Saturday, November 23, 2019

Trump's best defense against impeachment

Michael Anton, author of "The Flight 93 Election," arguably one of the most influential essays written in the runup to the 2016 presidential election, has another important essay which will be published in the next edition of The Claremont Review of Books, titled "The Empire Strikes Back." (If you're interested in the cutting edge of conservative thought, I highly recommend a subscription to this quarterly journal.)

If you're not up to reading the whole thing—it is a bit long—I'm here to help. Towards the end of the article is a solid, common-sense rationale for why, even if you stipulate that Trump did indeed withhold funds from Ukraine in an attempt to force them to investigate Burisma and Biden, that was far from being an impeachable offense. Here is the relevant excerpt:

The worst charge thus far alleged against President Trump is that he attempted to make $400 million in aid to Ukraine contingent on that country’s government investigating possible corruption by the Bidens. This is the much hoped for “smoking gun,” the “quid pro quo”—as if the foreign policy of any country in history has ever been borne aloft on the gentle vapors of pure altruism. 
… would that be sufficient to convince a majority of Americans, and a supermajority of senators, that Trump should be removed from office? 
I don’t see it. Especially since a) no aid was actually withheld; b) no investigation was actually launched; c) the American people don’t care about Ukraine and would probably prefer to get their $400 million back; and d) they would inevitably ask: so were, in fact, Joe Biden and his son on the take from a foreign government? And if it looks like they might have been, why, exactly, was it improper for the president to ask about it? 
Trump’s enemies’ answer to the last question is: because the president was asking a foreign government to investigate a political opponent for purely personal gain. Really? Is potential corruption by a former vice president—and potential future president—and his family a purely private matter, of no conceivable import or interest to the public affairs of the United States? That’s what you have to insist on to maintain that the request was improper. That’s the line we can expect the Democrat-CLM axis to flog, shamelessly and aggressively. But will a majority of Americans buy it? Especially since career officials at the Department of Justice already determined, and anti-Trump witnesses appearing before Representative Adam Schiff’s secret star chamber reluctantly conceded, that nothing Trump did or is alleged to have done was technically, you know, illegal.

I ask that any comments be focused not on Trump's myriad character flaws and tweets, but on the question of whether what he has done in Ukraine rises to the level of an impeachable offense.


Scholar87 said...

The damage that would be done to removing a duly elected President for this kind of crap would be incalculable. In 350 days, the country can send him packing but to impeach and remove now would move us closer to uncivil war.

A Clark said...

Well said. I’ve often wondered, if the Bidens are not guilty, how would this have any impact at all on the election? I think there’s a clear argument that if the Bidens are not guilty, the investigation simply exonerates them. If they are guilty shouldn’t we know before electing Joe Biden president? Compare this to all the fake dirt that was attempted against Trump in 2016. I think a growing number of Americans understand the differences and will vote accordingly. Even though this is a losing argument, it’s an argument the Democrats would prefer just to keep the focus off Trump’s success with the economy.

T. Burnstead said...

There is no evidence to support the debunked conspiracy theory that VP Biden engaged in any corruption in Ukraine as he enacted official US policy. This baseless argument is further undermined by the testimony of Hill, Volker, Morrison, Taylor, etc. So the main premise of his defense is untrue. That's not a great defense. There is no evidence to support the idea that Trump cares about corruption. Trump encouraged foreign interference in our elections in 2016. He did it again in 2019. He will do it again until he his held accountable. There is no defending the indefensible, blatant corruption of Donald Trump. Trump cares only about Trump.

The Cliff Claven of Finance said...

Trump did nothing concerning Ukraine that was even a crime, much less a high crime.

The transcript of the phone call reflects no crime.

Every "deep stater" (Democrat in government) questioned complained about Trump and had hearsay opinions that were often different than the transcript. Who cares what they think?

What a waste of taxpayer money.

It would be counterproductive for Democrats to send articles of impeachment to the Senate.

Then McConnell will take over and people with the surname Biden can, and I hope will, be questioned.

It's time to break up the "Biden Crime Family" -- Joe Biden and three grifters, his two sons and one brother.

I say that, and it was missed in this blog, because Joe Biden is on a 2018 video BRAGGING about a quid pro quo extortion of the then Ukraine president in 2016.

Joe Biden confessed to a crime!

It would be unethical. and perhaps a crime, for President Trump to look the other way, and NOT ask Ukraine what they know about those grifters, the Bidens.

