Thread by @JewhadiTM

.@RepJerroldNadler Is Caught in His Own Quid Pro Quo

via Dov Fischer spectator.org/jerrold-nadler…

Life is interesting, isn’t it? And when the Democrats roll out “the Resistance,” their pathetic public corruption of our social contract, life also takes on aspects of shamefulness and hypocrisy.

Take, for example, Act Two of their seasonal theatrical production, the Phantom of the Congress.

We the audience now return from intermission to find @RepAdamSchiff, the villain of Act One, missing and replaced by @RepJerryNadler.

Nadler seems less despicable because, beneath the surface, he is oh-so-vulnerable, oh-so-compromised, and oh-so-neutered. We wonder what has transpired during the period that the intermission passed over:

Legislation to reduce the cost of prescription drugs and to get control over health care? Passage of the USMCA Trade Agreement among Mexico, Canada, and the United States? Military funding authorizations?

Nope. None of it.

Meanwhile, the stage hands have changed the scenery from the House Intelligence Committee to the House Judiciary Committee, while borrowing some of the props from the previous scene, including the big leather chair.

And now we find Nadler presiding over the “judicious” contemplation of the Intelligence Committee Report, comprised of a Schiff-load of malarkey and rests on hearsay, innuendo, guessing, and presumptions.

None of that kind of secondhand guessing matters as evidence or testimony in a real justice system, only in a corrupt sham of a proceeding.

Most Americans are not aware of a secret known only to a limited number of law academics and professors — and to those of their students who took good notes and remembered what they learned even after final exams.

To wit: There is a legal principle known as the “legislative privilege.” Under that rule, any legislator can say in the Senate or in the House of Representatives any darned thing he or she feels like saying, and the law shields the legislator from being sued for defamation.

Thus, Harry Reid can lie on the Senate floor and say that Mitt Romney failed to pay his income taxes for 10 years, with Reid knowing full well that he is outright lying through his teeth, and Romney cannot do a thing about it.

In the same way, #StorytimeSchiff can lie all he likes while in the House chamber, and he cannot be sued. Same with all the others. Same in the Senate. Democrat senators can lie about Brett Kavanaugh at his confirmation hearings, and they cannot be sued.

Even Blasé Ford could whisper all her lies and cannot be sued based on what she testified in the Senate chamber. That’s the “legislative privilege,” and the protection applies to all who speak inside the House or Senate, even witnesses. Did you know that? Heckuva thing, no?

In the same way that elected representatives can lie without consequence when they stay in their playground facility, they can also make corrupt and deviant rules without consequence. In a real court of law, for example, hearsay is inadmissible.

That is why our Founding Fathers added this tidbit to the Constitution’s Bill of Rights:

Amendment VI

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law,

and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”

To be confronted with the witnesses against him

Short, sweet, and to the point. None of this stuff about “I didn’t hear it, but this one told me that he heard it from that one.” Or “I already told you, congressman, I did not hear it. I never said I heard it myself. I was only presuming.”

As the world turns now to Nadler and his House Judiciary Committee, the sham is that Nadler is going to make believe that he and his committee are impartial judges, as they would have the public infer from the name of the committee.

They want us to believe that now these impartial judges, with not a whit of personal interest or pecuniary concern and no pre-formed opinions, will objectively evaluate the Schiff-load of documents presented.

And that they will objectively, judiciously, fairly, and dispassionately adjudicate whether or not the president should be impeached.

Nadler would have the public understand, in evaluating whether or not there was a quid pro quo, that he himself is above it all.

But he is not. And @RepJerryNadler knows it.

#HouseInjudiciousCommittee #ImpeachmentFarce