What are your general thoughts on Impeachment?
As you can imagine I fall on the side of the President and Republicans just like the vote. I’ve read the transcript several times. It is a fast read and I suggest everyone read it for themselves. Click here. I do not see the crime in asking the newly elected President of Ukraine to cooperate with investigating to see if a former Vice President committed a crime. That is what it is going to boil down to. Answer the question. Is it a crime to ask someone to cooperate in the investigation of a crime? If someone claims it is a crime because the person involved is a potential political candidate for President, does that mean people running for President are above the law? I thought Nancy Pelosi and everyone is saying nobody is above the law. I also thought the Dems were good with having then-candidate and now President Trump investigated.
What do you think about the vote taken in the House?
Impeachment should be a bipartisan thing. Historians from both parties agree to this single fact. The Democrats could not get a single Republican to vote for the impeachment inquiry. On top of that two Democrats voted against the measure along with the Republicans. It is amazing they could not find a single Republican to vote with them. This should tell us all something about this process and the premise.
What do you think about the opening statement of Colonel Vindman and those who attacked him?
I read through his opening statement. Like other issues, I suggest people read it before they comment. Click this link to read the entire opening statement. I will paste in what I think is pertinent below.
On July 21, 2019, President Zelenskyy’s party won Parliamentary elections in a landslide victory. The NSC proposed that President Trump call President Zelenskyy to congratulate him.
On July 25, 2019, the call occurred. I listened in on the call in the Situation Room with colleagues from the NSC and the office of the Vice President. As the transcript is in the public record, we are all aware of what was said.
I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine. I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained. This would all undermine U.S. national security. Following the call, I again reported my concerns to NSC’s lead counsel.
I noticed the NSC (National Security Council) proposed the call between the Presidents. The call was monitored by the NSC and the office of the VP. The transcript is a matter of public record.
President Trump has made his views clear about the “Security” agencies even as a candidate. He doesn’t completely trust them. It was Chuck Schumer who said:
“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” Schumer told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.
- Remember, Chuck Schumer is the top Democrat in the Senate. He was not being kind but at this point, he was being honest. Could it be this was a set up by the NSC? Are they part of what we now know as the “deep state”? I’m just asking questions.
- With so many people on the phone call would Trump say anything he thought was illegal? Is it wrong for a President to ask for the cooperation of foreign leaders to investigate crimes committed in their country by our politicians? Again, is Biden above the law?
- Go read the transcript! We are back to that again. Vindman said it was a matter of public record so he is not suggesting a cover-up. Whatever Vindman thought was wrong is there for all of us to read.
- Vindman uses words like concerned, think, worried, could be, interpreted. These are not the words we used in the military when making a point of fact. They are words we used when making opinions known. So, all we know so far is Vindman holds an opinion that is the opposite of President Trump.
Finally, I know he received the Purple Heart. However, I do not know the man but I knew plenty of people who got wounded and receive the Purple Heart. If any veteran is seriously injured my heart goes out to them. However, a Purple Heart is meaningless when it comes to measuring character. It is like saying the person was in the wrong place at the wrong time and that sucks. Good and bad people get shot and seriously injured. Again, all I’m saying is it does not speak to a person’s character one way or the other. In that respect it is neutral. Acts of valor are different.
There’s your “bombshell” testimony.
Note: If you are not seeing Comments you may have been blocked.
With former acting director John McLaughlin’s comment “Thank God for the Deep State.”, the common fear of literally MILLIONS of Americans was confirmed. Our ‘security sector’ is rotten to the core and in much need of an overhaul. This farce being conducted by House Democrats (commonly known as an ‘Impeachment Inquiry’) is nothing shy of a whitewashed, covert method to undermine and remove a DULY ELECTED President and while I may no longer be an active duty member of the US Armed Forces, my oath of enlistment has no expiration date. I still am charged to ‘protect the United States… Read more »
I love your little very timely missives. I always agree on your take of things. Again here you are right. Much ado about nothing! The Dems are clutching at straws here. In 1 Year we get our say and reaffirm our support for Our President. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for your comments and encouragement Michael and Leo and thank you for your service! I added the “Years Served” block to comments because I wanted to discern between pro and anti-Trump comments on the length of service. I’ve always suspected the longer someone has served the
they are to support Trump.
