Rep. Louie Gohmert, frustrated, outraged — and rightly so, given the ridiculous direction of the House impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump — tried to insist Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler explain why he was allowing a witness to serve as questioner, and when he was shut down and told to stay silent, instead snapped: “How much money do you have to get [inaudible]?”
In other words: Are you on the take, Mr. Chairman?
To which a wide-eyed Nadler shot back: The gentleman will not “disparage” a member of Congress.
What happened was this: Barry Berke, the counsel for the Democrats on Judiciary, the same guy who had just served as a witness for the Dems earlier in the day — a witness who spent considerable time making a wispy, shaky, unfounded case for impeachment of President Donald Trump, by using previous hearsay and presumptions of guilt — was then given the platform to serve as questioner. He began firing questions at the Republicans’ counsel, Stephen Castor.
He served first as witness, then as pit bull for the Democratic Party.
“You don’t get to be a witness and a judge in the same case,” is how Gohmert put it. And quite right.
How, in even the wildest of imaginations, can such a charade pass as just?
Republicans attempted to intervene, to stop the process, to compel Nadler to abide what they said were the proper rules of the hearing. Nadler shut them down, saying “the gentleman has been appointed by me to ask questions.” And thus, the circus show continued.
And that’s an interesting question. Because at this point in the impeachment game — with the next presidential election dawning and Democrats, along with their funders, feeling the heat, facing a massive loss — voters in America, at least some, maybe even many, are beginning to wonder the very same.
• Cheryl Chumley can be reached at [email protected] or on Twitter @ckchumley.
Source : Link