What’s the impeachment craze about?
One thing I know is that it’s not about the content of Trump’s phone conversation with Ukraine’s president Zelensky, which you can find here, although the Democrats and NeverTrumpers will pretend it is.
It’s about other things.
The undoing of an election whose result they really really REALLY do not like.
The prospect of a juicy show trial, which Daniel Greenfield discusses here, is another:
Unless the Democrats take the Senate, impeachment would be a meaningless show trial. But Marxist regimes love show trials of political opponents. The Marxist element in the House desperately wants a show trial of President Trump because such a proceeding is an explicit rejection of our political system.
This is in line with other things going on around the world, most particularly in Western Europe, where “elites” wish to ignore the will of the people if that will conflicts with theirs. It’s a new aristocracy which feels it has enough power to accomplish this. Propaganda from the MSM enables them, as well.
Greenfield continues:
Impeachment is not just meant to be a trial of President Trump, but of the voters who chose him. Its outcome, whatever the composition of the Senate, is meant to be an argument for remaking the system of elections, whether by abolishing the Electoral College or tampering with the judiciary, that would take the power further out of the hands of the voters and concentrate them with the right sorts of people.
A Trump presidency is unconscionable to them and was from the start.
Democrats and others in this new aristocracy had grown very used to having a group of opponents – the GOP – who played the game like gentlemen (and that includes the Republican women). Every now and then there had been an eruption from the more combative right such as Clinton’s impeachment or Gingrich’s short-lived Contract With America, but for the most part the left and the Democrats had to deal with people who were only tepidly on the right and often more than willing to play ball with the left, people such as McCain (the candidate in 2008) and Romney (2012). Even George W. Bush was no street fighter and no conservative, although they hated him for other reasons.
The left grew used to having opponents of a certain type, and Trump most definitely was not of that type. That’s why the NeverTrumpers hate him, too, perhaps even more than the left does, because the NeverTrumpers were (and are) of that type as well.
They all feel deeply betrayed, not by Trump but by the American people. And the people must not be allowed to get away with it.
Impeachment is just one part of the war against Trump that has been waged relentlessly since the day he was elected and even before. This latest issue regarding Trump’s conversation with Zelensky is notable for many things, but one of them is the evidence it gives of the relentless surveillance of Trump by moles in the administration willing to report every single thing he does that can be capitalized on by the anti-Trump forces. He can trust no one, and no foreign head of state who talks to him can trust that their communication will not be broadcast to the world.
This is not good for the country, but the Democrats think it’s very very good for them.
[NOTE: As far as the phone call transcript goes and the reaction to it, please read this. And here’s an interesting document, a letter written by some Democratic senators in May of 2018 to the Ukrainian prosecutor.]
[ADDENDUM: Paul Mirengoff at Powerline makes a good point here, one I hadn’t previously noticed:
…Trump asked Zelenskyy to cooperate with Rudy Giuliani and Attorney General Barr in their exploration of the matter…
I draw a distinction between a U.S. president asking a foreign leader to investigate a political rival of the president and asking a foreign leader to assist Americans who are conducting such an investigation or making inquiries.
As I see it, the former — asking a foreign leader to conduct an investigation — is wrong under almost any circumstance. But asking a foreign leader to assist in an American investigation will often be appropriate. When potential wrongdoing by an American (whether a president’s rival or not) involves actions committed overseas, it may not be possible for Americans to investigate without foreign cooperation.
I disagree with Mirengoff’s first sentence of the second paragraph, his assertion that “asking a foreign leader to conduct an investigation — is wrong under almost any circumstance.” It is wrong under some circumstances, of course. But asking a leader to re-open an investigation that the person being investigated (or whose family is being investigated) previously pressured that leader to have closed is not wrong. And that would be the situation here, if in fact Trump had asked that. But he had not asked it.]
I believe one further element of the incoherent “plan” may be simple distraction for the media. Bear in mind the administration is nearing the rollout of the DoJIG report on the FISA abuses, plus probable indictments of former high officers in FBI and DoJ . . . and then. . . ? Elected officials? Could be. So, the Democrats are looking at very bad times to come. And they are desperate.
Charles Murray summed up Republican presidents in his 2016 appeal for Republicans to vote for Hillary
” Without getting into the comparative defects of Clinton and Trump (disclosure: I’m #NeverTrump), I think it’s useful to remind everyone of the ways in which having a Republican president hasn’t made all that much difference for the last fifty years, with Ronald Reagan as the one exception.”
https://www.aei.org/society-and-culture/a-reality-check-about-republican-presidents/
Trump is something different. And it is horrifying to them. As Scott Adams said today, Trump is the last president who isn’t control by the threat of intelligence community blackmail because Trump’s been under scrutiny for decades.
I’ve seen a few people write about this online but most refuse to connect the dots between Trump, Brexit, the protests in France, etc.
Basically, the bureaucratic state exploded in the aftermath of World War II and a managerial/administrative class arose to run these new and constantly expanding governments around the Westernized world. And, to be fair, this new ruling class didn’t do that bad of a job. They got us through the Cold War without killing everyone and generally oversaw substantial improvements in both freedom and standard of living.
Since the end of the Cold War, however, certain blind spots, preoccupations, and convictions of this ruling class have become more and more problematic. For example, they’re all convinced the destiny of Mankind is to live under one, unified, global government. That’s where their obsession with free trade and free movement across boarders comes from. As they’ve become more and more focused on their dreams of what the world should be, they’ve done a worse and worse job running the world as it is.
What we’re seeing around the world is push back against this ruling class and the institutions and status quo they not only take for granted but can’t conceive of them ever changing.
Mike
I have a minor theory that the key reason why people such as McCain and Romney were/are Republicans is because they know full well just how corrupt and vile the Democrat party is and has been, and don’t want any part of that.
But they don’t really disagree with the policies and ideas the Democrats offer up, so they never really feel the need to fight too hard against them.
Over time, the GOP base lost patience with this, leading to the embarrassing failure of the establishment’s chosen candidate- Jeb Bush- and the triumph of the guy the establishment hates- Donald Trump.
Or maybe Jeb et al are all just hapless incompetents who don’t even have enough political talent to defeat an orange-haired reality TV star who had never held elective office before.
Either works for me.
What’s it about? In summary, it’s about revenge for Trump depriving Queen Cacklepants her throne, and thus impeding the Hive’s campaign to turn the US into Venezuela del Norte.
In therapy it’s come to my attention that many of my significant relationships have been with men who have Narcissist Personality Disorder (NPD). So I’ve been studying up on that and it sure looks like Democrats suffer from collective NPD. Here are some bullet points on NPD:
Limited or no ability to:
* Self-reflect and take ownership of a problem
* Tolerate anything perceived as criticism, oversight or dismissal
* Recognize others as free agents with free will
* Feel genuine empathy for others
* Negotiate anger
* Genuinely apologize or feel remorse
Excessively:
* Requires attention, admiration, special consideration, or recognition
* Demonstrates a grandiose sense of entitlement — a hallmark!
* Controls and manipulates others to achieve his/her goals
* Manifests compulsive behaviors
* Demonstrates an all-or-nothing approach to life
* Compulsively seeks status, power, money, beauty, recognition etc.
–Eleanor Payson, “The Wizard of Oz and Other Narcissists”
Elsewhere in the book Payson says that the standard response of narcissists, when disappointed or thwarted by others, is rage.
Good post Neo, but when you say ” the relentless surveillance of Trump by moles in the administration,” my TV hearsay knowledge suggests that nobody on the left has any direct evidence at all. That is, the “whistleblower” filed a complaint based on his/her hearsay.
I’m wondering why Trump didn’t publish the complaint too, although I’d guess that those documents are protected under some statute? Or maybe there’s some poison pill tucked into the complaint?
_____
JK Brown makes a good point. I’m amazed that a supposedly intelligent guy like Murray would make such a boneheaded argument. Because the Nixon/Ford era was such a train-wreck in governance (and Kennedy/Clinton not terrible) we should just chill out and not worry too much about who is president. No Mr. Murray, we should pay extra attention to avoiding the Nixons, and Johnsons, and Carters and Obamas who muck up our country.
Then there was G.H.W. Bush, who was not a train-wreck but did become famous/infamous for his pre-Gulf war catchphrase “One world order,” which I think reinforces MBunge’s point.
I believe one further element of the incoherent “plan” may be simple distraction for the media. Bear in mind the administration is nearing the rollout of the DoJIG report on the FISA abuses, plus probable indictments of former high officers in FBI and DoJ . . . and then. . .?
sdferr: That’s one of my thoughts too. I’m frustrated at the molasses-like slowness of those reports’ release. I know they want to do a good, thorough, bullet-proof job, but I wonder if Trump wouldn’t prefer to bat last in this game, at least before the upcoming election.
Even Drudge has succumbed to the spin:
“Pushed him to work with U.S. Attorney General Barr…”
If you read the transcript, there is no PUSHING of any kind.
Neo,
You don’t find the phone call a little troubling? I’m trying to view this without a political lens, which is hard. But if I can be as dispassionate and unbiased as I can I find the transcript of the phone call to be a concern. A president asking the leader of another country to ‘look into’ the actions of a political rival – a rival whom the president happens to be behind in the polls – can have the look of anything from impropriety to a misdemeanor. It’s worth noting that he presumably would not ask this about a random politician or businessman who is not a rival. So he stands to personally benefit from any revelations that might be uncovered. It may not be illegal and it may not be impeachable but it is certainly problematic. And, of course, very political. Impeachment seems inevitable.
A president asking the leader of another country to ‘look into’ the actions of a political rival
No, to look in to the actions of the rival’s son, who has a dreadful reputation and a 20 year long history of milking and bilking. Hunter Biden exemplifies a half-dozen things wrong with the political economy of the federal capital (in addition to almost criminal grossness).
It’s about kneecapping Joltin’ Joe Biden and his billion dollar threat of “you can fire your prosecutor who’s investigating my son, or you can have those loan guarantees, but you can’t have both”.
Trump is either playing 5 dimensional chess, or he’s the luckiest non-politician politician alive. From my point of view, he’s baited them into impeachment, which goes no where in the Senate, and opens the Congresscritters up to the wrath of their constituents in 2020, and is a hell of a get out the vote for himself.
“A president asking the leader of another country to ‘look into’ the actions of a political rival”
If Hunter Biden didn’t do anything wrong…what’s the problem?
Mike
Or, since Donald Trump really isnt a 5 dimensional chess playing genius, Montage could certainly be right and the “genius” ends up finding himself impeached, in which case he screws us all next election cycle.
Having said that; what chutzpah Pelosi has in saying “No one is above the law”. Except if you belong to her party. Then you can get away with asn amazing amount of crap.
Deep Plumber continues to dredge Water Closet and expose Obama spied, Clinton colluded, Biden obstructed, DNC denied, the press carried out warlock trials, the media platforms steered votes, and the [anti] fascists raged. That said, after, what, 12 trimesters of social justice, there may finally be some justice dealt to the witch hunters and warlock judges. Here’s to progress.
