4 GOP torpedoes aim to sink Dems' impeachment hopes
Wednesday, November 13, 2019
Michael F. Haverluck (OneNewsNow.com)
Republicans on Capitol Hill are hopeful that their recent memo countering allegations against President Donald Trump will all but drive the final nails in the coffin of attempts to remove him from office.
Democrats' plans to oust President Trump before the 2020 election are being doused with an 18-page memorandum released yesterday by House Republicans from the three committees commissioned to the impeachment inquiry.
"In addition to raising concerns about the process behind the inquiry, the Republican members of the Intelligence, Oversight and Reform, and Foreign Affairs Committees described the facts in the case that they believe exonerate President Donald Trump from allegations that he leveraged foreign aid to get Ukraine to investigate a political opponent," the Daily Caller reported.
Torpedo in the hole
Each of the arguments raised in the memo shoots lethal holes in Democrats' allegations against Trump.
"Four key pieces of evidence are fatal to the Democrats' allegations," the memo reads. "Stripping away the hyperbole and hysteria, these indisputable pieces of evidence show that there was no, 'Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and Misdemeanors' – as required by the U.S. Constitution."
Republicans' arguments will reportedly make it virtually impossible for Democrats to prove Trump did anything close to being impeachable.
"Those four facts – the GOP members argue – are that  Trump's July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky does not show evidence of pressure,  Zelensky said he did not feel pressured during the call,  Ukraine did not know Trump was withholding security assistance at the time of the call, and  Trump both met with Zelensky and freed up foreign aid before Ukraine ever investigated Biden or Burisma as he requested," the Daily Caller's Amber Athey laid out.
Political analyst and bestselling author Dr. Jerome Corsi on the impeachment inquiry hearing, which started today:
"This I think is just criminal …. This is a kangaroo court. [Democrats' witness] Lt. Col. [Alexander] Vindman from the NSA … overheard the conversation and told Ukraine not to investigate Biden because the president of the United States wasn't correct. Others of our bureaucrats in the State Department told Ukraine don't worry about Donald Trump because he's going to be impeached. Who put the State Department or the NSC in charge of our federal foreign policy?"
"Adam Schiff [chairman of the House Intelligence Committee] will crash and burn because he is such a partisan socialist. He hates the United States, he hates Donald Trump – and let the American people start … watching on television. [They will remember] he made up his version of what Donald Trump's July 25, 2019, phone conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine was supposed to include – and when Donald Trump released the transcript nothing that Schiff said it included was there, [it was clear] Schiff made it all up.
"Well, Schiff's going to do the same thing again, and his witnesses are falling apart. Just let him go on television. My strategy with Schiff is go out and buy him some rope and put it down on his desk and say Here, Schiff – a go ahead and hang yourself on national TV."
Conservative commentator Gary Bauer (Campaign for Working Families), on today's proceedings:
"I've been in Washington … a long time – and I've seen a lot of really disgusting, dirty tricks in politics and all the things that make people despise government …. [But] I've never seen anything like this ….
" … Folks who choose to tune in today should not think of this thing as an isolated event. This began the night that the Electoral College passed the point where it was clear that Donald Trump had won the election …. Literally, within 24 hours, the left was plotting how they would take down the newly elected President of the United States and they've tried all sorts of things ….This is just another chapter of it. They thought they were so close in 2016 in finally taking control completely of the country, and when it didn't happen it infuriated them – and they just can't let it go."
Democrats' assertions about cause and effect and the order of events are said to not hold water.
"The chargé d'affaires to Ukraine, Bill Taylor, testified in late October that he believed aid to Ukraine was 'dependent' on an investigation of Burisma, but also admitted that he did not believe Ukraine knew about Trump's military aid freeze until late August – weeks after the disputed phone call," Athey pointed out. "Ambassador Kurt Volker – who recently resigned from the State Department – said in his deposition that he did not find the 'hold on security assistance' to be 'significant.'"
Volker's testimony corroborates that there were no conditions on whether the Ukrainians investigated the Bidens, as House Democrats fervently argue.
