Didn't the Democrats run in 2018 promising to finally hold the president accountable? Under the Republicans they said Trump got away with everything for two years. Finally, finally the Democrats will change all that and bring some welcome accountability. But after six months of a Democratic House, nothing has changed. Democrats still talk and promise and threaten just like they did when the Republicans held the House. Trump continues to do anything he wants. Enter Jerrold Lewis Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary. He's the guy that would be in charge of bringing Mr. Trump to task in any impeachment inquiry.
But even if the Democrats were to open an impeachment inquiry, who thinks Nadler would be up to the job? Even with the stronger powers of subpoena afforded by an impeachment inquiry, would Nadler use that power forcefully? Or would he continue to temporize, concede, negotiate, and hide every testimony behind closed doors? Yes, Mr. Nadler, I will testify in public but I insist on wearing a disguise and my voice electronically changed. Yes, Mr. Nadler, I will testify but I will only read declarative sentences from my eponymous report behind closed doors, and don't even ask me to go beyond the four corners of that report.
Look at what Nadler is doing with Hope Hicks and Robert Mueller. Nadler's left eyebrow remarkably rises, but the rest of him bends over backwards to accommodate recalcitrant witnesses. Hope Hicks will testify behind closed doors June 19 and a rapid transcript of her testimony will be released promises Nadler. But sorry Mr. Nadler, a transcript is not good enough. It looks weak. Written words are weak compared to a testimony with the cameras turned on. In fact, whenever a witness testifies behind closed doors you look weak, Chairman Nadler. Better Hicks not testify at all than you Mr. Nadler be seen to be conceding, conceding, always conceding to stubborn witnesses. Oh, you might have a 1001 reasons why America shouldn't hear Ms. Hicks testify in public, but pretty please let her testify in the open so we can see her refuse to testify about something "classified.” Or let us all see the White House lawyer tell her she can't testify about anything and everything. Seeing is believing. Reading a transcript means nothing.
The same with Mr. Mueller. Couldn't Mr. Mueller, who apparently has a fondness for going along just fine with the norms of the Department of Justice, no matter how thin, can't bring himself to follow the norm of obeying a request from the House Judiciary to testify? Nadler tells us he is in negotiations with Mueller, however, and Mr. Nadler is very sure that Mueller just very well may testify late in the summer. Be assured America, that Mueller just might testify. Looks weak. When did witnesses start telling the House just how they will testify? Do you remember Secretary of State Clinton's public 11-hour testimony with Monsieur Trey Gowdy presiding? Was it behind closed doors? What conditions did SOS Clinton negotiate with Mr. Gowdy? I will only testify for less than 12 hours? I will answer only every other question. No.
Of course "a president-can-run-the-country” President Trump will probably forbid Hicks and Mueller to testify at all. And so it will go for the next 18 months until November 2020.
Better Ms. Pelosi to ask Mr. Nadler to step aside for someone with fire in the belly to handle Mr. Trump. Maybe an AOC or a Justin Amash might be able to do the job. Ridiculous suggestions, right? Ha. Have you better ideas?