Deep Plunger continues to dredge Water Closet.
Just to lay down a marker here: Montage isn’t right, there won’t be an impeachment on any of these Ukraine grounds; all the Democrat and media lying today will redound to their detriment; and cherry on top, Trump will be reelected next year. How’s about them apples?
Wait, the transcripts show that Trump is primarily talking about Joe Biden not Hunter Biden.
There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me.
So he’s talking about, if anything, both Hunter and Joe. But why would he want to investigate Hunter? There is no tie – that I know of – between Hunter and national security concerns. With Joe Biden, maybe.
sdferr
I would bet – at this point – that there would be an impeachment. But that alone would not stop Trump from being re-elected. [It might help him actually] An impeachment is nothing more than a strong rebuke or censure. Trump would remain in office because the next phase is prosecution in the Senate and that won’t happen because they need 2/3rd of Senators to convict.
So he’s talking about, if anything, both Hunter and Joe. But why would he want to investigate Hunter? There is no tie – that I know of – between Hunter and national security concerns. With Joe Biden, maybe.
Uh, one of Hunter’s influence-peddling gigs concerns Chinese SOE’s. That aside, Hunter’s capacity to rake in oodles of cash is consequent to his proximity to political players. It’s certainly in the public interest to disrupt that sort of activity. (And we know the reason he wasn’t being investigated by the Ukrainian government). This isn’t that obscure.
I don’t believe the Democrats have the votes in the House. No majority, no bill.
Elites willfully blind to the will of the people, ignore the fate of the 18th century French aristocracy.
Tulsi Gabard seems like the one adult over there. And is there a bigger hypocrite than Schumer? He doesn’t have an ethical bone in his body. Here’s a quote from him – Sen. Chuck Schumer: “Simply to release the transcript is not going to come close to ending the need of the American public and the Congress to see what actually happened.”
I don’t even know what that means, except their minds are made up and it doesn’t matter what the facts are, they just know he’s bad.
Montage:
I’m not at my computer now and this will have to be way too brief, but you need to read the ADDENDUM and also the Mirengoff post at the link there.
Also, what Hunter Biden was doing for that firm is certainly very relevant to Biden’s quid pro quo pressure for Ukraine to stop the prosecution of his son’s firm. Among other things, Biden’s son was a ne’er do well with zero expertise in the fields for which he was being paid big bucks.
Tulsi Gabard seems like the one adult over there.
Alan Dershowitz, Jerilyn Merritt, Tulsi Gabbard. They practice inductive reasoning and have some fixed procedural principles. That used to be much more common than it is today. It’s difficult to imagine the likes of Christine Blasey being given the time of day by Democratic politicos a generation ago.
Among other things, Biden’s son was a ne’er do well with zero expertise in the fields for which he was being paid big bucks.
There’s a law degree in his past and he had a patronage job in the Clinton administration which had somethingorother to do with telecommunications policy (IIRC). I think some of his early buckraking traded on that. (Mark Warner and Chuck Hagel are two people who don’t seem that bright or technically proficient but who made a mint as principals in successful start-ups).
One of Hunter’s projects over the years was investment management in partnership with his uncle. He has no background in economics or finance, so it was sketchy right there (not sure, but I don’t think the uncle did either). What the two of them did (IIRC) was to charge unconscionable fees to the unawares for minimal work. (IIRC, they just parceled out people’s money among mutual funds managed by others).
Then there was his comical episode with the Naval Reserve. You can read about it here:
https://theothermccain.com/2014/10/17/glad-i-wasnt-caught-with-hookers-too-hunter-biden-didnt-say-after-dismissal-from-navy-reserve-for-blow/
Neo,
I’m simply curious if you found the phone call troubling. Even Powerline [who support Trump] wrote: “If it turns out that Trump did ask Ukraine to launch an investigation of the Bidens, I would consider the request highly inappropriate But that doesn’t mean it would be grounds for impeachment.”
So’s to be clear on a certain point: Whether or not anything of any substance comes out of this latest kerfuffle, Trump trolls dems and the dems contort themselves to the trolling. This is simply nature at work requiring no super-strategic mind bending genius to explain.
I’ll be happy that the Trump vest keeps my head above the left-wing authoritarian sewage but I’d be happier when I can feel my feet standing on a secure bottom.
Neo,
Okay I see your addendum with Mirengoff [of Powerline] and your comment. I quoted him as well in my previous comment. I didn’t recall seeing it until now. I wrote my initial response right when you posted and didn’t post right away. Thanks,
I don’t, myself, find the phone call troubling, now that the transcript shows that what the leftists were upset about isn’t there. There is a newly-elected leader in Ukraine who ran on an anti-corruption platform. He is re-starting previously cancelled corruption investigations — and corruption has been rampant in his country. Trump asked him to pass on any information with respect to the 2016 election meddling, for which we should all be grateful, and to pass on anything related to Americans (i.e., Bidens) in relation to the corruption investigation which was cancelled. Biden bragged about shutting down the investigation in Ukraine. So is our president supposed to ignore all this, because the guy involved is running for office again?
“So is our president supposed to ignore all this, because the guy involved is running for office again?”
Well yes, of course it must be ignored. Because reasons. And Joe Biden can commit as many corrupt actions as he likes since his boss whose name he can’t remember — President Pseudonym, for those keeping score — committed more corrupt acts than all the Presidents heretofore put together. It’s only fair.
Democrats are playing Abortionist’s advocate. Meanwhile, since announcement, then inauguration, and 12 trimesters later, the president is still viable, and their collusion with foreign and domestic government, special and peculiar interests, has failed to to reap planned profits. So, we are forced to play another trimester of whack-an-ass. Here’s to progress.
