On Wednesday evening Congressman Goodlatte sprang another one of his surprise “telephone town halls” on his unprepared Sixth District constituents.

Fortunately Bill Hamilton was able to record most of it.

A questioner in Lexington asked about Goodlatte’s practice of holding his “telephone town halls” with no advance notice.

Question: I was just wondering if you were going to be planning town halls on a regular basis or a set time for these phone town halls? It’s just that I happened to answer the phone tonight, that I did not know you were planning on ahead of time.

Goodlatte: Well, the answer is, we do them on a regular basis. We have lots of different ways for people to communicate with us, including every month at a set time we have an open door meeting in Lexington where people can go and meet with a member of my staff and pass along their concerns about issues. And I respond to all of those. We also have Facebook. We also have my website. We also have an e-newsletter that we send out every week. And there are at least, you know, ten different ways that people can contact me and either seek help with a government agency or ask questions about an issue that is before the Congress. But we have found that these telephone town hall meetings provide for an opportunity for a very civil discourse as opposed to what you’ve seen around the country where people turn town meetings into mob scenes and have cardboard cutouts of elected officials and all kinds of other things that kind of demean the process and take away from the people who show up and really want to have a serious discussion about the issues facing the country. So we will continue to have the telephone town hall meetings and we will continue to look for other ways. We meet with people individually all the time, every week. We visit schools and hospitals and businesses to talk about issues that are of concern to folks in those places. And we’ll continue to be accessible. We also receive over a thousand emails a week, in other words unique individual contacts, from people who have just simply reached out directly to my office, or they call one of my offices at the numbers that I gave out earlier, and I’ll give them out again later as well. So we want to be as accessible as we possibly can. We want to promote a dialogue where we have a constructive conversation about the issues. So thank you very much.

You’ll notice Goodlatte never responded directly to the question about scheduling regular town halls or having set times for “telephone town halls.” Instead he talked at length about how “accessible” he is and about all the other ways he meets people and receives their views.

The problem is that lots of constituents have contacted him in recent weeks asking for meetings (individual, small group, town hall) and he doesn’t respond. As for questions about issues: if he does answer, it’s usually in the form of a generic letter that doesn’t deal with the constituent’s specific concern. 

Goodlatte seemed to rule out in-person town halls for fear of “mob scenes” and “cardboard cutouts.”

If Goodlatte was referring to the cardboard cutout of himself featured at a recent meeting in Vinton, it was only there because he himself wasn’t.

And does Goodlatte really have such a low opinion of his constituents that he thinks any town hall meeting would turn into a “mob scene”? He might want to consult with his House Republican colleagues Justin Amash of Michigan and Mark Sanford of South Carolina.

Amash has faced some impassioned constituents at town hall meetings in his district. But he believes the meetings are valuable and plans to continue holding them. He responded to a tweet from President Trump about “liberal activists” organizing “angry crowds.”

“I think it is critical that members of Congress hold in-person town halls like this,” Amash said. “There aren’t enough of people on either side of the aisle who do it.”

Sanford and Republican Senator Tim Scott actually cosponsored a town hall meeting with the grassroots progressive group Indivisible Charleston, at which they faced challenging but mostly polite questions about the Affordable Care Act and other issues.

As Sanford remarked afterwards:

I’ve long believed that in many cases, a dissenting viewpoint is more important than one that agrees with you. You learn a lot more in contrasting an idea than having somebody simply say I’m with you. So I think the back and forth is important to the Socratic process of ultimately getting to the bottom line and hopefully truth at that bottom line.

…..

I thought it was a meaningful interchange. There’s certainly some energy at the front end. But, you know, you go – I think we went about three and a half hours all told. And by time, you know, you move past hour one and some of the, you know, again, pent-up energy that was built into that, I think we really had a meaningful exchange where people, at a heartfelt level, told me why certain things were important to them, why they mattered as they did. And I think that that’s what you’d want in any town hall exchange.

Goodlatte might want to give it a try.

