HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY COMPLETE, NOW MOVES TO JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
WHITE HOUSE AND SENATE PREPARE FOR TRIAL
It is expected that the House Impeachment inquiry phase is now concluded, but don't be surprised that like the Kavanaugh hearing, there may be more to come. The next step is a hearing in the Judiciary committee and a vote there, then move to a vote in the house on impeachment. It will then move to the Senate, controlled by Republicans, who will set the rules for the trial.
The conclusion of these hearings did establish that there was an effort to tie a white house meeting to a public statement from Zelensky that he would investigate Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election and corruption in Burmisa the Ukrainian Gas co.
While the democrats assume that this request had to do with interfering in the 2020 election to taint Joe Biden, the republican position is that Trump wanted to insure that those that were involved in the 2016 election were no longer in positions in Ukraine. He, as was the general consensus, was also concerned about corruption in general. Burmisa was accused of funneling huge amounts of money out of the country, some supposedly U.S. aid money. Joe Biden's son sits on the board of this co. so this is the Biden connection.
There did not seem to be any proof that the delay in conveying aid to Ukraine was tied to this public statement. Much was made that it was a national security issue, that Ukraine was in a war and needed the aid quickly.
There was one problem with all this, everyone admitted the Ukraine was one of the most corrupt governments in the world. This included the former President Porshenko and many in the cabinet. Zelensky did not take his office until May. 20, 2019. There then was the election of the Parliament. 70% of the parliament was replaced. The parliament did not take their seats until Aug. 29, 2019. They then held an all night session in which they passed a series of anti-corruption measures, including removing the immunity from prosecution of members of Parliament. There was also many members of the prosecutors office replaced. Vice-President Mike Pence met with Zelensky in Warsaw, Poland on Sept. 1., and the aid was released on Sept. 11. I don't understand why this was not more fully explained.
There was never a public statement about any investigations.
There was never a public statement about any investigations.
This hearing was really irrelevant, it was a show to garner support against the President. There has not been any doubt that the democrats wanted to impeach this president even before the Inauguration. There is no doubt they will produce enough votes to impeach.
As for the last witnesses in the hearing Fiona Hall and David Holmes, both of the NSC, were of one mind. Their contempt for civilian control of policy was clear. They visibly showed that they knew what foreign policy should be fostered by the United States. Holmes bristled when asked by a U.S. Representative if he thought it was appropriate to relay to others what he heard in a private conversation, in a casual setting, in an effort to embarrass the Ambassador and the President.
The demeanor of both these witnesses and Lt.Col. Vindman reminded me of political officers in the former Soviet Union or Gestapo in Nazi Germany. They conveyed the impression that you did not want to reveal anything or allow these people to know anything about you, as it would surely be noted somewhere and possibly reported. I expect it is also used as a weapon to those who they disagree. There was also the feeling of protecting their turf and resenting not being informed of all details of agendas or plans. I can see why some would avoid conveying any information to these people.
As for Holmes overhearing a cell phone conversation in a crowded restaurant from across the table. I don't buy it. It seems all communications of this president are monitored and if embarrassing promptly leaked to the press or in this case used to enhance an impeachment process.
I suspect they hoped that Sondland would dispute the contents of the call, but he wisely said he did not recall and he did not dispute anything that Homes said. You can bet it was a perjury trap that they hoped to use to squeeze and punish Sondland for stepping on their Turf.
I hope the Senate and other civilian members of our government take a long look at the culture of this agency.
The demeanor of both these witnesses and Lt.Col. Vindman reminded me of political officers in the former Soviet Union or Gestapo in Nazi Germany. They conveyed the impression that you did not want to reveal anything or allow these people to know anything about you, as it would surely be noted somewhere and possibly reported. I expect it is also used as a weapon to those who they disagree. There was also the feeling of protecting their turf and resenting not being informed of all details of agendas or plans. I can see why some would avoid conveying any information to these people.
As for Holmes overhearing a cell phone conversation in a crowded restaurant from across the table. I don't buy it. It seems all communications of this president are monitored and if embarrassing promptly leaked to the press or in this case used to enhance an impeachment process.
I suspect they hoped that Sondland would dispute the contents of the call, but he wisely said he did not recall and he did not dispute anything that Homes said. You can bet it was a perjury trap that they hoped to use to squeeze and punish Sondland for stepping on their Turf.
I hope the Senate and other civilian members of our government take a long look at the culture of this agency.
Ms. Pelosi must come up with a new strategy to stall this impeachment process in the judiciary committee for as long as possible taking it closer to the election.Moving on to the hearings I never believed the true power of 'Deep State' federal bureaucrats who honestly believe they dictate foreign policy and not the President . Being an old coot I find it weird that these operatives are proud to testify that they listen into other peoples phone calls.Talk about bad manners ,so I suppose it's a generational thing.The Democratic committee members state this is about National security.How could any foreign leader or intelligence agency risk talking to the U.S. government knowing their phone calls would be reported on by M.S.N.B.C. and others
ReplyDelete