In late 2019, Democrats thought they had him. They drew up articles of impeachment for then-President Donald Trump, accusing him of “obstruction of Congress” and “abuse of power,” all of which stemmed from a phone call the former president had with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The impeachment, which was nothing short of a total sham, didn’t quite go as planned. Democrats were humiliated on a large scale when Trump emerged without a scratch after the U.S. Senate voted to acquit him of the charges in early 2020.
Regardless, the weaponization of the impeachment process was still uncalled for. According to a couple of political insiders, at least one prominent Democrat had “feuded” with his colleagues over the constitutionality of Trump’s first impeachment.
In a bombshell report about a forthcoming book called Unchecked: The Untold Story Behind Congress’s Botched Impeachments of Donald Trump, co-authored by Politico Playbook’s Rachael Bade and Washington Post reporter Karoun Demirjian, it was revealed that none other than House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) was absolutely not in agreement with how Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) or House Select Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) were prepared to handle the impeachment process.
Fox News noted:
In October 2019, amid the Democrats’ plan to hold a full House vote on a resolution outlining the structure of impeachment proceedings against Trump, Nadler, according to the book, took issue with how Schiff, who was tapped by Pelosi to lead impeachment efforts, was prepared to proceed with the impeachment without due process for Trump.
Worried about the situation and the likelihood that his Judiciary Committee would not be able to cross-examine witnesses as the committee had done traditionally, Nadler confronted Schiff about the planned process, and, according to the book, said: “It’s unfair, and it’s unprecedented, and it’s unconstitutional.”
In response to Nadler’s many concerns about the particular process that was used by Schiff and Pelosi, Schiff reportedly responded by saying, “I don’t appreciate your tone…I worry you’re putting us in a box for our investigation.”
Nadler and his staff were reportedly “sidelined” for a spell while Pelosi and Schiff — and every Dem involved in the sham impeachment — carried on with the process. Nadler and his staffers, the authors claim, worked overtime to get back in the good graces of the House Democratic leaders. The strategy to include the Judiciary Committee in the impeachment process, after all, seemed to have worked before it all fell apart again.
Fox added:
She didn’t want the Judiciary panel to interview witnesses at all,” the book’s authors wrote. “Pelosi simply didn’t trust the panel — which was stacked with liberal crusaders and hotheaded conservatives — to handle the rollout of the complex Ukraine narrative with the careful, compelling treatment it required. She couldn’t afford another Nadler screwup. The Judiciary chairman could focus on the legal business of crafting the articles of impeachment and have academics testify, she allowed. But that was it.”
Though there wasn’t much historical information regarding past impeachments, as there haven’t been that many, Nadler went out of his way to prove that in previous impeachments, the presidents who were accused at least at the chance, through their attorneys, to face their accusers and mount a defense in front of the Judiciary Committee.
In the book, the authors wrote that Nadler said, “If we’re going to impeach, we need to show the country that we gave the president ample opportunity to defend himself.”
Schiff and Pelosi didn’t care about the constitution or legal due process as they proceeded to move forward. Bade and Demirjian noted that Schiff and Pelosi were too worried about what Trump’s lawyers might say during such an exchange — worried that they might say something to screw up Dem candidates in the 2020 election. Wow.
The authors wrote that Schiff’s response to Nadler’s demands for due process, even for Trump, was blunt: “F— Donald Trump,” he reportedly said.
For our VIPs: The Case for Impeaching Biden Has Nothing to Do With Trump
The relationship between the three leaders, and especially between Schiff and Nadler, devolved even further, Fox noted:
“I write the rules of my committee, not you,” Nadler added. “I resent you telling me how to run my committee.”
“I don’t really care about your resentment,” Schiff quipped. “Neither the Speaker nor I agree.”
Republicans, at the time, were extremely upset at the unfairness of the impeachment process, which was clearly being pushed through for political purposes and nothing more. Pelosi, according to the book’s authors, also knew that and went out of her way to make sure that the Republicans expressing concerns were not given any attention.
Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) said it best at the time:
“When Jesus was falsely accused of treason, Pontius Pilate gave Jesus the opportunity to face his accusers. During that sham trial, Pontius Pilate afforded more rights to Jesus than the Democrats have afforded this President in this process.”
Join the conversation as a VIP Member