There are three major stories headlining the news this morning. The first is the death of basketball great Kobe Bryant, the second is the ongoing trial of impeachment of President Trump, the third is the outbreak of coronavirus in China. Not being a sports fan, I have nothing to say about Kobe Bryant. May he rest in peace.
More about the outbreak in due course.
The course of President Trump’s impeachment is proceeding much as I said it would back in August which should tell you something. My view of the entire matter, as I have tried to articulate, is that the president should not have urged the Ukrainian president to investigate the Bidens although I don’t think that investigating politicians and their families for corruption is out-of-bounds. It was a boneheaded thing to do and that sort of thing should not be the way in which we conduct our diplomacy although I believe that far too often it is. I also do not think that it rises to the level of impeachment and that the House acted wrongly. I did not think that Bill Clinton’s perjury rose to the level of impeachment, either. Nancy Pelosi’s decision to open an investigation was primarily politically motivated and the House investigation was hasty and politically motivated. The two articles of impeachment are remarkably weak, the second being grossly premature. At the very least the House should have been willing to allow Trump’s refusal to cooperate with him make its way through the courts. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to delay sending the articles of impeachment was politically motivated and the Senate will acquit the president of the charges in due course, also for political reasons.
I generally agree with Dave’s impeachment analysis. However, calling it a “boneheaded†move, for Trump to insert corruption concerns, as a metric for how immediate the release of non-military funding would be for Ukraine, does not seem like an untoward or malicious act. After all, corruption was frequently used when referring to Ukraine’s governance, and especially so when Burisma was involved – a shady business that the Biden’s were financially profiting from. How then can Bidens’ expect immunity from US inquiries into international business dealings where a quid pro quo political relationship was not only obvious but publicly acknowledged by the elder Biden?
Wouldn’t you agree that any action that provoked being impeached by House that wasn’t absolutely necessary in the pursuit of national policy or security, whether malicious or not, was boneheaded?
The transcript of the call sounds to me like Trump knew he was walking a fine line when he made it, choosing his words carefully. Probably never ran it by anyone. Still I agree, does not rise to the level.
Dave: At the time of the infamous phone call ANYTHING the POTUS said or did was going to be used as a case for impeachment. They had everything ready to go for when Mueller brought the hammer down. When Mueller failed the #Resistance, everything was put on hold until a plausible pretext could be found. The phone call was that pretext.
I’m still not convinced the mention of Biden and Burisma were what started the avalanche. No one has actually seen the leaker’s actual complaint form, only the accompanying letter. Just like no one has seen ICIG Atkinson’s closed door House testimony before Schiff. It’s like they vanished into thin air.
Also, who gets to define what is absolutely necessary in the pursuit of national policy or security? Obviously the interagency did, which is why we are here now. In the middle of a power struggle between the Executive and his bureaucratic underlings.
At this point, the Democrats are ready to impeach Trump again for his tweets supporting the anti-regime protesters in Iran because the fall of the regime would politically benefit Trump. That’s how nuts they are.
R’s are turning, led by Romney, and a bitter old neocon with a book to sell. Possible now the Senate will allow witness’s, as dragging the trial out is the resistances best tactical option now.
I’m listening to Pam Bondi’s testimony (more like a documentary) regarding a detailed timeline involving Burisma, Bidens and others. The abuses noted, conflicts of interest, the money laundering entanglements, ridiculous salaries paid, corrupt oligarchs, and more, paint a picture whereby it is Biden and the Obama administration who should be on the hot seat of investigations, not the current president because he was openly concerned about the antics of his predecessor.
jan- Still waiting for all of those quotes and articles where Trump is encouraging other countries to investigate corruption, or even Ukraine to do so. LOL. Suspect I will have a long wait. What am I saying, I have already had a long wait.
Dave- So he is guilty of asking another country to help him with his re-election but that is not enough to merit impeachment? Seems like exactly the kind of thing for which we should impeach. That said, I think your best case is that even though he is clearly guilty of abuse of power we shouldn’t impeach because the Senate would never vote him out regardless what he did.
Steve
Steve, the facts are: 1) aid was given in the fiscal year it was appropriated: 2) no contingencies were employed. All your points are nothing more than your own interpretation, much like the parody reading done by Schiff.
jan- So at least we both agree now. Trump has no history of interest in investigating corruption.
Let me add to your list. 3) Withholding the aid was threatened. 4) Ukraine was asked to help with Trump’s re-election effort.
Dave -OT, but we are looking at record continuous deficits. Bestest economy ever!
https://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2020/01/cbo-projection-annual-budget-deficit-to.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+CalculatedRisk+(Calculated+Risk)
Steve
Steve, Trump has been interviewed over the years where he extemporaneously gave opinions and POVs regarding how he thought the country was being run. I’ve heard snippets of these political observations since he became president, with lopsided China trade practices at the top of his list of government critiques. Endless wars and giving trade to countries where most went into the pockets of despots, or to countries who hated us, were other issues and positions discussed and heaped with criticisms. He has carried these personal, private sector opinions into the public policies of his presidency. I have no security blanket links or footnotes to provide you. However, since most democrat evidence, condemning Trump of some wrongdoing, is frequently derived from anonymous sources, you should feel comfortable with me simply reporting what I’m heard.
BTW, Steve, your #3 & #4 additions are bogus hyperbole. No threats were posed in that released transcript, nor were felt by the Ukrainian President or foreign minister, unlike Biden’s full-bodied, publicly recollected threat. Re-election motivation has also been absent in all the testimonies taken on this highly amplified event.