Montage — Are you saying that it’s okay for the President to ask another country to investigate corruption, but not if the suspect is a potential political opponent? The US has put the arm on a lot of countries to investigate or prosecute people, but a political opponent has a ‘Get out of Jail Free Card?’
If Uncle Joe were the head of a public company, his threat to thje Ukranians would have violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. A fortiori, the crime should be worse when a Vice President of the United States does it.
Being in Iowa, we are just getting started with the political ad deluge. Tom Steyer’s current ad has one of his promises to “fix democracy.” Progressives want to “fix” it so no other candidates can be elected. Brexit is opposed because the people didn’t vote how they were supposed to.
On Hong Kong, the demonstrators want freedom while here in the US and Europe the elites are suppressing what people want. Not officially displaying, as of yet, the threat of force shown by China but certainly supporting Antifa and giving voice to removing our rights of speech, association and self-protection.
How far this will go is anyone’s guess at this point.
Republicans wrongly believed that Feminists cared about women and girls, rape, rape-rape, superior exploitation, etc., and were green to pursue impeachment in the opening to what would progress as #MeToo, witch hunts, warlock trials, and unearthing of of the remains of selective-children under the Chamber’s ethical (i.e. quasi-religious) doctrine.
“And the people must not be allowed to get away with it.” – Neo
I wish I knew how to make photo-shopped graphics.
This deserves to be on a poster on every fence and telephone pole in America.
Kate,
My husband turned on CNN this evening (we can’t get many US channels here) and everyone was repeating Dem talking points. There was no info about the timing of the calls to Zelensky ( right after his election and right after his party won in the parliament) nor of the fact that his is a political neophyte who ran on getting rid of rampant corruption. Trump’s talking points seemed to focus on getting to the bottom of corruption both in the Ukraine and at home and working together to do this. He is also asking about the Crowdstrike finding that Russia was involved in hacking the DNC computers when it could be that there were Ukranians involved.
No one in Trump’s administration can have much info on Zelensky to predict how effective he might be in his anticorruption efforts. I see all this as Trump trying to establish a constructive relationship with him and to identify areas he should be exploring. The Biden bit was just another area to look at.
You sure can’t expect CNN to provide any background info on Ukranian politics.
I was scrolling through the comments at Daniel’s post and found a couple of people who cited the “liberal” response (sometimes sotto voce) after 9/11 as the time when they discovered the rot in the Democratic Party and walked away.
It’s not a new thing.
Richard Saunders,
I understand what you are saying. But the distinction here is that Trump knew that the gain he would get by knocking off Biden would be far greater than the gain that our country or the Ukraine would get. So while I agree it is complicated it is also convenient. As convenient as Joe Biden pressuring a prosecutor who was about to begin [or had already begun] to investigate the company Hunter Biden worked with. Politics at work… [Although having read up on this the Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin was not a good prosecutor and apparently many in Europe, the G-7, the IMF and the EBRD wanted him gone. So when he was sacked it was no surprise and actually the beginning of the Ukraine draining their own swamp].
I’ll add that if a Democratic president had done the exact same thing by having a phone call with a foreign leader involving one of his political opponents it would raise flags as well. As it should.
More fun from Ace
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/383468.
Okay, I confess.
I just like the headlines Ace uses.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/383470.php
You’re Not Going to Believe This, But the Media Is Ignoring and Justifying The Democrats’ Overt Pressure on Ukraine to Open Political Investigations They Thought Would Hurt Trump
It is noteworthy that the current impeachment craze is a mental pattern much like other crazes in that it involves demonization and overexcitement of the mind. Democrats of late seem particularly susceptible to this type of hyper mental stimulation. The influence of hyper-demonizing postmodernist SJWs adds to the effect, nudging the temperature on the political left ever higher.
The primary reason I gravitated toward conservatism over time is the calmer, more reasonable environment that prevails there. The best rule of thumb in politics and life is to keep calm and carry on, used to great effect by the Brits in WWII.
expat, when I lived outside the US, I learned that CNN international and the NY Times international were virulently anti-American, and that people in the countries where I lived believed these sources. This was ten years ago; it’s probably gotten worse.
“Elsewhere in the book Payson says that the standard response of narcissists, when disappointed or thwarted by others, is rage.” – huxley on NPD
Many years ago, one of our LDS speakers who interfaces with a lot of world-wide NGOs, described her concern at working with people who had radically different social and moral values but wanted to achieve common worthwhile goals. She had wondered how to deal respectfully with those who held their beliefs honestly, and still oppose forthrightly those who were actually pursuing a different agenda.
Her conclusion was, that you could tell them apart quite easily, because the latter, “when you crossed them, they got mean.”
Her conclusion was, that you could tell them apart quite easily, because the latter, “when you crossed them, they got mean.”
AesopFan: That’s a great insight!
This is the kind of story I really don’t want to spend (waste) time closely following and examining because all of the subtleties are going to be lost and ignored by the Dems. No one in America really cares about Ukraine and few know where it is. All I know is that Josef Stalin induced a famine there in the 1930s ignored by the New York Times and 40% of all runway models are either from Russia or Ukraine.
I glanced at the National Review for some reason and hardcore anti-Trumper David French (who I’ve never liked on anything) thinks there was a quid pro quo whereas Rich Lowry doesn’t seem to agree. I only looked at headlines.
huxley on September 25, 2019 at 11:38 pm said:
..That’s a great insight!
* * *
Yep.
That’s why I remember it.
