How Democrats flip an impeachment witness
‘Welcome to the Resistance’
If your Squire is ever called to testify before Congress, he promises to sweat profusely (unlike Prince Andrew), mop his brow obsessively, and shield the microphone as he consults with his mobbed up lawyer. The Fifth Amendment would be invoked, White Privilege blamed. He would also say something about Epstein not off-ing himself.
Adam Schiff concludes the examination of European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland today by asserting that he never wanted it to come to this — that being impeachment. That is a Whopper made of over-processed soybean meal. Schiff has been looking for a crime to fit the verdict for the last couple of years. Where, indeed, is the beef?
The real whopper is that a Democratic congressman from Sondland’s home state of Oregon, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, has called for a boycott has organized pickets and a boycott against Sondland’s hotels. Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, asked Sondland if he’d received “threats and reprisals” since his name hit the news.
“Many,” Sondland replied. “We have countless e-mails, apparently, to my wife. Our properties are being picketed and boycotted.” Rep. Conaway commented:
Mr. Blumenauer should not be using the vast influences that we have to bully you (Sondland) and your businesses into harm — the hundreds or thousands of employees that operate your business — by trying take business away from you to force you into doing something that they wanted you to do. That’s a shame. I’m hopeful that my colleagues will join me in saying, ‘Mr. Blumenauer, you really shouldn’t be using your congressional influence to try to bully and threaten a witness before these proceedings.’
And you wondered why Sondland flipped from having Trump’s back to being an accuser!
‘Welcome to the Resistance’
Meanwhile, Blumenauer was apparently pleased with Sondland’s testimony on Wednesday, tweeting “Gordon Sondland, welcome to the Resistance,” according to the Seattle Times.
Gordon Sondland reminds us of Wallace Shawn in the movies My Dinner with Andre and Princess Bride. Nice guy, means well.
But talk about two-sided! Sondland’s opening statement said Quid Pro Quo, fo’ sho’. Only deep into the daylong testimony did Sondland quote the President as saying, in a direct face-to-face meeting: “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky — President Zelensky to do the right thing.”
“You can’t find the time to fit that in a 23-page opening statement?” Jim Jordan (the man in shirt sleeves) marveled.
Even the Bidens?
Should the Bidens be exempt from investigation?
Democrats are fond of saying no one is above the law. Would that include Joe and Hunter Biden? Even Sondland had to admit that Hunter’s $50,000 monthly stipend while his daddy was Veep had at least the appearance of a conflict of interest. And why did the Obama administration brief a previous ambassador on how to handle the Biden conflict of interest?
Finally, who sets administration foreign policy? The Constitution offers a clue. It’s not the foreign policy establishment. It is an elected President who is skeptical of pouring taxpayer dollars in foreign aid to kleptocracies that — in the case of Ukraine — campaigned for his election opponent.
The Capital Times wants Sen. Ron Johnson to recuse himself in any impeachment trial. Why? Because the senator took his oversight responsibilities seriously, because he was boots on the ground, and because he defeated Capital Times favorite Russ Feingold. Twice. In any event, the Constitution makes no such demands.
Sen. Ron Johnson explores the Deep State
The New York Times reports: As a member of the Foreign Relations Committee and a leader of the Senate Ukraine Caucus, Mr. Johnson has for years traveled to Ukraine and worked to build a relationship with the nation’s officials. Now considered a witness with firsthand information, he is prepared to use the newfound spotlight to defend the president.
Sen. Johnson’s letter to the House is a must read.
The Senator called the Democrats impeachment inquiry “a concerted, and possibly coordinated effort to sabotage the Trump administration that probably began in earnest the day after the 2016 presidential election.”
He singled out Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman as part of the Deep State:
Lt. Col. Vindman’s testimony, together with other witnesses use of similar terms such as “our policy,” “stated policy,” and “long-standing policy” lend further credence to the point I’m making. Whether you agree with President Trump or not, it should be acknowledged that the Constitution vests the power of conducting foreign policy with the duly elected president. … not what the “consensus” of unelected foreign policy bureaucrats wants it to be.”
I raise this point because I believe that a significant number of bureaucrats and staff … have never accepted President Trump as legitimate and resent his unorthodox style and his intrusion onto their “turf.”
Blaska’s Bottom Line: Folks, if Donald Trump wanted his pound of flesh, Ukraine would have conducted an investigation and found the Bidens guilty in absentia. Instead, that troubled country did not even promise a cursory look-see. And they still got the money! Our money. Americans’ money. No one stole it from Ukraine. Nor were they entitled to it.
