Share This Article with a Friend!

Rand Paul Shut Out, Cruz Scorches Schiff: Time To Vote And Acquit Trump

Cruz on impeachment
During yesterday’s question session during the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump our friends Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky were two of the stars.

Senator Paul’s star turn came not because of the answer he got to his question, but because Chief Justice John Roberts refused to pose the Senator’s question.

Sen. Rand Paul on Thursday tried to ask a question that allegedly could have identified the “whistleblower” whose complaint sparked President Trump’s impeachment — but Chief Justice John Roberts refused to read it.

“The presiding officer declines to read the question as submitted,” Roberts said after reading the Kentucky Republican’s written query during Trump’s impeachment trial.

Paul later read aloud his proposed question to reporters. According to reporting by Steven Nelson and Bob Fredericks here’s what Senator Paul wanted the Chief Justice to ask:

“Manager Schiff and counsel for the president, are you aware that House Intelligence Committee staffer Sean Misko has a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella when at the National Security Council together?” he asked.

“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?” Paul continued.

The relationship between Ciaramella, Joe Biden, Schiff and Misko has been plumbed in some detail by Paul Sperry and Kerry Picket so it is not exactly a secret who is who and what their relationships are. The point of the question seemed more aimed at exposing Schiff’s multiple lies on the matter, rather than the name of the “whistleblower.” However, Roberts, who is starting to remind us of screwball Associate Supreme Court Justice David Souter, still refused to ask the question without citing any law or Senate rule to support his decision.

Sen. Cruz, on the other hand, got his questions* in the record, and they scorched House impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff of California:

  1. As a matter of law, does it matter if there was a quid pro quo? Is it true that quid pro quos are often used in foreign policy?

  2. If Pres. Obama had evidence that Mitt Romney’s son was being paid $1 million/yr by a corrupt Russian company & Romney had acted to benefit that company, would Obama have authority to ask that that potential corruption be investigated?

  3. Is it true that Sean Misko, Abigail Grace, & the alleged whistleblower were employed by or detailed to the National Security Council during the same time period between 1/20/17 to the present?...Do you have reason to believe they knew each other? Do you have any reason to believe the alleged whistleblower and Misko coordinated to fulfill their reported commitment to ‘do everything we can to take out the president?’

  4. An August 26, 2019, letter from the Intelligence Community IG to the Director of National Intelligence discussing the so-called ‘whistleblower’ stated that …the IG identified 'some indicia of an arguable political bias on the part of the complainant in favor of a rival political candidate.' Multiple media outlets reported that this likely referred to the whistleblower’s work with Joe Biden. …the IG identified 'some indicia of an arguable political bias on the part of the complainant in favor of a rival political candidate.' Multiple media outlets reported that this likely referred to the whistleblower’s work with Joe Biden. …And did he assist in any material way with the quid pro quo in which then-Vice President Biden has admitted to conditioning loan guarantees to Ukraine on the firing of the prosecutor investigating Burisma?

  5. You [Democrat impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff] refused to answer the question on political bias. Are the House Managers refusing to tell the Senate whether or not the so-called ‘whistleblower’ had an actual conflict of interest? There are 7 billion people on planet Earth, almost all had no involvement in Biden's quid pro quo. Are the House Managers unwilling to say whether the so-called ‘whistleblower’ was a fact witness ...who directly participated in and could face criminal or civil liability for Joe Biden's demanding Ukraine fire the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma? And why did you refuse to transmit to the Senate the Inspector General transcript?

  6. Does the evidence in the record show that an investigation in the Burisma-Biden matter is in the national interest of the US & its efforts to stop corruption?

  7. When he took office, Viktor Shokin, Ukraine's Prosecutor General, filed to investigate #Burisma before Vice President Joe Biden pressed Ukrainian officials on corruption …  including pushing for the removal of Shokin. Did the White House Counsel's Office or the Office of the Vice President Legal Counsel issue ethics advice approving Mr. Biden's involvement in matters involving corruption in Ukraine or Shokin… despite the presence of Hunter Biden on the board of Burisma, a company widely considered to be corrupt? Did Vice President Biden ever ask Hunter Biden to step down from the board of Burisma?

Tellingly, in each case Rep. Schiff either deflected the question or simply refused to answer it.

Sen. Cruz has now said he’s ready to vote to acquit and after more than 90 questions and 8 hours of debate on Wednesday and Thursday, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has indicated to Republican senators he believes he now has the votes to defeat any Democratic motion that the Senate consider new witnesses when the Senate decides that question on Friday, according to two GOP sources. That would allow him to skip to the final stages of the trial, the sources told ABC News.

The toll-free Capitol Switchboard number (1-866-220-0044), we urge CHQ readers and friends to call their Senators to demand that a motion to acquit President Trump of all charges be submitted and voted on immediately.

*Text of Senator Cruz’s questions based on his tweeted versions of the questions.

Share this