Book excerpt: How Schiff outmaneuvered Nadler to become driving congressional force behind impeachment

close

Video

Democrats: New impeachment inquiry is ongoing

Reaction and analysis from Fox News contributor Liz Peek.

The following is an excerpt from "Abuse of Power" a book by Fred Lucas, a White House reporter for the Heritage Foundation-associated Daily Signal, on the saga that led to the impeachment trial of President Trump.

It was the Robert Mueller hearing that marked a fatal political blow for House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler and boost for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, according to high-level congressional sources.

“When Mueller came in and Nadler had promised this grand presentation from Mr. Mueller, that was the biggest dud and undermining of what they were doing,” a senior level Judiciary Committee source involved heavily in the impeachment process said.

“I think they thought even though he wasn’t going to come out with a smoking gun, at least they could rehabilitate [Mueller] and use him, manipulate his testimony. He was emasculated. The Republicans on the Judiciary Committee basically totally undermined everything Democrats said they were going to do. Nadler was on national TV shown to be utterly incompetent running his committee. He didn’t know how to keep control of his committee. His bevy of lawyers couldn’t help him. His members were terrible. I think that was strike one.”

***

Former special counsel Robert Mueller is sworn in before testifying to the House Judiciary Committee about his report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, July 24, 2019, in Washington. (Chip Somodevilla/Pool Photo via AP)

ANDREW MCCARTHY: COURT RULING ON EX-WH COUNSEL MCGAHN SUBPOENA FAILS TO DECIDE KEY ISSUE

Lindsey Boylan, challenging Jerry Nadler in a Democrat primary in his New York district, had declared in a campaign video that the House majority leadership, including the Judiciary chairman, was “stalling and feeding us a bunch of B.S.,” adding, “For too many of them, Donald Trump is a fundraising opportunity, not an existential threat to our democracy.”

But for Nadler, it’s not that he would swing and miss; it’s that he would swing repeatedly when there was no ball. The Mueller hearings weren’t the only hearings that bombed for congressional Democrats in 2019. Nevertheless, facing his primary challenge, Nadler declared the Judiciary Committee was conducting an impeachment investigation. It’s not one Pelosi endorsed or seemed to take seriously. Nor did anyone else.

Nadler held a made-for-TV hearings. … In what was almost entirely nostalgia for the riveting TV hearings of the 1970s, the ancient John Dean came before the Judiciary Committee. Dean hadn’t had the chance to call for removing an elected president since George W. Bush was in office, so he had grown a little rusty. This hearing accomplished little other than giving Dean a platform again, but also giving Republican members of the Judiciary Committee the opportunity to note Dean was very much a player in the Watergate scandal.

In a last-gasp attempt to string Trump up on obstruction of justice in the House, the Judiciary Committee brought Corey Lewandowski, Trump’s one-time campaign manager and trusted confidante, to testify in September. Lewandowski, known as a tough political fighter, said tartly, “I will be as sincere in my answers as this committee is in its questions.”

His snarky replies and the Democrats’ frustrated responses made for an entertaining spectacle, but there were certainly no bombshells. …

Pelosi almost certainly wasn’t going to make Nadler the top guy for any impeachment. Nadler’s performance at the Mueller hearing as “strike one,” said the Capitol Hill source deeply involved in the impeachment process.

“Strike two and three happened at the same time. That was when Corey Lewandowski came in and just utterly bombarded their committee,” the Capitol Hill source said. “Nancy Pelosi, after she saw Mueller, was upset. When she saw Corey Lewandowski’s thing, she basically said, ‘Nadler is done. We are not going to him for an impeachment.’”

