Thursday: Roberts Refuses to Read Rand Paul’s Question

SENATOR TWEETS ABOUT “CLOSE RELATIONSHIP” BETWEEN FORMER NSC EMPLOYEES, ONE NOW A SCHIFF STAFFER

by Sharon Rondeau

U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts was nominated by President George W. Bush and was considered a “conservative”

(Jan. 30, 2020) — At approximately 1:14 p.m. EST, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who is officiating over the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump, declined to read a question submitted by Sen. Rand Paul on the second day of questioning by U.S. Senators of both the House Impeachment Managers and Trump’s defense team.

“The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted,” Roberts declared.

On Wednesday, reports said that Paul had attempted to ask a question about the whistleblower whose August 12, 2019 complaint touched off the House’s impeachment inquiry, resulting in two Articles of Impeachment in December, and that Roberts had refused to recognize Paul.

There was no response from the Senate gallery after Roberts made his declaration on Thursday, although a journalist for Roll Call reported Wednesday that Paul was vocal about the issue.

The whistleblower reportedly interacted with staffers for Lead House Impeachment Manager Adam Schiff (D-CA28) prior to the filing of his or her complaint with the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), who deemed it to be a matter of “urgent concern.”  The complaint reported second-hand allegations that Trump had “abused his power” during a July 25, 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

Schiff had originally said he would immediately have the whistleblower testify but reversed himself not long afterward, stating that his or her testimony wasn’t necessary.

On Wednesday evening, Rep. Elise Stefanik, a member of the House’s presidential defense team, tweeted that Schiff’s staff “helped write” the whistleblower’s complaint, a claim Schiff denied during the Senate hearing on Wednesday.

Prior to the start of Thursday’s hearing at 1:00 p.m., Paul tweeted, “My question today is about whether or not individuals who were holdovers from the Obama National Security Council and Democrat partisans conspired with Schiff staffers to plot impeaching the President before there were formal House impeachment proceedings.

Paul issued several tweets after Roberts refused to read the question, the first of which said, “Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together 1/2” followed by “and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal house impeachment proceedings. 2/2.”

 

 

5 Responses to "Thursday: Roberts Refuses to Read Rand Paul’s Question"

  1. Jeffery Harrison   Friday, January 31, 2020 at 5:27 PM

    Is there any connections here with Robert’s flubbing Obama’s oath of office, Obama’s secret
    meeting with the eight of the Justices of the Supreme Court (prior to Obama’s inauguration)
    in which Robert’s was present and Robert’s declining to not read Rand Paul’s question at Trump’s hearing? So much for transparency here… Or is the fix in. Will Robert’s make another similar flub at this hearing?

  2. Cort Wrotnowski   Friday, January 31, 2020 at 10:15 AM

    There is information suggesting that putting the light on EC will do more to bring down the cabal than anything else. That we have White House visitor logs from the Obama era showing he was in that Ukraine meeting backdates the depth of his involvement to such an extent there exists the possibility that he worked with those carrying out the corruption. Aided and abetted international corruption; engaged in a conspiracy to commit fraud against the federal government; coordinated numerous other activities – talk about a key witness. Yeah he’s key.

    The only basis Justice Roberts had for blocking Rand Paul was the misguided liberal talking points defending the phony whistleblower.

  3. Bob68   Friday, January 31, 2020 at 9:37 AM

    Jan. 29-2020 comment from Joe Biden to a supporter about running for president:
    “Biden seemed to suggest later that an admitted non-citizen could run for president and beat Trump.
    “I think you could beat him,” Biden said to the man.
    The man responded, “I don’t think I could, I’m not an American citizen.”
    Biden replied, “Well, you might be able to, who knows.”
    After 8 years as VP with a non-citizen putative president it’s easy to understand why Quid Pro Joe would have no problem with that. The supporter also left off “natural born” and unfortunately that is very common.
    Article here:
    https://thepoliticalinsider.com/goofy-biden-doesnt-believe-economy-is-good-suggests-non-citizen-could-run-for-office/

  4. James Carter   Friday, January 31, 2020 at 9:17 AM

    Robert Laity is spot on.

    I watched both days of Q and A. Each question was given to Chief Justice Roberts on a printed card — one side had the name of who had submitted the question and who the question for, and the other side had the question. With ONE exception Chief Justice Roberts first read aloud who had submitted the question and who the question was for, then flipped the card over and read the question aloud WITHOUT having first read it to himself. The ONE exception was Rand Paul’s question — Chief Justice Roberts first read the question to himself and then declined to read it aloud.

    Because of what he did yesterday, on top of what he did re the PPACA, I no longer have faith in Chief Justice Roberts to preside over this “trial” or any Supreme Court case in even an impartial manner…much less a right-leaning manner.

    That an impeachment and removal of a President based upon hearsay from an anonymous whistleblower and conjecture, hearsay, opinion, supposition, etc. from every “prosecution” witness has gotten this far is tantamount to “When in the course of human events…”

  5. Robert Laity   Friday, January 31, 2020 at 4:13 AM

    Roberts has been described as a “Never Trumper” regardless of his doubtful status as a Conservative. Could the Chief Justice of the United States be a deep State operatives. Yes, he sure could be. Everyone knows that Eric Ciarmella is the Whistleblower. The Intelligence Whistleblower law does NOT grant Ciarmella anonymity. Roberts should know this immutable fact. Very, very suspicious subterfuge is going on in the intelligence community. As for Schiff, when he was asked a question, he refused to answer it. Answering it would have most likely incriminated him.

    Hypothetical: If VP Pence was a candidate for the Presidency and confessed that he withheld $1B in aid to Ukraine unless they fired a Prosecutor and if President Trump asked that Ukraine investigate, would Democrats even care, given the fact that Pence is a Republican?

    Biden confessed to doing such a thing. The fact that Biden is concurrently running for President is not a license to do what he did nor does it confer any immunity from Prosecution.
    See: The Treaty between the United States and Ukraine for Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters”, signed by former POTUS Wm. Clinton in 1998.

    It specifically authorizes foreign intervention in criminal matters that effect both treaty signatory nations. The Impeachment and Impeachment Trial are unconstitutional on their face. It should have never been allowed to progress as far as it has. It should have been REJECTED with extreme prejudice on constitutional grounds, by the Senate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.