder why?
Holy Moly!
No comments:
Post a Comment