Charade

[XCR1250]

Another pathetic Jerry Nadler impeachment charade

By Post Editorial Board

December 9, 2019 | 7:53pm

 

Enlarge Image

House Judiciary Committee counsel Barry Berke provided testimony in the impeachment inquiry of President Trump.Getty Images

Poor Jerry Nadler: The House Judiciary Committee chief so wants to make the rush to impeach President Trump look respectable — but his hearings keep doing the reverse.

Monday’s show, which nominally began the drafting of articles of impeachment, has to qualify as Democrats’ most blatant publicity stunt so far. It began with Nadler rejecting Republican demands to call various witnesses, such as Rep. Adam Schiff.

Schiff ran the Intelligence Committee “fact-finding” hearings but refuses to explain many of his investigative steps, from his staff’s relationships with the whistleblower who kicked off the whole affair to his peculiar decision to subpoena — and then publish — phone records of the top Republican on Intel, as well as various potential witnesses.

But Nadler won’t let Republicans question him under oath. Maybe he remembers how the testimony of chief “collusion” investigator Robert Mueller proved a disaster?

Instead, Nadler had two Democratic staff lawyers, Barry Berke and Dan Goldman, offer their opening testimony, followed by a series of “questions” in which the chairman basically had them agree with his own statements. Wow: The staffers agree with the boss!

Berke later switched hats from witness to counsel for the Dems and, in a truly surreal moment, began questioning other witnesses, including his co-worker, Goldman, and Republican counsel Stephen Castor.

It’s a wonder Berke didn’t question himself, running back and forth between seats.

Nadler repeatedly shot down GOP complaints, including that Berke shouldn’t be “a witness and a judge” at the same time and that his questioning of Castor amounted to badgering the witness and not letting him answer the questions.

Nadler even refused to acknowledge a simple request from a GOPer to adjust a display screen so he could see it. Republicans would’ve had every right to walk out.

More troubling, of course, is that the Dems’ whole case is built on such garbage. They claim the facts supporting impeachment are “unambiguous” but ignore evidence to the contrary. They’ve opted to rely on hearsay and “presumptions,” because they’re in too much of a rush to get first-hand testimony.

And when Trump refuses to participate in their charade, they cite that as “obstruction” — worthy of impeachment itself.

If Dems really had a solid case, they’d slow down the process, ensure that it’s fair and earn GOP support. That they won’t is strong reason to doubt the whole endeavor.