(Tea Party PAC) – When it comes to the Constitution, you don’t want to mess around with Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who memorized most of the document when he was a young man and is one of the foremost scholars in constitutional law in the country.
In fact, anyone who dares to challenge the meaning of the Constitution is in for a rude awakening when Cruz steps up to the plate. The Texan recently took leftists to task for thinking that President Trump doesn’t have the right to call in Hunter Biden or the “whistleblower” in order to defend himself in the upcoming impeachment trial in the Senate.
Here’s more from Gateway Pundit:
Senator Ted Cruz joined Maria Bartiromo this morning on Sunday Morning Futures.
Senator Cruz discussed the likely process in the upcoming impeachment trial in the US Senate.
Ted Cruz argued that President Trump should be allowed to call any witness he wants to in order to defend himself.
Senator Ted Cruz: If the president wants to call Hunter Biden, if the president wants to call the whistleblower due process mandates that we allow the president to defend himself, to make his case. So I think we should do so.
Senator Cruz then went on to argue the current charges will be tossed out immediately because they do not come close to being “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Via Sunday Morning Futures:
Cruz has also stated that he doesn’t believe the two articles of impeachment passed against President Trump meet the requirement set forth by the Constitution.
Here’s more from Real Clear Politics:
Sen. Ted Cruz explained why he thinks the two articles of impeachment against President Trump are “laughable” during an interview with FNC’s Maria Bartiromo on “Sunday Morning Futures.”
MARIA BARTIROMO: Welcome back. And now it goes to the Senate, in a historic week in Washington, where the House of Representatives brought two articles of impeachment and impeached President Trump. Now, the articles go to the Senate. But how soon might that happen? Joining me right now with reaction is Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, on the Foreign Relations and Judiciary Committees. And Senator, it is always a pleasure to see you.
SEN. TED CRUZ: It’s great to be with you, Maria. Thanks.
MARIA BARTIROMO: Thank you so much for joining us. So, Nancy Pelosi said, after the impeachment, that maybe she’ll sit on the articles of impeachment before sending it over to you and your colleagues in the Senate. Can she do that?
TED CRUZ: You know, you can’t make this up. Listen, I think this is a sign of weakness. This is a sign she understands just how weak these articles are. And these articles of impeachment that they actually voted on were really an admission of failure. The House Democrats haven’t alleged any high crimes and misdemeanors, much less proven any. And so now, Pelosi is in a situation that she knows when it goes to the Senate, it’s going to be a fair trial. We’re going to give both sides the opportunity to present their case. We’re going to protect due process. But she also knows the result of a fair trial is these impeachment claims are going to be thrown out, because they haven’t met the constitutional standard.
MARIA BARTIROMO: Do you want to see witnesses in a Senate trial?
TED CRUZ: I would. But let me tell you how I think it’s likely to play out. The trial will start in early January. It’ll start with the chief justice of the United States swearing in all 100 senators. It will then shift to the House managers presenting to their case. That will probably take several days. They’ll stand up. They’ll walk through evidence. They’ll make arguments. Then it will shift to the White House, to the defense team for the president making their case. And the president is going to have a full and fair opportunity to defend himself. It then will shift to questions. Now, here’s where it’s a little weird. I think some people, having seen what happened in the House, they’re expecting in the Senate to see a bunch of senators asking questions.
Well, the Senate impeachment rules prohibit any senator from speaking in open session, in other words, when the TV cameras are on.
So, you’re not going to see Elizabeth Warren and me going 15 rounds on the Senate floor — because that’s not allowed. We’re both going to be sitting quietly at our desks. Now, we can submit questions, but the questions have to be in writing. And so, we can write out the question. We hand them down. And the chief justice asks the questions from the senators. I think, at that point, we’re likely to recess and have a discussion. I think one of two things will happen. One, it is possible that a majority of the Senate will be prepared. “Let’s move forward, let’s vote. They haven’t met their threshold. They haven’t come close. Let’s reject these claims.” I think that’s an outcome that could happen.
MARIA BARTIROMO: Okay.
TED CRUZ: Secondly, there could well be a procedural fight. “Do we need more evidence? Do we need more witnesses?” in which case, that question is decided by 51 senators. Every legal question — the chief justice can rule in the first instance, but the chief justice can be overruled by 51 senators. I think John Roberts is very likely to follow the Rehnquist precedent and just defer the procedural questions to the Senate, which means if 51 Republicans agree — we can resolve any legal issue. And to me, that means, if the president wants to call Hunter Biden, if the president wants to call the whistleblower, due process mandates that we allow the president to defend himself, to make his case. And so, I think we should do so, but that’s a decision, in the first place, for the president and the White House legal team.
MARIA BARTIROMO: Based on what you know today, do you expect any Republicans to vote to impeach in the Senate?
TED CRUZ: You know, I don’t. It is certainly possible. And then — there are a couple that could vote that way. But I think anyone voting on the facts, anyone voting on the law, this is a very easy vote. What they have alleged is not a high crime or misdemeanor. You know, as weak — there’s two articles. The first article is just this amorphous “abuse of power” — which, by the way, is maladministration. It’s literally the term that was rejected in the Constitutional Convention. That’s what they’re alleging.
That plainly doesn’t meet the constitutional threshold. The second article, though, is orders of magnitude weaker. So, the second article is obstruction of Congress. And interestingly enough, people are used to obstruction of justice.
MARIA BARTIROMO: Yeah. I’ve never heard of obstruction of Congress, but I’ve heard of obstruction of power or —
TED CRUZ: Well, and obstruction —
MARIA BARTIROMO: Obstruction of justice.
TED CRUZ: Obstruction of justice is a crime. It’s a felony. It’s a serious felony.
MARIA BARTIROMO: But they named it “obstruction of Congress.”
TED CRUZ: Because they couldn’t prove obstruction of justice. By the way, Bill Clinton —
MARIA BARTIROMO: Wow.
TED CRUZ: — was impeached on obstruction of justice. Richard Nixon was going to be impeached on obstruction of justice. They couldn’t prove obstruction of justice. The basis for their so-called obstruction of Congress claim is that the president and aides in the executive asserted privileges. That’s it. That — for example, when they wanted John Bolton to testify, John Bolton, national security advisor of the president — his lawyer went to a federal district court and said, “The House has asked me to testify. The White House is asserting executive privilege. Your honor, what do I do? Judge, I’ve got two conflicting demands here. I’ll do what you tell me to, your honor.” You know what the House Democrats did? They said, “Never mind.”
They just backed away. They didn’t subpoena Bolton. They didn’t litigate it.
MARIA BARTIROMO: I see.
TED CRUZ: Remember, the Nixon case was litigated all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court? The U.S. Supreme Court, at the end of the day, ordered the White House to hand over the White House tape. And I think, two days later, Richard Nixon resigned. That’s how you actually fight these matters.
MARIA BARTIROMO: Yeah.
TED CRUZ: The House Democrats didn’t do that. Instead, their assertion is simply claiming a privilege is an impeachable offense. If that were true, all 45 presidents — going back to George Washington, every one of them would have committed impeachable offenses. That’s just laughable.
MARIA BARTIROMO: This is a new precedent; it sure is.
This whole thing has been nothing more than a witch hunt by radical progressives who are ticked off that Trump defeated Hillary Clinton and thus stalled their plans to transform America into a socialist country.
In fact, they have so obsessed over getting rid of Trump that they’ve neglected to do anything for the upcoming 2020 election, in which they’ll no doubt be facing off against the current president and will end up with another mark in the loss column.