House Democrats took an important step in the impeachment inquiry, throwing a wrench into the GOP's biggest defense

t
• On Tuesday, House Democrats officially filed a resolution outlining the terms and parameters of the ongoing impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump.
t
• The resolution significantly undercuts many of the Republican criticisms that the inquiry isn't transparent enough and is denying Trump and the GOP "due process."
t
• The resolution enables the House Intelligence Committee to publish redacted transcripts of closed-door depositions and start holding public hearings, with the committee counsel for each side given equal time to question witnesses.
t
• It also lays out the parameters for the White House's legal team to participate in hearings by submitting written testimony and responses, physically attending the hearings, and cross-examining witnesses.
t
• Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

On Tuesday, House Democrats officially filed a resolution outlining the terms and parameters of the ongoing impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, throwing a wrench into many of the Republican criticisms of the impeachment process.

The resolution, H.R. 660, comes a little over a month after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formally announced that the House Intelligence, Oversight, and Foreign Affairs committees would be jointly pursuing the impeachment investigation.

It lays out the terms for "open and transparent" impeachment hearings conducted by relevant House committees - and significantly undercuts many of the Republican criticisms of how the inquiry has been conducted.

Specifically, Republicans have charged that the committees are not being transparent by mostly hearing witness testimony and reviewing documents behind closed doors, the process is shutting out Republicans, and the inquiry is denying Trump "due process."

They have also claimed the process is illegitimate because the full House has not voted to approve an impeachment inquiry, but House Democrats are set to hold a floor vote on the resolution on Thursday.

Last week, 30 House Republicans made their displeasure known by barging into a secure committee room where the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight committees were attempting to depose a Pentagon official behind closed doors.

A total of 46 House Republicans, including 12 who participated in the storming of the sensitive compartmented information facility, sit on one of those three committees and are able to participate in every step of the inquiry, but the resolution gives the minority party even more authority to question witnesses and drive the process.

The House Rules Committee put out a one-page summary describing the key points of the resolution, which aims to:

t
• "reaffirm" the ongoing investigative work, which some Republicans have dismissed as illegitimate
t
• increase transparency by authorizing the House Intelligence Committee to publish redacted transcripts of recent depositions
t
• establish public hearings for witness testimony, with each side's committee counsel given 45 minutes to question witnesses
t
• give "the minority the same rights to question witnesses that the majority has," including subpoena power for Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee.
t
• give Trump and White House counsel staff chances to participate in hearings by submitting written testimony and responses, physically attending the hearings, and cross-examining witnesses, with the caveat that the relevant committees can deny those requests if the White House refuses to cooperate with the inquiry
t
• vest the power to determine whether articles of impeachment are sent to the full House with the House Judiciary Committee.

By bringing the impeachment inquiry into its "public phase," the resolution is virtually negating all of the GOP's criticisms that the inquiry is being conducted in secret and the minority and the White House are being shut out of the process.

Minority members of the committees not only get equal time for their staff to question witnesses, but they also can request subpoenas with the approval of the committee chair.

The impeachment inquiry centers around the claims lodged in an anonymous whistleblower complaint that Trump used "the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election" in a series of events culminating in a July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The complaint specifically charged that Trump pressured the Ukrainian government to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter days after withholding a nearly $400 million military-aid package Congress had already appropriated to Ukraine.

Trump's personal attorney has for months been pushing an unsubstantiated theory that Biden, in his capacity as vice president, called for the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating the Ukrainian oil and gas company Burisma Holdings, where Hunter Biden served on the board from 2014 to 2019.

Since then, the whistleblower complaint has been corroborated by the White House's own summary notes of the Trump-Zelensky call, White House officials themselves, and the sworn testimony of several career diplomatic and national-security officials.

The White House's notes of the call confirm Trump brought up how the US does "a lot for Ukraine" and, immediately after, asked Zelensky to do him a "favor, though" by investigating Biden and a debunked conspiracy theory that Ukraine is in possession of a Democratic National Committee server.

Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff and director of the Office of Management and Budget, also seemingly acknowledged in a press briefing to reporters last week that the administration engaged in a quid pro quo with Ukraine to trade US military aid for investigations.

"Did he also mention to me in passing the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about that. But that's it, and that's why we held up the money," Mulvaney said during the conference, later doubling down and adding, "I have news for everybody: Get over it."

Pressuring a foreign government to dig up dirt on a political opponent is a potential violation of federal campaign-finance laws, and withholding military aid to do so could constitute bribery, extortion, and misappropriation of taxpayer funds - all of which are issues the impeachment inquiry is looking to explore.

Read more: Meet Alexander Vindman: The refugee, Army colonel, and Purple Heart recipient testifying about his concerns over Trump's Ukraine dealings Democrats just dropped a big hint that they have everything they need to impeach Trump

Trump is getting battered on all fronts as Congress, the courts, and even his own officials eviscerate him"