Home » Update on the Star Chamber that is the “impeachment inquiry”

Comments

Update on the Star Chamber that is the “impeachment inquiry” — 34 Comments

  1. Relax. You’re going to get exactly what your asking for as soon as the investigative stage is over.

    Benghazi also had closed hearings at first. There was no congressional investigative stage in Clinton /Nixon because there were independent council’s doing the job…which were closed other than for the leaks.

    You don’t have the rely on the press. You can read opening statement transcripts and go look at the mugshots of the 2 goons Trump hired to smear Biden for yourself.

  2. When the “inquiry” (there is no investigation) is over the whole pantomime will be dropped!

    So “Relax!”, say the character assassins, “Impeachment? No worries! We don’t have the votes and we’re not going on get them. Now hold still while we break your thumbs.”

  3. The Ds are juggling bottles of nitroglycerin & have no clue the size BOOM they’re about to get.
    When the polls are showing “Americans expect civil war,” to keep the Star chamber operating 24/7…well…that’s courting disaster.

  4. You can read opening statement transcripts and go look at the mugshots of the 2 goons Trump hired to smear Biden for yourself.

    How’s the pay, manju ? Minimum wage ?

  5. Star Chamber is a good term for it. And yet, it’s not entirely secret. Schiff and staff leak the things they think will play well in their media, and hide exculpatory material. I wouldn’t support this behavior to investigate someone I despise. Democrats seem to think it’s okay because they dislike the target so much. I hope most Americans have more sense of right and wrong.

  6. The grand jury simile is not appropriate here. The secrecy in a grand jury proceeding is to protect someone who is innocent but accused so as to not besmirch someones name. But here we know the accused. That is plain. So the secrecy requirement does not fit.

  7. Scott quotes Rep. Ratcliffe (R-TX) from a story by John Nolte at Breitbart which details some of Schiff’s shuriken being tossed around in his Star Chamber proceedings.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/10/23/nolte-adam-schiff-desperate-to-hide-william-taylor-testimony-that-would-kill-ukraine-hoax/

    I found [Taylor] to be very forthright. He had very strong opinions about Donald Trump’s approach to foreign policy. But again, the mainstream media reporting that he provided evidence of a quid pro quo involving military aid is false. I questioned him directly on that. And under [House Intelligence Chairman] Adam Schiff’s rules I can’t tell you what he said, but I can tell you what he didn’t say. And neither he or any other witness has provided testimony that the Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld. You can’t have a quid pro quo with no quo.

    Schiff’s Rules remind me of the Wisconsin John Doe investigations (aka Gestapo raids) that were shut down by their Supreme Court, for Extreme UnConstitutionality.

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/01/wisconsin-john-doe-update.php

  8. At this point, I’ve decided to just resign myself to the whatever comes. If the American people are going to punish Donald Trump for actually doing a surprisingly decent job as President and reward his enemies for their hysterical and un-American behavior, then the American people are going to deserve everything they’re going to get.

    My only regret is that, as too often in life, the crap won’t hit the fan soon enough so the people actually responsible for it have to get dirty.

    Mike

  9. David Samuels, Tablet Magazine: Q & A With Angelo Codevilla

    [. . . what follows are the final few paragraphs, perhaps 1/10th of the whole article or less. Read the whole thing.]

    DS: There was one quote, I forget who it came from, but it came out of an interaction of one of the reasonably high-up war planners in the Defense Department and a journalist for, I think it was, The Atlantic. And the quote was that power creates its own reality. So it doesn’t matter what we say, because even if it’s not true now, by the time we’re finished we will make it true. And therefore there is no real difference between statements that are true or false, as long as we make them.

    Do you have the sense that a similar attempt to manufacture reality was at play in what at this point are the still-unknown interactions between the CIA, the FBI, and the Obama White House with regard to the surveillance of Donald Trump’s associates, and the attempt to suggest some vast Putin-Trump conspiracy to game American elections, and whatnot?

    AC: I don’t think that it went that far. Or I should say, I don’t think the people involved thought about it that deeply.

    DS: I would agree.

    AC: I think what you had was a small pooling of resources to tweak the news cycle with regard to the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, which then turned into something very major.

    DS: After the election.

    AC: After the election. It was, like Watergate, a minor attempt to gain marginal advantage. Which then, unintended by the people involved at the time, became something very big, which escaped everyone’s control.

    I believe that there are a whole bunch of people in Washington right now who are quaking in their boots because the House Intelligence Committee has shaken loose some of the documents involved. Because in the long run there are no secrets in Washington. And one can then wonder about the quality of the people who imagined that the things they did could remain secret.

