Desperate: Adam Schiff Tries to Disqualify White House Counsel from Impeachment Trial

Breitbart: House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and the other House impeachment managers sent a letter Tuesday to White House Counsel Pat Cipollone seeking to disqualify him from representing President Donald Trump at the Senate trial.

The argument: because the articles of impeachment allege Trump committed “obstruction of Congress” by following legal advice to decline subpoenas, the lawyer who advised him is a “material fact witness.”

The letter argues: “Evidence indicates that, at a minimum, you have detailed knowledge of the facts regarding the first Article and played an instrumental role in the conduct charged in the second Article. The ethical rules generally preclude a lawyer from acting as an advocate at a trial in which he is likely also a necessary witness.”

If Cipollone is to represent the president, Schiff and the Democrats argue, he should have to “disclose all facts and information to which you have first-hand knowledge that will be at issue in connection with evidence you present or arguments you make in your role as the President’s legal advocate.”

In other words, Cipollone would have to violate attorney-client privilege and his duty of confidentiality to his client, effectively disqualifying him from participating.

The extraordinary letter is the latest in a series of bold — or desperate — tactics by House Democrats determined to retain control of an impeachment process that has passed into the hands of the Republican-controlled Senate. read more

15 Comments on Desperate: Adam Schiff Tries to Disqualify White House Counsel from Impeachment Trial

  1. If he was a witness, then why didn’t both Schitt and Nadler subpoena him?

    If they did NOT subpoena him, then they (obviously) did NOT consider him a credible (or valuable) witness.

    izlamo delenda est …

  2. wait a minute

    isn’t this exactly what shit schiff did during the house investigation?

    schiff had some lawyer/politician/dc bureaucrat (cannot remember just who it was) act as both a witness and a prosecutor, didn’t he?

  3. If this were true, any prosecutor could call the defendant’s lawyer as a witness and force him to divulge privileged information. It’s completely absurd and shows a deep ignorance of the law. Completely banana republic.

  4. “The ethical rules generally preclude…”

    Adam, can you show me this thing called “The ethical rules”? Are they in a book? Or is that some silly shit you just made up yesterday because the actual laws relating to government ethics don’t say what you want them to say?

  5. Seriously.
    What the fuck would Schitt know about “ethics?”
    Just as the Devil quotes Scripture, the unethical yammer about ethics.

    izlamo delenda est …

  6. Wait, wouldn’t that preclude Schiff from acting as a prosecutor since Schiff could be a material witness himself? Remember, Schiff met with the “whistleblower” before the Ukraine complaint was filed. What Schiff knew and said is material. He just disqualified himself.

  7. I do not like calling people names unless it’s at Adam Schifty. That guy is a freaky freak who is as crazy as he looks. And you can never trust crazy.

  8. I am so sick of this fuckwit I could vomit every time I see his stupid bug-eyed face. He is beneath contempt.

  9. When they wrote that article of impeachment they probably had that very rationalization in mind in order to rob the president of his counsel during the senate trial.

    That might be the central purpose of that article of impeachment because on it’s own at face value it’s just plain obviously stupid.

  10. Adam Schiff to the Senate:

    – We found overwhelming evidence of impeachable crimes by the President in our House proceedings.

    Also Adam Schiff to the Senate in same speech:

    – We need to be able to present more evidence to prove our case against the President.


Comments are closed.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!