IMPEACHMENT

November 14 3019

The impeachment of a president is a political affair.  Nonetheless, the basis of all impeachment, which is another word for indictment, must be a crime.  The Dems do not have one.  Trump violated no law. Therefore, the Dems must rely on yelling, undocumented allegations, nonsense claims, lies, fabrications, 3^rd hand complaints by bureaucrats who disagree with his policies and denial of fundamental rights to our legally elected president. If they get away with this, their process will go a long way to destroying America’s constitution, its sense of fairness and the due process of law.

The American people sense the unfairness of the process and the press in this Congressional charade. As a result, it is quite possible that Trump could win in 2020 by a landslide since the Dems and the Press has angered so many people with their fundamentally unfair process.  It is a true Kangaroo Court or Star Chamber where the accused cannot defend themselves and if they do, the Judge, a political partisan Dem, can overrule the defense.  They constantly move the goal posts and change what is the crime as they discover new avenues – treason to corruption and now bribery.   The chair is Adam Schiff and has been proven a liar to the American public on multiple occasions over the last 3 years. The process violates common law, which is the basis of our legal system. It does not allow the accused know his accuser, have an attorney present for accusations, raise questions about the hearsay allegations or call witnesses to challenge allegations.  It has nothing to do with law or justice.

The internet provides many sources and ideas on this topic. The best that I found is an article by Pollak, in Breitbart news.  I will excerpt from that article and add my understanding and comments.

There are two impeachment cases against Trump. One is legal and one is political. The defense for the legal case against Crump is very simple. Pres. Trump is acting in pursuit of his constitutional duties when he asked Ukraine president Zelinsky to “do us a favor.”  It is the president’s constitutional duty to investigate all nations with respect to corruption if they are about to receive any form of AID from the United States.  This is black letter law. Judge Janine covered this topic thoroughly in a recent weekly show. 

The political case against impeachment is also straightforward. The Democrats are pursuing a partisan impeachment that lacks any pretense of procedural fairness.  They feel that the base can write the rules in the house and can make those rules that meet their immediate political needs.   Their immediate political needs are that they must remove Trump since they will not be able to defeat him in the 2020 election.  They are dividing the country for short-term political gain.  They still feel that they must repay the Republicans because of the Bill Clinton impeachment.   However, Clinton committed a crime. This impeachment is a step towards dissolution of the American Republic. Before the open hearing started, Adam Schiff dismissed the Republican requests for testimony from Hunter Biden, Devon Archer (Biden’s partner), Nelly Ohr (fusion GPS author of dossier), and Alexandria Chalupa (DNC researcher on dirt on Donald Trump). Accordingly, Schiff does not seek the truth but anything negative about Trump is sought and leaked.

THE PRESIDENT’S PHONE CALL

House Democrats launched an impeachment inquiry based on the letter of a call from a whistleblower dated August 12, 2019.  Note that this is inquiry and not an impeachment since Schiff’s 37-man committee is a subset of the House of Representatives.  Per the constitution, impeachment requires the vote of the entire House of Representatives.  This has not occurred to date.

Today, November 13 2019, Representative Dan Bishop identified the whistle blower.  This is uncorroborated by other sources by me, therefore, it may not be true. His name is Eric Cyamarella.  His background is that he is a career CIA analyst, has links to the Trump dossier and interfaced with fusion GPS during the writing of the Trump dossier, which has since been shown to be all-false and to have been paid for by Hillary Clinton and the DNC.  This individual reportedly worked for Biden and Brennan, who is a leader in the deep state “Get Trump” gang.  The forthcoming Horowitz report should expose Brennan for his actions before the FISA court.  I point out that this man is a zealot partisan, has no first-hand knowledge of the call and has worked directly with the leaders of the deep state. In short, in my mind he is a partisan political plant.

Let us look at a phone call itself.  Pres. Trump released the transcript of the actual call so anyone could read it.  This is unusual because the conversation is between two heads of state and should be strictly confidential.  It does show the political pressure for truth that Trump wants, but that the impeachment committee does not want.   It is apparent that Adam Schiff did not know that Trump was going to release this transcript.  He created one, which was purely fabricated and all negative against Trump and read it to the press as factual.  Being a Congressman, he cannot be prosecuted for this character defamation.   Nonetheless, it shows the degree of evil that the Democrats will resort to get rid of Donald Trump… 

On July 25, 2019, Pres. Trump called president Zelinsky of the Ukraine election to congratulate him on his election win.  The transcriptrefutes the whistleblower’s claims.