"Abuse of Power" by Fred Lucas detailes the saga of President Trump's impeachment, including the story of how Rep. Adam Schiff. D-Calif., became the central figure in the case against Trump rather than Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y. (AP/Getty)

***

On January 15, Pelosi announced the appointment of House impeachment managers to act as prosecutors in the Senate impeachment trial. … Schiff was named to lead the crew, marking the third time he led a Senate impeachment team, after the federal judge trials in 2009 and 2010. Nadler didn’t even get a co-captain role, showing how far his stock had fallen. …

The highlight of the first day of the trial didn’t come until after midnight, when Nadler accused the Senate of engaging in a “coverup” for Trump.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, scribbled a note and passed it to the secretary for the majority, Laura Dove, who gave it to Chief Justice John Roberts. … It’s actually rare enough to see Chief Justice Roberts speak on TV, since Supreme Court cases are not televised. He was expected to do little more than gavel in and out, playing mostly a ceremonial role. After receiving the note from Collins, he made it clear to both sides he wouldn’t allow them to overreach.

“I think it is appropriate at this point for me to admonish both the House managers and the president’s counsel in equal terms to remember that they are addressing the world’s greatest deliberative body,” Roberts said. “One reason it has earned that title is because its members avoid speaking in a manner and using language that is not conducive to civil discourse.”

What had only been a subtle rivalry was becoming more overt between Nadler and Schiff. It was interesting that the less flashy Nadler is the one who created headlines in the opening day by besmirching the Senate.

The next day, as the managers held a press briefing, the first question directed to Nadler was about the chief justice’s rebuke. Schiff cut off the reporter, to say, “I’m going to respond to the questions.” Schiff talked for about four minutes on impeachment rules, then asked for other questions. But Nadler jumped in to say. “Let me add something here.” The chairmen of the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees were clearly not reading from the same script.

Nadler talked for two minutes, wrapping up with his point, “any senator who votes to deny a witness, who votes to deny evidence, is voting to cover up the president’s crimes and subversion of the Constitution.”

In this image from video, House impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., holds redacted documents as he speaks during the impeachment trial against President Donald Trump in the Senate at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 22, 2020. (Senate Television via AP)

BOLTON ACCUSES DEMS OF TAKING IMPEACHMENT 'OPPORTUNITY' AND DRIVING STRAIGHT INTO A DITCH WITH IT'

That’s when Schiff put his hand on Nadler’s back and said, “Let’s go to questions.”

Roll Call, a Capitol Hill newspaper, said this represented “internal discord.” That show of discord would flare up again. A week later, Schiff and five other House managers, except for Nadler, were doing another press gaggle before the trial proceedings began. Schiff was doing all the talking. Suddenly Nadler showed up, as if no one told him and he just found out. He awkwardly stood in the background, barely in the camera frame.

Nadler tried to move in front of Rep. Sylvia Garcia to be closer to the front. Garcia, being a more junior House member, graciously stepped behind him. Nadler was in camera view now, but Schiff continued to talk.

That night, January 30, saw the fifty-nine-year-old Schiff lose a foot race to the seventy-two-year-old Nadler, who in 2002 shed massive weight from his formerly 300-plus pound frame through surgery. In a spectacle, Chief Justice Roberts asked the final question of the evening. Schiff had been the first to step forward to the lectern and answer every question that night, unless he designated someone else from the team to do so.

Not this time.

Nadler walked briskly, almost jogging, to the podium to answer the question. Schiff was left standing and was heard loudly whispering, “Jerry, Jerry, Jerry.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

If Nadler could hear him, he was ignoring him, and began to answer the question, saying the arguments against calling witnesses were “absurd” and “nonsense.” …

The video of Nadler’s triumph at the lectern knocking out Schiff’s closing argument for the night became a viral video lighting up Twitter. Some tweets showed the video in slow motion, of Nadler seizing the lectern as Schiff stood bewildered as the theme of “Chariots of Fire” played. The blatant rivalry certainly wasn’t lost on senators.

“People were very aware that there was that competition between the two of them on who was going to grab the spotlight,” Sen. Marsha Blackburn said in an interview for this book after the trial. “I think everybody thought it was interesting that they chose to take it away from Nadler and give it to Schiff. As you saw it role out, you saw why. What we were able to pick up was that they felt like Schiff was the one to drive the issue.”