Swalwell to Karlan, offered an anecdote about a Romanian man he met recently who told him how he would always tell people how corrupt his home country is when he returned there. But now when he goes home, they wag the finger at him.
They tell him, "You're going to lecture us about corruption?"
Karlan says this suggests ppl think U.S. doesn't believe in rule of law.
She continues:
Karlan says this suggests ppl think U.S. doesn't believe in rule of law.
She continues:
"It tells emerging democracies not to take it seriously when we tell them their elections aren't legitimate because of foreign interference or persecution of the opposing party."
Then, Swalwell notes how Turley said lawmakers should wait, go to courts.
"We've done that already," he says.
"We've done that already," he says.
Ted Lieu is up and notes Karlan point on how bribery was defined much more broadly at the time of framers writing.
He asks her now - It is true, we don't have to beat the federal bribery statute to impeach on basis of bribery, or incl. article?
Karlan: That's correct.
He asks her now - It is true, we don't have to beat the federal bribery statute to impeach on basis of bribery, or incl. article?
Karlan: That's correct.
Lieu plays back video of Sondland testimony where the amb. said he understood that the military aid wouldn't be delivered unless the announcement about investigations was made.
So Lieu asks, how about that? Would that meet the federal standard for bribery?
Karlan: Yes, it does.
So Lieu asks, how about that? Would that meet the federal standard for bribery?
Karlan: Yes, it does.
Panelists are asked by Republican Rep McClintock for a show of hands for how many supported Trump. Karlan cuts in and says she doesn't think that's relevant to q's. There's crosstalk as Nadler wrangles the committee back to order. Then McClintock asks for a show of hands again.
Feldman says, after no one raises hands, that not raising hands isn't an indication of anything if they choose not to answer the question.
.@jamie_raskin is up.
What does the existence of impeachment power in Const. tell us about POTUS claim that Constitution allows him to do whatever he wants?
Karlan: It blows it of the water.
What does the existence of impeachment power in Const. tell us about POTUS claim that Constitution allows him to do whatever he wants?
Karlan: It blows it of the water.
@jamie_raskin Tagged the wrong account, missed a word. Let's try this again.
@jamie_raskin His House account is @RepRaskin.
Raskin: What does the existence of impeachment power in Const. tell us about POTUS claim that Constitution allows him to do whatever he wants?
Karlan: It blows it out of the water.
Raskin: What does the existence of impeachment power in Const. tell us about POTUS claim that Constitution allows him to do whatever he wants?
Karlan: It blows it out of the water.
@jamie_raskin @RepRaskin As Rep Debbie Lesko's rattles off questions, like did Trump abuse his office? Did he commit impeachable offenses? As she says no, I am hearing a public spectator in the chamber whisper "yes" each time to her question.
@jamie_raskin @RepRaskin Rep Jayapal: One of the claims by POTUS is that he actually cared about corruption.
So how do you figure out if this is credible? How to determine?
The explanation must fit w/the facts, Jayapal answers own Q.
So how do you figure out if this is credible? How to determine?
The explanation must fit w/the facts, Jayapal answers own Q.
So Jayapal points to Vindman testimony where he said, under oath, that he prepared talking points on anti-corruption for Trump-Zel call. But per the transcript, Trump never mentioned any of those points.
He never mentioned the word corruption.
He never mentioned the word corruption.
Turley says he objects to the impeachment because there's "presumption over proof" He adds: "If you believe in democracy & you're going to remove a sitting pres. then you have an obligation to gather all the information. It's not that you can't do this, you can't do it this way."
WH could have avoided a lot of this by just being forthcoming with requests from investigations before impeachment inquiry began.
That point being driven home by Rep Val Demings as she displays graphic of all WH officials who have ignored requests for testimony and docs:
That point being driven home by Rep Val Demings as she displays graphic of all WH officials who have ignored requests for testimony and docs:
Rep Ben Cline doesn't know why we are in this room (House Ways and Means) instead of usual House Judiciary Committee.
Can confirm: It is literally because it is large and can accommodate the public, the reporters, the cameras, the witnesses for a massively historic moment.
Can confirm: It is literally because it is large and can accommodate the public, the reporters, the cameras, the witnesses for a massively historic moment.
Rep Nunes has joined Rep Meadows to spectate.
For those of you who love to read a transcript, I've got another one for you. This is the transcript from yesterday's vote to forward the impeachment inquiry from House Intel to House Judic: documentcloud.org/documents/6567…
If you missed our story on that yesterday and you want a quicker run through, voila - courthousenews.com/impeachment-in…
.@BadLegalTakes, question from the peanut gallery, Rep Armstrong suggested that 90% of communication is nonverbal and that you can tell if someone is lying through their body language.
Survey says?
Survey says?
@BadLegalTakes This tweet from Melania Trump has been entered into the record from Republicans before Professor Karlan was admonished by Rep Mike Johnson of Louisiana.
@BadLegalTakes Seems a good time to remind folks that POTUS referred to the entire nation of Haiti and other African nations as "shithole countries"
Which is ::checks notes:: not a pun about the name Barron being swapped with the title of baron.
#ImpeachmentInquiry
Which is ::checks notes:: not a pun about the name Barron being swapped with the title of baron.
#ImpeachmentInquiry
