© Global Look Press / Stefani Reynolds / CNP / AdMedia 12
On Wednesday, the sound of millions of TV remote controls clicking in unison echoed across the heartland as the top American diplomat in Ukraine Bill Taylor told the stony-faced gallery: "What I can do, um, for you here today is tell you what I heard from [dramatic pause] people."
Translation: The inquisition's star witness 'witnessed' absolutely nothing that could warrant the removal of a sitting president from office. Their other so-called witness, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent, did not fare any better at proving that Trump was looking for some 'quid pro quo' (i.e. dirt on his political rival Joe Biden and his dealings with a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma Holdings, in return for US military aid) in his June 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
To add some gravy to this dry biscuit of a story, the White House on Friday released the very first phone call between Trump and Zelensky just hours after the latter was elected to office. Predictably, Twitter has lit up in a virtual game of Clue to find some hint of foul play on the part of the US president.
Perhaps now we can better understand why the Democrats opted to hold their initial impeachment inquiry in the basement of the US Capitol building for weeks before opening up this excruciating exercise in political suicide to public scrutiny. Even the Mueller 'Russiagate' monstrosity looked sexy by comparison.
Actually, it was not so much that the hearing was "boring" as it was profoundly pointless. The main reason being that the transcript of the Trump-Zelensky call has been declassified for many weeks and shows no impeachable offense; the Ukrainian president himself admitted there had been no undue pressure placed on him by the White House. Therefore, there isn't much that can any 'witness' - even that of the whistleblower, whose identity the Democrats are suspiciously reluctant to reveal - hope to add to this body of evidence, aside from second-hand hearsay? Although there remains the possibility that the hearings will produce a magical 'gotcha' moment (the former US ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, who was abruptly recalled by Trump in May, is scheduled to provide testimony on Friday), the first day of deliberations points to another waste of taxpayer dollars chasing phantoms.
So why did the Democrats - who must be aware that their impeachment case rests on very thin ice - decide to drag the probe-weary public through yet another witch hunt just weeks after the Mueller report failed to prove collusion between Trump and the Russians? First, they have nothing to lose, literally. Aside from Fox News and an army of YouTube bloggers, the liberals control the media message lock, stock and barrel. Thus, the Democrats can rest assured that this latest super dud will be buffed squeaky clean for public consumption by a media industrial complex that has been on the offensive against Donald Trump since day one of his presidency. And let's not forget that the Democrats have been screaming about impeaching Trump long before the US leader ever made a phone call to Zelensky.
Second, the Democrats are painfully aware that not one of their presidential pretenders stand a good chance of defeating Trump in 2020. In fact, if the Democrats thought that their top contender, Joe Biden, had any realistic hope of crashing the Oval Office, they would never have opened impeachment hearings against Trump in the first place.
The reason is because the public will now be treated to tantalizing details about Biden's son, Hunter, who reportedly profited handsomely through his affiliation with Burisma Holdings while his father was serving as vice president in the Obama administration. In 2016, during a meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations, Biden bragged openly that he forced Kiev to fire its prosecutor general in return for the release of $1 billion in US aid. If ever there was a 'quid pro quo' between US and Ukrainian officials, that was it. The incredible irony here is that Trump could actually be impeached for NOT investigating Joe Biden and his numerous murky dealings with Kiev.
Finally, the Democrats are pushing ahead with impeachment proceedings against Trump at a time when they themselves are under investigation. That fact should raise some eyebrows, yet it is rarely discussed by the mainstream media. How many people know that back in May, Trump appointed Attorney General William Barr to investigate the origins of the 'Russiagate' fiasco? Barr's appointment came just weeks after he told members of Congress he believed "spying did occur" against one of Trump's campaign aides. If these disturbing allegations are confirmed, some top US officials may find themselves in need of very good legal counsel as Washington becomes ground zero for yet another political trial no less momentous than the Watergate hearings. Barr told a press conference this week that the release of the report is "imminent."
Here we have a situation where the White House may bring serious criminal charges against Democrats, only to have the Democrats counter in one voice (with the loyal support of their media lapdogs, of course) that Trump is only resorting to such a move because he is attempting to save himself from impending impeachment.
When all of the factors are taken into consideration - the upcoming presidential elections that the Democrats seem unlikely to win, together with the possibility of arrests in the upper echelons of the FBI, Justice Department and Democratic Party - it becomes more understandable as to why Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi pushed forward with yet another political show trial, and one that seems doomed to fail.
As things now stand, the Democrats and Republicans are locked in a race against time to see who can appear less guilty in the eyes of the American people. And since the Democrats enjoy full support of the media, Trump's case against their political opponents must be absolutely rock solid. Whether the country can survive the fallout from this historic clash is another question, but I suspect we'll be getting an answer sooner rather than later.
Reader Comments
to our Newsletter