    It really was a marvel. The idea was that if we all say it together long enough and we shout it loud so nothing else can be heard, then it will become the effective truth, Machiavelli’s verita effettuale. But I mean, there is a limit to this. I have some close personal friends who are more on the left, and I said to them: OK. Where’s the evidence? Who did what when to whom? Where are the quids and where are the quos? What’s going on here? And all they could say is, “Well, the investigation is going on.”

    What is not clear is just how much of the reality will come into the public’s consciousness.

    DS: Whose fault is this?

    AC: The fault here is not of Democrats on the left. The fault here is of Donald Trump and his friends who have refused to enforce the most basic laws here. The most obvious one is Section 798, (18 U.S. Code), the simple comment statute. Now anybody in the intelligence business knows that this is the live wire of security law. It is a strict liability statute. It states that any revelation, regardless of circumstance or intent, any revelation period, of anything having to do with U.S. communications intelligence is punishable by the 10 and 10. Ten years in the slammer, and $10,000 fine. Per count.

    Now the folks who went to The Washington Post and The New York Times in November and December of 2016 and peddled this story of the intelligence community’s conclusion that Trump and the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia, these people ipso facto violated §798.

    Considering these matters are highly classified, and that the number of the people involved is necessarily very small, identifying them is child’s play. But no effort to do that has been made.

    DS: But doesn’t that failure in turn point to what is, to some extent, the root of this entire drama, which is that Donald Trump seems unfamiliar with and temperamentally at odds with the executive function that he has now assumed?

    AC: That’s certainly true. But you have to go beyond Donald Trump, to Republican power holders in general. These people far more than Donald Trump would be inclined to forbear for the sake of comity with the ruling class. And what kind of comity are we talking about? We’re talking about social comity. Because if you follow the law in this case, you end up putting former directors of CIA, FBI etcetera behind bars. They, and a whole bunch of their subordinates. Maybe a dozen people here would end up behind bars.

    DS: We’ve come to accept that certain classes of people are in fact above the law.

    AC: We have come to accept that.

    The election of 2016 was precisely about whether anyone in America is above the law. The reason why so many people did not vote for Hillary Clinton is the feeling that she and her ilk were above the law, were acting as if they were above the law, which happened to be entirely true. Now the fact that the Trump administration is acting according to the same premise, i.e., that some people are above the law, is evidence that the revolution that the voters wanted in 2016 has only just begun.

  10. From ace.mu.nu (flaming skull alert)

    http://ace.mu.nu/

    “John Durham Has Reclassified Russian Hoax Inquiry as an Official DOJ Criminal Investigation”

    We shall see who is above the law.

  11. https://mobile.twitter.com/eliehonig/status/1187526145488625666

    Elie Honig:

    It was bad enough Trump and Barr were wasting resources on this. But now they are fully weaponizing DOJ for political purposes.

    Attorneys General *can* be impeached.

    This angle was always in the cards. The Democrats and as here their MSM skunks (with their manjus as well) will scream this in a frenzy the next few months.

    Trump and team knew this was inevitable. That’s why the case has been dragged out so long. Dotting every i, crossing every t, maintaining patience throughout, not leaking anything as they go. Careful as the investigators may have been, this line may yet have purchase on the public’s ignorance.

    We’ll see. It will be the hardest thing Bill Barr has ever done.

  12. Neo: But a more apt one is “kangaroo court” or “witch hunt” and/or “Star Chamber proceeding,” the latter being the term I happen to favor.

    the more accurate term would be Council Star Chamber or Soviet Kamera or Chamber

    ie. you become a foil having people walk down the wrong branch of understanding
    of course you wont agree… but its not a question of snakes, its a questoin of what species of snake. and this example is even MORE apt as what your describing is a king snake, and long gone, and what i am pointing out, is a venemous coral snake.

    they look the same… but if you dont notice wheter red and yellow touch or not, then you wont notice the salient differences… even if you do, you might not live to figure it out

    Other differences might be the star court was the result of the devine right of kings, and the similar thing, is run by athiests, even if they pretend religion knowing only the people they need to manipulate are easier to handle that way.

    -=-=-=-=-

    The apparatchik and their leaders the nomenklatura (pelosi, etc), who do not like that Trump has taken a nomenklatura position and this occupation was not approved by the (communist) party because he is mot a member (as other recent republicans must have been).

    An apparatchik was a full-time, professional functionary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union or the Soviet government apparat (???????, apparatus), someone who held any position of bureaucratic or political responsibility, with the exception of the higher ranks of management called nomenklatura.

    The nomenklatura forming a de facto elite of public powers in the former Eastern Bloc; one may compare them to the western establishment holding or controlling both private and public powers (for example, in media, finance, trade, industry, the state and institutions).

    the next layer would be the intelligentsia – a status class of educated people engaged in the complex mental labours that critique, guide, and lead in shaping the culture and politics of their society As a status class, the intelligentsia includes artists, teachers and academics, writers, and the literary hommes de lettres.

    there is your Troika…

    NKVD troika or Special troika were the People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs of three persons who issued sentences to people after simplified, speedy investigations and without a public and fair trial. The three members were judge and jury, though they themselves did not carry out the sentences they dealt. These commissions were employed as instruments of extrajudicial punishment introduced to supplement the Soviet legal system with a means for quick and secret execution or imprisonment

    Given that these are social democrats, socialists, and crypto communists, this is a form of the peoples court! and they are/believe representing, the people.

    Do note that many on the “not left” have mentioned or coined that this is like a Soviet Star chamber… Sean Hannity for one..

    “I would be happy to yield when we talk about all of the things that this House could be doing that it’s not, like lowering drug prices, like getting better trade deals with our friends in Mexico and in Canada, and in all the other countries that are lined up that would love to come behind USMCA that can’t right now. They can’t because there’s this infatuation with impeachment in a one-sided way, in a closed way, in a Soviet-style star chamber. But that’s what’s happening right now. [Bills being signed into law] is what’s not happening, [issuing subpoenas] is what’s happening. It’s not what the American people expected out of this majority.” – Steve Scalise

  13. I like “star chamber” too, and maybe if others like Scalise pick it up, even Trump will use it.

    But if Trump keeps using “witch hunt”, which is also a LOT more understood by the vast majority of voters, then I’ll go with what Trump tweets.

    And a key issue is whether or not a crime occurred. Only if there was no crime is it a witch hunt — if there WAS a crime, it’s an investigation.

    This should be more emphasized because of course the Dems will call Durham’s investigation a “witch hunt”. But the Reps, and those supporting the investigations, should be asking – “so you think illegal leaking is not a crime? You think illegally providing false evidence is not a crime?”

    The TDS based crap IS a witch hunt, because no Trump crime. There have been numerous deep state crimes which ARE crimes.

    If a real crime is being investigated, like perjury about having sexual relations with another woman in a sexual harassment suit, it’s not a witch hunt. Nor a lynching.

    On the other hand, consider a real investigation and indictment over an illegal email server and illegal destruction of evidence, real crimes done by a real person. If the criminal being hunted is a witch, it might well be honest to call it a witch hunt. One I’d support.
    Lock her up – another “lie” by Trump. Not too late to change.

  14. I majored in English history in college. I never intended to do so, but fortunately, my pre-law advisor in college was also the Chairman of the English History department, and he kept his lecture room full of budding lawyers.

    One of the things I remember from those studies was the use of a “bill of attainder” by the English parliament and sometimes the crown. They started using it in the 1300’s and did so until the 18th Century. Bills of Attainder are prohibited under the US Constituion, Article 1, Section 9.

    I found this encyclopedia article which provides a good explanation. In short, a bill of attainder is when the legislature passes a bill holding that someone is guilty of a crime — so that they can be punished without the benefit of a trial.

    This is what is happening right now as the Democrats are having secret meetings to build a case, barring Republicans — and American citizens — from hearing what they’re doing. I thought is was simply marvelous that some Republican congressmen finally had the balls to break into the secret meeting today. Hope lives.

  15. Looks like Trump is acting “badly” again…
    https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/10/doj-reportedly-opens-criminal-inquiry-into-doj-russia-collusion-investigation-of-trump/

    So, ahem, “unpresidential”!! “So Saaaad”…

    Doesn’t he know that “To err is human; to forgive divine”?
    Doesn’t he understand the ethical imperative of “turning the other cheek”?

    To all this (and more), it seems only too obvious that the Democrats will surely have to teach him a lesson or three…in compassion; in humility; in humanity; in rule of law; in love of country, etc.

    (To be sure, that’s what the Democrats—and their MSM and NTer co-educators— have been trying to do for the past three years….)

    By all means, keep it up, kiddos!!

  16. on another quick note, the move to the war is proceeding unabated, unquestioned, and never discussed cogently Russia Will Test Its Ability to Disconnect from the Internet

    You’d be more cogent if you’d acknowledge that contingency planning is what responsible governments do. The question is, why is our government not doing this?

