[ad_1]
WASHINGTON – Democrats investigating the question of whether to recommend to the House to remove President Trump will publicly question one of his most outspoken supporters: Corey Lewandowski.
Former campaign manager of Mr Trump and still a confidante, Mr Lewandowski was enlisted in a ultimately unsuccessful ploy by the president in the summer of 2017 to significantly reduce the special advocate's investigation, thus ending the control of his campaign. The special advocate, Robert S. Mueller III, was eventually informed of it and included him among the dozen possible impediments to justice committed by Mr. Trump, described in his report and currently reviewed by the Judiciary Committee of the House.
But if the Democrats on the committee hope that the public confirmation of Lewandowski's report will be able to relaunch his impeachment case, their bitter witness has his own objectives: to defend Mr. Trump aggressively and possibly even to campaign for a potential campaign. Senate in New Hampshire.
The hearing before the Judicial Committee Chamber must begin at 1 pm Is and should last much of the afternoon.
Here's what you need to know before the start of the hearing.
Mr. Trump appealed to Mr. Lewandowski for the release of the special advocate. Mr. Mueller then wrote about it.
Mr. Lewandowski appears frequently in the list of more than Report of 400 pages, including in his discussion of the contacts of the Trump campaign with the Russians. But the main area of interest of the Judicial Committee is focused on Mr. Lewandowski's interactions with Mr. Trump in the summer of 2017, when the president was trying to influence the work of the newly appointed special council through various means.
As Mr. Mueller mentions in Volume II of his report on the possible obstruction of justice by Mr. Trump, the President met with Mr. Lewandowski at the Oval Office in June 2017, just two days after leading Donald F McGahn II. Attorney of the House at the time, to dismiss the special advocate. This time, Mr. Trump criticized Attorney General Jeff Sessions for being challenged to oversee the investigation of Russia and asked Mr. Lewandowski to convey to the Attorney General a message that He dictated on the spot.
It was said that Mr Sessions should make a speech announcing that Mr Trump had been treated unfairly and that he would limit the scope of the special advocate 's investigation. According to the notes shared by Mr. Lewandowski with Mr. Mueller's team, the dictation continued:
Now, a group of people wants to subvert the US Constitution. I will meet with the special prosecutor to explain that it is very unfair and let the special prosecutor conduct an investigation into electoral interference for future elections so that nothing can happen in future elections.
Mr. Lewandowski said he would convey the message, but the demand was languishing. Mr. Trump followed up at another meeting of the Oval Office in July, and Mr. Lewandowski told the special advocate that the President had told him that if Mr. Sessions did not meet him, he should inform the Attorney General that he was fired.
Instead of conveying the message, Lewandowski tried to solicit the help of Rick A. Dearborn, a former Sessions assistant who had worked at the White House. In the end, neither man communicated the message to the Attorney General, but Mr. Trump would continue to publicly criticize Mr. Sessions and privately request his removal.
The Democrats want to recreate the results, but do not expect many new facts.
The Democratic inquiry has been slow, largely because of the White House's repeated intervention to block the appearance of key witnesses. They hope that Mr. Lewandowski can help change that.
His appearance will be the first time that the Judiciary Committee will hear publicly a factual witness recounting the events reported by Mr. Mueller. And although the White House has also limited its testimony – it is allowed to speak only of its work for the Trump campaign and elements included in the public version of Mr. Mueller's report, thus limiting any further factual investigation – Democrats still feel it is enough ground to cover them.
To this end, New York representative Jerrold Nadler, the chairman of the commission and other Democrats will try to bring to life some of Mr. Mueller's extensive written report on the shooting of television cameras.
Mr. Lewandowski is not going to play softly.
Because he will be under oath, Mr. Lewandowski may have no choice but to publicly confirm what he has said in private to Mr. Mueller. But that does not mean that he can not turn into a witness firecracker, annoying loudly the presidential obstruction and making the Democrats rain in sparks and smoke.
In a Twitter post early Tuesday, Mr. Lewandowski presented a sample of what had happened.
He may have also anticipated his fighting approach during an interview with Fox News Radio last month when he called Democrats to the commission "such phonies", accusing Mr. Nadler of 39, be captive to "the far left" and claiming that the investigation could be conducted as a whole. attributed to the Democrats' refusal to accept a simple fact: "Donald Trump destroyed Hillary Clinton by a huge electoral margin".
"I'm happy to come, okay, because I want to explain that there was no collusion, that there was no obstruction Meme it "said Mr. Lewandowski. "I am an open book. I want to go and remind the American people that these guys are on the witch hunt. "
He can expect significant help from Republicans sitting on the Judiciary Committee, who oppose Democratic majority movements.
Mr. Trump welcomed the eventuality of Mr. Lewandowski's run, declaring last month that his former campaign manager was "fantastic" and that it would be "hard to beat. "said in front of a crowded arena in Manchester. The most powerful Republicans of the country of origin of Mr. Lewandowski, who fear that it will accelerate the destruction of what remains of New England distinguished policy.
The White House ordered two other former senior officials not to show up.
The witness table at Tuesday's hearing was supposed to be much more crowded. The Democrats had summoned subpoenas to Mr. Dearborn and Rob Porter, the former secretary of the White House staff, to appear with Mr. Lewandowski.
But Monday, the White House Council, Pat A. Cipollone, told the committee that Mr Trump had ordered the two men not to show up as they were "absolutely safe" from appearances before Congress as former presidential advisers.
If this statement sounds familiar, it is. The White House has invoked the same demand for immunity as other potential witnesses, including Mr. McGahn, the former White House Council, who was omnipresent in Mr. Mueller's report.
Last month, the House brought a lawsuit in federal court to challenge the complaint in the case of Mr. McGahn. And a decision in this case could have an impact on the need to testify of MM. Dearborn and Porter. In the meantime, on Monday night, Nadler described the White House's position as "a shocking and dangerous claim to the privilege of executive power and absolute immunity".
What's going on with the impeachment investigation of the Democrats?
There has been a lot of confusion in recent days about the state of the Democrats' inquiry, some of which was deliberately fanned by the Republicans. But part of the problem seems to be that the Democrats do not agree on the seriousness of their impeachment.
Mr. Nadler insists that his committee conduct a thorough investigation to determine whether or not the Judiciary Committee should draft impeachments and recommend them to the House as a whole. He and the other Democrats on the committee are becoming more outspoken in recent weeks and Monday, the President announced that he was ready to vote in favor of dismissal, but warned that he should try to pull the country and its caucus. along first.
"In my opinion, dismissal is imperative, not because it will be removed from office – the Senate will not do it – but because we have to defend the Constitution," Nadler said.
Democratic leaders are supportive of the progress of the investigation at this stage, but they are much more reluctant to support a dismissal vote itself. Chair Nancy Pelosi regularly described the work of the committee as part of a broader legislative, legal and investigative strategy to hold Mr. Trump accountable, and opposed the use of the term "investigative inquiry". Accused".
Many caucus moderates, who need the Democratic majority, fear that their legislative work on the health sector and the economy will cover their legislation, problems that they feel are much more urgent for their districts. .
Perhaps one of the most important consequences at the moment, Democrats are unified in moving forward by calling witnesses and convening hearings on behaviors that, in their opinion, may be impossible to achieve. . This includes areas that go beyond Mr. Mueller's conclusions, such as whether illegally taking advantage of foreign and national government spending and reports that he was pardoning immigration officials, reluctant to enforce his policies.
[ad_2]
Source link