To the surprise of literally no one, the partisan impeachment sideshow inquiry is off to a rocky start. Already, two officials (John Eisenberg and Robert Blair) have failed to show up for the depositions scheduled for Monday morning, and Michael Ellis and Brian McCormack are expected to do the same.
The four men join a growing list of witnesses who have refused to comply with Democrats’ demands. Charles Kupperman, former deputy to National Security Adviser John Bolton, filed a lawsuit after receiving a subpoena as well as White House instructions to remain silent. Kupperman failed to appear before the House committees at the designated time, with his attorney stating that with Kupperman torn between two branches of government he is waiting for a judge to make the decision for him.
Trump has been attempting to block witnesses from cooperating with the impeachment inquiry, although some who denied initial requests from Congress eventually complied upon receiving subpoenas.
Is it unprecedented for government officials to ignore subpoenas and presidents to encourage a lack of cooperation with inquiries? Perhaps. But you know what else is unprecedented? Closed-door impeachment hearings.
Appearing on “America’s Newsroom” with host Sandra Smith, Starr said the impeachment evidence should be laid out before the American people in public hearings, dismissing the need for more closed-door witness interviews. He objected to the argument by Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Ala., a member of the House Intelligence Committee, that the White House is “afraid” of what will come out.
“What we’re dealing with here are questions about the legitimacy, appropriateness of this resolution passed last week that continues the process … for these to be closed-door hearings. And that’s the fundamental problem, the closed-door nature of an impeachment inquiry is, I think, it’s unprecedented, that’s undisputed. It’s also quite wrong and it’s unfair to the American people. We need to see these witnesses,” he said.
Damn right, Starr. Transparency in government is beyond necessary in a truly free country. And until this clown show is made public, I fully support any and all witnesses’ decisions to refuse to cooperate. Really, what are the Dems going to do if they don’t show up? Fire them?
It reminds me of Ron Swanson’s testimony about misconduct in the Parks and Recreation department:
It worked for Ron, it’ll work for the Republicans.
By the way, is anyone else suspicious about WHY, exactly, the Democrats think it’s necessary to have closed-door proceedings? Very little of what’s going on now is precedented, regular, or even logical. Any attempt on the left’s part to assure us that this is a nonpartisan search for justice was weak enough already, but there’s nothing about the way they’ve gone about this that could scream anything but “partisan political points.”
And it’s only Monday!