    Suggest one reason VP has often had stratospheric approval ratings is that (1) unlike the heads of government in most occidental countries, he knows very well of which country he is President, and has an interest in the welfare of that country, not of some nebulous transnational class of cosmopolitan twits and (2) Russians understand themselves as a nation in a particular country and have some actual loyalty to each other as Russians, ergo, you earn their congenial regard by looking after Russian interests. Occidental countries are fissured into cultural-political tribes and the tribe containing the bulk of the professional-managerial class despises the tribe containing the bulk of the non-exotic working class. It’s difficult to identify an occidental country where this does not appear to be the case.

  17. Art Deco is spot-on. At a time when Western nations are ruled by people who are trying to undo Western civilization and dismantle their own nations, Russia is interested only in Russia’s interests. Russia is not a buddy (Democrats, circa 2012) or an evil monster (Democrats, circa 2016 and since).

    Likewise, I would not characterize Putin as inherently good or bad. He is no friend to me, a citizen of the United States, but neither should he be. I see absolutely no contradiction in pointing out good things that Putin may do for the Russian people, or even comparing his leadership quality favorably against those leaders of Western nations who are in a race against each other to destroy their nations the fastest, while not implying that I personally approve of him, or his policies. As a citizen, I would much rather be represented by leadership that pursues policies that are intended to benefit citizens – especially the “non-exotic working class” – of their nation. It appears that Trump would like to be a leader like that, but the insane far left can’t leave him alone for a moment to do his job.

  18. MSM squandered trust: Indeed! I despise, detest, and distrust the NYT and WaPoo, and do not watch TV news. I just can’t believe them.

  19. Margot Cleveland, The Federalist: Sidney Powell Drops Bombshell Showing How The FBI Trapped Michael Flynn

    Earlier this week, Michael Flynn’s star attorney, Sidney Powell, filed under seal a brief in reply to federal prosecutors’ claims that they have already given Flynn’s defense team all the evidence they are required by law to provide. A minimally redacted copy of the reply brief has just been made public, and with it shocking details of the deep state’s plot to destroy Flynn.

    […]

    What is most striking, though, is the timeline Powell pieced together from publicly reported text messages withheld from the defense team and excerpts from documents still sealed from public view. The sequence Powell lays out shows that a team of “high-ranking FBI officials orchestrated an ambush-interview of the new president’s National Security Advisor, not for the purpose of discovering any evidence of criminal activity—they already had tapes of all the relevant conversations about which they questioned Mr. Flynn—but for the purpose of trapping him into making statements they could allege as false.”

    Wheels within wheels are turning, grinding lies to powder.

  20. My first exposure to the term Star Chamber was the movie “The Star Chamber” (1983) which was about a secret vigilante court used to counter a lax criminal justice system. Later I learned that the term derived from British history. The intro piece from Wikipedia is informative (sorry for the length).

    The Star Chamber (Latin: Camera stellata) was an English court which sat at the royal Palace of Westminster, from the late 15th century to the mid-17th century (c. 1641), and was composed of Privy Counsellors and common-law judges, to supplement the judicial activities of the common-law and equity courts in civil and criminal matters. The Star Chamber was originally established to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against socially and politically prominent people so powerful that ordinary courts would probably hesitate to convict them of their crimes. However, it became synonymous with social and political oppression through the arbitrary use and abuse of the power it wielded.

    In modern usage, legal or administrative bodies with strict, arbitrary rulings and secretive proceedings are sometimes called, metaphorically or poetically, “star chambers”. This is a pejorative term and intended to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the proceedings. “Star Chamber” can also, rarely, be used in its original meaning, for instance when a politician uses parliamentary privilege to examine and then exculpate or condemn a powerful organization or person. Due to the constitutional separation of powers and the ceasing of the Star Chamber, the main powers of select committees are to enhance the public debate—politicians are deemed to no longer wield powers in the criminal law, which belongs to the courts.

    The original meaning seems to be damn close to our current situation. I thought it slightly odd that folks like Scalise would call it a “Soviet-style Star Chamber.” I presumed he was just trying to amp-up the rhetoric.

    Certainly, the Soviets had secret courts, and I found artfldgr’s comment very interesting, but the Soviets could just keep the entire thing secret couldn’t they? The Brits needed to provide a pretense of transparency. I had heard of the Soviet classes that artfldgr calls the troika, but hadn’t seen it described concisely like that.

    Artfldgr, Was the NKVD tribunal a troika in the sense that it always had people from the apparatchiks, nomenklatura, and intelligensia classes?

