HEY MAN! Joe “Plugs” Biden, the folksy lying liberal Democrat candidate for president, is a corrupt serial plagiarizer, hair-sniffing perv, foreign-policy deadhead, Obama coat-holder ... and a confused wanderer in the desert of cogent thought ... has been bought and paid for by China, the Ukraine and, likely, many others ... PERIOD!
Apparently the National Security Council has had a copy of John Bolton’s book for security review since the end of December. How come that Bolton’s comments about the Trump linkage between Ukrainian aid and its investigating of the Burisma/Biden scandal was leaked to the NewYorkTimes and not to Trump’s legal defense team? Is this a perfect validation of the Deep State? Afterthought: And was this Deep State created when Obama made hundreds of his political appointments into protected civil servants right before he left office?
I here imagine myself the lead Trump defense lawyer, Jay Sekulow, and would lay out his defense in the Senate impeachment trial as follows:
First, I would set up what Biden had been up to after Obama put him in charge of the Ukraine portfolio. And then how his son, Hunter, was appointed to the Burisma board of directors at $83,000 per month. And then how the Ukraine attorney general was starting to look into this Burisma corruption.
Next I would play the above Joe Biden video where he brags about how he withheld $1 billion of US loan guarantees to the Ukraine unless and until this attorney general was fired ... which he, “son of a bitch,” promptly was.
Next, I would offer, on video, a professional actors’ re-enactment of the two phone calls between Trump and the Ukraine’s new president, Zelensky
Then, as a contrast, I would play Schiff’s reading of this famous July 25th call which was a blatant misrepresentation.
Then I would offer the videos from Schiff’s Intelligence Committee hearings ... in particular the embarrassing queries to the no-fact witnesses who were asked if they knew of any Trump crimes or impeachable offenses ... and no one replied in the affirmative. To be followed by the only fact-witness, Ambassador Sondland, relating Trump’s response when he was asked what he wanted, “I want nothing, no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do what he promised to do to get elected.” And that the US aid was shortly forthcoming.
Then, I would show what the Constitution writers wanted impeachment to be ... using Dershowitz’s explanation why maladministration was not impeachable. Followed by excerpts of the Ken Starr interview on impeachment with Mark Levin. And then, Professor Jonathan Turley s House Judiciary Committee’s testimony pointing out that the Democrats’ impeachment process was the real abuse of power.
Finally, I would present 10 to 20 videos of the House managers calling for Trump’s impeachment ... all before his famous July 25th phone call with Zelensky.
All told, this defense could be wrapped up in just one 8-hour day.
Rep. Jerry Nadler is giving President Trump until Friday to name his witnesses and decide if he will have White House counsel present in the upcoming House Judiciary Committee hearings on impeachment ... see: Nadler Deadline Letters.
This throwing down the gauntlet is meant to call the Republicans bluff on their complaints lodged against what went on in Adam Schiff’s Intelligence Committee Kangaroo Court hearings last week ... and therefore pose a dilemma for the Trump defenders — put forward a strong defense of Trump in the House impeachment phase ... or wait until the Senate trial where defensive actions can’t be voted down by a partisan Democrat majority.
This Trump vs. Pelosi strategizing all gets very complicated on both sides ... in terms of timing relative to the Horowitz IG report on the FISA court abuses ... and the Barr/Durham ongoing criminal investigation into the predicate for the Russian collusion investigation. Chairman Nadler (really Pelosi) has said that his hearing won’t just be on the Ukraine/Burisma matter but also on the warmed-over Russian collusion issue. How’s that for throwing all the balls in the air?
Clearly, if Trump calls witnesses involved in either of these charges, he could be undercutting their impact upon the public with their revelations ... because such revelations would be forthcoming in a hostile environment where they could be blunted by rulings of the chairman or the full committee votings. This would not be the case in a Senate trial. On the other hand, Chairman Nadler has done a rather ineffective job in previous hearings meant to embarrass Trump: Mueller’s report testimony and the Corey Lewaindowski debacle.
