If you’ve slugged through the Democrats’ impeachment star chamber from the beginning, you have figured out that the Democrats are trying to manufacture a false impeachment narrative to justify their articles of impeach – which they’ve probably already written! – and to try to convince Americans that the President really, really did something worthy of impeachment. And you have also figured out that all they’ve got is hearsay, opinion, and conjecture while ignoring testimony that fully exonerates the President.
I hate to use the word “exonerate” because, in reality, the President has been exercising his full legal authority when it comes to Ukraine: (1) the President has the constitutional authority to run foreign policy, not the unelected bureaucracy; and (2) the President is fully within his legal authority to investigate criminal activity associated with Burisma and 2016 election corruption associated with American citizens under a US-Ukraine mutual legal assistance treaty since by Bill Clinton in 1999. (I really like the irony of that last bit, don’t you?)
The Republicans, led by Congressman Devin Nunes (R-CA), have been exposing the Democrats’ false narrative at every turn while pointing out the hearsay and conjecture, as well as honing in on the actual statements made by the President to Gordon Sondland to the effect that POTUS expected nothing from Ukraine other than for President Zelensky to “do his duty” as he promised to do.
Although some of the questioning by the individual Republicans is, of course, important in flipping the Democrats’ narrative, the real “must watch TV” in these hearings is Rep. Nunes – particularly his opening statements before the various sessions. He provides a concise summary that highlights the farce the Democrats are running while pointing out key facts that the American people should know and which the Democrats and legacy media willfully ignore. One might go so far as to say that the only parts of these hearings worth watching are Nunes’s statements, as the rest has been a waste of time.
As a great example, here are excerpts from his opening statement before the testimony of David Hale, undersecretary of State for political affairs, and Laura Cooper, a deputy assistant secretary of defense, in the Wednesday afternoon session: (paraphrased)
As we Republicans have argued at these hearings, the American people are getting a skewed impression of these events. That’s because the Democrats assume full authority to call witnesses, and they promptly reject any new witnesses that Republicans requested. I’d like to take a few moments to discuss a few of the people whose testimony has been deemed unacceptable for the American people to hear.
The whistleblower. The whistleblower is the person who started this entire impeachment charade by submitting a complaint against President Trump that relied on second-hand and third-hand information and media reports. This began a bizarre series of events that, although the complaint had no intelligence component within it whatsoever, the intelligence community inspector general not only accepted it but even changed the guidance on the complaint form to eliminate the requirement for first-hand information. Then his office backdated the forms to make them appear as if they were published a month before. Democrats then took the extremely rare step of pushing a whistleblower complaint into the public, using it as the centerpiece of their impeachment crusade. We later learned that Democrat staff had prior coordination with the whistleblower though the Democrats themselves had denied that on national television. Following that revelation, the Democrats then did a dramatic about-face. They suddenly dropped their insistence that the whistleblower testify to us and rejected our request to hear from him. Then in the hearing yesterday (Tuesday), the Democrats cut off our questions and accused us of trying to out the whistleblower even though they claim that they don’t even know who he is.
Alexandra Chalupa. Chalupa is a former operative for the DNC who worked with officials of the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, DC, in order to smear the Trump campaign in 2016. She met directly about these matter with the then Ukrainian ambassador who himself wrote an article criticizing Trump during the 2016 campaign. Chalupa’s activities were one of several indicators of Ukrainian election meddling in 2016 all of which were aimed at the Trump campaign. Once you understand that Ukrainian officials were cooperating directly with President Trump’s political opponents to undermine his candidacy, it’s easy to understand why the President would want to learn the full truth about these operations, and why he would be skeptical of Ukraine.
Hunter Biden. Biden is another witness whom the Democrats are sparing from cross-examination. His securing of an extremely well-paying job on the board of a corrupt Ukrainian company Burisma highlights the precise corruption problem in Ukraine that concerned not only President Trump but all of the witnesses that we have interviewed so far. The Democrats have dismissed question about Biden’s role at Burisma as “conspiracy theories,” yet they’re trying to impeach President Trump for having expressed concerns about the company. If we could hear from Biden, we could ask him how he got his position, what did he do to earn his lavish salary, and what light could he shed on corruption at this notorious company. But Biden would make an inconvenient witness for the Democrats, and so they’ve blocked his testimony.
At these hearings, we’ve heard a lot of second-hand, third-hand information and speculation about President Trump’s intentions, but in the end, the only direct order we’ve heard from the President is his order to our last witness Ambassador Sondland that he wanted nothing from Ukraine. That is consistent with the testimony provided by Senator Johnson (R-WI) who said that President Trump angrily denied accounts that a quid pro quo existed.
Aside from rejecting our witnesses, the Democrats have tried other petty tricks to shape public opinion. Just this morning, they called a break in the hearing in order to press their absurd arguments to TV cameras. Then for this hearing, they canceled the multiple rounds of initial questioning they had earlier today with Ambassador Sondland, and as they had had with all the previous witnesses who they bizarrely considered to be their star witnesses.
When you look through the presumptions, the assumptions, and smoke and mirrors, you see the facts of this case are clear. President Trump was skeptical of foreign aid generally and especially skeptical of aid to corrupt countries like Ukraine. He wanted to discover the facts about Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election against his campaign.
A brief hold on Ukrainian aid was lifted without Ukraine taking ANY steps there were supposedly being bribed to do. President Zelensky repeatedly said there was nothing improper about President Trump’s call with him, and he did not even know about the hold in aid at the time he was supposedly being extorted with it.
So what exactly are the Democrats impeaching the President for? None of us here really know because the accusations change by the hour. Once again, this is an impeachment in search of a crime. Mr. Chairman, I would urge you to bring this to a close … to adjourn this hearing and move on and get back to the work of the Intelligence Committee.
<End of his opening statement>
There’s your star witness in action, folks. What a great summary of where this farce stands! I daresay that you have heard nothing about the truths he conveyed and the points he made from any of the legacy media, including Fox News. You certainly won’t hear any of that from any Democrat. The legacy media are completely in bed with the Democrats and, in fact, are a main player in perpetuating the Democrats’ false – and shifting – impeachment narrative as this travesty continues. In fact, the new meme that the likes of CNN and MSNBC are repeating endlessly is that Sondland “took a blowtorch to the President’s defenses.” What tripe – as anyone who really listened to his testimony and the cross-examination by Republicans could quite easily figure out!
Why waste time watching any of the witness testimony? You would be better served to DVR Rep. Nunes’s opening statements and carefully watch them to know where things stand. And then get on with important things in your life – which will be great for your blood pressure!