Some people have complained that the phone call document is not, you know, a transcript-transcript.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-transcript-read-ukraine-president-phone-call-transcript-pdf-released-today-joe-biden-crowdstrike-2019-09-25/
And that’s absolutely not reliable!!
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2019/09/25/the-medias-reporting-on-the-trumpbidenukraine-call-is-another-underreported-fiasco-n2553690
But then were these memos also not absolutely reliable?
“These are interpretive memoranda produced by [the Director of the FBI]. They are not absolute records of what transpired.”
It is a puzzlement.
I kept seeing the claim that the whistleblower’s lawyer was a political operative and ho-hummed: who isn’t one, in DC? And it was already a given that the politics of both were Democratic.
However, I just saw this (via a comment by Art Deco linking Ace linking the post at WE) and it’s very much worse than just politics-as-usual.
So, ICYMI too:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/ukraine-whistleblowers-lawyers-work-for-group-that-offers-to-pay-officials-who-leak-against-trump
Ukraine whistleblower’s lawyers work for group that offers to pay officials who leak against Trump
by Steven Nelson, | September 24, 2019 01:21 PM
In fairness, some of the information in the article makes the group sound like they are legitimately concerned about whistleblower-retaliation and suppression (having begun during the Obama administration), but a lot more sounds awfully partisan about President Trump himself, although that could be an artifact of him being the only president at the moment.
At any rate, the group solicits cases; they weren’t some random lawyers with a walk-in client.
We’re gonna need a lot more GOP primary challengers.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/former-mccain-romney-adviser-claims-30-gop-senators-would-vote-impeachment-anonymously
I find it depressing that no one anywhere mentions that the Ukraine gave up the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world for guarantees by the U.S., Russia, and others. VP Biden broke those guarantees when he threatened the Ukrainian prosecutor. *sigh*
In a nutshell?
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/wsj-journo-shreds-attempt-take-out-president-after-transcript-release
The MSM—with typical dependability, seriousness and relevance—in….
“She loves me, she loves me not; she loves me, she loves me not; she loves me, she loves me not….” mode:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/acting-director-of-national-intelligence-threatened-to-resign-if-he-couldnt-speak-freely-before-congress/2019/09/25/b1deb71e-dfbf-11e9-be96-6adb81821e90_story.html
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/25/politics/acting-national-intelligence-director-threaten-resign/index.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/25/acting-dni-joseph-maguire-denies-report-he-threatened-to-resign.html
Oh, the pathos….
The Hillary wing of the Democrats is heavily represented in the impeachment crowd. As Neo observed in an earlier column, Ukraine is an irresistible twofer, Biden is sidelined and Trump is destroyed.
What will happen when Warren peaks due to several of her well established positions, impeachment fails in the Senate, and Trump looks likely to win?
Hillary, the 2016 popular vote winner, the true choice of the people, will come of retirement.
Among the few small bits of actual news we may have learned in this media frenzy was this: despite the President’s multiple statements to President Zelensky that the US AG Barr would be in touch, neither President Trump nor the White House staff contacted the AG to request Barr get in touch with Zelensky. Nor did the AG do so independently. There was no follow through.
Now I have no idea why this is so. Nor do I read anything like exculpation of wrongdoing or anything the like that into the fact, as I see nothing untoward in such a proposed contact in the first instance. No. What I wish to note about it, however, is merely the inconsistency, which inconsistency may have any one of many causes, some benign, others not so good on examination, i.e. human error along the way, or sloth, or inattention to detail, disorganization, sloppiness, etc.
But there it stands. And noted.
We’re gonna need a lot more GOP primary challengers.
This fellow Murphy is one of the Krack Kampaign Konsultants that have helped make the GOP such an effective force in federal politics. These guys don’t care for Trump, one suspects because the properties of his campaign and his approach to public relations have provided evidence toward the thesis that Krack Kampaign Konsultants are grifters hustling their clients.
What’s amusing about this era is the number of people who’ve been on the payroll for decades who’ve revealed themselves to have esoteric motives or to be running on fumes. If you want an understanding of how the GOP has managed to control the House of Representatives for 20+ years and the Senate for around about 15 years without discernible effect on federal policy (at least after about 1998), your answer is there.
I have to disagree a bit with this about impeachment:
the Democrats think it’s very very good for them.
I think Pelosi and more serious, cynical, Dems, don’t think it is good unless there is a crime there. BUT, many activist Dems are such strong believers that Trump is Hitler, or a criminal, that impeachment will find the crime where Mueller failed.
It’s a clown show; it’s a distraction. It reduces what Trump can do. Actually, I’m usually against gov’t “doing something”, so having Trump’s gov’t do less might be one of the better things. Whenever gov’t does nothing, it avoids making an active mistake. Usually the “problems” sort of solve themselves, or at least good mitigation actions are started, even without gov’t leadership.
But but but … the Dems have got to Do Something! (Just like they so often think the gov’t has to do something).
The serious Dems can’t think of better Other things to do.
They are pretty sure doing nothing means Trump wins for sure — and I agree with this idea. If they do nothing, if they go along with Trump’s (arguably good) actions, Trump wins for sure.
They are sure the Dems have to Do Something.
Impeachment is Something.
Therefore, impeachment must done.
Good idea or not — have any better active ideas for what the Dems can do? Dems don’t.
AOC, the real leader of the House, said on CNN that they need to act on impeachment to prevent 2020 election meddling which has yet to happen.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/25/aoc-impeachment-inquiry-needed-to-prevent-potential-meddling-in-2020-election/
Well, the “whistle blower’s” complaint has been released and in it, he or she reportedly complains, with great suspicion, that the transcript of the call was not kept in the usual file, but was taken out of that file, and put into a file usually used for classified information.
