Senator Lindsey Graham said that he will be introducing a Resolution in the Senate condemning the House process on the impeachment inquiry.
On today’s Jay Sekulow Live we discussed Senator Graham’s forthcoming resolution to condemn the House process, and also provided an update regarding ACLJ client, imprisoned Pastor John Cao.
Last night on Fox News, Senator Graham said about the House impeachment inquiry process:
This is un-American at its core. What the House of Representatives is doing is a process of political revenge. It is alien to American due process. It should be dismissed quickly in the United States Senate. So what would happen if they impeached the president based on this closed-door, behind-the-scenes, lack-of-due-process inquiry? We should dismiss it without a trial because it is illegitimate on its face. And if it is allowed to stand, there is no protection for future presidents.
First there was the Mueller Report. That went nowhere. Then you had a suposed quid pro quo with the Ukraine phone call, but there was no quid pro quo. Then there was a whistleblower and that has gone away. Now it’s don’t worry we don’t need a whistleblower. How do you impeach a President on anonymous? It’s nonsense. It’s political theater.
Nancy Pelosi’s Official Speaker’s Office, not campaign, came out with a document that was supposed to be the basis of impeachment. It was four pages with a lot of different sized text. The first page was just a graphic. It looks like a bad direct mail piece that shouldn’t have even been approved to go out. As I said on the show, I look at this document and think, this is amateur hour.
ACLJ Director of Government Affairs, Thann Bennett made the following point:
The transcript that this is supposed to be based on is longer than the document Speaker Pelosi released. I think that Senator Graham is doing the right thing. The Senate is supposed to have a constitutional role in this. That role kicks in after the House has done theirs. At this point the minority does not even have ready access to a transcript of the depositions that have occurred. Not only do they have to go to a secure place, they have to be baby sat by a Democrat staffer while they read it. Mind you, they are the ones with the constitutional authority to do this process, but an un-elected staffer has to baby sit them while they review the transcripts.
You would have more constitutional rights in a municipal court during a parking ticket case than the Democrats are allowing during this impeachment proceeding or whatever they are doing. What the House is doing is denying fundamental due process.
This is political theater.
We also discussed a major win in an international tribunal for ACLJ client Pastor John Cao. It doesn’t get him out of jail but it certainly puts pressure on China. Pastor Cao has been imprisoned in China for over two and a half years and we’ve been working to get him out.
ACLJ Senior Counsel CeCe Heil explained:
We filed a complaint with the United Nations working group on arbitrary detention earlier this year and during their session they agreed with us. They condemned the arbitrary detention of Pastor Cao and they urged his immediate release.
We’ll continue working to free Pastor Cao and give you updates on his case. We can’t do this work without your help.
You can listen to the entire episode here.
Jay Sekulow is Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), one of the most prestigious law firms in the country. He is an accomplished Supreme Court advocate, renowned expert on religious liberty, a number 1 New York Times-bestselling author, and a respected broadcaster. Jay Sekulow is an attorney with a passion for protecting religious liberty – freedom – democracy. For nearly a quarter of a century, he’s been on the front lines – working to protect religious and constitutional freedoms in the courts, in Congress, and in the public arena. At the Supreme Court of the United States, Jay Sekulow has argued 12 cases – including several landmark cases which have become part of the legal landscape in the area of religious liberty litigation.
Used with the permission of the American Center for Law and Justice.