  21. FNC : Clinton ally Blumenthal sought to stop publication of Russia probe book: source

    Clinton family associate Sidney Blumenthal has made legal threats to the publisher of a forthcoming book featuring allegations against Democrats in connection with the Russia investigation in an attempt to stop publication, Fox News has learned.

    A source familiar with the matter told Fox News that Blumenthal claimed the book – “The Plot Against the President: The True Story of How Congressman Devin Nunes Uncovered the Biggest Political Scandal in U.S. History,” by Lee Smith – was defamatory. […]

    “The Clinton machine wanted to intimidate Lee,” the source said.

    Smith himself would not discuss any purported legal threats, but acknowledged opposition to the book from those in the Clintons’ orbit.

    “People in the Clinton world are keen for this book not to come out,” Smith said.

  22. I’ve heard various talking heads claim that Pelosi was bullied, bluffed, or arm-twisted into this pseudo impeachment proceeding. But I suspect that the Dems are just trying to get ahead of what’s coming down from the DoJ.

    “A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week.” — George Patton

    The GOP will seemingly never learn the wisdom of Patton’s quote, but the Dems learned it a long time ago. Because of a documentary film by the same name, George Stephanopoulos ran a Clinton campaign “War Room.” However, the original name for GS’s team was the instant response team, or similar. Those folks would get a calculated response out to the media within 10’s of minutes following some negative incident.

    So while Horowitz, Barr, and Durham perfect their cases; we’ve got the star chamber impeachment proceedings preceding those releases. The “first mover advantage” will allow the Dems to say that these IG and DoJ cases are just a retaliation for their pursuit of justice.

  23. A source familiar with the matter told Fox News that Blumenthal claimed the book – “The Plot Against the President: The True Story of How Congressman Devin Nunes Uncovered the Biggest Political Scandal in U.S. History,” by Lee Smith – was defamatory.

    Already ordered the audio version. Delivered next Monday.

  24. If I can ever afford to have a nice house built for myself, I’m going to have star-shaped room built into it, so that I can have my own Star Chamber.

    Then, if my kids start squabbling about something, I’ll haul them into my Star Chamber to decide their fate.

    It’s always been a cool-sounding name, and I don’t see why autocratic despots and secretive cabals should get to have all the fun.

  25. Into the Star Chamber with you, where you’ll be forced to sit on a starfish while listening to Jefferson Starship, eat star fruit and suffer starlings to flit about your ears. Stark, startling stuff.

  26. “Because of a documentary film by the same name, George Stephanopoulos ran a Clinton campaign “War Room.” However, the original name for GS’s team was the instant response team, or similar. Those folks would get a calculated response out to the media within 10’s of minutes following some negative incident.”

    And that led to Bill Clinton being impeached, which was followed by eight years of George W. Bush as President, and ultimately to Hillary Clinton being handed the Democratic nomination so she could lose the Presidency to Donald Freakin’ Trump of all people.

    I’m not entirely denying the virtue of the “war room” approach to politics but…

    A. It works much better when a compliant liberal media repeats everything you give them.

    B. It requires a breed of human scum to sustain it over the long run, which often causes just as many problems.

    C. It eventually annoys and aggravates the audience. Al Gore got the worst media treatment of any Democratic Presidential candidate in my lifetime and I don’t have any doubt that was partly the result of media folks being so damn sick and tired of the Clintons that they took it out on Gore.

    Mike

  27. “Al Gore got the worst media treatment of any Democratic Presidential candidate in my lifetime”
    If I recall correctly, the media were screaming that Gore lost because Bush cheated. Just like Hillary lost because Donald cheated. Every time the democrats lose it’s because the republicans cheated.

  28. Ray, The Dem,s project their own methods onto the Packs. They cannot imagine how anybody could win an election otherwise.

    R.C., You don’t have to go to all that expense. The Star Chamber was not so named for its shape but because the ceiling was painted with stars. Just paint over the ceiling of the spare bedroom.

  29. It’s ironic that the Star Chamber was a royal (executive) court to which Parliament (the legislature) objected…..

    And, in terms of secret procedure, etc., likening Democratic Fauxpeachment to the Star Chamber is accurate enough (and Boy Howdy! would the Dems like to be able to pass a bill of attainder or work corruption of the blood on Trump and the rest of the ‘pubbies).

    However, the real problem with the Star Chamber comparison is that – despite it having been a byword for a tyrannical court for more than 200 years – almost no one under the age of 60 has any idea what the Star Chamber was and why it was an unacceptable instance of the Royal Prerogative. Sigh.

Leave a Reply

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

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>