It’s been difficult to follow the in’s and out’s of this weeks hearings – too many online narratives are spun, taken out of context, etc., so I watched as much of the live broadcast as I could.
I didn’t have time to watch the whole thing, but did listen to a big chunk of it. In the reflections that follow, I’m sure some details will be missing, and some perspectives skewed, as they are for all of us. And because of the way I approach politics, and my posture regarding the current administration, some things will get more emphasis than they should.
Sorry in advance.
To be sure, you won’t agree with everything, and I beg for any corrections, additional information, etc. I’m writing this morning because I’ve come to value dialogue across party lines more than I used to. The greatness of our country subsits in our united-ness before anything else, something that’s been fast eroding lately.
So please, comment below and let me know what I’ve missed. I’ll listen. But I also ask that you share your perspective without insult or accusation. Disrespect has no place in political discourse, especially if you want the other person to listen, and if you share my emphasis on the importance of unity.
Regarding impeachment, most importantly, we don’t have inarguable proof of a quid pro-quo. There are no letters, tapes, emails, etc. of Donald Trump saying, with his own mouth,”Withhold aid from Ukraine until they investigate the Bidens.”
This, understandably, is the biggest area of pushback from the minority.
The majority, however, isn’t thwarted by this. There are too many government employees, charged with the care of the US/Ukraine relationship, who are firmly convinced, based on what they saw/heard, either directly from Trump, or “simple math,” or whatever, that a quid-pro-quo happened.
Each of these witnesses spoke of the global importance of Ukraine’s success, and of her relations with the US. So when aid suddenly stopped, with no explanation, people passionately asked “why?” and got no answer. When they begged their superiors to resume aid, crickets.
It took some time for them to realize that the stoppage coincided with Trump’s request/expectation that the President of Ukraine announce an investigation into Joe Biden’s involvement with the Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. According to these witnesses, the president didn’t ask for an investigation, only the announcement of one.
Each one of these folks, closer and more committed to the action than you or I, became increasingly convinced that the aid stoppage was a pressure tactic from the Trump administration. According to ambassador Taylor’s statement, a Ukranian official, Alexander Daniuk, then Secretary of the National Defense Council in Ukraine, stated that Zelensky didn’t want to be a pawn in the US reelection campaign.
Even the Ukrainians were feeling this.
The minority countered with, “Ukraine is corrupt, the money was held until they could get their act together.”
I can’t do any simple math to get this to work. Ukraine’s always struggled with corruption, and was following US directives to clean things up. My understanding is that they’re less corrupt now than they were when we first gave them aid.
And if the $$ stopped because of corruption, why the silence? Now that the pressure’s on, there are all kinds of statements coming from the White House explaining the stoppage; some legit, but I’m still left wondering where these explanations were when people were begging for them.
Another argument is: “The Biden thing is corruption in Ukraine, we weren’t going after Biden, we were going after corruption.” I can’t swallow this one either. While the Biden thing seems fishy, this isn’t the first time that corruption has gone down in Ukraine.
This is however the first time that the Trump administration has halted aid, while simultaneously asking for an investigation of Trump’s biggest percieved political threat.
What About the Bidens?
Joe Biden’s involvement with Burisma seems fishy to me. His son made $50,000 a month working on the board of directors, while then vice president Biden, point man for Ukraine, threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid until Ukraine fired their prosecutor general.
They did, and the aid never stopped.
Why are the democrats going after Trump while completely ignoring the sins of their own? That’s a great question, and if we deal with it honestly it will lead us into one of the darkest realities about American politics.
If you’re expecting the Democrats to investigate their own, keep dreaming. And before my conservative friends applaud, the same goes for your side of the hill.
This is American politics – Dems have a vested, financial interest in keeping their thing going, so do Republicans. If there’s money/power involved, rest assured that people from both camps will fight for it.
I don’t believe that every democrat and every republican is solely motivated by the survival of their party. Some are, some aren’t. There are good people on both sides.
But when one makes the argument, “Why aren’t the so-and-so’s investing their own so-and-so,” he/she takes a shot to the foot. If Devin Nunez thinks Joe Biden is guilty, or at least worthy of investigation based on the evidence we have, then, by definition, so is Trump.
When you tell the Democrats that they need to investigate Biden, or Hilary, or Obama, you’re simultaneously making the same case for these impeachment hearings.
Ultimately, none of anyone else’s alleged sins have anything to do with whether or not Trump is guilty. Asking, “why aren’t we going after Joe Biden?” is a legitimate question I think, but nigh unto completely irrelevant to Trump’s alleged misdeeds.
To my conservative friends, I ask that you apply the same standard of evidence to DT that you apply to Hilary, Joe, Obama, and all the other liberal miscreants.
