Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowIn addition to being fishy, a red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question. The president’s insistence on learning the identity of and “confronting” the Ukraine bribery whistle-blower is a good example of a red herring. He knows that a whistle-blower’s identity is protected under law. He also knows, as we all do, that the whistle-blower’s information in this case is secondhand.
The president argues that he will be denied due process if he cannot “confront” this whistle-blower. This is a real attempt at a diversion, akin to his claiming a denial of due process if he could not “confront” jurors while they deliberate a criminal case against him.
The fact is that a number of witnesses with actual, firsthand knowledge of the facts have given depositions under oath before Congress about his Ukrainian extortion/bribery plot. Members of the president’s political party freely cross-examined them. Now, those members have another opportunity to do so during the House impeachment hearings that officially began Nov. 13. Moreover, under the rules adopted by the House, the president and his counsel will also have the right to cross-examine these witnesses. They can “confront” these witnesses to their hearts’ content.
The whistle-blower merely and quite properly sounded the alarm. He never claimed to have firsthand knowledge of the facts. The president should stop trying to distract or mislead us from getting to the real issues and facts in this case. It would also be helpful in that regard if he stopped obstructing justice and allowed past and present White House employees to testify before Congress.
__________
Sid Mishkin
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Let not get into the entirety of the Whistleblower rights but the 6th amendment does state that the President as all citizen gets to stand before the accuser, Red Herring or Blow Fish. Sir Jurors are not making accusatory accusations.
The hearings are an Inquiry of Impeachment not an Articles of Impeachment, little things mean a lot. The house needs to convene for an Articles of Impeachment vote.
6th Amendment of the United States Constitution ( I believe this to still the Rule of Law)
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.