The whistleblower claims that the president –

   Is using his office to solicit their support a from foreign country in the 2020 election

   Is pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of president’s main domestic political rivals in return for weapons aid.

This is all hearsay and false. The whistleblower admits that he was not a direct witness to anything.  This is third-hand knowledge and what legal people would call hearsay.  It is not admissible in a US court of law.  The aid was not mentioned. It was provided within 6 months.

The actual transcript shows very clearly –

• Neither party mentioned the 2020 election
• No pressure was applied
• The president did not ask the Zelinsky to “dig up dirt” on former VP Joe Biden

Further, both presidents have now issued statements that no pressure was applied or felt.

Finally, the motive behind the Dems creation of this inquiry may be the fact that on an open interview, Joe Biden, used a Quid pro Quo of telling Zelinsky to drop the investigation of Burisma where his son was a Director or he would not give them a Billion dollars of military aid needed to defend themselves from Russia and it had to be done within 6 hours.   The investigator of Burisma was fired within the 6 hours and the Ukraine got its aid.  Interestingly, Breitbart reports that during the Obama administration, Hillary was trying to orchestrate yet another administration change in a foreign country.  Joe Biden was the point man, 5 Billion dollars was given and Hunter Biden was put on the board of the Gas Company since that was the company that controlled the Russian pipeline through the Ukraine.   This sounds very plausible.

Adam Schiff also noted that Trump sought information about the possible origin of the Russia collusion accusations – claims disproven by Robert Mueller’s 2 – 3 year $35 million investigation.  Politico had found that Alexandria Chalupa working for the DNC had worked within the Ukraine to help create the dossier.  It was the president’s constitutional duty to investigate and protect the country from interference.

The Dems insertion of their negative beliefs about Donald Trump on the telecom is not verified by the facts of the transcript. These are – (1) Whistle blower had no firsthand knowledge and lied. (2) Adam Schiff lied  (3) There was no pressure and the two presidents have had press releases that state that (4) Trump sent the armaments but months after the telephone conversation.  (5) Trump was doing his due diligence required by law about corruption before sending the aid.

CLAIM THAT TRUMP WAS SOLICITING A BRIBE

Some of the Dems have claimed that the president was soliciting a bride.  He was asking Ukraine for something and in turn would provide aid, which was valuable. This too is nonsense. Let us see why.

To commit bribery under federal law, an individual must seek something of value in return to being influence in the performance of any official act.  The bride must have been solicited with what a jury thinks is an “an evil and blameworthy purpose.” This charge fails on every count. –

• The president had no corrupt intent.
• He immediately released the transcript of the call and publicly asked the Ukraine and China to look into possible corruption by the Joe Biden who had a press release where he made a clear quid pro quo, “fire this prosecutor within 6 hours or you do not get $1 billion aid”.
• There is nothing legally or morally wrong with the president asking other nations about suspected public corruption. It is his job per the law.  He must investigate before any aid is given.
• No one who actually listens to the call has said that they thought that Trump did anything illegal.  
• First hand witnesses to the call have said that there was no “quid pro quo” including the President of the Ukraine.
• The White House submitted the transcript to the Department of Justice for investigation, specifically into the question of whether the president has somehow violated campaign finance laws by gaining something of political value in his request.

Special representative to the Ukraine, Kurt Volker, mentioned that he “presumed” that there was a quid pro quo but did not know of one with certainty. 

THE PRESIDENT’S PHONE CALL

House Democrats launched an impeachment inquiry based on the letter from a whistleblower dated August 12, 2019.  Note that this is inquiry team is a subset of the House of Representatives.  Per the constitution, an impeachment requires the vote of the entire House of Representatives.  This has not occurred to date.  This is an inquiry as to whether there should be an impeachment investigation.

