Democrats are violating every standard of due process. It will backfire.

After dozens of House Republicans demanded access to a secure facility in the Capitol on Wednesday where House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) was preparing to depose a Pentagon official, Democrats expressed outrage at the breach of protocol. “They’re doing this because this is what the guilty do,” said Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.). “Innocent people cooperate with investigations. Innocent people follow the rules of the House.”

Well, people engaged in impartial investigations aimed at finding the truth don’t violate every precedent and standard of due process set during previous presidential impeachments.

Contrast today’s partisan inquiry with the Nixon impeachment. As American Enterprise Institute President Robert Doar has pointed out, the Nixon inquiry was a model of bipartisan cooperation. The Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Peter Rodino (N.J.), assembled a unified staff (including Doar’s father, John, a Republican whom Rodino appointed as special counsel). The full House voted on authorizing the inquiry. The minority was given joint subpoena power. The president’s counsel was allowed to be present during depositions, given access to all of the documents and materials presented to the committee, allowed to cross-examine witnesses, and even permitted to call witnesses of his own. Most important, the committee did not leak or release selective documents cherry-picked to make the president look bad.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/24/democrats-are-violating-every-standard-due-process-it-will-backfire/

phildidge wrote:After dozens of House Republicans demanded access to a secure facility in the Capitol on Wednesday where House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) was preparing to depose a Pentagon official, Democrats expressed outrage at the breach of protocol. “They’re doing this because this is what the guilty do,” said Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.). “Innocent people cooperate with investigations. Innocent people follow the rules of the House.”

Well, people engaged in impartial investigations aimed at finding the truth don’t violate every precedent and standard of due process set during previous presidential impeachments.

Contrast today’s partisan inquiry with the Nixon impeachment. As American Enterprise Institute President Robert Doar has pointed out, the Nixon inquiry was a model of bipartisan cooperation. The Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Peter Rodino (N.J.), assembled a unified staff (including Doar’s father, John, a Republican whom Rodino appointed as special counsel). The full House voted on authorizing the inquiry. The minority was given joint subpoena power. The president’s counsel was allowed to be present during depositions, given access to all of the documents and materials presented to the committee, allowed to cross-examine witnesses, and even permitted to call witnesses of his own. Most important, the committee did not leak or release selective documents cherry-picked to make the president look bad.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/24/democrats-are-violating-every-standard-due-process-it-will-backfire/

As long as Republican members of that committee are allowed in, it's all good. Not every member of Congress has the credentials to see sensitive material.

But this is going to probably end up in a party vote. The house will vote to impeach and the Senate will vote to acquit.

phil wrote:Well, people engaged in impartial investigations aimed at finding the truth don’t violate every precedent and standard of due process set during previous presidential impeachments.

The Impeachment process, as dictated by the Constitution, follows Anglo-American criminal procedure.  First, the House investigates the charges and reaches a finding of impeachment, or not.  This is the investigative, or Grand Jury stage, that involves the rights of the accused leading to an indictment.  An indictment is a determination of probable cause (or not) and is only preliminary.  Grand Juries, like any investigation, are secret, and by law are not open to the public.  Persons being investigated are not entitled to legal representation, as they have not been formerly charged.  Indeed, because it is only preliminary, anyone who violates the secrecy provisions is apt to be thrown in prison.

The secrecy of the investigative (or impeachment) stage is for two reasons: 1) to protect and keep secret the witnesses and evidence; and 2) to shield the accused in the event of a 'no-bill' finding.  So, it is in part a protection of the accused that is the reason for secrecy.  If a true bill is found, then the accused and his/her lawyer are furnished a copy of the Grand Jury transcript and evidence, which they must likewise keep secret.

In criminal law, the procedure moves on to a trial court for trial.  Under Article One, section 5, the question of impeachment removal moves on to the Senate for trial.  In presidential impeachment trials, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court sits as Judge. And the Senators sit as Jurors.  The impeachment trial, as with any trial, is the open part of the process.

Only the trial phase, in both cases, is to be public; before trial, it’s like an investigator’s dossier.  The only difference is, the House maintains secrecy of the preliminary investigation, just as with a Court in a criminal matter, up to the point of House Committee hearings.  Because impeachment is political, the public is entitled to hear the evidence.  We are now at the close of stage two, with investigations and hearings behind us.

phil wrote:Well, people engaged in impartial investigations aimed at finding the truth don’t violate every precedent and standard of due process set during previous presidential impeachments.

There is no precedent or standard, as each House writes its own rules for each phase of the proceedings, each time the matter is brought.  Other than the Constitutional mandates, which are quite brief, every case of impeachment is different.  Andrew Johnson's impeachment rules differed from Richard Nixon's, and from Bill Clinton's.  They will be different this time as well.  The rules change to match the context and charges.

Maddog wrote:But this is going to probably end up in a party vote. The house will vote to impeach and the Senate will vote to acquit.

That is almost a certainty.  But the Democrats are not doing this to actually oust the President, but to educate the general public about his lawlessness.

Then, if the Republicans are seen to be in lock-step with a Russo-Republican organized crime agenda, the bet is the American voters will fully oust them too in the November elections.

May be the end of the Republican Party.

There is no evidence in the O/P to support Dodge's misleading heading for this thread...

As the O/P itself shows quite clearly,  it is a few rogue Rupublican boofheads who are misbehaving..

'Wolfie wrote:

There is no evidence in the O/P to support Dodge's misleading heading for this thread...

As the O/P itself shows quite clearly,  it is a few rogue Rupublican boofheads who are misbehaving..

Well, you know didge.  He's full-throated for wealth and privilege.  He's not going to miss a chance to twist the truth in their favor.

But Red is right.  The vote will go along party lines, as the Republicans are now fully Russo-Republicans, and taking their orders from Putin.  For an impeachment trial, the constitutional requirement is for a two-thirds (67 Senators out of 100) vote, and there is probably no way that that many will cross the line to vote for impeachment.

For Democrats, the impeachment vote is largely symbolic...a chance to say you are against lawlessness.  The impeachment case paints a picture: Democrats = rule of law; Republicans = lawlessness and treason. Democrats may lose on the impeachment front, but votes follow awareness, and already some 70% of voters are in favor of ousting Trump.  Look for a landslide exactly one year from now.