Connect with us


The impeachment Schiff-show, sans noise



The impeachment Schiff-show sans noise

“To Take Care That the Laws be Faithfully Executed”

The Impeachment Schiff-show has grabbed a lot of headlines and made a lot of noise. So let’s take a moment to update you on the key points, absent the noise.

Let us begin with salient facts. Donald Trump called Ukrainian President-Elect Zelensky in April to congratulate him on his victory and invite him to the White House. The rest of this call is basically fluff. Then on July 25, they had a second call. It began with a discussion of draining the swamp in both countries, and segued to a discussion of how little the EU countries were doing for Ukraine. The US was a much larger help. And Ukraine was about to buy more anti-tank missiles. Then comes the part that Schiffless Adam and the rest of the Dems have jumped all over with both feet.

Trump moved into a discussion about the 2016 election. “Do me a favor.” Find out what happened in the “Crowdstrike” affair. This refers to the Democratic National Committee server data breach. The FBI under James Comey had refused to subpoena the server to examine it. Instead, a private firm, Crowdstrike, announced that the Russians had hacked it. This article of faith has persisted even though metadata from Wikileaks shows that it was an inside job. Trump went on with “I’d like you to get to the bottom of it.” This was based on the fact that Ukrainian actors are well-known to have had a part in all sorts of 2016 election interference: all in favor of Hillary Clinton.

One special point deserves our attention here. In 1998, under President Clinton, the US signed a treaty with Ukraine that requires mutual assistance with testimony, documents, records, searches and so on related to criminal matters such as the 2016 DNC question. Also, the Department of Justice is part of the Executive Branch, and the Constitution vests all executive authority in the President. He is required to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” (Article II, Section 3). The President has an affirmative obligation to seek the assistance Trump asked for in the call. He doesn’t get to avoid the issue if he’s going to fulfill his oath of office.

The final bits of the letter have to do with Joe Biden’s on-camera boast that he got an anticorruption probe that got close to his son shut down. “Fire the prosecutor or you don’t get a billion dollars.” As Trump said, “It sounds horrible to me.”

The Democrats are claiming that this is evidence of bribery, a crime under 18 USC 1601. Shortly before the call, aid to Ukraine was delayed. Rolling Stone reported that “Trump asked officials, particularly National Security Director John Bolton and new Defense Secretary Mark Esper, to review the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, the program that would provide the aid. According to a senior administration official, the president wants to make sure that U.S. interests abroad are being prioritized.” This is pretty ordinary.

On September 11, the aid was released.

The key issue in this picture is that the Democrats are insisting that Trump was looking to dig up dirt on his 2020 political opponent. Let’s make this very clear. The Dems are all about 2020.

Let’s recap. In April, Trump called Zelensky to congratulate him and invite him for a White House visit. In June or July, he ordered a review of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, and delayed $400 million in aid until that was complete. On July 25 he called Zelensky to discuss draining the Swamp in both countries, including an investigation related to the election three years ago. Six weeks later, with no public events related to the Ukrainian side of the investigation, the $400 million went to Ukraine.

This is the key. Trump’s language was that we need to “get to the bottom of this.” That means we need to figure out what happened. Of course, a lot of this is what Attorney General Barr, DOJ Inspector General Horowitz, and US Attorney John Durham are doing on this side of the pond. And the Democrats are quaking in their boots.

As long as the argument is about 2016, Democrats have no proper arguments whatever. So they claim that Trump “pressured Zelensky to dig up dirt on Joe Biden, his 2020 opponent.” Notice this calculated lie. Trump was talking about the PAST, and they make it an argument about the FUTURE since that’s their only viable angle.

Let’s examine this a bit further. We’ve all heard both Presidents vociferously state that there was no pressure, coercion, or “quid pro quo.” They are the very best witnesses, and without eyewitnesses to anything more direct, that should be the end of the story. And even though “quid pro quo” sounds vaguely evil, it just means “something for something,” and is what the US does every time it negotiates with another country.

Next, while the financial aid was stopped and then later released, this happened at times remote from the call, without anything happening related to any part of the call. At no time did Trump refuse to send the money appropriated by Congress. So now we have to ask: “What evidence exists for the Democrat narrative?”

Schiffty has called three witnesses: William Taylor, George Kent, and Marie Yovanovich. Under Republican questioning we have learned that not one of these knows anything. You heard that correctly. The best any one of them can bring forward is water cooler talk. In short, after two full days of testimony, the most important thing that came out is that Ambassador Yovanovich was offended by being fired. Since the President can fire an Ambassador for any reason or no reason, that’s not impeachable.

As for Taylor and Kent, they were somehow offended that Trump used “irregular channels” for his diplomacy. In other words, he didn’t trust the Swamp at Foggy Bottom, so he sent someone he did trust to get the job done. This turned out to be wise, since many State Department staffers were actively trying to sabotage his policy. Of course, he was using a “back-channel” used as far back as George Washington.

And this turns out to be the root of the whole kerfuffle. Trump is uprooting the Swamp, and it’s trying to uproot him. But once again, there is a huge problem for the Swamp. Foreign policy is the exclusive province of the President. Anyone who cannot carry out the President’s policy has two choices. First object to superiors in an attempt to get the policy changed. Or, resign. If you can’t do what President Trump tells you to do, get out of town.

Now we have it. This is actually a revolt of career Swamp Critters against the President. They don’t like his policy. It happens to threaten Swamp patrons, so they hide while screaming, “Treason!” Their allies in the Democrat party are happy to take up the battle cry because removing Donald Trump is a shared purpose.

If the Democrats can lie about one thing and divert you on another, they think you can be hoodwinked into supporting impeachment. But the call was actually about Trump doing his Constitutional duty to “see that the laws be carried out” regarding a huge criminal enterprise that began when he rode down that escalator with Melania. We will shortly discover what sort of vile creatures are being dragged up in William Barr’s net.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement