Sally Vix wrote:
Please address these major concerns that I have with this impeachment "inquiry":
1) Why is only one party questioning the witnesses? Should it not be a bipartisan inquiry?
This is a misconception. Each committee includes Republic members. The committees are led by Democrats because Democrats control the House and, to the extent whatever rules of Congress the Republicans deigned to leave intact delegate authority to prescribe House procedures to the majority, they control those two. There is nothing preventing the Republican majority in the Senate holding parallel public hearings and there is nothing preventing the White House making public the materials that underlie 90% of what's being discussed. Republican whining about the House process is completely inconsistent with (a) how impeachment inquiries have been handled in the past and (b) how Republicans have argued inquiries should be handled in the past. It is optics, nothing more.
2) Why is no cross-examination allowed of the witnesses?
What do you mean by cross-examination? This is not a trial (yet). All members of the committees get to ask questions, the Republicans have had counsel there on several occasions.
3) Why is it being held behind closed doors? Some parts of it may need to be held in private, but shouldn't the American public be privy to what is going on? Isn't sunlight the best disinfectant? Also, selective stuff can be leaked.
The Democrats have committed to releasing all the transcripts once the decision is made as to whether or not to draw up articles (though they don't have to). In the meantime, the inquiry is similar to a grand jury hearing which are held behind closed doors. While the opening statements have leaked the testimony has generally not, which prevents new witnesses "fixing" their testimony to fit what's already in the record. For further info. on why closed door hearings are appropriate at this stage I refer you to Gowdy's, Nunes' and Boehners' statements re. the Benghazi hearings.
4) Why is Adam Schiff ruling over this inquiry? He is a proven liar time and time again. Should not someone with more credibility and truthfulness be in charge?
Trump calling him a liar doesn't make it so. He's in charge because Pelosi put him in charge by choosing the Intelligence committee as the point committee over the Judiciary committee. She has that authority because the Democrats are in the majority in the House and they gave it to her. That's it.
5) Why does Nancy Pelosi have a timeline for this inquiry? She has promised to have a vote by the end of the year. But 6 committees are engaged in looking into fact-finding. How can be trust that ALL 6 of the committees will have completed their fact-finding by that time? If we want to ensure a completeness of the fact-finding let's not put a timeline on anything. Allow EACH of the committees sufficient time to complete their tasks.
The only good question you asked. I don't know - ask her. I guess she's confident 95-100% of the work will be done by then and she wants an easy answer to the inevitable claims that they're going to run the clock all the way through 2020.