Attorney General William Barr appears before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee to make his Justice Department budget request, Wednesday, April 10, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Recently, I covered Jerry Nadler’s House Judiciary Committee passing rules for an “impeachment inquiry.” As some of us have speculated for months now, this was simply an attempt at stealth impeachment, i.e. getting to use the benefits of impeachment (grand jury access, increased subpoena power, etc.) without having too actually pass articles of impeachment.

The game in this case is that Nadler wants to pretend he’s emperor with no guidelines while not having to pay the political price of having House Democrats actually vote as a majority to impeach. There’s noway the courts should allow that and it would present an enormously dangerous precedent if allowed to proceed.

Now, the DOJ is striking back, signaling they aren’t going to take this nonsense lying down.

They also note that Nadler himself insisted as recently as late July that his committee was not conducting an impeahcment inquiry because of the various possible outcomes. pic.twitter.com/oRrDDq3SvU

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 13, 2019

DOJ also notes that the Judiciary Committee initially said the grand jury material was crucial so it could interview McGahn effectively.

But then Nadler said this week that he didn't require McGahn's testimony to fully consider impeachment. pic.twitter.com/OejnMvqXLR

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 13, 2019

The full filing: https://t.co/dbLPHGJOzm

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 13, 2019

Judges, if they are fair, don’t usually like double talk and political games. That’s exactly what the Democrats have been doing. They continually downplay impeachment publicly, claiming that what Nadler is doing isn’t actually an impeachment inquiry, then they run to their base and tell them the opposite. Remember, we’ve been assured by Democrats that what you say publicly matters to how judges should rule on your actions (i.e. Trump’s tweets). Meanwhile, they want to the courts to play along with this scam, giving them near unlimited power of investigation without them having to go through the proper channels to get it.

Let’s be clear, if Nadler gets away with this, it opens the door for every single House majority to target and handicap a sitting president based on nothing more than supposition and suspicion. Normal oversight is fine. Proclaiming you can override executive privilege and force testimony by abusing impeachment powers is not.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.