Castor delivers opening statement at impeachment hearing | ABC News

By | December 10, 2019

Castor delivers opening statement at impeachment hearing | ABC News
Castor delivers opening statement at impeachment hearing | ABC News
My name is Steve, Castor, Congressional staff member serve with the oversight committee on the Republican staff with mr. Jordan. Also for purposes of this investigation, I’m a shared staffer with the Judiciary Committee committee on intelligence and Mister Nunez. It sure is a typical for a staffer to be presenting, but again thanks for having me the purpose of this hearing. As we understand it is to discuss whether President Donald J, Trump’s conduct mission of a high crime and misdemeanor, it does not such that the committee should consider articles of impeachment to remove the president from office, and it should not. This case in many respects comes down to eight lines in a car transcript. Let me see clearly and unequivocally that the answer to that question is no the record in the Democrats. Impeachment Corey does not show that President Trump abused the power of his office or obstructed Congress impeach a president whose 63 million people voted for over eight lines in a call transcript is bologna. Democrats need to impeach president meaners, but because they disagree with his policies is impeachment. Angry is not the organic outgrowth of serious misconduct. Democrats have been searching for a set of facts and which complete President Trump since his inauguration on January 2017, just 27 minutes after the president’s inauguration at day, The Washington Post ran a story that the campaign to impeach the president has already begun. The article reported Democrat and liberal activist amounting broad opposition, this timing, Trump’s agenda and noted that impeachment strategist believe the Constitution’s emoluments Clause would be the vehicle. In the first two years, Administration house introduced articles of impeachment to remove President Trump from office on several very different sexual bases. On January 3rd, the very first day of the new Congress, Congressman Sherman, introduced articles of impeachment against same-day Representatives president set on MSNBC. If we don’t impeach, this President will be re-elected even speaker. Pelosi and prayerful exercise has called President Trump an impostor and said it is dangerous to allow voters to judge his performance in 2020. The obsession with impeaching, the president is reflected in the house. Democrats have used the power of their majority in the Paw 11 months in the oversight committee. The Democrats first announced witness was Michael Cohen, a disgrace felon, who is who pleaded guilty to lying to Congress when he came before us at the oversight committee. He then light again as many 8 * oversight. Committee Democrats demand information about the president’s personal finances and even subpoenaed. The president’s accounting firm Azar’s were large swaths of sensitive and personal financial information about the entire Trump family. The subpoena was issued over the objection of committee. Republicans and without a vote in the Ways and Means Committee Democrats demand at the president’s personal tax return information. The reason they cited for wanting the president’s tax returns, they said, was to oversee the IRS audit process for presidential tax returns. You can judge that for yourself in the financial service committee Democrats demanded and subpoena the president bank records going back 10 years to financial services committee staff, the Republicans tell me the information demanded would cover every withdrawal credit card, swipe your debit card purchase of every member Of the Trump family, including his minor child, the reason that the Democrats gave for why they needed such the Luminous and intrusive personal information about the Trump family was get this financial industry. Compliance with banking statue and regulations. Here in the Judiciary Committee Democrats sent out letters demanding information from over 80 recipients, butina president’s children, business employees is campaign, businesses and Foundation course. The main events of the Judiciary Committee was the report of special counsel Mueller, which Democrats would believe, which is the evidentiary basis for impeaching. The president, spite interviewing 500 Witnesses issuing 2800 subpoenas executing almost 500 search warrants and spending 5 million dollars. The special counsel’s and 40 FBI agents, analyst and staff found no conspiracy or coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government after the trump-russia collusion allegations did not pan out Democrats Focus their efforts on obstruction of justice. They criticized Attorney General, but in fact, was entirely appropriate for the Attorney General to make that call, because the special counsel declined to do so. Not surprisingly, the Democrat smaller hearing was underwhelming, to say the least, and the sequel, Corey Lewandowski definitely did not move the impeachment needles either intelligence Committee in the Russia collusion investigation committee Democrats prepare for their anticipated effort to impeach the president president zelenski the Foreign Affairs committee. The committee of jurisdiction, wasn’t the committee leaving the impeachment inquiry for holding hearings either was the oversight committee Chief investigative entity? The Judiciary Committee was only recently brought back into the mix after fact-finding concluded. Instead, the impeachment for you is run by the house intelligence committee and he’s former Federal prosecutors intelligence Committee in a manifestly unfair way. All the fact-finding was unclassified and that was made clear at the top of every single deposition. But the Democrats took advantage of the close processing the capital basement bunker the skiff to control access to information, the secrecy effectively weaponized the investigation, with cheerful leaks of witness testimony Democrats refused to invite Republican Witnesses and directed Witnesses called by the Democrats. Not to answer our questions in a public hearings. Many of these unfair process he’s continued Fusion right. Numerous Witnesses requested by Republicans interrupted Republican questioning and prevented Witnesses from answering Republican questions. Democrats voted down by virtue of a motion to table with no notice subpoenas for documents and testimony requested by Republicans Democrats before the intelligence committee reflects the degree to which Democrats are obsessed with impeaching the president. The Democrats went searching for a set of facts on