So no one has problem with the President using Military Aid to extort a foreign government into cooperating into investigating his political opponents? No this is not a real investigation. How long Ago did this supposed crime take place? How long ago did Trump take office? Why wait till now to push for an investigation? Why use his personal lawyer to do his dirty work? Trump did nothing on this until he needed to dig up dirt on his political opponents. Until Joe Biden became the fore runner, Trump did not care about this. I wish we could see a… Read more »
Hi Jon, if you didn’t catch it I created a post related to your comments here.
Is it a crime to ask someone to cooperate in the investigation of a crime? No, but threatening to withhold foreign aid if they don’t cooperate is. does that mean people running for President are above the law? No, but the current President isn’t above the law either. Even though Trump seems to make it so. Just look at his lawyers’ statement that the President is above ALL law. This impeachment is no more partisan than Clinton’s was. President Trump has made his views clear about the “Security” agencies even as a candidate. He doesn’t completely trust them. But instead… Read more »
I’ve read the transcript and there is no threat to withhold foreign aid. Please site a factual basis for your accusation. You can add a link.
I have read the transcript, and with the withholding of foreign aid right before? I would like to see th full transcript. What was released accounts for less than half the time of the call.
Doesn’t matter anyway, Mulvaney came right out and said it occured and it was SOP.
Let’s think for a minute. If one assumes that there was something that should be in the transcript that was not, we would be accusing the CIA and others of covering things up. Is that what you are saying? I just want to be clear about your thoughts. On Mulvaney: Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, said Sunday that his words were taken out of context when he acknowledged on Thursday that military aid to Ukraine was being tied to President Trump seeking a political favor. You can take Mulvaney at his word or dismiss what he… Read more »
I’m in my sixties, I have followed politics since my twenties. However, I don’t recall any politician or their minions taking any statement back.
No they don’t usually take them back. They all like to use the term “clarify”.
Here’s a little old-time quote to make us all chuckle. Not sure if I have it 100% correct but close enough.
What about the other six people who have testified under oath that there was?
Sorry, I’ve lost the train of thought here. What about the people who have testified? Give me some quotes because we are talking a lot of pages of testimony. Are we talking opinions, presumptions or actual orders by the President? Please cite corroborated first-hand testimony that is not an opinion, or presumption by the one testifying.
No, but the current President isn’t above the law either. Agreed. If you can prove an actual crime. I don’t mind an investigation but you must have an actual thing to investigate. If you start digging into anyone to find a crime I bet you would in 90% of all cases. That is a witchhunt and not the way our legal system works. Do police ever show up and start rooting through your house and computer without probable cause? If they can prove something I will listen to the evidence. In the case of Biden’s son, it is a bit… Read more »
“If you can prove an actual crime”
They have to prove the crime in order to start the investigation?
I should have put that off as a new paragraph. In other words, I agree nobody is above the law. However, all we have now are accusations.
NEW YORK — A New York judge ordered President Donald Trump to pay $2 million to settle a lawsuit alleging he misused his charitable foundation to further his political and business interests.
Judge Saliann Scarpulla also signed off on an agreement Thursday to close the Trump Foundation and distribute about $1.7 million in remaining funds to other nonprofit groups. The train is coming
Pj, this is where you go a bit over the edge by ending with “The train is coming.” It reminds me of one of my right-wing nut job friends that uses the same type of term meaning the opposite of what you mean. Breathe in deeply, exhale fully. Repeat until you feel calm. I could write another book on this subject alone. I’m part of a non-profit that got caught up in a $30,000 problem. Now, when you deal with larger amounts the screw up can cost you more like 2 million vs $30,000. These laws are so hard to… Read more »