Just one day after Congressman Goodlatte and other Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee killed a resolution requiring the Department of Justice to turn over documents on President Trump’s ties to Russia, news emerged that Attorney General Jeff Sessions, then a top adviser to Trump’s campaign, met twice with the Russian ambassador to the US.

Testifying under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he was asked in January by Al Franken what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government during the 2016 campaign. “I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. He added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.”

There’s more: Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) sent Sessions an additional written question: “Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day?” The AG’s one-word answer could not have been more categorical: “No.”

Sessions’s responses to these questions are at best misleading and incomplete. At worst, they would seem to demand criminal prosecution for lying under oath.

Last year, in his role as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Goodlatte wanted Hillary Clinton prosecuted for perjury for alleged misstatements to Congress about her email setup. So far I have found no reaction from Goodlatte on the Sessions revelations.

Update: Goodlatte belatedly issued a statement saying Sessions “did the right thing” by recusing himself from matters arising from last year’s presidential campaign.

At the beginning of every session of Congress, Bob Goodlatte introduces “balanced budget” amendments to the Constitution while piously declaring his opposition to imposing crush debts on future generations.

So on the surface, it’s rather odd that Goodlatte was so enthusiastic about President Trump’s address to Congress on Tuesday.

Never mind for the moment Trump’s ridiculous promise to come up with a health care plan to provide better insurance at a lower cost to everyone currently covered through Obamacare. Or his cynical effort to equate immigration with crime, even though immigrants to the US have a lower crime rate than native-born Americans.

How does Goodlatte expect Trump to fulfill the promises in his speech to massively increase military spending, create a huge infrastructure program and cut taxes on corporations and the wealthy without exploding the deficit?

Based on past history, the answer is that Goodlatte doesn’t expect anything of the sort. And he really doesn’t care. His vaunted fiscal conservatism only seems to kick in when a Democrat happens to be president.

As expected, and despite grassroots demands, Congressman Goodlatte and other members of the Republican majority on the House Judiciary Committee voted against Congressman Jerrold Nadler’s resolution of inquiry asking the Department of Justice to provide Congress with documents relating to President Trump conflicts of business interests and possible ties to Russia.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) called the resolution “unnecessary, premature” and driven by politics. Instead, he said Republican members of the committee are drafting a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions requesting his voluntary cooperation in any investigation related to Russia and Trump’s business conflicts — with Democrats encouraged to sign on.

Other Republicans were harsher.

“This is just about politics and the hyperbole is thick enough to cut with a knife,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Florida freshman Republican. “In fact, what we are witnessing is that President Trump’s detractors are going through the stages of grief because Hillary Clinton lost and Donald Trump won.”

Though Republicans voted down the measure, the vote itself was a partial victory for Democrats, who forced many of the committee’s 23 Republicans into the uncomfortable position of rejecting a call for greater oversight of Trump’s potential conflicts.

After the vote, Nadler tweeted:

The most important thing that will happen Tuesday on Capitol Hill won’t be President Trump’s address to Congress.

It will be the Goodlatte-chaired House Judiciary Committee’s consideration of Congressman Jerrold Nadler’s resolution of inquiry (H. Res. 111) that would compel the Department of Justice to provide Congress with documents relating to President Trump’s conflicts of business interests and possible ties to Russia.

According to Nadler:

Chairman Goodlatte… gave notice of an amendment in the nature of a substitute to my resolution, with wording virtually identical to H. Res. 111. That amendment only exists as a threat to cut off debate on the underlying resolution. I urge the Chairman not to break from the longstanding practice of the House Judiciary Committee, and to allow a full debate on the resolution of inquiry. If Republicans choose to block the measure, so be it.  At least we will know where they stand.

Goodlatte needs to hear from his Sixth District constituents by 10 a.m. Tuesday that they want the Judiciary Committee to approve Nadler’s resolution of inquiry. Phone his office at (202) 225-5431 or email him via his website.

You can watch the Judiciary Committee hearing starting at 10:15 a.m. Tuesday here.

Politico reports:

House Republicans next week plan to derail a Democratic resolution that would have forced disclosure of President Donald Trump’s potential ties with Russia and any possible business conflicts of interest, according to multiple House sources.