which to impeach the president, the emoluments Clause, the president business and financial records, the Mueller report, locations of obstruction before landing on the Ukraine phone call is clearly an orchestrated effort to up and our political system. According to Politico, the speaker has scripted every step of the impeachment inquiry. Democrats have reportedly convene focus groups to test which allegations Weatherby quid pro quo, or bribery or extortion. A remote telling to the American public speaker Pelosi said Democrats must strike while the iron is hot. On impeaching, the president, the entire duration of the impeachment and Corey from the dime speaker, Pelosi announced it and September horse until today has been 76 days, as Professor Turley testified last Wednesday. This impeachment would Stand Out Among modern impeachments has the shortest proceeding with the thinnest evidentiary record and the narrowest Browns ever used to impeach a president, the artificial, an arbitrary political deadline. This leads to a rush process and missed opportunities to obtain relevant information. Democrats avoided the accommodations process required by federal courts. Executive Democrats decline to attempt to negotiate with the administration for the production of documents and Witnesses. Democrats did not exhaust all options agency Warriors or initiating Contempra seatings. Sometimes the threat of a contempt proceeding gets you a different result. Sometimes two witnesses choose to appear when contempt is on the table. Democrats, but you were subpoenaed one witness who asked a federal court to resolve conflicting orders from Congress and the executive either, because the Democrats did not want to wait for the court to rule where they didn’t. Like the presiding judge, judge Leon Democrats made their demands and refused to budge. Democrats told Witnesses at the outset that their refusal to cooperate in full would be used against them, and the president Democrats threatened employees at their salaries could be withheld for not meeting committee demands. These tactics are fundamentally unfair and counterproductive for gathering information in any serious inquiry. This run and take-it-or-leave-it approach to investigating is contrary to how successful Congressional investigations typically work. Congressional investigations take time. in this job. You must take the information that’s offered. Even if you don’t like the terms, you should not say no to taking a witness’s testimony, because you would prefer the agency cancels not present. If that’s the only means of obtaining the testimony you should. Your priority must not be on blocking information out; it must be on seeking information in all recent major Congressional investigations, for example chairman goodlatte and Gowdy investigation into the justice decision during 2016, the IRS targeting investigation, the Benghazi investigation in Fast & Furious there have been given Take between Congress and executive in a good luck investigation, for example. What’S up 2 months, two months of negotiations before the committee is conducted, the first witness interview with deputy director McCabe the justice department. Only investigations in Congress get everything it wanted right at the beginning, certainly not within 60 76 days, but with persistence and patience. We eventually did receive enough information to do our work and con sorry to talking points. The Trump Administration has in fact, cooperated with and facilitated Congressional oversight and investigations at the White House with Central allegation put forward, was at the White House deviated from established procedures to Grant clearances to certain White House staff. The Democrats thought the interview who performed a security clearance reviews but declined the witness initially to appear with the agency Council house in the white house where an impasse. However, after a little bit of time, we, the Republicans to Africa, with the help of mr. Jordan, convince the witness to appear agency Council for our own transcribed interview and the Democrats came along subsequent interviews in a security clearance. Investigation were conducted with agency Council. Testimony allowed to get to the bottom of what was going on and it wasn’t what was alleged. Nobody outside the security clearance office was handing out clearances, certainly not too senior White House staffers agency counsel to accompany Witnesses. Democrats have turned away information by declining to negotiate in good faith with the administration about the scope of document requests. As a result of these failures, the evidentiary record in the impeachment, incomplete and in any places incoherent. The failure to exhaust all avenues to obtain information severely risks undermining the legitimacy of any articles of impeachment. Has Professor Charlie said to the committee last week, I’m concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. I believe this impeachment not only fails to standard past impeachments what would create a dangerous precedent for future impeachments Professor Charley elaborated that the current lack of proof is another reason why the abbreviated investigation into this matter is so damaging for the case of impeachment of case. For impeaching President Trump as a result of an artificial, arbitrary and political schedule relies heavily on ambiguous facts presumptions in speculation. President earlier warned here to that, impeachments have been based on proof, not presumptions. The Democrats do not have the proof. Am I Democrat counterparts on the intelligence committee or talented attorneys? I’M sure they were tell you a riveting story about a shadow or irregular Farm policy apparatus are campaign designed to extort Ukraine for the president’s political benefit. Don’T tell you about President Trump and how he put his own political interests ahead of National Security. A man raising allegations of Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election on the July 25th call they’ll try to convince you that the Trump Administration, the same Administration Democrats regularly accused of being incompetent orchestrated an international conspiracy at the highest levels. None of this adds up. It may be a great screenplay, but it’s not what the evidence shows. The Democrats impeachment in Creed, yours all, of the evidence that does not Advance their story. The Democrats, impeachment narrative, resolves all ambiguous facts and conflicting evidence in a way that is most unflattering to the president. The Democrats impeachment narrative ignores public statements from senior officials. They contradict