Today, November 13 2019, Representative Dan Bishop identified the whistle blower.  His name is Eric Cyamarella.  His background is that he is a career CIA analyst, has links to the Trump dossier and interfaced with fusion GPS during the writing of the Trump dossier, which has since been shown to be all-false and to have been paid for by Hillary Clinton and the DNC.  This individual reportedly worked for Brennan, who is a leader in the deep state “Get Trump” gang.  I point out that this whistleblower is a zealot partisan, has no first-hand knowledge of the call and has worked directly with the leaders of the deep state. In short, in my mind he is a partisan political plant. This makes him the enemy within. 

Let us look at a phone call itself.  Pres. Trump released the transcript of the actual call so anyone could read it.  This is unusual because the conversation is between two heads of state and should be strictly confidential.  It does show the political pressure for truth that Trump wants, but that the impeachment committee does not want.   Adam Schiff did not know that Trump was going to release this transcript.  Accordingly, he created one, which was purely fabricated and all negative against Trump and then released that for the public.   Being a congressman he cannot be prosecuted for this character defamation.   Nonetheless, it shows the degree of evil that the Democrats will resort in order to get rid of Donald Trump… 

On July 25, 2019, Pres. Trump called president Zelinsky of the Ukraine election to congratulate him on his election win.  The transcriptrefutes the whistleblower’s claims.

The whistleblower claims that the president –

• Is using his office to solicit their information from a foreign country for the 2020 election.
• Is pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of president’s main domestic political rivals – Joe Biden – when Biden’s name was not mentioned.

This is all hearsay and false. The whistleblower admits that he was not a direct witness to anything.  This is third hand knowledge and what the legal profession would call hearsay.  It is not admissible in a US court of law. 

The actual transcript shows very clearly –

• Neither party mentioned the 2020 election
• No pressure was applied
• The president did not ask the Zelinsky to “dig up dirt” on former VP Joe Biden

Further, both presidents have now issued statements that no pressure was applied.

Finally, the motive behind the Dems creation of this inquiry may be the fact that on an open interview, Joe Biden, used a Quid pro Quo of telling Zelinsky to drop the investigation of Burisma where his son was a Director or he would not give them a Billion dollars of military aid needed to defend themselves from Russia and it had to be done within 6 hours.   The investigator of Burisma was fired within the 6 hours and the Ukraine got its aid. 

Adam Schiff also noted that Trump sought information about the possible origin of the Russia collusion accusations – claims disproven by Robert Mueller’s 3-year $35 million investigation.  Politico had found that Alexandria Cholula working for the DNC had worked within the Ukraine to help create the dossier.  It was the president’s constitutional duty to investigate and protect the country from interference.

The Dems insertion of their negative beliefs about Donald Trump on the telecom is not verified by the facts of the transcript. These are – (1) Whistle blower had no firsthand knowledge and lied. (2) Adam Schiff lied  (3) There was no pressure and the two presidents have had press releases that state that (4) Trump sent the armaments anyway but after the telephone conversation.  (5) Trump was doing his due diligence required by law about corruption before sending the aid.

CLAIM THAT TRUMP WAS SOLICITING A BRIBE

Some of the Dems have claimed that the president was soliciting a bride.  He was asking Ukraine for something and in turn would provide aid, which was valuable. This too is nonsense. Let us see why.

To commit bribery under federal law, an individual must seek something of value in return to being influenced in the performance of any official act.  The bribe must have been solicited with what a jury thinks is an “an evil and blameworthy purpose.” This charge fails on every count. –

• The president had no corrupt intent.
• He immediately released the transcript of the call and publicly did not ask the Ukraine and China to look into possible corruption by the Bidens. He asked them to look into corruption, as was his legal obligation before granting any aid.
• There is nothing legally or morally wrong with the president asking other nations about suspected public corruption.
• No one who actually listened to the call has said that they thought that Trump did anything illegal.
• Witnesses have said that there was no “quid pro quo.”
• The White House submitted the transcript to the Department of Justice for investigation, specifically into the question of whether the president has somehow violated campaign finance laws by gaining something of political value in his request. The answer was no.
• Special representative to the Ukraine, Kurt Volker, mentioned that he “presumed” a quid pro quo but had no firsthand knowledge of such. He heard nothing.

