C. President Trump may raise privileges and defenses in response to unfair, abusive proceedings.
Speaker Pelosi's impeachment inquiry, as conducted by Chairman Schiff, has abandoned due process and the presumption of innocence that lies at the heart of western legal systems.[1] Due to this abusive conduct and the Democrats' relentless attacks on the Trump Administration, President Trump may be rightly concerned about receiving fair treatment from House Democrats during this impeachment inquiry.
During the Clinton impeachment proceedings, Rep. Bobby Scott, now a senior member of the Democrat caucus, argued that the impeachment process should "determine[], with a presumption of innocence, whether those allegations [against President Clinton] were true by using cross-examination of witnesses and other traditionally reliable evidentiary procedures."[2] Similarly, Rep. Jerrold Nadler argued then that "[w]e have been entrusted with the grave and awesome duty by the American people, by the Constitution and by history. We must exercise that duty responsibly. At a bare minimum, that means the President's accusers must go beyond hearsay and innuendo and beyond demands that the President prove his innocence of vague and changing charges."[3]
Furthermore, Democrats had previously argued that the assertion of privileges by a president does not constitute an impeachable offense. During the Clinton impeachment proceedings, Rep. Scott stated:
At the hearing when I posed the question of whether any of the witnesses on the hearing's second panel believed that the count involving invoking executive privilege should be considered an impeachable offense, the clear consensus on the panel was that the charge was not an impeachable offense. In fact, one Republican witness said, I do not think invoking executive privilege even if frivolously, and I believe it was frivolous in these circumstances, that that does not constitute an impeachable offense.[4]
Despite this prior commitment to due process and a presumption of innocence, the Democrats now favor a presumption of guilt. Chairman Schiff has said publicly that the Trump Administration and witnesses asserting their constitutional rights and seeking to test the soundness of subpoenas have formed "a very powerful case against the president for obstruction, an article of impeachment based on obstruction."[5] Similarly, Chairman Schiff has made clear
- ↑ See, e.g., Id. at 102 (statement of Rep. Maxine Waters) ("As Members of Congress have sworn to uphold the Constitution, we must always insist on equal and just treatment under the law. The presumption of innocence until proven guilty is central and basic to our system of justice.").
- ↑ Id. at 82 (statement of Rep. Bobby Scott).
- ↑ Id. at 78 (statement of Rep. Jerrold Nadler) (emphasis added).
- ↑ Id. at 83 (statement of Rep. Bobby Scott).
- ↑ Kyle Cheney, Trump Makes 'Very Powerful Case' for Impeachment Based on Obstruction, Schiff Warns, Politico, Oct. 28, 2019.
106