Trump is not doing this for political gain -- he would love to run against an old man Quid Pro Quo Joe Biden, with his early signs of dementia.

And if nothing was found to implicate Joe Biden, that conclusion would HURT Trump's chances.
Although I hate to think the Joe Biden video is nothing.

I wrote on the subject of conspiracies in my last economics newsletter, published earlier this week.
Most conspiracies are imaginary.These two are real. This is a link to a large portion of my first draft of the article that didn't make the final newsletter, so I put it on my politics blog:

The two American conspiracies led by government leftists, and most of the media:
(1) The coming climate change crisis (coming since the 1970s but never shows up)
(2) The conspiracy to retire Donald Trump (started in early 2016, and apparently never ends)

Impeaching Trump will make him stronger for the 2020 election.
And maybe the Senate could investigate the "Biden Crime Family" in 2020?
Common sense says sending impeachment articles to the Senate would be counterproductive.
But Democrats have had no common sense since they caught "Trump Derangement Syndrome".
They can impeach Trump for any imaginary crime, or even if they don't like how he combs his hair.
I hope the American public is not fooled.

The Russian Collusion Delusion, calls for open borders, the Green New Ordeal, and now the Ukraine Extortion Delusion. The Dumbocrats seem to be doing everything they can to make Trump look like a genius !
end of rant
Richard Greene
Bingham farms, Michigan

The Cliff Claven of Finance said...

Bum-stead the Clueless
Joe Biden is on video CONFESSING to his crime of extorting the then Ukraine president using a $1 billion of US loan guarantee aid as a quid pro quo to fire a Ukraine prosecutor investigating Burisma, a Ukraine company that was paying Hunter Biden at least $83,333 a month for the no show job of being a member of their board.

Hunter's business partner Devon Archer got an identical "payment" each month.

This continued for many years.

The payments correspond to Morgan Stanley bank records the New York Times reported on
earlier this year.

They were submitted as evidence in a case against Devon Archer, who was convicted in a scheme to defraud pension funds of an Indian tribe, of tens of millions of dollars.

You are entitled to your own opinions, Bum-stead, but not your own facts.

Joe Biden had threatened the then Ukraine president with withholding $1 billion of U.S. aid (a loan guarantee
that Ukraine desperately needed, to buy military equipment, for their war with Russia).

There are many other links to the 2018 Quid Pro Quo Joe Biden video if the one above does not work

T. Burnstead said...

It seems, that you are a conspiracy theorist. Good day.

The Cliff Claven of Finance said...

T. Bim-stead
I am a seeker of knowledge who does not vote for Republicans or Democrats.

You are a character attacker, meaning you can refute nothing I've written.

I'm sure you did not watch the Joe Biden video.

You go through life with fact-free conclusions, good enough for you leftists, but not good enough for me.

By the way, i explained why the Trump Russian Collusion charge was false in late 2016, in print, years before YOUR team of only Democrats, investigated only Republicans, and came to the same conclusion.

It is embarrassing to be a Democrats today -- they are so bad they make Trump look good.

They seem to be working to get him reelected in 2020.

What will you do then?

Climb a tall building and throw yourself off ?

Fred said...

The best impeachment case against Trump is that he committed the federal crime of bribery by corruptly seeking something of value in return for an official act. It doesn't matter that the aid was given or that the investigations didn't begin. We convict people every day of attempted crimes that are unsuccessful. That said, I have come to the conclusion that it is better for the voters to decide Trump's fate this late in the game. If the democrats nominate a crazy socialist then they deserve to lose to Trump.

Unknown said...

"I don’t see it. Especially since a) no aid was actually withheld; b) no investigation was actually launched; c) the American people don’t care about Ukraine and would probably prefer to get their $400 million back; and d) they would inevitably ask: so were, in fact, Joe Biden and his son on the take from a foreign government? And if it looks like they might have been, why, exactly, was it improper for the president to ask about it?"