 

IMPEACHMENT SHOULD INVOLVE THE ACTUAL COMMISSION OF A CRIME – NOT DISPUTES OVER POLICY AND OPINION

The Democratic advocates for impeachment argue that the Constitution is sufficiently vague about the phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” that they can appease the president for any reason that they desire.

In practice, the House never impeaches the president for any reason other than an actual violation of the law.  The first impeachment of Pres. Andrew Johnson after the Civil War had the house searching for any possible reason to impeach him.   There was a policy dispute because Andrew Johnson was a Southerner but loyal to the north during the war.   However, after the war he was against reconstruction.   The house wanted reconstruction. It was simple, get rid of Johnson in order to have reconstruction.  Sound familiar?   There are many parallels between Trump and Johnson impeachments…  –

• The House Judiciary Committee began meeting in secret to consider all matter of accusations against Johnson.
• One witness claimed that Johnson had been conspiring with the Confederacy and the proof existed in a letter from Johnson to the Confederate Pres. Jefferson Davis – but he did not have the letter and did not low what it said it nor would he reveal his sources.
• The journalist in question had written the story because he “presumed” that is what Johnson would have done.

It went on, but in the end, it was concluded that the impeachment must end if Johnson had not committed any crimes.  Further, the beliefs among the framers of the Constitution clearly revealed that the president should not serve merely at the pleasure of the legislature, nor should he be removed for any policy differences with the legislature.

ATTEMPTED COUP

Pres. Trump’s political opponents have been planning to impeach him since Inauguration Day.  This is how they attempted to do it –

• Fusion GPS worked for the Washington free Beacon, a new site with costs covered by anti-Trump billionaire Paul Singer.  Paul Singer is notorious for its financial rape of Argentina. 
• After the election, free Beacon stopped its work with Fusion but Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee picked up the expenses and Fusion continued.
• Nelly Ohr, the wife of DOJ official Bruce Ohr was hired to find dirt on Trump. She failed.
• Fusion hired British spy, Christopher Steele.  He picked up the pieces and wrote the dossier.
• In July 2016, WikiLeaks released emails that have been downloaded from the DNC server.  The Democrats blame Russia.  In fact, the most likely scenario is that the DNC server had been attacked using a USB drive and the individual was an employee of the DNC. His name was Seth Rich.  He alerted WikiLeaks directly. Most likely, this was the man shot in the back and killed while walking on the streets of DC.  “Dead men tell no tales”.
• Fusion developed the Russia conspiracy theory as a way to distract the scandal that would emerge if Clinton’s missing emails were ever really found.  These 30,000 emails presumably have the transaction and communications with Clinton Fund donations.  This was Clinton’s pay for play scheme that has now dried up.  It was just announced that donations are down 90% from 2009.[i]  They would likely document “pay for play” with Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton.
• The Obama administration would claim that attempt from the Australian diplomat about a junior Trump aid, George Papadopoulos right, suggest that the Trump campaign was working with Russia to obtain Clinton’s emails.
• The counterintelligence investigation used FISA warrants obtained without revealing to the court that the source of who paid for the unverified Steel dossier.  Nonetheless, these words allowed the FBI to eavesdrop on individuals connected to Trump campaign.
• After the election, the deep state bureaucrats attempted to undermine the incoming administration. They did an investigation of a national security advisor, Michael Flynn, based on wiretaps and misinformation – in pursuit of conviction under this the Logan act, a centuries-old law that was rarely enforced.
• Senior Obama officials then unmasked Flynn’s name and other names.
• Just prior to leaving office, Obama changed classified information rules to allow multiple agencies to have access to classified heretofore compartmentalized data.  This new policy enabled leaks of classified information.
• The circumstances that led to the launch of the Russia collusion investigation are now subject to a criminal investigation by the US attorney John Durham due to released shortly.  The Horowitz IG investigation of the FISA mishandling is to be released December 9, 2019. Criminal referrals have been made.