There is even a chance that Pelosi is hoping that the Nadler hearings might be a way of backing Trump down so she might quietly kill this whole impeachment thing ... which has not gone as she and Schiff had expected. In any case, I predict that it won’t be a Pelosi win.
John Solomon is an impressive investigative reporter of deep credentials. He has been the source of much of President Trump’s and Rudy Giuliani’s suspicions regarding the Ukraine’s corruption ... including the Burisma-Biden connection and this country’s interference (on Hillary’s side) in the 2016 election. He is a careful reporter who heavily footnotes his articles with reference to documents and videos. But now he is being attacked for an obvious reason — he disputes many of Adam Schiff’s impeachment themes.
So, kind reader, I suggest that you go to the original evidence of Solomon’s reporting ... as thoroughly as you wish ... and decide for yourself if this man is credible ... see: John Solomon Reports on Schiff Revelations.
If you want to dig further, then try this one: Muck Rack.
Your research into this man and what he uncovered can be as thorough or shallow as you wish ... but understand that what he has reported is pivotal to much of what Trump was thinking in dealing with the Ukraine and our State Department’s views of same.
In closing and to provide some balance, “The Hill” is beginning to investigate Solomon’s reporting that was the basis of much of these Trump suspicions ... see: Politico Article.
I know that I am generally against drawing moral equivalences. However, I fear I am now forced to reverse this stance in the following specific instance:
President Trump’s supposed quidproquo (aka, bribery) was that the new Ukraine president needed to clean up his country’s rife corruption ... including the Burisma/Biden miasma ... before Trump would be releasing the next round of military aid.
Now, the fact that the Bidens were included in this transaction meant, according to Schiff and the Democrats, that Trump was trying to besmirch Joe Biden, a potential political adversary. Now, kind reader, key question — how could Joe Biden be disadvantaged after such an investigation unless he was shown to have acted illegally or immorally?
Ah, so pilgrim! According to the Deep State Department, the mere fact that such an investigation itself took place, or was taking place, would disadvantage Joe Biden in any future election.
Now, here comes the curve ball!
Isn’t the fact that Adam Schiff is conducting a much more public investigation into Trump’s supposed corruption ... the requested Ukrainian quidproquo (aka, bribery) ... the moral equivalence of what Trump was supposedly asking from the new Ukrainian administration? And cannot this be said to be an attempt to damage Trump next year in his re-election bid?
So who is legit? Both are right or both are wrong! Should Schiff be impeached along with Trump? Or, if Schiff is within the yard markers, then so was Trump!
Why was our Ambassador Marie Yovanovich recalled by Trump the very night before the new reform Ukrainian President Zelensky was inaugurated?
Could it be that Yovanovich had been too close to the former corrupt Ukrainian President Poroshenko and seemed to be a pebble in the shoe of any future U.S.-Ukraine relations ... working against Trump and his attempt to get to the root of the previous Biden-Burisma corruption and 2016 U.S. election-meddling fraud? Could it be that Zelensky didn’t want her to attend his inauguration and that is why she was told to get on “the next plane?”
Obviously I don’t know this for sure, but such timing cannot be coincidental ... and it is revealing that, if this nexus got out, it would not be beneficial to either country.
But Zelensky clearly favors Trump over Obama ... see: Washington Exanimer Story. After all, Obama and his Ambassador Yovanovich were hostile ... and had favored the Russians ... and I surmise were colluding with them (evidence: no Obama arms assistance to the Ukraine, nor any real pushback when Russia annexed the Crimea. Also don’t forget Obama saying to Medvedev on a hot mic to tell Putin that “After my election I’ll have more flexibility” (see below). That was in 2012 ... Russia annexed Crimea in early 2014.
Like most Democrat accusations, too often, they themselves are doing what they are accusing ...
Quid Not withhold $1B Ukraine aid Not delay $400M Ukraine aid
Type Explicit Alleged Implicit
Evidence Video tape Phone call transcript
Quo Fire prosecutor investigating Investigate Biden’s previous
Burisma corruption and then threat and circumstances around
appointing Hunter Biden as a Burisma’s adding Hunter Biden
Director at $50K per month (with no experience) to its Board