A) The money was withheld and only got released after the whistleblower's complaint and Democrats starting an investigation. The cost of this aid being delayed is unknown, but it's possible people died due to this. Oh, it also helped Russia, surprise surprise.
B) Trump didn't even want an investigation of Biden, he only wanted Zelinsky to publicly announce an investigation so that blows up the talking point of Biden being corrupt. Trump only needs to look in a mirror if he wants to see what corruption looks like.
C) I care about Ukraine and so do a lot of others, especially since it is a buffer for Europe. Furthermore, the argument that no one cares is a terrible excuse for not impeaching Trump. This is a pathetic talking point, to be honest.
D) Joe Biden wasn't on the take. And his son likely got the job due to his potential connections, or just name recognition alone since it adds credibility to their company. Not to mention, look at Trump's own kids! The hypocrisy is astounding and anyone engaging in these talking points is only furthering Russia's goals.
E) Trump should have gone through the proper channels (DOJ) if he really thought Joe Biden was corrupt. Instead, he asked a foreign government to publicly announce a sham investigation on a political opponent. This goes right to the heart of democracy since it requires free and fair elections. What Trump did is what dictators do in other countries that are filled with corruption. Democratic leadership was waiting for the election next year to get Trump out of office, but when Trump is trying to rig the election that changes everything. You have to impeach at that point. What's the alternative? Admitting that we are fine with political opponents using foreign governments to target your political challengers? C'mon!

Anyone who is floating conspiracy theories is unamerican and the furthest thing from what you could call a patriot. Bribery is specifically mentioned in the constitution as an impeachable offense. I thought conservatives worshiped the constitution or is that when it only benefits their tribe? I am disgusted by how Republicans have acted in their defense of Trump. It will now be harder to get great diplomats or even military officers due to disparaging those witnesses. Anyone who is against Trump is now considered part of the "deep state."

Anyone still defending Trump's behavior is part of the cult, and when polls show that 62% of Republicans will support Trump no matter what (, what more is there to say? I am amazed by the blatant disregard of truth by most Republicans and right-wing media outlets (talk about the real fake news). If they started saying the earth was flat, over half of Republicans would end up agreeing with that statement. Why people defend this obvious idiot is the real question. Pence will give you conservative judges, protect your 2nd amendment rights, and try to strip away a women's right to choose. So what is so special about a narcissistic serial liar where you'll cast aside all your values and morals to defend him?

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities".

Soaring Eagle said...

The situation is simple for those who have followed closely and have reasonable brains:

The bottom line over coming months:
Will D Trump PARDON O Bama, "we did everything BY THE BOOK"??????

randy said...

Many things can be true at once.

The Democrat's, with Adam Schiff as the poster child, are so incredibly disingenuous it makes you nauseous. They have had an impeachment team since Trump won, in continuous search mode. You would like there to be actual offense to initiate impeachment, rather than an attack team in search of something to impeach for. Russian interference - fail. White racist - fail, not impeachable. Ahah! Ukraine bribery - yeah, except there really is something worth investigating about Burisma.

Biden is accountable for the conflict of interest with his son. There is no evidence it resulted in improper influence. And Biden was not alone in asking for the corrupt prosecutor to be sacked. Many other world leaders were asking the same thing. Still, if Trumps kid was employed in the same fashion as Hunter Biden, the Democrats would be calling it murder. Biden should have stopped his son from enriching himself corruptly. That is not something "debunked'. It is corrupt.

Trump is a human wrecking ball. Yes he got tax cuts and deregulation. He's also set back true conservatism... for who knows how long. He lies, cheats, makes a mockery of responsible governance, if he gains something it's pure luck. More often he's badly damaging America's role as world leader. If the Ukraine episode was a semi-isolated event, it would be reasonable to give it the benefit of doubt. But it's not - he's has consistently operated outside of acceptable lines for the leader of the worlds greatest country. If anything, in my opinion, he deserves to be impeached because being stupid enough to go down this obviously personal pursuit based on conspiracy theories, just shortly after getting through the Mueller report - shows he is unfit to be our leader.

With that said, the best course of action would be censure by the Senate, and then let the voters decide.

Bill Snarf said...

Let's rely on an election. The people decide. Wait a moment this is the POTUS who benefited from the Russians in the last election, who uses tactics to limit minorities from voting, whose job is not to investigate Biden (or at least did not use the proper protocols). If he cares about corruption (the real estate developer mobster who doesn't pay bills / intimidation is his main tactic) use the right channels and procedures to investigate. Lastly show your taxes. I agree election is the best route forward but for DT the laundry list of offside actions and inactions (taxes not filed). This discussion is of no value as the Senate will stand by him so they can keep their jobs. I support his policies especially not interfering in other countries.

Kevin said...

What??!!! You're taking about when Biden got the Ukrainians to fire a corrupt investigator who was NOT investigating corruption. Yes, he used the tools of diplomacy to advance our national security interests in Eastern Europe, and help spread the rule of rule and fair markets.