RULES AND PROCEDURES OF THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

There are a series of rules and precedents that were violated by the current impeachment inquiry. –

• Historically, the House Judiciary Committee, not the Intelligence committee, has handled impeachment.
• The House Intelligence committee was used because it could use secure compartmentalized information facility (SCIF) – the basement of the Capitol.
• Adam Schiff likened his investigation to a secret grand jury. This is a lie.
• Adam Schiff denied legal representation for Donald Trump in the committee.
• Adam Schiff leaked testimony from the committee to the public that was detrimental to Trump but would not allow Trump supporters do the same.
• Adam Schiff was allowed to veto Republican witnesses, subject to the appeal to the committee as a whole. This was not allowed to the minority.
• Democrats had full access to all transcripts of early interviews. Republicans could only access a single copy of the every transcript with the Democratic staffer beside him. This allowed the Dems to release information to the public that was detrimental to Trump.

Sen. Joe Biden (D – DE) stated: “The President of the United States does not serve at the pleasure of the legislature. He is elected directly by the people United States of America, the only nationwide vote. The American people cast their votes and that is a big deal. And we in Congress as Democrats have thrown all of those principles aside in urging Trump to be impeached – some as soon as he took office.”

In summary –

• Democrats are using impeachment as a first resort to remove Trump from office, not the last resort.
• They began an impeachment inquiry within a year of the next presidential election, usurping the role of the voters.
• Today the majority of Americans rightly believe that the impeachment procedures are primarily politically motivated and do not identify any impeachable offense that actually took place
• The Democrats are not just attacking the president. They are attacking the Constitution and the American people and the American culture of fairness. They refuse to acknowledge the results of the 2016 election and are abusing impeachment.  This is a show trial, not a fair process. The stain of their parochial attacks will cling to their party for generations.
• All allegations are hearsay. They are 3^rd and 4^th party – never first party.  Not one witness had talked with the president or heard his phone conversation.
• In the hearings, the career government witnesses generally felt and stated that Trump did not carry out State Department policy.   This is policy that they wrote. It was not Trump policy.  He, the elected official, has the obligation to create the policy.  They have the obligation to carry out his policy.  This is what is meant by the “Deep State”.  Bureaucrats want to use their policies and regulations to run the nation.  They ignore the fact that they are there in their jobs to implement the policies of the elected official – – – not the reverse.

CONCLUSION

The impeachment hearings were a Kangaroo court created by the deep state, which are those people who are in office or government jobs who believe that they know more than the elected officials in office.   It was a search expedition looking for something that was close to the Constitution, “bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors” that is the law of the land.  They finally settled on “bribery” although nothing in the hearings came close to proving bribery per federal statutes.  All witnesses were government employees who had strong views that were not proceeding with the State Departments written policies – which they had created.  They proved very clearly that Trump, by law, makes the policies but they, being permanent bureaucrats, knew more than Trump and he should have followed their advice.   Nuts.  They forgot that Trump, as the elected official, makes the policies and they, as bureaucrats, must implement them.  

All allegations were associated with what the witness “presumed” that Trump would do. In no instance, did anyone say that they had firsthand information and that this is what Trump actually said on the phone.  They were not there. In fact, some were no longer employed there at the time of the conversation.   This was a colossal wasted of time for the Congress and the American people.   The Committee insulted the intelligence of the American people by implying, “You should believe this because we believe it to be true”.  Yet, it became obvious to all listeners that this was a one sided “railroading” of Donald Trump by partisan democrats led by a liar Adam Schiff to the American people. 

Will it work?   Obviously, the democrats believed that this should convince the American people that Trump should be impeached and that they should not vote for him 11 months from now.  I doubt that it did not do its job for several reasons, (1) It was transparent that the whole inquiry was unfair and one sided and really did not care about the truth.  (2) Schiff’s statements at the end of each day clearly showed his bias by blatantly calling everything a “bomb” when it was not even a whisper.  (3) The extended nature and obvious searching for a crime – now 31/2 years – has turned the voter off and put them into Trump’s court. 

To me it appears as if Trump could win the 2020 election by a landslide and win back many democratic seats.  In America, we do not like liars, cheaters, dishonest people and bullies.  The democrats have demonstrated that their ranks are full of those types of people.    We will see – in less than a year.  When the two IG reports appear, the democrats may rue the day that they ran this charade of dishonesty.  The Justice Department inquiries will provide facts to counteract the Schiff distortions of facts.  

---

[i] Joseph P Hawranek, 39 Years of Clinton Scandals and Corruptions, Vol III, Page Turner, 2019.