Stop Picking on Donald Trump
Ranking member Nunez claimed, over and over, that this impeachment proceeding is just another example of liberals picking on Trump, his prime example being the Russia investigation.
According to Nunez, allegations that Trump colluded with Russia are completely and utterly false.
Bob Mueller, one of the most reputable men in Washington (according to Trump early in the investigation), trusted by most, was charged with looking deeply into these allegations – he stuck his head farther up the hindquarters of this Russia thing than anyone else.
Here’s what He didn’t say:
-
- “Donald Trump is Innocent.”
- “The President is Exonerated.”
- “Allegations of collusion between DT and the White House are completely and utterly false.”
The investigations were a let down for both parties, neither got what they wanted. But using this as an example of a totally unfounded attempt to discredit the president is ridiculous to me.
In addition, he payed off a prostitute, that bothered a lot of people. He was accused multiple times of sexual assault by women who’ve never accused anyone of sexual assault. We should note that he didn’t sue them for libel, defamation, or slander. It’s a very risky thing to accuse a wealthy, powerful individual of something you can’t prove, and where there are, by definition, no witnesses. Trump could’ve easily won, but didn’t defend his name. God knows it’s not because he’s shy of legal action. Can you blame me for wondering if he didn’t sue any of these people because he’s afraid of what would be dug up in the proceedings?
Trump totally lost me when he was caught on tape glorifying the many virtues of sexual assault. And in his early campain rallies he encouraged his supporters to physically assault attenders who spoke out against him.
On his watch, our country has seen more division than I can remember.
Some of my friends support him and we’re still friends. I try, not always successfully, to listen when we have political discussions. But I’ll ask you to understand why I’m not a fan, why I don’t think he’s good for our country, and why the narrative “Democrats are just picking on Trump” doesn’t stick with me.
I was living in Texarkana when the Clinton impeachment went down. During that time, Gov. Mike Huckabee wrote a book, Character IS the Issue: How People with Integrity can Revolutionize America. It sold like gangbusters among my conservative religious friends – a direct, timely response to the indescretions of Bill Clinton, and the percieved moral erosion of politics and culture in the US.
I agreed with Gov. Huckabee then, and I agree now (although it seems his posture has changed). Integrity matters, and many in our country believe, as I do, that the president is struggling here. Again, I’m fine if you don’t see things as I do, but I’m getting tired of hearing about how people like me just need to see the bigger picture.
From my perspective, he’s not a victim, he’s a person that many in America simply don’t trust. At this point, with all we’ve seen and heard from him, I don’t see that changing.
The Wistleblower
Another prolific minority complaint is that we don’t know who the whistleblower is, i.e., the person who kicked this whole thing off, and that he needs to come forward. Fortunately, his testimony no longer matters, there are more than enough people who’ve corroborated his story.
Aid to Ukraine Has Been Reinstated
Of course it has, and again, with no explanation, and no change in the general trajectory of Ukraine’s corruption issues.
If I had to sum up my experience listening to the impeachment proceedings, I’d say I heard a lot of credible people talking about how they came to believe that a quid pro quo went down, and a lot of people from the minority taking the weak spots of these testimonies and trying to make them sound like the most important thing ( Sondland doesn’t take notes, for example).
Overall, I found the minority’s arguments, accusations, and conclusions lacking in substance. But hey, I’m biased, and no Trump fan, so that’s what I’m supposed to think, right?
I’ll leave this to you to correct, clarify, or outright condemn. I welcome your thoughts, and will happily respond.
If you made it this far, thanx for reading.
Thanks for writing your perspective! To be honest, it is hard for me to accurately judge what I make out of our president and this impeachment process because I realize that most people are super charged with emotion when it comes to taking a side in politics. I find it very hard to find objective truth in the midst of so many opinions. I never feel like I can trust the news because it is usually slanted. And I didn’t have very much time to follow the days worth of impeachment hearings. I say all of that to say that I appreciate your honest review on how you have processed all of this information. I value your review of our president and the impeachment process more than most. You’ve taken a stand that isn’t leaning to the right or left, but I think very balanced. And I love all of your logic in all of this.
With that being said, I think that it’s important to realize that President Donald Trump is not King Jesus Christ! He has his pros and cons. I think that his pros reach almost as high as his cons dive low. That is probably another reason why our Country stands so divided. No doubt, he is not a man of integrity. Also no doubt, I believe that God uses him for conservative values. Then again, I don’t believe that the means justify the end. God used pharaoh and King Cyrus for His purposes also, and they weren’t saints.
I think it’s a shame that we have such a hard time going through an impeachment hearing because corruption is rampant on both sides. Who can we trust? Nobody seems to be the answer. And capital hill seems so far away from where I stand. I think that is the frustration that I face.