And it may even have come at personal expense, if you do indeed believe he didn't want Burisma aggressively pursued.

How does this compare to soliciting a foreign state for help in a political campaign???? Except for using the same type of leverage, trump blatantly ignored the advice of his administration, tossed all of our well-documented diplomatic and national security goals aside, and requested them to act for his personal political gain.

The issue here is not the quid pro quo - it is Trumps requests that foreign states meddle in our domestic elections. And that he did this while also discarding our national security interests is a high crime indeed

Tom said...

Having worked in developing countries, I can assure you if you ask for an investigation of Biden in order to get $400 million in military aid, two things will happen. First, they will assume you want him to be guilty and second they will find him guilty. By the way, I have no problem with our justice dept investigating either or both Bidens. I think Hunter Biden is completely unethical and that Ukraine story is just part of it. What’s obvious is that Trump assumed we couldn’t convict either of anything and that’s why he extorted Ukraine. Also, to the argument that no aid was actually withheld, clearly it would have been except for the whistleblower as the aid was released two days after the whistleblower complaint and all the testimony shows there was no other reason to withhold. Personally I don’t mind if he’s not removed from office, but this is a big deal and he and future Presidents need to know it is absolutely wrong. In case you guys haven’t figured out the obvious, anything Trump gets a way with a future Democrat will also do.

Kevin said...

"Biden is accountable for the conflict of interest with his son."

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that we're all accountable for any bad acts by our offspring? I think probably, since that's clearly pretty bonkers.

So you must mean Joe's own conflict of interest.

Now look, I think Hunter's service on the Burisma board stinks to high heaven. He should not have taken it.

However, let me make two points. First, and more trivial, Joe doesn't control the actions of his son. He may have told him not to take it - we simply don't know.

But second, Burisma clearly misplaced3 if they thought paying Hunter all that money would curry favor with the VP of the US. As stated in the video, Biden, along with other heads of state, and using the leverage of financial assistance, persuaded Ukraine to dismiss their corrupt prosecutor who WAS NOT PURSUING BURISMA ET AL AGGRESSIVELY ENOUGH (because he'd been bought off).

Could someone please explain to me where Biden's actual conflict of interest is? Because I don't see it.

Maybe I've simply missed it, amongst all the partisan lies. But I'd like to know the facts (haha, yes, silly old me still believes such things exist!)

I agree with the poster above that the best thing to do might be a strong senate censure, and then letting the people decide on the election. Anything else would probably be saddeningly even more divisive.

Kevin said...

Hear hear!

Kevin said...

Just to be clear, when I said above "he'd been bought off ", I was referring to the Ukrainian prosecutor, the one who took money to stop investigating. NOT Joe Biden.

Al said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rick Jones said...

>Towards the end of the article is a solid, common-sense rationale for why...that was far from being an impeachable offense.

As Gerald Ford said, " impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers [it] to be at a given moment in history"

I think the Republicans threw away any claim to having the moral high ground on impeachment when they impeached Bill Clinton for a blow job. But hey, he only got impeached, he didn't get convicted.

The same will probably happen with Trump. And as we saw with Clinton, getting impeached is now just one of the hazards of the job, not something that deserves any special mention. Kind of like school shootings..."Oh, 17 more kids got murdered? What are we having for dinner tonight, hon?"

Arno Oehlbaum said...

Asking Ukraine to install back an old corrupt investigator which many official Gov deemed as a corrupt investigator and then to ask to open in a foreign corrupt country an investigation into a US citizen is not in the best interest of the US.
It is obvious if he really wanted a fair investigation of the former vice president he could have opened the case in the US.

Aid was sent after the whistleblower showed up and the same is the truth for the announcement.

Personally, i understand that people don't care about Ukraine I just hope that my home country will never be on the receiving end of any improper demands of the US and i see that the strong and the mighty US can play another game on another level. It's just shocking to see how the US lost his moral advantage and no one cares or can do something about it.

Charlie said...

"Especially since a) no aid was actually withheld; b) no investigation was actually launched; c) the American people don’t care about Ukraine and would probably prefer to get their $400 million back; and d) they would inevitably ask: so were, in fact, Joe Biden and his son on the take from a foreign government? And if it looks like they might have been, why, exactly, was it improper for the president to ask about it?"

Points (a) and (b) are the same argument: basically, an attempted crime is not a crime. Granted, if it is not a crime, then the attempt isn't either.

