There have so far been two hearings in the House Democrats’ effort to impeach President Donald Trump over the Ukraine matter. Both have been held in secret. One was last Thursday, the other Friday, and the public does not know what was said in either. Two more are scheduled for this week, and they will be held behind closed doors, too.

The hearings are part of an effort to remove the president from office. There could not be a matter of more pressing public concern. There could not be a matter in which the American people have a greater stake. And yet the public has no idea what is being discovered.

Last week’s sessions weren’t just secret. They were super-secret. The first hearing, in which the witness was former Ukraine special envoy Kurt Volker, was held in what is known as a SCIF, which stands for sensitive compartmented information facility. It is a room in the Capitol built to be impervious to electronic surveillance so lawmakers can discuss the nation’s most important secrets without fear of discovery.

The second hearing, in which intelligence community inspector general Michael Atkinson testified, also was in the SCIF.

Were highly classified matters discussed at the Volker and Atkinson hearings? Apparently not. Neither interview was classified. And even if some classified information were involved, it would be astonishing for Democrats to believe they could attempt to remove the president on the basis of information that is not available to the public.

The secrecy, decreed by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, has taken Republicans by surprise. Some are now speaking out about it.

“Adam Schiff is running an impeachment inquiry secretly, behind closed doors, and he’s making up the rules as he goes along,” Republican Rep. John Ratcliffe said.

“These proceedings should be public,” Republican Rep. Jim Jordan said. “Democrats are trying to remove the president 13 months before an election based on an anonymous whistleblower ... and they’re doing it all in a closed-door process.”

“This is nothing more or less than a show trial for the media,” said Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee, noting with secrecy rules in place, the public knows only what is leaked to the press. “The Democrats leak what they want to leak to build narratives.”

Of course, that is not how Democrats would describe it. Schiff has said secrecy is needed to protect the identity of the CIA whistleblower who started the entire process.

“The whistleblower has the right in the statute to remain anonymous,” Schiff said recently, referring to the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, which lays out the process through which intelligence community whistleblowers can file complaints.

In fact, the law says: “The inspector general shall not disclose the identity of the employee without the consent of the employee, unless the inspector general determines that such disclosure is unavoidable during the course of the investigation.”

First, the inspector general is the only official specifically prohibited from disclosing the identity. And second, even if the statute’s use of “investigation” refers to the inspector general’s probe, the fact is, the whistleblower is now part of an impeachment proceeding. Disclosure is, in fact, unavoidable; Democrats cannot keep entire hearings secret, keep vital information away from the American people, in the name of preserving the anonymity of a whistleblower.

Yet that appears to be what Schiff and his Democratic colleagues are doing.

This week the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, was scheduled to be interviewed, but the State Department nixed his appearance at the last minute. That session was set to take place behind closed doors. Also this week, lawmakers will interview former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovich — behind closed doors. Republicans can complain, but Democrats, in firm control of the House, can do as they like. (An inquiry to Schiff’s office went unanswered.)

The Democratic drive to impeach Trump over Ukraine is the first impeachment proceeding solely about foreign policy. The exercise of foreign policy sometimes involves secrecy. The imposition of secrecy was an enormous problem in public understanding of the Trump-Russia affair, which ended with the special counsel unable to establish there had been any conspiracy or coordination involving Russia and the Trump 2016 campaign. In that investigation, the public would have been better served by more disclosure, more quickly.

Now, the American people deserve to know precisely why one party in the House proposes to remove the president. They deserve to know the facts behind the Ukraine matter. It is simply inconceivable that a party could seek to remove a president but say to the American people, in essence, “Trust us, we’ve got good reason.”

The impeachment proceedings should be opened up — now.

Byron York is chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner. Contact him at byork@washingtonexaminer.com.

Recommended for you

(13) entries

Bulldog

Everyone participating in this coup needs to be arrested for sedition

natives5

Yawn

Father of Six

Well of course you yawn. I'm sure you yawned when Hillary destroyed servers? You then yawned when the DNC wouldn't let the FBI investigate the hack on their server? (I wonder why that was?) Now they want to hold an impeachment investigation, about a public transcript, and do it in secret. Yawn again. I guess the term equal justice only applies to you and those you want to extend it to. Sad.

natives5

Pushing conspiracy theories I see. There was an investigation in 2015 by the FBI and they found no malign intent. Remember Hillary testified in front of Congress for 11 hours (something trump won’t allow his cohorts tondo, why is that?)? How would the DNC be able to control who and what the FBI investigates?!? Seriously are you that naive Father of Six?

Bulldog

Mmhmm

Father of Six

Equal justice? I guess you really believe Hillary did nothing wrong. Equal justice is dead in a world run by Naive5.. sorry Natives5

natives5

Quiet hypocritical of you to holler about equal justice, don't ya think? FBI investigation was done, unlike what you stated above, and they determined nothing criminal was done by Clinton. Can't dispute that fact can you? Keep pushing your conspiracy theories, though.

Bulldog

The FBI has zero 0 credibility. Comey and his thugs are part of the coup, but some people are too stupid to see that. They would rather stick to their ideology than the truth. Clinton did not intend to break the law? Give me a break. That's a defense now? How about when she destroyed cell phones and computers that were subpoenaed? Did she intend to break that law too? No the deep state will do everything in its power to keep the march toward globalism.

natives5

Are you self-reflecting, Bulldog? Again the FBI cleared Hillary of any wrongdoing but you see that as flawed because trump hates the FBI and keeps telling y'all they are bad. "If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so," and that's an exoneration in your mind....hmmm. Conspiracy theories make you sound like Rudy......

Bulldog

Like I said

natives5

"Deep state" "FBI has zero credibility" What a great "patriot "you are, Bulldog. Maybe you can get a job as a news analyst with Fox.

Father of Six

I guess you don't follow the news or just maybe just CNN. Deep State FBI members were exposed, as will be John Brennen and Clapper. Hang on Buttercup.

natives5

Buttercup... you burned me with that one...haha...no facts just name calling.

Sign the guestbook.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.