Schiff Says WH Staffer No-Shows Are ‘Further Evidence’ Of Trump’s Obstruction | Talking Points Memo

House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff (D-CA) declared on Monday that four White House staffers’ refusal to appear for their scheduled hearings that day will only serve as more evidence of President Donald Trump’s attempt to obstruct justice.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1259984
1 Like

All Schiff has to do is find someone with power who cares.

McConnell and the rest of his GOP believe they have already secured permanent Republican hegemony.

We are all eagerly waiting for the courts – which McConnell has spend 3 years furiously packing with Federalist foot soldiers – to side with Schiff.

9 Likes

What are they hiding? What are they hiding?? What. Are. They. Hiding???

8 Likes

Given the calendar, I’d say they’re hiding christmas presents!

5 Likes

While it’s good to use these no shows to support an obstruction of justice impeachment claim, Schiff and Pelosi need to do two more things:

  1. Subpoena all no show witnesses; and

  2. Find all witnesses who ignored subpoenas to be in contempt of Congress. This will allow our next AG to prosecute these criminals. The only way to deal with thugs is to prosecute and jail them.

15 Likes

Step 1 is already done. Step 2 will likely happen once the House is back in Session (They’re out this week, despite the fact that people are still around and working).

7 Likes

Excellent!

2 Likes

Word.

1 Like

Pretty shifty move there, Mr. Schiff.

Trump’s crime world’s are colliding…

Well played…

2 Likes

Trump: “But when I gave the order for everyone to refuse to comply with Congressional subpoenas for testimony and documents, it was a joke. Shifty Adam Schiff and Nervous Nancy have no sense of humor at all. They’re taking this all so seriously, like the Constitution and laws and expectations and responsibilities of a president actually mean something.”

5 Likes

Yep, Democrats need to hammer these people, and use them as a wedge to show that the administration is hiding something. As the transcripts and testimonies come out, these people will get named, and some, especially Eisenberg, appear to be participating in a cover up. Those kinds of staffers went to jail during Nixon’s impeachment investigation, and it should be made clear that not cooperating will lead to the same event as the evidence comes out. Turn the screws, use the courts to force testimony, and give them no quarter or mercy for interfering in Congressional oversight…that’s what needs to happen, and the Democrats seem to be onboard with that.

I really hope we get a Democrat in 2021 as president, and they put in a AG who will prosecute all of these people to then fullest extent of the law for their extralegal efforts to protect Trump.

5 Likes

res ipsa loquitur

1 Like

There’s a lot of talk about how the Legislative branch of government is accorded Constitutional oversight rights over the Executive branch. It seems in practice Congress can exercise oversight only to the degree the Executive agrees to be subject to oversight.

2 Likes

The perfect phone call
perfect my friend
It was so perfect we don’t need to discuss it

2 Likes

I think that Trump may even push them too far , so blatant his crimes that they will have an attack of conscience instead of trying to defend the indefensible

3 Likes

When the next AG is in position, every member of the GOP will be pearl-clutching shocked at the idea that someone from the previous administration would be…held accountable for their actions. The fact that the Puppet has been threatening and taking action against people who have stood up to him will be conveniently forgotten. (“What? He did what? Next you’ll be saying that this enormous deficit grew during a GOP administration. Typical Dem projection.”)

4 Likes

That ain’t gonna happen. They may very well, however, decide that his personal problems aren’t theirs to fix. We should know very shortly, given the appeals court decision today regarding Mazars.

If they grant cert and take it, good sign that they are willing to do his personal dirty business. If they deny, then not.

6 Likes

There’s a lot of talk about how the Legislative branch of government is accorded Constitutional oversight rights over the Executive branch. It seems in practice Congress can exercise oversight only to the degree the Executive agrees to be subject to oversight.

This is a key point…

Post-2021, seems to me legislation is required to speed disputes between the Article 1 and Article 2 branches through the courts. It ought to take weeks not months.

If a change like that was made, the incentive for delaying-decision tactics would be reduced.

3 Likes

The natural assumption is the no shows are hiding something. That is soon to be the legal conclusion. I hope that next year, after the elections, the new President installs a functioning DOJ and some of these fuckers end up in jail. The lawyers especially have shown themselves to be knowing law breakers.

4 Likes

Federalist judges will have an attack of conscience? That assumes they have consciences in the first place.

2 Likes