Seeking to avoid a full House vote on the so-called “resolution of inquiry” — a roll call that would be particularly embarrassing and divisive for the right — Republicans will send proposal by Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) to the House Judiciary Committee for a panel vote on Tuesday, two Democratic sources said. The GOP-controlled committee is expected to kill the resolution.

Without committee action, obscure parliamentary procedures would allow Democrats to call the resolution to the floor for a vote by the full House. But rejection by the Judiciary panel all but assures the measure will never see a floor vote.

“Unless the resolution is reported by the committee within 14 legislative days, either favorably, unfavorably or without recommendation, then it can be brought up on the House floor immediately thereafter, so the committee plans to address this resolution next week,” said one House Judiciary Committee aide in a statement.

…..
Resolutions of inquiry are rare in Congress and privileged, meaning lawmakers can circumvent leadership and force action on the floor if they’re ignored for 14 legislative days.

The resolutions can force presidents and agencies to give Congress private records. Nadler’s, for example, demands that Attorney General Jeff Sessions hand over to the Hill “any document, record, memo, correspondence or other communication” pertaining to “criminal or counterintelligence investigations” related to Trump, White House staff or his business.

Democrats have blasted Trump for failing to make a clean break from his real estate empire, accusing him of being vulnerable to conflicts of interest. They also are suspicious of his campaign’s relationship with Russia. U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that top Russian officials orchestrated interference into the 2016 presidential election on Trump’s behalf.

The House Judiciary Committee is chaired by Bob Goodlatte, who has ignored requests by committee Democrats to schedule hearings on Trump’s conflicts of interest. If Goodlatte and the other Republicans on the Judiciary Committee vote to block the disclosure to Congress of information on Trump’s conflicts of interest and his campaign’s connections with Russian officials, all their claims to be interested in getting to the truth about these matters will be exposed for the shams they are.

As people in Waynesboro and throughout the Sixth District ask “Where’s Bob?” Congressman Goodlatte traveled to India this week with other members of the House Judiciary Committee.

In principle there is nothing wrong with members of Congress visiting other countries. But they should do so with a modicum of independence, and not just as an emissary for the president.

Before meeting [Prime Minister Narendra Modi], …Goodlatte declined to answer a question on visa restrictions, saying it was up to President Trump to reassess his policies on immigration.

Goodlatte also said the U.S. president had been a businessman, “And he likes to do deals and he also wants to do deals with India and other countries around the world.”

That’s nice. But what do you think, Congressman?

Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin is one of a handful of conservatives who have tracked the first weeks of the Trump administration in undisguised horror.

Her displeasure extends to the hypocrisy of Trump-supporting Republicans in Congress– including the representative from the Sixth District of Virginia.

One can only marvel at the toadyism of House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) — who previously recommended gutting the ethics office — in demanding a full-scale investigation by the Justice Department inspector general into leaks but resolutely resisting any investigation into President Trump’s breached hotel lease, his conflicts of interest, his ties with Russia and his recent receipt of a trademark from China — just after reaffirming the One China policy — which is indisputably an “emolument” from a foreign government.

Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee have asked twice for Goodlatte to schedule hearings on Trump’s conflicts of interest– to no avail. If he ever shows his face in public to his Sixth District constituents (not just a selected group), maybe we could ask him about it.

Since the House of Representatives is off next week for “district work,” Congressman Goodlatte may actually be out and about in the Sixth District. Not that he is likely to make his presence anywhere widely known in advance.

If you spot Goodlatte, or learn of his whereabouts, please report it in the comments below.

(Hat tip: Chris Gavaler)

Update: Unless you’ll be in India next week, never mind. Indian media report that Goodlatte will lead a bipartisan Congressional delegation of eight lawmakers visiting New Delhi and Bangalore from February 20 to 23. No mention of the visit on his website, and it’s about as far from the Sixth District as you can get.

There’s nothing wrong in principle with members of Congress visiting foreign countries. But maybe an Indian reader of Goodlatte Watch (there is at least one) can ask him when he will hold an in-person town hall meeting in Roanoke, Staunton or Front Royal.