Point (c): This is an issue between the public and congress, and has no bearing on whether Trump committed an impeachable offense.

Point (d): If Trump thinks Biden committed a crime, he has a perfectly capable attorney general to take care of this sort of thing. Trump did not simply "ask about it" as the evidence makes clear; this is a rhetorical argument.

The simple fact is that when a president, governor or mayor directs "investigations" in the way that Trump has here (considering all evidence as a whole) it is a corrupt act. As they say, 2 + 2 = 4.

I agree with most arguments that this will damage Democrats politically. Conversely, if they did not impeach, then Democrats would have "owned" Trump's corruption, and that also would have been damaging. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

ebg investor said...

What do you think about Bloomberg's plans for presidency? Can he be more constructive and the same good for business but less scandals?

Houston Advisor said...

As an Independent, I caucused with the GOP for 20+ years. The pretext to the IRAQ war was the last straw. I've also never voted for any Presidential Candidate that was credibly accused (or admitted to on a hot mic) of sexual assault...and I never will. Have any of you? This version of the GOP is a continuous self-inflicting wound that will last for several decades. #KARMA The moral rot is out of control. I'm not even sure what conservatism means anymore. I expect Trump will be impeached by the House and acquitted by the GOP Senate. Voters have had enough of TRUMP TV. Time to change the channel. He will be a 1-term president that will face indictments in NY for years as INDIVIDUAL #1.

Scott Grannis said...


Bloomberg's appeal mainly consists of his being a centrist. But that disqualifies him from today's Democratic voters' perspective, which is very left-leaning. Republicans, myself included, despise his nanny-state tendencies. For the average voter he offers very little charisma, and he is an elitist by nature, and elitists are not in demand these days. His only chance at winning is that he might be the least damaging of the anything-but-Trump crowd, but I am not convinced that is a winning position. Like Tom Steyer, I think Bloomberg will discover that having billions is not going to be enough to buy the presidency.

Fred said...

Mayor Pete has some appeal as a veteran who appears to be somewhat supportive of capitalism but currently has zero percent support among blacks so he has no chance. Biden might have been a reasonable alternative but couldn't win a nomination even when his teeth stayed in his mouth so I doubt he can prevail. That leaves Warren who has run all the big Wall Street money off and who will be destroyed by a decent ad campaign highlighting her years of false advertising as a minority deserving of affirmative action. That leaves the current occupant who will probably win handily even though I find that most distasteful. Oh well- what do we expect when evangelical Christians wouldn't come out to vote for Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon but believe that God anointed Trump to be President?

Bryon said...

I'm worried about secret pacts with military commanders to keep a president in office after their time ends.
That is when freedom dies and tyranny thrives.

Johnny Bee Dawg said...

Biden is a lying crook, and so is his reprehensible drug-addled son.
Quid Pro Joe bragged to the creepy CFR that he withheld aid from Ukraine unless they fired the guy investigating his son's company.
His son got millions from Ukraine's most corrupt company with zero skills or experience.
Zero Hedge says Biden himself got hundreds of thousands in laundered money.

Its absurd that the POTUS who wants to inquire about it all, is the one being smeared. LOL. But OF COURSE he would be.
The entire impeachment scam is a circus. Every "witness" testified that they had zero knowledge of any crime.
Literally 2 or three direct questions from PUBs ended their endless hours of self-aggrandizing displays.
No crime. No witness to anything.
DEMs trotted out Deep State bureaucrats, who all bragged about undermining the sitting President's foreign policy aims.
Yet had no evidence of any crime.
Every one of them was a display of the corrupt, priveliged and creepy Washington, DC groupthink.

I elected Trump so that he would root out corruption in our government. I want him getting foreign countries & our own DOJ to investigate crooks in the Obama administration, and the giant bribery that went on with not just Ukraine & Russia, but all the way to the Clinton Foundation.
Alas, it seems the Swamp doesnt like getting drained. No surprise.
A Senate trial would be disastrous for the Swampers on the take. Lots could come out.

Trump isn't going to be removed from office. The only way he loses a second term is election rigging.
These modern DEMs are insane.

Meanwhile, markets keep melting up to new all-time highs, and the high beta, risk-on part of the market has surged since the breakout at the end of October. Trump policies are making America Great Again.

NormanB said...

"..myriad character flaws..":But this is why he is being impeached.

steve said...

It's all moot, people. NO WAY 20 GOP senators cross the aisle to remove Trump! It will go to the 2020 election and if the Dems are dumb enough to nominate EW to run against Trump, they'll lose in a landslide.

