A Sham Process
Since the day President Trump was elected, Democrats have been more interested in getting rid of him by any means necessary than they have in working with him. Without evidence, prominent Democrat leaders accused President Trump of colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election. After a years-long investigation found no evidence of collusion, nearly one third of House Democrats still voted to impeach President Trump.
Now, Democrats are engaged in a sham “investigation” in which their side leaks one-sided information all designed to discredit the president, while simultaneously claiming that the investigation must be conducted behind closed doors and in secret. This process is an outrage. Democrats are trying to convince the public impeachment is a last resort, but in reality, they introduced articles of impeachment during the president’s first year in office. Our nation has witnessed serious impeachment inquiries in the past, but this is not a serious process.
In past impeachment proceedings, there was serious time and consideration taken after receiving a complaint – for President Bill Clinton, it took 27 days and for President Richard Nixon, 99 days. Two days before Congress received the whistleblower complaint, Speaker Pelosi announced the impeachment inquiry. In previous impeachments processes, impeachment proceedings were initiated by a vote of the whole House, provided the minority with subpoena power, and allowed the president’s counsel the right to cross-examine witnesses. In Speaker Pelosi’s House, the impeachment process was begun by unilateral decree, the minority was afforded no rights, and the president can’t defend himself through counsel. This isn’t hard, or at least it shouldn’t be. If the majority is so confident that President Trump committed an impeachable offense, then they should authorize an impeachment inquiry that is fair to all sides through a formal vote in the House.
House Democrats are trying out a new defense of their sham process, referring to it as a grand jury investigation. This is laughable. Congress isn’t a law enforcement entity. There are more than 63 million Americans who voted for President Trump, and they deserve the right to see this process in the light of day.
Another questionable aspect of this investigation is how the Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Adam Schiff was tipped off by the whistleblower – who had a professional relationship with one of the Democratic candidates for president in the past – before the complaint was filed. Sunshine is the best disinfectant, so let’s put all the relevant facts and evidence out there for the public to review and then we can decide for ourselves. President Trump allowed the release of the Mueller Report and the unredacted transcript of his call with President Zelensky. Why are House Democrats prioritizing secrecy and deception over transparency?
Chairman Schiff’s motives deserve to be called into question. He will not allow members of Congress outside HPSCI the ability to read transcripts or sit in on hearings – something that is usually a congressional courtesy and is paramount in an investigation where the goal is removing the president from office. Last week, as characterizations of this testimony from members of the majority casting negative light on the president were rampant in the media, I was preparing to go read the transcript of Ambassador Kurt Volker’s interview when I received word that the majority decided to disallow the testimony’s review. Chairman Schiff has shown he is unfit to run this investigation and that is why I joined 180 of my colleagues in voting to allow debate on a resolution to censure Chairman Schiff for his questionable behavior. Unsurprisingly, the House Democrats voted to block this resolution.
Democrats are wasting the time and money of all Americans on this sham impeachment inquiry. We can, and should, be working on legislation that fights against the opioid epidemic, secures our borders, gives American workers a fair trade deal, ends surprise medical billing and sets a federal budget not a continuing resolution. I will not stand for the unfairness of this impeachment inquiry, and I will continue to fight against a one-sided, partisan process.My door is always open to East Tennesseans and I encourage constituents to continue reaching out to my office to share their views on this important issue with me. Feel free to contact my office if I can be of assistance to you or your family.
