Also serving the communities of De Luz, Rainbow, Camp Pendleton, Pala and Pauma

Under pressure from Republicans, House Democrats plan vote to formalize impeachment probe

WASHINGTON – The House will take a vote this week to formalize the Democrat-run impeachment inquiry amid criticism from Republicans and President Donald Trump that the probe is illegitimate.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the step is being taken “to eliminate any doubt” about the process as the White House has vowed to not cooperate with the inquiry until the Democrats follow the process established in prior impeachment proceedings.

In a letter to colleagues Monday, Oct. 28, Pelosi said the resolution will “affirm the ongoing, existing investigation” and lay out procedures for open hearings and the next steps going forward. She dismissed the White House’s argument that impeachment isn’t happening without a formal vote.

The Constitution doesn’t require a vote to begin impeachment, but both of the impeachment inquiries in recent history were initiated via a formal vote by the House. Trump and his Republican colleagues have cited the lack of a formal vote and other issues to lambast the probe. The White House used the argument in a detailed letter to the House earlier this month, saying that the administration would not cooperate.

Many government officials have cooperated with the inquiry despite Trump’s orders. But Pelosi’s letter comes as a national security official defied a House subpoena Oct. 28, escalating the standoff between Congress and the White House over who will testify.

Charles Kupperman, who was a deputy to former national security adviser John Bolton, failed to show up for a scheduled closed-door deposition after filing a lawsuit asking a federal court in Washington to rule on whether he was legally required to appear. In a statement, Kupperman said he was awaiting “judicial clarity.”

The Democrats are investigating the allegation that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. The transcript of the July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky shows no obvious evidence of pressure in Trump’s request for an inquiry. Zelensky has twice confirmed that he was not pressured on the call.

The impeachment inquiry was triggered by an anonymous whistleblower who alleged that Trump’s request may have amounted to a campaign finance violation. The Justice Department reviewed the whistleblower’s complaint and determined no further action was necessary.

Democrats have indicated that they are likely to use no-show witnesses to write an article of impeachment against Trump for obstruction of justice, rather than launching potentially lengthy court battles to obtain testimony.

Two current National Security Council staff members, Alexander Vindman and Tim Morrison, are scheduled to appear this week and would be the first White House employees to testify in the inquiry.

Morrison’s attorney, Barbara Van Gelder, said in an email Monday that if Morrison is subpoenaed, he will appear.

The argument advanced by Kupperman’s lawyers turns on his status as a close adviser to the president and may not be available for other administration officials who are lower down the executive branch organization chart or who did not have regular contact with Trump.

Kupperman, his lawyers said, met with and advised Trump on a regular basis and therefore cannot be compelled to testify. In Kupperman’s lawsuit, he asked a judge to decide whether he should accede to House demands for his testimony or assert “immunity from Congressional process” as directed by Trump. He said he “cannot satisfy the competing demands of both the legislative and executive branches,” and without the court’s help, he said, he would have to make the decision himself – one that could “inflict grave constitutional injury” on either Congress or the presidency.

“Given the issue of separation of powers in this matter, it would be reasonable and appropriate to expect that all parties would want judicial clarity,” Kupperman said in a statement.

The three chairmen of the House committees overseeing the inquiry told Kupperman’s lawyers in a letter over the weekend that the suit was without merit and appeared to be coordinated with the White House.

Kupperman’s attorney, Charles Cooper, said in a letter that it was not his client who was challenging Congress’s constitutional claims.

“It is President Trump, and every president before him for at least the last half-century, who have asserted testimonial immunity to their closest confidential advisers,” Cooper said. “If your clients’ position on the merits of this issue is correct, it will prevail in court, and Dr. Kupperman, I assure you again, will comply with the court’s judgment.”

Epoch Times reporter Ivan Pentchoukov contributed to this report from The Associated Press.

 

Reader Comments(0)