Charlie said...

"His son got millions from Ukraine's most corrupt company with zero skills or experience."

This reminds me of Dr. Evil's line from Austin Powers: "One million dollars!"

Folks don't see the difference between commonplace corruption and exceptional corruption. For a start, just look at the $ amounts. I can't wait to see what happens after the Republican Senate gives him another green light.

Benjamin Cole said...

I agree with this post,

Trump is a man of manifest flaws, as am I, and probably most people reading this blog.

My complaint about Trump, on policy issues, is that he has not been aggressive enough in removing the United States from foreign entanglements.
The MMT crowd is financing our military and foreign adventures.

The Bidens hardly look clean on Ukraine, by the way. I am told I am a Russian bot for writing that.

Benjamin Cole said...

Add on: The DC establishment, Donks and 'Phants, detests Trump as he is so obviously an insincere carpetbagger, instead of at least presenting a virtuous facade. Trump is giving the game away.

Johnny Bee Dawg said...

“Folks don’t see...”

Yeah, the documents exposed on Zero Hedge show corruption infinitely more than Hunter’s measly $50,000 per month salary payoff.
One payment, alone, to Quid Pro Joe was $900,000.

DC does not want all this pay to play funding exposed.
It’s tens of millions.
Interesting how the tens of millions of Sovereign payments to the Clinton Foundation dried up once she lost all power.
Funny how that happens.
Dr. Evil is crying. Idiot.

Benjamin Cole said...

Johnny Bee Dawg---

The amount of foreign money-gravy-slush oozing through DC power corridors should frighten anybody. Turn over a rock----a Manafort, a Biden, a Clinton, a Bush----and one sees offshore lucre seeping out of the ground, like the devil's excrement. And then the US is endlessly entangled in offshore tar-babies.

I keep hoping the mercurial Trump throws his hands in the air and pulls all US troops home from everywhere (the way a businessman would), and we can start fresh from there.

alexathomson said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
steve said...

You really have to question the Dems end game. literally everyone knows Trump will be exonerated by the senate so I guess the reason we're going through this charade is to charge their base BUT I think it will also sink Biden. Are we then left to believe that any one of the other nominees is going to defeat Trump in a general election?

Think about that for a minute. You're asking those who voted for Trump in '16 to change their minds and vote for a candidate with literally a 180 degree different policy agenda. This is surely why the market is making new highs. The market knows this is complete BS.

Fred said...

Many people who voted for Obama voted for Trump in 2016. Anything can happen in this environment.

Dr C. said...

You must acknowledge that if Obama did what Trump did the Republican party would have impeached him in a heartbeat.

The Cliff Claven of Finance said...

The two Biden sons, and one brother, are/were grifters -- getting tens of millions of dollars (combined) over the years.

They got undeserved jobs, and high salaries, intended to buy influence with Senator Biden, and later with VP Biden.

Unfortunately, that type of grifting is unethical, but legal, just like the nearly-fake charity called The Clinton Foundation.

BUT ... Quid Pro Joe Biden bragging on a 2018 video that he extorted the Ukraine president in 2016, is NOT legal.

Biden withheld $1 billion in desperately needed U.S. loan guarantees for Ukraine, in trade for the Ukraine president firing the Ukraine prosecutor.

That prosecutor was going after the Burisma CEO -- recently raided his home for information, and Joe Biden's son -- Mr. "no show" Hunter.

That video is an actual Quid Pro Joe Biden confession to a crime.

Smarmy Dumocrats want to ignore the video. Of course if they only watch fake news CNN and MSNBC, they have never seen it, or even heard of it.

Biden's sons and a brother got Jobs they had NO HOPE of getting with their own skills.

The Burisma board "job" paid at least $83,333 a month, based on bank records, not $50,000, and was a NO SHOW "job".

The claim that asking Ukraine for any information they had on the 2016 election (they worked with, and supported Hillary) and the Bidens, is EXACTLY what the top law enforcement officer in the US should do -- I congratulate Trump for asking for the information, although it appears Ukraine ignored him.

Dumbocrats seem to be unaware that foreign aid almost always comes with a quid pro quo -- doing so is NOT illegal -- it would be stupid to hand out money, and ask for nothing in return for the United States.

