I spent this morning looking at some of the summaries put forth by people in the media commenting on the impeachment hearings. Many of them talked about how the case had been made against President Trump. That's strange. I keep waiting to hear any evidence of wrongdoing by the President. Did I miss it?
Let's start with the simple question. What was the crime that Trump committed? The Democrats kept changing the target during the hearings. We went from quid pro quo to extortion to bribery. Still, there remains no competent evidence of any of that. And to be clear, by "competent" evidence, I mean evidence that would be admissible in a federal criminal court. We had hurt feelings by bureaucrats. We had third hand hearsay by others. We had people who didn't like what the president said because it didn't agree with the policy they thought appropriate. What we didn't have, however, is any evidence that Trump told the Ukraine that it would have to conduct a phony (or any) investigation of Joe Biden or American aid would be cut off. In fact, everyone agrees that Ukraine conducted no investigation of any sort regarding Biden and the aid was delivered in any event. That means no quid and no quo.
But was there bribery? Under the constitution that would require someone to have given a bribe to the President for him to take an action to favor the briber. Trump didn't get anything, though. And Trump didn't give any special favors. Somehow, the Dems want to turn this around to claim that Trump gave a bribe to Ukraine in exchange for a special favor. That's backwards, but even so, it also isn't borne out by any evidence. Trump did nothing but release the aid appropriated by Congress. That's not a special favor. And Trump got nothing in return. There is no investigation of Biden.
The big "bombshell" of the hearings supposedly was the people who claim to have overheard a phone call in which Trump said he didn't care about Ukraine, just the investigation. The testimony seems dishonest, but let's give it credence for the moment. It's not a crime or even improper for the President to tell an ambassador that he doesn't care about a particular country. Let me tell you, I don't care much about Thailand. That's not a crime when I say it and it's not a crime if the president says it. Also, it's not a crime for the president to care about investigating the obvious corruption of former vice president Biden. Telling an ambassador of that view is also not a crime.
So there's no crime and no evidence of a crime. I didn't miss anything.
Let's start with the simple question. What was the crime that Trump committed? The Democrats kept changing the target during the hearings. We went from quid pro quo to extortion to bribery. Still, there remains no competent evidence of any of that. And to be clear, by "competent" evidence, I mean evidence that would be admissible in a federal criminal court. We had hurt feelings by bureaucrats. We had third hand hearsay by others. We had people who didn't like what the president said because it didn't agree with the policy they thought appropriate. What we didn't have, however, is any evidence that Trump told the Ukraine that it would have to conduct a phony (or any) investigation of Joe Biden or American aid would be cut off. In fact, everyone agrees that Ukraine conducted no investigation of any sort regarding Biden and the aid was delivered in any event. That means no quid and no quo.
But was there bribery? Under the constitution that would require someone to have given a bribe to the President for him to take an action to favor the briber. Trump didn't get anything, though. And Trump didn't give any special favors. Somehow, the Dems want to turn this around to claim that Trump gave a bribe to Ukraine in exchange for a special favor. That's backwards, but even so, it also isn't borne out by any evidence. Trump did nothing but release the aid appropriated by Congress. That's not a special favor. And Trump got nothing in return. There is no investigation of Biden.
The big "bombshell" of the hearings supposedly was the people who claim to have overheard a phone call in which Trump said he didn't care about Ukraine, just the investigation. The testimony seems dishonest, but let's give it credence for the moment. It's not a crime or even improper for the President to tell an ambassador that he doesn't care about a particular country. Let me tell you, I don't care much about Thailand. That's not a crime when I say it and it's not a crime if the president says it. Also, it's not a crime for the president to care about investigating the obvious corruption of former vice president Biden. Telling an ambassador of that view is also not a crime.
So there's no crime and no evidence of a crime. I didn't miss anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment