Radio Recap: Mounting Irregularities in Democrat Inquiry

By 

Jay Sekulow

|
October 11, 2019

3 min read

Constitution

A

A

We’ve spent 2-3 weeks discussing what I call the irregularities of this whole impeachment inquiry. There are serious constitutional issues that have been raised. We’re talking everything from Separation of Powers, the Supremacy Clause, Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of Association.

On today’s show went back through all the relevant events of the last two to three weeks, step by step and explained what is at stake for our Constitutional Republic.

There have been attacks made by the California state legislature to try to change the qualifications to be President of the United States by adding a tax return requirement.

A court struck that down.

There was an attempt by a county attorney in NY to obtain financial records of the sitting President of the United States.

The President’s legal team got a stay on that subpoena just a few days ago from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

Then you have the irregularities of the House proceedings. The fact that you can’t call witnesses and you can’t cross-examine. The White House has issued a letter dealing with these issues.

Then you have the Chairman of the House Intel Committee himself, saying he and his team did not speak with the whistleblower. That ended up being false.

He has a hearing where he reads a transcript of the President’s phone call with the President of Ukraine. Except it is not the actual transcript of the actual conversation, it was a fabrication. He had the actual transcript, but he didn’t bother to read that into the record.

Then the President is exercising real constitutionally protected privileges, including Executive Privilege. Now the House of Representatives wants to say that exercising those constitutional privileges is violation of the President’s oath of office and is grounds for an impeachment.

First it was the Russia Hoax. They couldn’t prove that. No collusion.

Then it was obstruction of the Mueller investigation, except Mueller did his investigation and he couldn’t establish obstruction. Then he testified. That was about the last time you heard from Bob Mueller.

Then you had “quid pro quo” with Ukraine, except the transcript is released and there is no quid pro quo.

“There’s a whistleblower.”  But the whistleblower doesn’t have firsthand knowledge for most of what’s in there. The whistleblower didn’t bother to tell the Inspector General that conversations were had with the House Committee.

Then the Inspector General found out that this particular whistleblower had political bias and animus. But don’t worry, there’s a second whistleblower. Forms haven’t been filled out yet, but a lawyer has been retained. It happens to be the same law firm representing the first whistleblower.

Now you’re not hearing a whole lot about the Ukraine conversation. It’s now the “They’re not allowing us to move forward” argument. That might be their basis for the impeachment inquiry, except Article 1, Section 2 of the United States Constitution talks about impeachment being from the House of Representatives, not a subcommittee or committee. They haven’t had a vote.

They have turned the Constitution upside down. We’ve called it an attempt to weaponize the execution of the Constitution. It’s a power grab. That’s what’s at stake for our constitutional republic. That is why it’s critical you understand exactly what’s happening here and get involved.

The good news is, we’ve got a lot of options.

You can listen to the entire episode here.