The intelligence community whistle blower also says that he/she got his second hand information from a number of sources within the White House.
The first question that arises is, what the hell business is it of some intelligence community dweeb how the White House wants to handle records of what are supposed to be confidential talks between the President and other world leaders?
As far as I can see, that is absolutely none of the business of this supposed “whistle blower.”
Second, if this little dweeb is telling the truth about the source of his information, it appears that there are still a lot of disloyal Leftist moles in the White house that have yet to be rooted out, and booted out.
Third thought, such actions as these make it much much harder for our President to confer with foreign leaders–to conduct foreign policy–because those leaders and the President can never be sure, now, that their conversation won’t end up in the National Enquirer the next day.
I wonder if it has ever occurred to those around President Trump who are tying to take him down that, in making all these attacks, leaking all this information, that they are actually dismantling the Presidency itself, and leaving future presidents with far less room to maneuver, and a loss of power, credibility, and capability.
It appears that they couldn’t care less, if it gets rid of Trump.
This item cites a 2017 Politico report on Hillary Clinton’s collusion with Ukrainian sources to take down Trump before the election:
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/09/when_hillary_clinton_colluded_with_ukraine.html
Its pretty obvious, from what has gone before, that those on he Left—with the absolutely essential help of their allies, the leftist propagandists and “inflators” in the MSM—are going to continue to find a whole host of illusory and picayune things to attack President Trump on; each one of these MSM “inflators” pointing to this or that latest mirage, and attesting to its existence and solidity, and/or busily inflating a tiny molehill into a gigantic mountain—see CNN, MSNBC, Rachel Maddow, Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo, et al.
The question for the MSM—and, indeed, for our country, and our Republic and its future—is whether the MSM will be successful in so propagandizing and deceiving its audience that they buy the MSM’s alternative universe, with its alternative set of ”facts,” or will the MSM utterly destroy it’s claim that it is reporting “the “truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” and, instead, be recognized by a majority of the public as just and solely the propaganda organ of the Left; the Left’s PRAVDA?
I reproduce Rep Devin Nunez opening remarks at today’s “whistle blower” hearing because I have never read such an on target, slashing indictment of the Democrats as this statement is:
September 26 Nunes Opening Statement for Whistleblower Disclosure Hearing
f t # e
Washington, September 26, 2019
Nunes Opening Statement for Whistleblower Disclosure Hearing
September 26, 2019
“I want to congratulate the Democrats on the rollout of their latest information warfare operation against the President, and their extraordinary ability once again to enlist the mainstream media in their campaign.
This operation began with media reports—from the prime instigators of the Russian collusion hoax—that a whistleblower is claiming President Trump made a nefarious “promise” to a foreign leader. The released transcript of the call has already debunked that central assertion, but that didn’t matter. The Democrats simply moved the goalposts and began claiming that there doesn’t need to be a quid pro quo for this conversation to serve as the basis for impeaching the president.
Speaker Pelosi went even further when asked earlier if she’d put the brakes on impeachment if the transcript turned out to be benign. She responded, “We have many other candidates for impeachable offenses.” So there you go—if their whistleblower operation doesn’t work out, the Democrats and their media assets can always drum up something else.
And what other information has come to light since the original false report of a “promise” being made? We’ve learned the following:
The complaint relied on hearsay evidence provided by the whistleblower.
The Inspector General did not know the contents of the phone call at issue.
The Inspector General found that the whistleblower displayed “arguable political bias” against Trump.
The Department of Justice investigated the complaint and determined no action was warranted.
The Ukrainian President denies being pressured by President Trump.
So, once again, this supposed scandal ends up being nothing like what we were told. And once again, the Democrats, their media mouthpieces, and a cabal of leakers are ginning up a fake story, with no regard to the monumental damage they’re causing to our public institutions and to trust in government, and without acknowledging all the false stories they propagated in the past, including countless allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to hack the 2016 election. We’re supposed to forget about all those stories but believe this one. In short, what we have with this storyline is another Steele dossier.
I’ll note here that, in the Democrats’ mania to overturn the 2016 elections, everything they touch gets hopelessly politicized. With the Russia hoax it was our intelligence agencies, which were turned into a political weapon to attack the president. And today, the whistleblower process is the casualty. Until about a week ago, the need to protect that process was a primary bipartisan concern of this committee. But if the Democrats were really concerned with defending that process, they would have pursued this matter with quiet and sober inquiries, as we always do for whistleblowers.
But that would’ve been useless for them. They don’t want answers, they want a public spectacle. And so we’ve been treated to an unending parade of press releases, press conferences, and fake news stories.
This hearing itself is another example—whistleblower inquiries should not be held in public at all, as our Senate counterparts, both Democrats and Republicans, obviously understand—their hearing with Mr. Maguire is behind closed doors. But again, that only makes sense when your goal is to get information, not to create a media frenzy.
The current hysteria has something else in common with the Russia hoax. Back then, they accused the Trump campaign of colluding with Russians when the Democrats themselves were colluding with Russians in preparing the Steele dossier. Today, they accuse the president of pressuring Ukrainians to take actions that would help himself or hurt his political opponents. And yet, there are numerous examples of Democrats doing the exact same thing. For example:
Joe Biden bragged that he extorted the Ukrainians into firing a prosecutor, who happened to be investigating Biden’s own son.
Three Democrat senators wrote a letter pressuring the Ukrainian general prosecutor to reopen investigations it reportedly froze on former Trump campaign officials.
