SUMMARY:
The Obama
Administration
was the most corrupt
administration in
American history.
They weaponized
the CIA, FBI and
State Department
to help Hillary Clinton,
and hurt Donald Trump.
They faked an
FBI investigation
of Hillary Clinton,
while conducting
a real, but
unjustified,
unjustified,
investigation of
candidate Trump.
Fortunately,
Obama's people
were also
incompetent --
the FBI managed to
claim Hillary was guilty
of obstruction of justice,
and espionage, but then
annoyed people by claiming
no punishment was justified.
Proper FBI procedures
are to keep investigations
secret, until charges are
filed ... or permanently
secret, if no chrages are
filed.
As much as I dislike the
Clintons, because they are
very rich "charity grifters",
the FBI's James Comey
managed to conduct
a fake investigation, with
no punishment decided
BEFORE the FBI interviews.
But that investigation
smeared Hillary's
character, in spite
of no charges being
filed against her --
which adds up to an
un-American process,
that probably caused
her to lose the election !
The election interference
by high level Obama people
was bad, even though their
obvious incompetence
ended up hurting Hillary.
Democrats are
now weaponizing
the House's authority
over impeachment,
for partisan purposes,
rather than actual
law breaking, which is
exactly what Alexander
Hamilton had feared.
House impeachment
"because we don't like you"
is a new precedent
that may be worse
than government officials
( Obama's Deep State Democrats )
actively trying to prevent
a Republican from
becoming president,
using the incredible powers
of the FBI, CIA and State
Department.
DETAILS:
Abuse of power
can be charged against
virtually every president
by the opposing party.
But obstruction of Congress
can't extend to a president
invoking executive privileges,
which are intended
to be decided by the
Supreme Court, as the
"referee" of conflicts
between the legislative
and executive branches.
Alexander Hamilton
feared that having vague
impeachment criteria
would allow a majority
of the House to impeach
a president from the
opposing party
just because they had
more votes than
the president's party.
Hamilton declared that
to be "the greatest danger."
Madison worried that
open-ended criteria
for impeachment,
such as for
"maladministration",
would give Congress
too much discretion
and power.
To prevent these dangers,
the framers settled on criteria
with well-established meanings:
Treason, bribery and other
high crimes and misdemeanors.
House Democrats are simply
ignoring those words, and this
history, because they have
the votes to do so.
This lawless view
places Congressional
Democrats above the
supreme law of the land,
namely the constitution.
According to Hamilton
in Federalist 78, any act
of Congress that does not
comport with the
Constitution is "void."
This view was confirmed
by the Supreme Court in
Marbury v. Madison.
Could the
president's lawyers
make a motion
to the Chief Justice
— who presides
over the trial of an
impeached president —
to dismiss the articles
of impeachment on
constitutional grounds?
For an ordinary criminal case,
if someone is indicted for
a non-crime, the trial judge
would be obliged to dismiss
the indictment, and not
subject the defendant
to an unconstitutional trial.
Impeachment
is not an ordinary
criminal proceeding.
Impeachment by the House
is similar to indictment
by a grand jury, and a
removal trial by the Senate
is similar to a criminal trial,
presided over by a judge.
Several possibilities:
(A)
The president's lawyers
could file
a motion seeking
dismissal of the
impeachment as
unconstitutional.
(B)
The president's lawyers
could seek judicial
review of the House's
unconstitutional
action.
The Constitution says
the House shall be the
"sole" judge of impeachment,
but two former justices have
said there might be a judicial
role in extreme cases.
(C)
The Senate could conduct
a short trial trial focusing
on constitutional defects
in the articles of impeachment.
Only legal arguments
would be presented,
before a Senate vote
was taken.
No fact witnesses
would be called.
This is because the
Ukraine bribery and
extortion claims
have completely
disappeared,
probably done
deliberately by
the Democrats
to avoid the natural
reaction of calling
two Bidens' as
"Ukraine witnesses."
The Democrats don't want
the Biden Crime Family's
Ukraine corruption exposed.
Without the Ukraine
connection in the
articles of impeachment,
an "attack" on Bidens
could backfire
on Republicans.
I think it's obvious
the U.S. Senate
will vote to acquit
President Trump.
Then the
"union of stupid
Americans" will be
very disappointed,
after thinking that
"impeachment"
actually meant
Trump was
thrown out
of office.
Our Constitution says
a president shall be
impeached and removed
on conviction by the
Senate of “Treason,
Bribery, or other high
Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
"Misdemeanors" had a
different meaning then.
