Since the impeachment of President Donald Trump began, members of the Republican Party, analysts, and the general population have criticized the severe irregularities of the process.

Moreover, some have even predicted that these contradictions will make it clear that the president did not do anything criminal, reinforcing his positive image and becoming an authentic “boomerang” for the Democratic opposition that seeks to win the presidential elections in 2020.

Lack of due process

In a recently published opinion piece, lawyer and presenter Marc A. Scaringi pointed to some of the great fallacies of the Democratic opposition’s arguments.

First, Scaringi recalled that since House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) revealed on Sept. 24 the beginning of the “official impeachment inquiry,” Democrats have prevented the full House from voting on a resolution authorizing the appropriate authorities to carry out the process while establishing fair rules for it, as happened in similar situations against other presidents.

However, the Democrats moved forward with their own agenda and passed H.R.660, “which simply resolved that the House committees continue doing what they were doing and proposed some rules going forward that are far from fair for the man Democrats have accused of high crimes and misdemeanors,'” Scaringi said in his article in The Western Journal.

The lawyer, in fact, clarified that the aforementioned resolution does not conform to due process and “denies President Trump some basic rules of fairness”:

  • It gives Democrats veto power over Republicans’ use of the subpoena while placing no limit on Democrats’.
  • It requires House Republicans to submit their witness list to the Democratic committee chairmen for approval with no similar requirement on Democrats.
  • It does not afford the president the right to counsel in the House Intelligence Committee where the bulk of the impeachment proceedings have occurred and will resume.
  • It authorizes the continued use of the top-secret Intelligence Committee even though this has nothing to do with national security and that committee is not intended for and has never been used for impeachments before.

Likewise, the public hearings, which began Wednesday, Nov. 13, do not give the president the right to be represented by a lawyer on the Intelligence Committee.

Contradictions and the ‘boomerang effect’

Until the public hearings began on Nov. 13, the Democratic opposition, led by Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Pelosi, conducted the impeachment process behind closed doors, without allowing President Trump to be represented by a lawyer or Republicans to present their own witnesses and evidence. In many cases, the right of Republicans to cross-examine Democrats’ witnesses has even been limited, Scaringi said in his column.

He added, “In what were supposed to be top-secret proceedings, Democrats released the opening statements of certain witnesses and leaked out testimony they believed to be favorable to them.”

One point the Democrats are strongly questioned about is that the process began when Schiff cited the alleged transcript of a call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

President Trump has been accused by Democratic lawmakers, who allege that he called Ukraine’s president to pressure him into investigating former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, who is his political rival in the 2020 elections.

The accusation was based on an anonymous whistleblower who appears to be linked to the CIA.

Trump 2020 Advisory Board member Jenna Ellis Rives noted that Schiff initially appeared in the mainstream media citing the alleged transcript of the call between Trump and Zelenskiy.

However, the White House emphatically denied the accusations made against the president and published the actual transcript of the conversation between U.S. President Donald Trump and Zelensky.

The conversation shows that President Trump did not pressure or threaten any kind of financial retribution to Ukraine to investigate the son of Joe Biden, who was involved in a case of corruption of the main gas company in the European country.

Indeed, Schiff’s quotes hardly resembled the transcript published by the White House, Rives recalled in a column in The Washington Examiner.

“Because the transcript of the call, and the statements of the Ukrainians themselves, revealed there was no crime, Schiff had to make it up,” Scaringi said.

Indeed, after more than a month of the inquiry, “Democrats still have not shown us the crime,” he added.

“Rest assured, if the president had committed a high crime or misdemeanor Democrats would have put the name of that crime in neon lights on top of the Capitol Building,” the attorney said.

“Look, if you have evidence and proof and you are conducting a fair trial. Why do it in secret? Why deny due process to both the president and the Republicans?” asked Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas).

“It seems to me that this [impeachment inquiry] has been [created] for Democrats to harm the president for purely political reasons,” Brady said in an interview with local media KPRC 2 Click2Houston.

“Democrats have the majority and are licking their chops to take out this president who beat them in 2016,” Scaringi added in his column in The Western Journal.

The impeachment is expected to radically change direction in the Senate, which is dominated by Republicans.

That’s why some analysts claim that this process is actually reinforcing Trump’s leadership in the GOP.

“Each punch Pelosi throws at Trump hits half of America—the half that put Trump in the White House and kept Congress in the hands of the Republicans in 2016 (…) And now, thanks to this impeachment, it will happen again,” said Scaringi, who was Trump’s delegate to the Republican National Convention in 2016.

“In the end, Pelosi’s punch will go down in history as one of the biggest haymakers that missed its mark and ended up knocking out her own political party,” he concluded.

Sign up to receive our latest news!

By submitting this form, I agree to the terms.