Another Democratic senator went to Ukraine and pressured the Ukrainian President not to investigate corruption allegations involving Biden’s son.
According to Ukrainian officials, Democratic National Committee contractor Alexandra Chalupa tried to get Ukrainian officials to provide dirt on Trump associates and tried to get the former Ukrainian President to comment publicly on their alleged ties to Russia.
Ukrainian official Serhiy Leshchenko was a source for Nellie Ohr, wife of Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr, as she worked on the anti-Trump operation conducted by Fusion GPS and funded by the Democrats.
And of course, Democrats on this very committee negotiated with people they thought were Ukrainians in order to obtain nude pictures of Trump.
As you see, it’s a reliable rule of thumb in these information operations that whatever the Democrats accuse you of doing, they’re doing themselves.
People can reasonably ask why the Democrats are so determined to impeach this president when in just a year they’ll have a chance to vote him out of office. In fact, one Democratic congressman—one of the first to call for Trump’s impeachment—gave us the answer when he said, “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach the president, he will get reelected.”
Yes, winning elections is hard, and when you compete you have no guarantee you’ll win. But the American people should have a say in all this, and they made their voices heard in the election. This latest gambit by the Democrats to overturn the people’s mandate is unhinged and dangerous.
They should end this entire dishonest, grotesque spectacle and get back to solving problems, which is what every member of this committee was sent here to do. Judging by today’s charade, however, the chances of that happening anytime soon are zero to none.
See https://republicans-intelligence.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=969
Kate says above: “when I lived outside the US, I learned that CNN international and the NY Times international were virulently anti-American, and that people in the countries where I lived believed these sources.”
I had such a moment in the summer of 1967, my one and only trip outside the U.S. It was weird to watch American westerns in the living room of a small house in a tiny village in Finland. Then the news came on. The Detroit and other big-city riots were going on at the time. H. Rap Brown (look him up if you don’t recognize the name) was interviewed, stating dogmatically and without contradiction, that what was happening was that the U.S. government was attempting to exterminate black people. No one contradicted him. My hosts had no way of knowing that he was talking nonsense. I was very much a leftist at the time and believed a lot of bad things about the U.S., but I was not so far gone as not to recognize incendiary nonsense. I never forgot the lesson.
Sean Davis, The Federalist, sums the declassified and released “whistleblower” (sdferr, in aside: whistleblower? BULLSHIT, that’s not a whistleblower) complaint: https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/26/complaint-from-so-called-whistleblower-is-riddled-with-gossip-blatant-falsehoods/#.XYzPvjBXixY.twitter
rtwt
Just a few things to keep in mind:
https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1177018590299611136
https://twitter.com/SidneyPowell1/status/1177074191205617664
File under: “Stay calm and carry on…”
I think Daniel Greenfield has the big picture right, but he is mangling one of the key parts of his argument. Greenfield calls a Trump impeachment “a meaningless show trial” unless Democrats take the Senate. Meaning, they can’t get a conviction so the trial is just for “show,” in his usage.
That’s not a show trial. The Soviets put on show trials, and the phrase means that the trials were supposed to resemble fair justice as practiced in free societies; but were, in reality, simply performances because the guilty verdict was predetermined and the punishment was certain. They were shows, fake judicial proceedings. The show also served the purpose of intimidating others who might not want to kowtow to the regime’s requisite ideological conformity.
So Greenfield has the history wrong and is twisting the meaning of the phrase. It’s too important a piece of history to stand uncorrected, IMO. Of course, he may one day be right, if the Democrats as presently constituted ever win majority power in both houses again. They are perfect Stalinists. As he writes, they could stage a million show trials then and really get their ya-yas out. They could and would.
h/t CTH commenter:
http://dcwhispers.com/doh-did-you-know-theres-a-treaty-between-the-usa-ukraine-regarding-cooperation-for-prosecuting-crimes/
The treaty is embedded there, and available here:
https://www.congress.gov/treaty-document/106th-congress/16/document-text
Formal Title
Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998, and with an Exchange of Notes signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application.
Date Received from President
11/10/1999 Text of Treaty Document
Countries / Parties
Ukraine
Executive Reports
Ex. Rept. 106-24
Latest Senate Action
10/18/2000
Resolution of advice and consent to ratification agreed to in Senate by Division Vote.
I’m sure Neo will post on this today, but if you just can’t wait any longer, the National People’s Radio is on the ball already:
First one is the official talking points for the Left (the only sites pulled up by Google to this point):
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/26/764582548/whistleblower-complaint-released-detailing-concerns-about-trump-ukraine-call
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/26/764071379/read-house-intel-releases-whistleblower-complaint-on-trump-ukraine-call
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/26/764354457/u-s-intelligence-boss-joseph-maguire-to-face-congress-on-ukraine-affair
To their credit, they do link the documents, which the Federalist post does not.
The complaint does not appear to have a signature at all, not even redacted.
Does anyone at ICIG or DNI even know who sent it?
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6430359-Whistleblower-Complaint
Atkinson’s letter to Maguire.
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6430358-ICIG-Letter-Whistleblower-Complaint
Great stuff, Snow On Pine. I’ve been calling them New Pravda or Pravda-West for years.
While it appears to be true that the whistleblower material is based on hearsay, Neo’s line ”… the relentless surveillance of Trump by moles in the administration,” is exactly on point.
While the unknown whistleblower is undoubtedly some leftist weasel, he/she apparently had numerous conversations with a number of individuals who did have access to the full phone call transcript (or were supposed to have access?) who were a) incensed, and b) leaking like a sieve.