President Trump
did not violate
any federal or state
law that was
"on the books".
Even Democrats
now admit that.
So this impeachment
(charges against the
President) is entirely
for political gain,
NOT law enforcement.
Our President has many
personality flaws --
his bragging and gross
exaggerations really
annoy me -- I can't
listen to him speaking.
But as the most
investigated president
in American history,
Trump has NOT been
a lawbreaker.
In fact, he has been
too open with Democrats,
by giving them a huge
quantity of requested
documents, never
declaring executive
privilege, and allowing his
White House Attorney
to testify for an amazing
30 hours -- all to HELP
the Mueller Team of
ONLY Democrats,
investigating ONLY
Republicans.
That level of cooperation
set a very bad precedent,
and probably hurt
the president.
There was no evidence
of a crime that justified
the formation of the
Mueller Team,
and that Team
made sure the American
public never found out
there was no evidence
of any Trump crime
before the 2018 Election,
which helped Democrats.
There were lots of
Democrat witnesses
before Congress who
did not like Donald Trump,
especially when Trump's
foreign policy did not
match their own
"expert" opinions.
That's not a crime.
The State Department
works for the president
-- he does not work for them.
The only "mistake" was
that President Trump
did not fire EVERY Obama
political appointee on his
first day as president
There was only one
"fact witness" before
Congress, in over
two weeks, and he
specifically said
there was no
quid pro quo crime.
The president of Ukraine
said there was no crime.
The transcript of the
July 25, 2019 phone call
between the two presidents
revealed no crime.
The 22 month long
Mueller investigation
found no Trump crime.
Nasty Nancy Pelosi
claims she doesn't
hate Trump, but has
made repeated hateful
statements about him,
by the dozens.
One of her
statements
about Trump,
was “All roads
lead to Putin!”
Nasty Nancy Pelosi
will be infamous in
U.S. history for leading
the first impeachment
with no crime.
She forever changed
the definition of an
impeachable offense
to 'Anything we say
it is' (which means
anything that we think
will help us win
the next election').
In fact, Pelosi could lead
ANOTHER impeachment
process before
the 2020 election,
by claiming there is
new evidence !
Nasty Nancy Pelosi
is shameful example
of an elderly woman,
desperately clinging
to power, allowing
young Democrat
socialists / marxists,
such as Alexandria
Occasionally Coherent,
to manipulate her like
she's their puppet.
Consider Article I,
“Abuse of Power.”
Trump briefly held up delivery
of $391 million in “vital military
and security assistance to oppose
Russian aggression.”
which
“compromised the national
security of the United States.”
The Truth:
The Trump administration
repeatedly transferred lethal aid
— sniper rifles, Javelin missiles —
that President Obama denied
Ukraine for three years.
There was no quid pro quo,
and Trump was not charged
with that form of bribery.
If Trump’s brief hold on aid
really compromised U.S.
“national security,”
then Obama’s years
of denying lethal aid
to Ukraine was far worse.
Where are the
“high crimes”
in this impeachment
resolution ?
in this impeachment
resolution ?
There is no high crime !
There is no moderate crime !
There is no low crime !
There is no crime !
Trump asked Ukraine’s
president to investigate
the Bidens and Burisma
Holdings, a Ukraine company
which bought "protection"
by paying Joe Biden's son
Hunter Biden $83,333
a month to merely use his
name as a board member
-- he never attended meetings
... while VP Joe Biden was
the White House point man
for rooting out corruption
in Ukraine.
It is Trump's RESPONSIBILITY,
as chief of U.S. law enforcement,
to ask Ukraine’s president
to look into the very suspicious
Biden-Burisma dealings !
Article II is titled
“Obstruction of Congress.”
Trump “directed the unprecedented,
categorical, and indiscriminate defiance
of subpoenas issued by the House
of Representatives pursuant to its
‘sole power of Impeachment.'”
Trump did direct the Executive
branch to not provide witnesses
and documents subpoenaed
by the House Intelligence and
Judiciary Committees, both
of which were very partisan,
chaired by Trump-haters
Jerrold "Frumpy" Nadler
and Adam "Shifty" Schiff.
Conflicts between the President
and Congress are traditionally
decided by the Supreme Court.
But Pelosi, Nadler and Schiff
refused to wait for the court
to issue a ruling.
Instead, they decided to create
a new "crime", out of thin air,
without a Congressional vote,
which they decided to call
"Obstruction of Congress.”
