As little as I knew about Biden's VP activities, I thought of him as a decent man. First remember that he has not been nominated to run and is still in a field of about 19 others. Without any of this current hoopla, his debates were pretty much lack luster, he's made a lot of gaffes that appeared to be age related and probably more telling, his agenda is not left enough for the younger folks. He may never have gotten the nomination even though he's among the current front runners. The questions regarding his Ukraine conflict of interest were raised in the press months ago (not to mention a similar conflict of interest appearing incident involving China that hasn't been brought out publicly but appeared in the press.) There is no doubt regarding him having the prosecutor investigating the company his son was involved in fired or Ukraine's funding would be denied. He openly stated it himself on public TV. At this point, assuming that the investigations would have found the company and its officers clean as driven snow doesn't matter. The optics of a VP's son being brought into a company in a foreign country, not appearing to have the qualifications for it and his father slated to head relations with the country is at least questionable but not criminal. The investigations of corruption in that company being shut down due to the VP's quid pro quo threat is at the very least unethical if not illegal but the optics are even worse.
Trump has been in the limelight for as many years as I can recall. His antics and ego well recorded in the media, lauded by some, disapproved by others but pretty much an open book. The one thing that never changed through the years were the things he felt were being done wrong in the country. He's changed the party he's registered as numerous times. Democrat, Independent, Republican.. but in the past he's claimed he's most aligned with the Democrats. He doesn't fully conform to the Republicans either but considers himself a Nationalist. He could have been a great leveler since he wasn't locked into either parties agenda. Although an unconventional outsider, he's met with zero interest from the Democrats in finding equitable solutions to the countries issues but rather an unprecedented effort to take him down by any means possible from day one. This may read like a biased statement but it's not. It's a factual witnessed one shared by his base. Nothing that's been thrown at him has stuck. The Mueller report that was banked on for three years to do the trick, costing us some $40 million, turned up nada but that still wasn't enough. Now lets look at this latest attempt to impeach him.
FACTS KNOWN TODAY:
1. There is a treaty between the Ukraine and the USA established during the Clinton administration to share knowledge of wrong doing and collusion.
2. Up until this particular Whistleblower's statement, the official form clearly stated that all information must be FIRST HAND or would be rejected. This new statement submitted states that the information contained is not first hand but does not list either who it came from or who the Whistleblower is. This important requirement BOLDLY calling for first hand information has been dropped sometime within the past year leaving anyone able to accuse anyone of anything. It states commentary that is not supported by the President's transcript nor by the Ukraine President's. It appears to have been prepared by a lawyer rather than an individual.
3. Nancy Pelosi announced an Impeachment Inquiry, including negative comments, without the House taking a vote or having read the President's transcript of the conversation.
4. Adam Schiff gave a 30 minute speech of what was supposed to have been a direct reading of the President's transcript adding his own comments to increase the perception of Trump's misdeeds that was broadcast over TV. Only being caught at it brought the admission he was doing a "parody". Something as critical as this is not the time for jokes.
5. The Ukraine was rumored to have knowledge of some of the hacking of the 2016 elections which is what the Crowdstrike security company reference referred to. There are a lot of conspiracy theories floating around and Trump has the right to see if they might have answers to get to the bottom of it. The same, with the already public, speculation regarding Biden.
Aside from making dubious claims against the President and making the release of a private conversation with a foreign leader public a necessity, the effect on other foreign leaders can be disastrous as well as embarrassing not only for Trump but for any future President. Other than a short reference to #5, absolutely nothing in the transcript alluded to a quid pro quo. It was a nothing burger until turned into this circus.
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index