And the big bone of contention was? The full transcript was “supposed” to end up in the usual non-national-security critical server where dozens or hundreds of prying eyes can access it. Instead the transcript was “secreted” onto a limited access server, for the impermissible reason that the whistleblower and his/her pals just absolutely know is partisan politics.
Then Nancy Pelosi addresses the nation this morning, cloaks herself in The Constitution (which she loves so dearly), and frames the whole issue as the equivalent of Rosemary Woods erasing 18 minutes of audio tape. “It’s the Coverup !!!”
USA Todays helpful summary (the word they use to describe the transcript of the phone call).
Summary is the word that actually does apply to the WaPo story on the phone call release, h/t Barry link in the Biden Video thread.
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/343238/
Rebuttal from the Right
https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/26/complaint-from-so-called-whistleblower-is-riddled-with-gossip-blatant-falsehoods/#.XYzPvjBXixY.twitter
Read through the whistleblowers’ complaint–and it had no more actual substance than a souffle–it was a framework consisting of a series of mentions of things that other people told the “whistleblower,” strung together with a lot of things mentioned in various MSM news sources, all connected by a narrative that very closely tracked what the President and his aids were doing vis-a-vis the Ukraine, which this whistleblower objected to, and which he/she thought might contravene U.S. law.
From the level of detail given, It does seem like this whistleblower” had the President’s actions and statements under constant and minute surveillance and, moreover, that this whole complaint was written from the standpoint that the whistleblower assumed that the President was a criminal who bore watching, and was going to do something illegal.
I got the impression that this “whistleblower” was just waiting to spring, when the President made what he saw was going to be President Trump’s inevitable evil and illegal move.
I wonder, was that this constant surveillance the whistleblower’s official job? I’d think not.
Honestly, I think that the Left and Trump’s enemies have thrown around more shit so far than all of the farm animals in Amish country could supply, and, mind you, the actual election is still more than a year away.
BTW, the alacrity with which the FBI credited Crowdstrike’s analysis of the DNC server may be explained by the bio of ione of its execs (via some links through CTH). Maybe they were justified, but the double-standard of the FBI’s handling of evidence in investigations for Democrats vs Republicans is still remarkably one-sided.
https://www.crowdstrike.com/about-crowdstrike/executive-team/shawn-henry/
https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/09/24/nancy-pelosi-puts-the-cart-before-the-horse-in-announcing-impeachment-inquiry/
[referencing the Hunter Biden contretemps]
(Dyer continued)
RTWT for a good analysis of how this non-impeachment impeachment investigation or whatever it is can / should proceed, and what it has no power (yet) to compel.
Conclusion, preceded by analysis emphasizing the President’s inherent authority to make a phone call to another country’s leader about investigating possible criminal activity by US citizens in that country.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/09/25/trump-zelensky-phone-call-content-is-about-investigating-spygate-and-is-a-nothingburger-otherwise/
AesopFan–It just seems to me like the most basic of common sense, that if the main allegation is that “the Russian’s hacked the DNC’s servers,” that those servers would have to have been examined by the government–in this case by the FBI, and such hacking certified to have happened–and not by some outside outfit, no matter how illustrious this non-governmental outfit’s leader’s credentials might be.
It would seem to me to be a prime angle of attack to argue in court that, since the government had not actually examined, nor could produce the servers in question, their assertions that “the Russians hacked those DNC servers ” were not and cannot be proven and, thus, any case they have brought–based on that basic assertion/assumption–collapses.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/09/25/cant-make-this-up-in-2018-senate-democrats-sent-ukrainian-prosecutor-a-letter-asking-him-to-investigate-trump/
Montage — So if LaGuardia heard that a scion of Tammany Hall had been involved in corruption in Ireland, he shouldn’t have wired the President of Ireland to ask him to investigate?
Aesopfan — One of my favorite writers described the C I A as “a few good people swimming in a sea of left-wing bureaucrats.” BTW, there’s a similar treaty with Russia. Needless to say, Mueller never even tried to invoke it.
Good stuff from J. E. Dyer. Thanks to AesopFan for linking it.
Such hypocrisy and double standards the Dems have. They have engaged in all the things they accuse Trump of doing.
Using money to obtain a desired action from a foreign country. Check.
Engaging in foreign diplomacy by Senators and private citizens. Check.
Collusion with foreign agents and governments to influence an election. Check
Using political office for personal financial gain. Check.
In each of the above categories we can all remember both past and recent examples of such activities. The Dems keep making things up as they go along. All preposterous and laughable when compared with what has gone before.
I watched the hearing with Maguire today. Adam Schiff is certifiable. His TDS has reached the point where he should seek professional help. He has delusions of moral grandeur and will grasp at any straw to depict DJT as a debauched and thoroughly evil man.
I ask liberal friends who detest Trump to name one thing he has done in office that has made their lives worse. Other than that they can’t stand him, they have no real complaints. Yet, they want to get rid of him. “Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds” is at work again.
“I ask liberal friends who detest Trump to name one thing he has done in office that has made their lives worse. Other than that they can’t stand him, they have no real complaints. Yet, they want to get rid of him. ” — J. J.
I used to wonder why, historically, people went out to fight for the cause of this or that claimant to some throne or earldom or whatever, when (in the long run) it made no difference to them personally, the general rule being that the peasants got screwed regardless of who was in charge at the top.
In some cases, you can identify the nobles, and sometimes upper-upper middle class, and often high-level clergy, who stood to benefit from supporting scoundrel A versus scoundrel B, but the ability to propagandize the masses* has been operating for a long, long time.
It is a puzzlement.
* (I’m not counting coerced or reluctant levies, just either volunteers or passionate partisans willing to be drafted)