Jerrold Nadler, chair of the House Judiciary Committee and the other Democrats on the Committee have taken the first step to sharpen their witness interrogations. He plans to use staff counsel to question Attorney General Barr when he testifies. Anyone who has seen a Congressional hearing has recognized that most of the Committee members are incapable of asking relevant and incisive questions.
Sometimes members simply don’t have enough background information to pose the right questions; at other times members may be more interested in posturing for the good of their re-election campaigns. Even when their staffers or others supply the right initial questions, it is often beyond the members’ skill to ask the right follow-up questions. And those members who are both knowledgeable and skillful enough to interrogate a witness run into the five or three-minute time frame usually imposed by committees.
To combat these limitations, Nadler and the Democrats want to use the format typically used in high stakes hearings like Watergate or Iran Contra. In the hearing to investigate Watergate--Campaign Activities Related to the Presidential Campaign of 1972—conducted by a Select Committee of the Senate, counsel interrogated the witnesses. (The Senate Select Committee voted on February 19, 1973, to suspend any further public hearings so that the House Judiciary Committee could review and consider the evidence for impeachment.)
The Democrats should also consider two additional steps. Establish a select committee made up of the critical members of other pertinent committees, such as the judiciary, intelligence, and government oversight. A select committee can better create a narrative of wrongdoing that the public can understand. Also, by not including members from House Financial Services (chaired by Maxine Waters) and Ways and Means (chaired by Richard Neal), some insulation is provided from Republican charges that they are trying to obtain Trump’s financial records for investigative rather than legislative purposes.
And bring in as many expert witnesses as possible to explain the evidence and fill in gaps. When members of the administration refuse to heed subpoenas, bring in experts to review any previous testimony they may have given. Show why their statements are essential and why it is likely that the courts will eventually rule in Congress’ favor and hold them in contempt if they do not testify. Use as many special effects as possible to describe the narrative and explain how the pieces fit together.
The Democrats need to remember that these hearings are more about persuading an audience than they are about an investigation. Robert Mueller has conducted an investigation and found Donald Trump to unfit to hold the office of President. Now the House must persuade the public that he must be impeached or, at least, not worth their vote in 2020.
Sometimes members simply don’t have enough background information to pose the right questions; at other times members may be more interested in posturing for the good of their re-election campaigns. Even when their staffers or others supply the right initial questions, it is often beyond the members’ skill to ask the right follow-up questions. And those members who are both knowledgeable and skillful enough to interrogate a witness run into the five or three-minute time frame usually imposed by committees.
To combat these limitations, Nadler and the Democrats want to use the format typically used in high stakes hearings like Watergate or Iran Contra. In the hearing to investigate Watergate--Campaign Activities Related to the Presidential Campaign of 1972—conducted by a Select Committee of the Senate, counsel interrogated the witnesses. (The Senate Select Committee voted on February 19, 1973, to suspend any further public hearings so that the House Judiciary Committee could review and consider the evidence for impeachment.)
The Democrats should also consider two additional steps. Establish a select committee made up of the critical members of other pertinent committees, such as the judiciary, intelligence, and government oversight. A select committee can better create a narrative of wrongdoing that the public can understand. Also, by not including members from House Financial Services (chaired by Maxine Waters) and Ways and Means (chaired by Richard Neal), some insulation is provided from Republican charges that they are trying to obtain Trump’s financial records for investigative rather than legislative purposes.
And bring in as many expert witnesses as possible to explain the evidence and fill in gaps. When members of the administration refuse to heed subpoenas, bring in experts to review any previous testimony they may have given. Show why their statements are essential and why it is likely that the courts will eventually rule in Congress’ favor and hold them in contempt if they do not testify. Use as many special effects as possible to describe the narrative and explain how the pieces fit together.
The Democrats need to remember that these hearings are more about persuading an audience than they are about an investigation. Robert Mueller has conducted an investigation and found Donald Trump to unfit to hold the office of President. Now the House must persuade the public that he must be impeached or, at least, not worth their vote in 2020.
The New York Times. Fandos. House Democrats Push Barr to Submit To A Lawyer's Questioning;
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/29/us/politics/house-democrats-barr-hearing.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/29/us/politics/house-democrats-barr-hearing.html
Rolling Stone. Wade. Barr and Nadler Sparring Over Attorney General's Upcoming Testimony. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/barr-and-nadler-judiciary-testimony-828435/