In addition, any Dumbocrats who believe asking for information on the Bidens, relative to law breaking, is somehow wrong for "investigating a political rival", might want to put on their thinking caps:

Obama Democrats in the CIA and FBI investigated Trump in 2016, HOPING to find dirt to derail his campaign -- do you Democrats have any problem when a Republican is being investigated, with no evidence any crime has been committed ?

Biden was not yet nominated for President (he never will be), so he was not yet a Trump "political rival".

Trump would LOVE to run against Joe Biden -- an old man with early dementia -- so knocking Biden out of the race would be counterproductive.

If Biden WAS nominated, Trump did NOT need a Ukraine investigation to charge Biden with extorting the Ukraine president -- Trump could pay for political ads SHOWING an actual Joe Biden video confession of just that !

Trump was doing the right thing for justice, but also taking a big political risk by asking Ukraine to investigate Biden.

If Ukraine, who supported Hillary in 2016, found nothing illegal concerning the Bidens, or falsely claimed they found nothing, they would have made Trump look like a conspiracy theory fool, which could have cost him the 2020 election.

Trump had nothing to gain with a Biden investigation.

I oppose lying and lawbreaking in Government -- the Dumbocrats have a long track record of doing both after 2008.

It must be embarrassing to be a Democrat, and see your party stand for four things that will guarantee a loss in the 2020 election: Hating Trump, the Green New Ordeal, open borders, and loving socialism.

Sending articles of impeachment to the Senate would be such a huge political mistake, that only a stupid party would do it ... and I've just described Democrats after Trump won the 2016 election.

Trump should ask to be impeached, so Senate Republicans can launch investigations of Democrats !
en would have behaved like that.

Proud to be a libertarian, since 1973
Richard Greene
Bingham Farms, Michigane

Iris said...

Good grief.
An attempted crime IS a crime. If I plot to murder someone and stop before I actually do so (by an obnoxious whistleblower warning that it could be a bad idea), I still go to jail.
How any reasonable Republican can continue to support the man in the White House who daily damages US credibility- and proclaims he alone is capable of making all decisions, with no information other than what he has just heard on Fox News- simply mystifies me.
OF COURSE Trump should be impeached and convicted, but the numbers are not there for the latter, and censure probably won't happen either.
In the current political system, he really COULD shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it.
I have always wondered if a military takeover were possible in this democracy, and I think we now begin to see how it might one day unfold.

Douglas said...

If this is the strongest defense for POTUS he would be doomed. The passages quoted are anything but a "solid, common sense rationale" showing no impeachable act was committed. It is rife with logical flaws and hidden assumptions. Starting with the last first, there is no stipulation that an act must be illegal to be an impeachable offense. It probably would be but it is not required. Another interesting "point" is the idea that nothing happened: no investigation was undertaken, no aid was withheld, weakest of all — Americans don't care. I am aghast that this was even expressed as a reason to do or not to do anything. To Iris's point, attempted murder is a crime, attempted robbery is a crime, attempted extortion is a crime. Conspiracy to commit a crime is a crime as well. An interesting nuance is that there has been testimony that POTUS didn't really care about *actual* investigations. All he really wanted was the announcement of an investigation, and - damage done. I would say that POTUS has already achieved his goal of damaging Biden (which does not break my heart, though the Democrats don't seem to have gotten the memo yet).
So much damage done to American interests, it really is astonishing, and much of it tending to the advantage of Vladimir Putin. This is really something to contemplate. Quite apart from the Ukraine Affair, things like the fact that since the POTUS declared his interest in withdrawing from Syria Russia has FOR THE FIRST TIME a blue water port on the Mediterranean. ALL other Russian ports are susceptible to ice or to blockade, but now thanks to POTUS they have a naval port from which they may project force into the Mediterranean and beyond. That is not a crime either but it does serious harm to US and Western European interests. I know that was a bit off topic... but not really, is it?
And so what if he will have immunity by Senate, that does not absolve the House of doing its Constitutional duty to Impeach a POTUS who has done such harms as will be presented in the Articles of Impeachment. Impeachment is not a legal proceeding, if it was all the Senators on either side of the aisle would be struck from the jury for cause. None has an open mind, all have prejudged the case. Also, the Senate, not the presiding judge, decides what evidence and witnesses are admissible, so if McConnell decides x witness or y piece of evidence doesn't please him, so be it. Oh, but, that would never be described as Mitch's Star Chamber would it? Oh no, Mitch McConnell is the very model of probity. So POTUS will (probably) be acquitted by the Senate, though there seems to be a steady stream of evidence emerging showing just how corrupt the whole affair is, so anything can happen, but I think we know the outcome. History will judge. And in November 2020 the electorate, 48.8% of whom support Impeachment (43.5 don't), will decide. Personally I think POTUS is toast. We will see.

BillyRayValentine said...

No evidence other than the videotaped confession by the elder Biden. That we have all seen.

Unknown said...

But at least he didn't use Gmail!

If he did, we would lock him up for sure. Thank god Hillary didn't win, her impeachment for Benghazi and Gmail would have torn the country apart.

Both political parties are equally bad, amiright?

randy said...

Unknown - you are right.

Flying Robot said...

Trump's only defenses are C)to some degree, and a partisan Senate. A)& B) only became true after the administration learned they'd been discovered. This speaks even more clearly to their guilt. C)not really the point - it's imperative to impeach at some point. If you allow the President to do illegal things (which he clearly did), when does it stop? Are we a country of laws? We may decide it's not worth removing him from office, but you can't turn a blind eye on illegal behavior without inviting further bad behavior. Realize that Trump's initial broaching of this subject with the Ukrainian President was within a day or so of the Mueller report being issued. D)Biden had the prosecutor removed because the prosecutor was refusing to move forward on the investigation of Burisma. If anything, this speaks well of Biden's character; it's the exact opposite of some sort of crime. The Burisma investigation clearly could involve Hunter, and yet the senior Biden is trying to force the investigation forward. Virtuous behavior is being recast as something sinister by defenders of the administration. As for the kids, be they Biden's or Trump's or any President - such arrangements are unethical, but generally legal.

Charles said...

To reach an impeachable offense there would have to be a "quid pro quo" (not likely) plus a problem with either the quid or the quo. Presidents routinely use the powers of their office to improve their political prospects. It becomes improper when there is an abuse of those powers. In this case is investigating the collusion between the Clinton campaign and Ukraine or Biden's corrupt influence peddling abusive? I do not see how it is either abusive or not in the national interest. Nor is it a problem for a president to use private individuals whom he trusts to conduct foreign affairs. There is plenty of precedence for this and prudence dictates it in the present circumstances.

steve said...

Things would be a helluva lot rosier if not for all Trump's trade nonsense.

The Cliff Claven of Finance said...

Overall, the comments from leftists are lame.

Not one impeachment "witness" so far had any first hand information of any crime, or even anything unethical, by Trump.

The one witness who had first hand information, said under oath that Trump specifically told him no quid pro quo for the military aid to Ukraine -- which was far more than Obama ever sent, and included lethal weapons, that Obama NEVER sent.

While Russia was seizing 25% of Ukraine (Crimea) , Obama did NOTHING.

This may be the first impeachment in US history with no crime.

The phone call transcript has no evidence of any crime.

The Ukraine president has repeatedly said he was not pressured to do anything.

In fact, Ukraine did nothing to investigate 2016 election interference (where they helped Hillary and got Paul Manafort fired) or the Biden Crime Family.

No one in Ukraine knew military aid was temporarily delayed until one month AFTER the Trump phone call.

The aid could have been held up until the end of the 2019 fiscal year, which was September 30, 2019, to be more confident that it would not be stolen, or sold, by the many corrupt people in Ukraine.

From that day the US Ambassador informed Ukraine the military aid was on hold, it took less than two week for the hold to be released.

The leftists who made comments here appear to live in a fantasy world, where their opinions and beliefs do not match actual facts.

The primary reason for an impeachment with no crime is to protect the Quid Pro Jope Biden crime family -- his two sons and one brother have been grifters for years.

The Joe Biden 2018 video where he BRAGS about extorting the Ukraine president in 2016 -- an actual confession to a serious crime -- guarantees that Joe Biden will never be president, nor will he ever be nominated, because Trump's campaign ads would consist of showing one minute of the Biden video.

Or better yet, one minute of Biden's "best" gaffes !

Dan said...

I'm surprised no one seems to be concerned with the precedents being set by this administration where it has seemingly become acceptable to obstruct any and all investigations with blanket insuboridance to subpoenas. If there is no concern over the actions of the president and those in the administration, it would seem there would be an eagerness for those involved to testify and clear their names. What are they hiding? Why the stonewall?

Scott Grannis said...

Dan, you appear to be ignoring similar actions on the part of the Obama administration. Both Obama and Trump correctly argued in favor of Presidential privilege when it comes to communications between the president and high-level advisors. Congress is NOT entitled to know everything a president does or says.