As House Democrats irresponsibly hurdle toward impeachment tomorrow, the Senate led by Mitch McConnell is going to do it's duty. In remarks today, Senator McConnell explained what the House has done and why this impeachment is problematic both now and for the future.
It appears that the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history is about to wind down after just 12 weeks and that its slapdash work product will be dumped on the Senate.
‘I’ll have much more to say to our colleagues and to the American people if and when the House does move ahead. But as we speak today, House Democrats still have the opportunity to do the right thing for the country and avoid setting this toxic new precedent.
‘The House can still turn back from the cliff and not deploy this constitutional remedy of last resort to deliver a pre-determined partisan outcome.
A lot people have admitted mistakes, promised reforms or are acting further on the incredible IG report of Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz. This weekend former FBI Director James Comey even admitted he was wrong on the basis of the report. But one person has not budged: the leader of the impeachment efforts for Democrats, House Intelligence Committee Chair Rep. Adam Schiff. And besides the FBI and Obama Department of Justice, if there is one person who should be admitting he was wrong, it is Rep. Schiff.
It should be noted that much of this was available to Rep. Schiff, who denied it when Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Rep. Devin Nunes came out with a report confirming that the FISA warrants were wrong and based on information known to be false.
Schiff tells Chris Wallace he was unaware of errors and omissions in FBI use of FISA process. Bunk. The much-derided Nunes memo, which Schiff strongly disputed at the time, called attention to these very abuses. Most media, of course, echoed the Schiff version, scoffed at Nunes.— Brit Hume (@brithume) December 15, 2019
Let’s start with a tweet from a lawyer with experience in congressional investigations in both parties:
The debate on Article I reveals one of its more fundamental flaw. It doesn't allege a crime (like the Nixon and Clinton abuse of power articles did). It also doesn't allege that @realDonaldTrump committed an act that is unlawful (but not criminal).— Sam Dewey (@samueledewey) December 12, 2019
ICYMI: The Left, Right and Victims Are Concerned by the DOJ IG’s Findings About FISA and the Trump Campaign
There is a lot to unpack in Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report on the review of four FISA applications. It is impossible in one short blog post to detail all of the things uncovered. The only safe conclusion is all Americans should be upset by this report. As one group said (emphasis added):
For instance, the litany of problems with the Carter Page surveillance applications demonstrates how the secrecy shrouding the government’s one-sided FISA approval process breeds abuse. . . . The FBI must also adopt higher standards for investigations involving constitutionally protected sensitive activities, such as political campaigns.
That statement is not from a Republican or a conservative group, it is from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Speaking of Carter Page, he has an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal which begins:Read more
Today, the RNLA filed a Federal Election Commission complaint against Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg and Bloomberg News, alleging that the way that Bloomberg News has announced that it will cover the presidential campaign constitutes an impermissible in-kind corporate contribution that is not subject to the media exemption.Read more
In our continued focus on Democrats who oppose impeachment, today we focus on famous lawyer and law professor Alan Dershowitz, who makes a strong case against impeachment, again. We say again because he also wrote a book about the first quasi-impeachment effort which became the Mueller report. Dershowitz details how Maxine Waters' interpretation of Congress' impeachment power is wrong and dangerous.
There are those like Congresswoman Maxine Waters who argue that Congress can impeach on any ground a majority wishes. “There is no law,” she has asserted, because then power to impeach is vested solely in the House and there is no judicial review of its actions. Even if that were true — and it is debatable —Waters’ lawless and reductionistic view confuses what Congress can get away with, as distinguished from what the Constitution obliges its members to do: namely to apply the criteria set out in the Constitution.Read more
The voters in November 2020 can and should be the judge of President Trump. In light of the recent struggles of their party’s candidates, it seems House Democrats fear that potential judgment and want to insert their own. Professor Jonathan Turley, a Democrat and Trump opponent, breaks down how that judgment may damage all future Presidents in his written testimony today:
To put it simply, I hold no brief for President Trump. My personal and political views of President Trump, however, are irrelevant to my impeachment testimony, as they should be to your impeachment vote. Today, my only concern is the integrity and coherence of the constitutional standard and process of impeachment. President Trump will not be our last president and what we leave in the wake of this scandal will shape our democracy for generations to come. I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. If the House proceeds solely on the Ukrainian allegations, this impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record, and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president.
From Left-Wing Revolutionary to Conservative Supreme Court Justice: Created Equal–Clarence Thomas In His Own Words
Set to be released in early 2020, Created Equal–Clarence Thomas in His Own Words is a two-hour documentary that allows viewers to get up-close and personal with Justice Clarence Thomas as he discusses firsthand the numerous hurdles he faced en route to the Supreme Court of the United States. The purpose of the documentary is to “tell the Clarence Thomas story truly and fully, without cover-ups or distortions.”Read more