"I am quite sure that at least I, [Secretary of State Mike] Pompeo, the official representatives of the U.S., never communicated to Ukrainians that it is being held for a reason," Volker insisted before Congress.
Democrats now appear to be backpedaling as the proceedings move forward – as Republicans seek to question the main player driving the impeachment probe while meeting resistance.
"The Republicans' memo comes as Democrats – led by House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff – move the impeachment inquiry into open hearings," Athey added. "This past weekend, Schiff denied a Republican request to interview the whistleblower – whose complaint about Trump's call with Ukraine spurred the impeachment process – while Republicans moved Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, one of their biggest stars, over to the Intelligence Committee."
Dems' star witness no longer a bright spot
Furthermore, the Democrats' key witness against Trump – decorated U.S. Army officer Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who is currently a White House National Security expert – is no longer the shining star of their impeachment inquiry they one thought him to be. Four flaws were found in his testimony, as outlined by the Washington Examiner:
"1) Beyond his opinions, he had few new facts to offer. Vindman seemed to be an important fact witness, the first who had actually been on the July 25 call when Trump talked to Zelensky. But the White House weeks ago released the rough transcript of that call, which meant everyone in the secure room in which Vindman testified, and everyone on the planet, for that matter, already knew what had been said."
"2) Vindman withheld important information from investigators. Vindman ended his opening statement in the standard way, by saying, 'Now, I would be happy to answer your questions.' As it turned out, that cooperation did not extend to both parties."
"3) There were notable gaps in Vindman's knowledge. Vindman portrayed himself as the man to see on the National Security Council when it came to issues involving Ukraine. 'I'm the director for Ukraine,' he testified. 'I'm responsible for Ukraine. I'm the most knowledgeable. I'm the authority for Ukraine for the National Security Council and the White House.' Yet at times there were striking gaps in Vindman's knowledge of the subject matter. He seemed, for instance, distinctly incurious about the corruption issues in Ukraine that touched on Joe and Hunter Biden."
"4) Vindman was a creature of a bureaucracy that has often opposed Trump. In his testimony, Vindman's perspective could be mind-numbingly bureaucratic."
What's the offense?
Besides offering transparency by handing over transcripts of his phone conversations in question, Trump argues that there was absolutely nothing wrong with his exchange with the Ukrainian leader.
"President Trump has insisted that his call with the Ukrainian president was 'perfect' – insisting there was no quid pro quo," WND noted. "Some Republicans, however, believe the president should acknowledge a quid pro quo – a promise of aid in exchange for a favor – arguing such exchanges are a normal part of diplomacy and that the president had a legitimate concern about possible corruption by American citizens.
"Trump's interest in the Bidens is focused on Hunter Biden's receipt of some $80,000 a month as a board member of a Ukrainian gas firm while his father was President Obama's point man for Ukraine policy."
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) contended that the true issue should be Trump's intent – not whether his request constituted a "quid pro quo."
"The quid pro quo – in my judgment – is a red herring," Kennedy offered on CBS's Face the Nation Sunday. "Here are the two possible scenarios: 1) the president asked for an investigation of a political rival, [and] 2) the president asked for an investigation of possible corruption by someone who happens to be a political rival. The latter would be in the national interest, [while] the former would be in the president's parochial interests and would be over the line."
He concluded by laying out the crucial questions that need to be asked to get to the bottom of the matter.
"I think this case is going to come down to the president's intent – his motive," Kennedy impressed. "Did he have a culpable state of mind? For me … there are only two relevant questions that need to be answered: Why did the president ask for an investigation? And number two – and this is inextricably linked to the first question – What did Mr. Hunter Biden do for the money?"
Comments will be temporarily unavailable. Thank you for your patience as we restore this service!
We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) recently publicized a government waste report, exposing blatant spending by federal officials, including taxpayer funds outlaid for things that don’t benefit Americans whatsoever.
One News Now Poll
Poll of GOP voters: Election was stolen, glad Cheney gone
An overwhelming majority of GOP voters support the removal of Rep. Liz Cheney from a key post according to a timely poll, and two-thirds remain convinced Joe Biden benefitted from a stolen election.