a narrative, an impeachment and Corey paint a different picture. I won’t provide a detailed presentation now, but allow me to highlight a few points. First, the summary of the July 25th phone call reflects no conditionality or pressure president solensky, never vocalized any discomfort or pressure on the call. Contrary to Democrat allegations, President Trump was not asking for a favor that would help his re-election. He was asking for a cyst and helping our country move forward from the divisiveness of the Russia collusion investigation. Second, since President Trump is Declassified and publicly released the call summary, 75 days ago, president selenski has said publicly and repeatedly that he felt no pressure. He said it on September 25th, at the United Nations General Assembly, an interview published on October 6th and, most recently he said it just last week in Time Magazine, other senior Ukrainian officials have also said there was no linkage between a meeting security assistance and an investigation. If President Trump was orchestrating a pressure campaign before Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Biden, one would think that Ukraine would have felt some pressure at the time of so that the security assistance was paused. They did not learn. It was pause until the pause was reported. Publicly in the US media on August 28th, as Ambassador volcker, testified because the highest levels of the Ukrainian government, I know about the pause it was no leverage implied. Finally, president swenski met with President Trump in New York on September 25th at the United Nations shortly thereafter, or shortly before that, the security assistance flow to Ukraine, both happened without Ukraine ever taking actions or investigations. As substantial evidence going to the president’s State of Mind undercutting the Democrats, assertion of some malicious intent Witnesses testified that President Trump has a deeply rooted, genuine Andre stemming from its history of corruption. President Trump is skeptical of US taxpayer funded foreign assistance and believes that our allies should share more of the burden of Ukraine’s defense. Ukrainian politicians openly spoke out against President Trump during the 2016 election. These events bear directly on the president State of Mind presidential platform, but he was an untried politician with a relationship to a controversial Ukrainian oligarch when Vice when former vice president Pence met with president salansky in Warsaw in Warsaw on September 1e. Stress to him the need for reform and reiterated the president’s concern about Burger sharing, especially among European allies. In late August, early September after his party took control of the Ukrainian Parliament, Ukraine pass historic reforms to fight corruption. These reforms, including removing parliamentary immunity which Witnesses said it didn’t historic source of corruption, adjective members of our Congress, had immunity later lifted the pause on security assistance and met with President zalenski. Two weeks later, Viet was pause for 55 days. Very simply the evidence in the Democrats. Impeachment inquiry does not support the conclusion: did President Trump abused his power for his own personal political benefit and withholding a meeting or security assistance play some legitimate explanations for these actions that are not as serious as the Democrats allege. Be Faithfully executed give his office by delivering on what he promised the American voters. He would do Democrats make disagree with the president’s policy decisions were there matter in which he governs, but those disagreements are not enough to justify irrevocable action of removing him from Office. The Democrats, Hyperbole and histrionics are no good reason, 11 months out for mental action to prevent the American people from decided on their own. Who is going to be. The next president has not support a conclusion. The President Trump obstructed Congress during the impeachment inquiry. For many of the procedure of defects I touched on earlier, additionally is a factual matter. The only direct test investigation has obtained about the president’s reaction to the inquiry is from ambassadors on one who testified. President Trump told him to cooperate and tell the truth. President Trump has also phone calls with the president. President solensky President Trump has said that he would like witnesses to testify, but he’s been forced to resist the unfair and abusive process. I believe strongly in the prerogative of the Congress. It’S awful to hear testimony from last week when he can’t eat the house for proceeding on impeachment so rapidly and on such a thing record professor said to set this abbreviated schedule, demand documents and then impeach, because they haven’t been turned over when they go to court. I think is an abuse-of-power, the impeachment of a duly elected president as chairman. Another said in 1998, is the undoing of a national election. Now I understand Democrats issued a report over the weekend, arguing the contrary to the chairman statement in 1998. Impeachment is not on doing it an election, I would just respond dang it. I don’t think many of the 63 million Americans from all around the country who voted for President Trump in 2016 would agree with essentially be notifying. The decision of those America and house would be doing it in less than or less than 11 months before the next election. There still is no compelling argument for why Democrats in the house must take this decision out of the hands Motors and do it before Christmas. During the Clinton impeachment in 1998, the chairman said that a bare minimum, the presidents, that users must go beyond hearsay and innuendo and Beyond the demands that the president review prove his innocence of changing charges. I would submit those words ring as true today, as the chairman believe in to be in 1998. Innuendo and presumptions Democrats have lava and ever-changing charges for impeachment going as far back as the president’s inauguration. For all these reasons, extraordinary exercise of houses impeachment Authority is not warranted on the evidentiary record presented. Thank you for allowing me to present this information this morning and you’ll be back
Republican Counsel Steve Castor argued that Democrats haven’t proven Trump acted with malicious intent in his dealings with Ukraine.

Historic public impeachment hearing underway: Live updates and analysis

#ABCNews #BreakingNews #Trump #Impeachment #Hearing #Politics #JudiciaryCommittee #Nadler

Watch More on


Category: Uncategorized Tags:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *