House Minority Leader Appoints Jim Jordan to ‘Impeachment Committee’...

[jimnyc]

A great move in the right direction. Now all we need is for everyone to step up and bring TOTAL fairness to this inquiry. Then we'll see more facts coming out, and not just a one sided and skewed version. Then hopefully if everything goes public, we won't have to rely on leaks and replays to get the facts. But the biggest thing will be bringing in tons of witnesses on their own, and also being able to subpoena others and ask the damning questions of their own. And hopefully with those subpoenas, they will go back and get the entire truth and all of the facts, not just one sides.

--

House Minority Leader Appoints Jim Jordan to ‘Impeachment Committee’ Until ‘Democrat Charade Is Over’

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) has joined the House “Impeachment Committee," House Minority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) announced Friday.

Since Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) has turned the House Intelligence Committee into the “Impeachment Committee,” Jordan will join the committee until “this Democrat charade is over,” McCarthy tweeted:


"I am appointing @Jim_Jordan to the Intelligence Committee—which has now become the Impeachment Committee—where he will continue fighting for fairness and truth.

"@RepRickCrawford has been an exemplary member of the committee and will rejoin it when this Democrat charade is over."

Republicans, such as Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), have been calling on the House Minority Leader to staff the committee with Republicans versed in grilling witnesses, since the committee has turned its attention away its intelligence focus.

As CNSNews.com reported Thursday, Rep. Gaetz said the appointment of colleagues like Jordan is necessary in order to “match the Democrats’ moves”:


“We’ve got great members on the Intelligence Committee now – but, they are experts and specialists in analyzing intelligence, not necessarily in defending against impeachment.

“And, that’s why we’ve got to match the Democrats’ moves with some strategy of our own.”

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/house-minority-leader-appoints-jim-jordan-impeachment-committee-until-democrat

[Gunny]

Wow. An actual strategic move by the Republicans. And a pretty good one, IMO. I think it's trying to save the ship with a 5 gal bucket, but it at least it's something positive.

And the MSM and Dem character assassination of Jim Jordan begins in ...3.....2.....1....

[jimnyc]

What I've been saying. Pretty confident that Dershowitz is a little more knowledgeable than I am, and can likely point things out better than I can. :)

--

Dershowitz to Newsmax TV: GOP Should Have Equal Right for Witnesses

House Republicans should have the equal right to call witnesses in the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, as he is the defendant and subject to the possibility of impeachment, Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus of law at Harvard University, and one side should not be giving the other permission to present testimony, told Newsmax TV Friday night.

"There's no such thing in law as one side's witness," Dershowitz told "Newsmax Now" host John Bachman. "Every witness is supposed to be the witness to the truth, and the Republicans should have equal right to call witnesses up as Democrats, indeed probably more because of the defendant, in this case, the president, is being subject to the possibility of impeachment."

Meanwhile, the presumption should be that there will be due process, but one side holds control of one of the chambers of Congress, it makes that difficult, said Dershowitz.

"That's why we really look at courts and judges and juries, rather than Congress, to get to the truth and to do justice."

It's also wrong to say that Trump or his appointees are obstructing justice for refusing to testify, said Dershowitz.

"We have a system of checks and balances, in which the branches are co-equal," he said. "If the executive branch believes it has a plausible argument for not turning material witnesses over to the legislative branch, the issue has to be resolved by the judicial branch. That's called checks and balances, not obstruction of Congress.

He added that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Maria Yovanovitch, who reportedly communicated with a Democratic staffer through email after testifying that she had not, should not automatically be excluded as a witness, or be accused of perjury.

"I've no idea whether she did or didn't lie," he said. "I think you always have to err on the side of presuming a person. Innocent. Perjury is a very hard crime to prove."

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/dershowitz-impeachment-witnesses-trump/2019/11/08/id/940873/

[Gunny]

I agree, Minus the reality of life in the US, on paper, the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty and has the Right to examine all evidence and witnesses against him/her.

Until the Dems start telling us it's not a court of law so the Rights of the Accused don't apply :rolleyes: I think they've used that line before.

[Kathianne]

IMO, the obvious unfairness that Schiff has perpetrated has helped keep some folks on the president's side and strongly against impeachment. This includes many that wish he'd not been elected, but recognize he was.

It seems to me that there were some wrongs done, BUT none of which weren't committed by previous administration and are part and parcel of real 'diplomacy.' It's better than wars, as it were. None of these rise to impeachment level.

[jimnyc]

IMO, the obvious unfairness that Schiff has perpetrated has helped keep some folks on the president's side and strongly against impeachment. This includes many that wish he'd not been elected, but recognize he was.

It seems to me that there were some wrongs done, BUT none of which weren't committed by previous administration and are part and parcel of real 'diplomacy.' It's better than wars, as it were. None of these rise to impeachment level.

I agree here. I'm unsure why the Dems would want to do things in a manner that may turn the public against them. It appears from the outside that they are working things behind the scenes and not following the law - while the republicans are trying their best to expand things and bring their full abilities aboard. I don't think Americans are that stupid. I think a lot see what's going on. For one major reason, folks want to know the entire story, and if hidden from them, they get suspicious.

Schiff getting nailed for absurdity from day one harmed them. And they have ignored that since.

Past administrations have long used aid and what not, and holding things back, in order to make deals and get things done. In this case, nothing was really held back, IMO. And no threats made of course, and the leader of the Ukraine has stated as much.

There were things unethically wrong here as many have stated. Things most certainly could have been approached differently. But I honestly don't see anything worthy of removal from office in what is going on here. IMO, if they fully investigated, I see more wrongdoing from the left in things done, both with Biden and investigations... than I do by Trump's desire to investigate.

I truly would love to see this go ENTIRELY public and both sides have full unfettered access and give us the entire truth of everything that took place.

[Gunny]

IMO, the obvious unfairness that Schiff has perpetrated has helped keep some folks on the president's side and strongly against impeachment. This includes many that wish he'd not been elected, but recognize he was.

It seems to me that there were some wrongs done, BUT none of which weren't committed by previous administration and are part and parcel of real 'diplomacy.' It's better than wars, as it were. None of these rise to impeachment level.I'm against impeachment for the partisan hatred driving this one. I was against impeaching Bill Clinton. I consider impeachment should be held to a much higher standard than either of the aforementioned occasions. I also was a naysayer in all the calls for impeaching Obama even tough if anyone deserved it, it was him. Waste of time and money.

They aren't going to remove Trump from office and even IF the Senate does impeach him, it does not preclude him from running for reelection that I am aware of. Might ensure a lot of voters on the fence who see it for what it is vote to reelect him though.

If they can't come up with a real crime backed by real evidence and bust him fair and square, I'll vote for him just to cancel a Dem vote, as usual.

You are correct though. This is a bunch of unfair, carnival BS and it has turned me more and more against the left, and even the remote possibility of voting for someone else.