Sen. Graham says it's "imperative" that the whistleblower be interviewed "in public under oath." pic.twitter.com/277ZzTQ4Sk— TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) October 6, 2019
“If the whistleblower’s allegations are turned into an impeachment article, it’s imperative that the whistleblower be interviewed in public, under oath and cross-examined,” Graham told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” host Maria Bartiromo. “Nobody in America goes to jail or has anything done to them without confronting their accuser.”
The Republican senator, one of Trump’s most diehard loyalists in Congress, argued that the whistleblowers need to publicly testify “so the public can judge their credibility.”
“If that doesn’t happen in the House, I will make sure it happens in the Senate,” he said.
Graham confirmed he would use his subpoena power as Senate Judiciary chair to do so.
“Who are these people? Where did they come from? Are they tied to [ex-CIA director John Brennan] at all?” Graham asked. “These are questions I’d like to know.”
Conveniently, he has Lindsay to say it for him. This is Lindsay's response to the news multiple whistleblowers in the intelligence community may have had enough of the lawlessness and disregard for the law of Donald J. Trump, POTUS. Lindsay's argument is farcical. He is no position to demand witnesses appear in open hearings. A) it's a violation of law. B) Lindsay's not going to change his vote because people put their careers on the line to satisfy his demands. C) That "hearsay" thing he trotted out lasted all of about 10 seconds. He needs another diversion. D) His purpose is clear: to scare the whistleblowers back into the shadows. E) and the last bit echoes Ron Johnson's comments on MTP this morning, so you know it's a talking point all the GOP will be repeating. Johnson gots his ears boxed for that; Lindsay made sure he said it on FoxNews.
It's worth nothing everything said in the publicly released whistleblower account has been corroborated by Trump or by the White House. Lindsay wants to cut off any further revelations with his threats.
Witness tampering, in other words. Plain and simple. If this case were in court, he could be charged; and he knows it. It isn't, so he knows he can bellow and shout, hopefully scare the witnesses (unlikely; they'll have lawyers telling them to ignore this), and loudly declaim the trial "unfair" because of this grandstanding ploy.
But he's not gonna vote for removal, and he's playing to his GOP base in South Carolina.
No comments:
Post a Comment