Democrat Representative Elijah Cummings spent 19 years practicing law and demands that the House Oversight Committee, of which he is ranking Democrat chair, is the proper place for hearing claims against the president. Cummings, whose Maryland congressional district is heavily gerrymandered to make him impossible to unseat, seeks to use the committee to make political hay of claims against Trump, rather than allowing an honest investigation into the claims.

As Al Franken’s replacement is being named and John Conyers is vacating his seat, it seems that Democrats are pushing on the idea that Trump should be investigated as well. They have made the demand of Trey Gowdy, a Republican congressman from South Carolina and chairman of the House Oversight Committee, even going so far as to have Democrat congresswoman from Florida Lois Frankel present him with signatures from Democrats demanding an investigation into claims against Trump.

Gowdy’s response was terse and to the point: “This Committee, nor any other Committee of Congress, does not, and cannot, prosecute crimes. This is true for many reasons but especially true in crimes of this serious nature.”  Gowdy’s response continued on to point out that “Those alleging sexual assault or criminal sexual conduct deserve to be interviewed by law enforcement professionals, and charging decisions should be made by prosecutors based on the quantum and quality of the admissible and provable evidence.”

Trey Gowdy would be one to know.  After all, he spent years of his life working in law, as well as working as a prosecutor. Drawing on that experience, Gowdy sent along the letter to the proper authority,  the Department of Justice’s head and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the former Senator from Alabama. He further pointed out that “The victims deserved and received our compassion, patience, and gratitude at both the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the District Attorney’s Office while I was there.”


Trey Gowdy, a Republican Congressman from South Carolina, spent 22 years practicing law, most of it as a prosecutor for the government. It is likely that he knows precisely what he is talking about when he recommends the proper venue for hearing claims made against President Donald Trump, whether Elijah Cummings wants to admit that or not.

Democrats, however, thinking they know better than Gowdy, who spent twenty years prosecuting various crimes at levels both state and federal, were infuriated by the decision.  Elijah Cummings, the highest-ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, who spent 19 years in the practice of law, disagrees with Gowdy.

Cummings, who sits in a safely gerrymandered congressional seat, says that claims of sexual harassment are within the bailiwick of the committee, and that they are able to hear such complaints.  He has also previously disagreed with Gowdy concerning whether the House Oversight Committee was the proper place to hear matters concerning Michael Flynn, even though there was a criminal investigation led by Robert Mueller at the time.

According to Cummings, “Congress is in the midst of a critical and long-overdue examination of allegations against its own Members—both before and after they were elected to Congress.”  Cummings goes on to say that the House Oversight Committee is the perfect place to hear claims against the President of the United States of America, concerning sexual harassment claims.


Trey Gowdy suggested to Elijah Cummings and his Democrat allies that the proper place for the hearing that they demand is in the Department of Justice, not in a political committee in the House or Senate. Jeff Sessions spent much of his life prior to becoming a Senator from Alabama as a prosecutor for the government, and has shown that he is more than capable of hearing complaints against the President of the United States.

Gowdy’s retort to Cummings and Frankel stated that any allegation that falls short of criminal conduct should be reported to the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over “allegations related to fitness for office and non-criminal matters.”

Realistically, it seems like the Democrat party is not truly interested in ‘justice’ of any sort.  As any prosecutor could tell you, proving a crime a decade or more after the fact is nigh impossible; in fact, it’s part of the reason why United States law has limits for how long past the commission of a crime criminal charges can be brought against an individual.  At a certain point, bringing charges for many crimes becomes pointless.

Further, it seems that they’re simply looking for a chance to posture in a committee while talking about what a terrible man Trump is because his language is coarse.  It’s notable that when there were multiple claims against Bill Clinton for sexual assault and harassment, as well as a concept called ‘command rape’, many Democrats (including Elijah Cummings), felt that the charges did not merit a hearing, let alone debating where the hearing should take place.


Congresswoman Lois Frankel, a Democrat from Florida, collected signatures in an attempt to bully Trey Gowdy into bowing to her whims. Obviously, her attempt resulted in failure, as Gowdy has declined to hear the charges and suggested a more appropriate venue.

The idea of due process also includes a proper process for where evidence or claims should be heard.  If the women accusing Trump (the ones who haven’t been debunked) are making the same claims they made during the election season, then Congressman Gowdy is correct, and they should be heard by the Department of Justice.

As Gowdy, a prosecutor with 20 years of experience pointed out, “Those alleging sexual assault or criminal sexual conduct deserve to be interviewed by law enforcement professionals, and charging decisions should be made by prosecutors based on the quantum and quality of the admissible and provable evidence.”

The Democrats are simply looking to make cheap political hay after two of their members were forced to resign to avoid dragging the DNC down with them.  The Democrats in the last election cycle had a lot to say about arbitrarily ‘believing women’ without evidence, and they now have cause to regret it, and are looking to find a way to utilize their faux moral standard to damage the Trump presidency.