Thanks again for your blog. It was helpful for me.
I suspect that if Hillary Clinton had won the election, the GOP would have attempted to be right where the Dems are now, with a wrongdoing by the President that could fuel impeachment proceedings.
When it comes to what each side is saying, it is much like what prosecution and defense attorneys say in a trial. It is then up to the jury to decide if the prosecutor has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. When it is the president who is on trial, the Senate serves as the jury. When Bill Clinton was impeached by the House, the Senate voted to acquit him. The most likely outcome for Trump is the same.
Unfortunately, the result of these trials of Presidents over crimes that for most of us don’t rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors” is that we become more cynical about the politicians on both sides of the aisle, concluding that they care more about winning and destroying each other than they do about the people they are supposed to be governing on behalf of.
We would much rather they be tackling the big issues of our day, such as immigration, the push for democracy in Hong Kong, the conflicts in the Middle East, health care, and guarding our freedoms.
At least, I hope we do.
I’m Canadian, so what do I know? Now that we’ve got THAT out of the way…
Don’t be distracted by this quid pro quo thing. It has stuck in people’s minds, but it was not necessary to prove an exchange of value here or that aid was held up with its release contingent on a favour. The simple act of the President inviting foreign interference in an election was sufficient as a abuse of power.
It’s mens rea, the guilty mind or intent. It doesn’t matter that the aid wasn’t in the end withheld, or that the investigation didn’t take place. Trump’s intent was to subvert a democratic election by inviting a foreign power to investigate his political rival. It doesn’t matter if Hunter Biden is guilty or not! Maybe he is, it takes a court of law to decide that. This is about behaviour. Trump’s behavior.
It seems valid to say that, more than ever, ordinary citizens have an alarmingly poor knowledge of the legal system, what constitutes a crime, the concept of innocence until proven guilty, and why a “nation of laws, not men” is desirable, in fact, essential.
I find it alarming that other commenters have basically stated that these impeachment hearings are a storm in a teacup, blowing up minor indiscretions into something more serious than they are, thus alienating the general public.
Seriously? That’s also apparently what Mulvaney thought when he stated, live on national broadcast, that “this happens all the time.” Maybe Trump has so normalized corrupt behavior that you’ve stopped noticing it. POTUS is the most powerful office in the world, and this President openly invites investigation into a political rival, thus abusing the power of his office, and you think that’s a minor thing?
I don’t know where to start – so tired of my conservative friends shouting “no evidence” then talking about Biden/Obama/Clinton being crooks
The conservative mindset is colorful, but lacks subtlety. They are a little dramatic. They like their misdemeanours like their town cars and their women’s hair: big and splashy. They need Hillary running a child sex ring out of a pizza parlor. Now, THAT’s crime! A totally fabricated non-existent crime, but a crime. Something as minor, but real, as Trump putting himself above the rule of law by ignoring subpoenas, which means literally anything could happen, is too abstract for them.
Trump has put himself above the law. He could call in the National Guard and shut down Congress. *You are in the midst of a constitutional crisis, a meltdown in which you’ve become a nation of men, not laws.* This is in no one’s interest, conservative or liberal.
A propos the whistleblower – don’t people understand why a whistleblower needs their identity protected? Who would come forward otherwise? It’s all part of what I see as the gradual stifling of dissent and a demand for conformity. Colin K is therefore a quasi-criminal for his peaceful protest. Calls for the whistleblower’s identity are sinister. It is extraordinarily hard to protest, to risk exile from the group, to speak up for what is right. I am very discouraged about the future of democracy, even of basic freedoms. I’ll shut up now.
Politics makes hypocrites of us all. We want our government to pursue a particular agenda and there are politicians who support our agenda. Unfortunately, those politicians are susceptible, like all of us, to temptation and corruption. But we want our agenda moved forward, so we are all tempted to minimize the sins of our guys and gals while maximizing those of the opposition.
If you think that you are not guilty of this, then compare your reaction to the sins of the crop of leaders we’ve had over the last few years. Did it upset you when Hillary defended Bill’s philandering and denigrated those who accused him of harassment? Did it upset you when Trump talked freely of harassing women? If you felt differently between the two, then you, like most of us, are guilty of the hypocrisy that is all too common. They were both perpetrating the unacceptable conditions that the current #MeToo movement is finally addressing.
Sorry if this doesn’t provide a satisfying answer. I can’t say that I have one.
Oh, and if I were to say “The Black mindset is colorful, but lacks subtlety” you would rightfully call me a bigot. I’m calling Mr. Roddis on his bigotry toward conservatives. Yes, there are crazy conspiracy lovers out there, but if you lump all conservatives into that bucket, you are using bigoted thinking. Please stop it and engage in honest discussion.