It’s clear that Reb Eliezer and GH continue to suffer from Trump Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Neither of you have either seen the transcript or seen any of the hearings
A. The transcript does not mention suspension of the aid or a quid pro quo
B. None of the witnesses called by Schiff heard Trump state he wanted a quid pro quo. They testified that they thought Trump was implying it, yet most of the nor only hadn’t ever met Trump, they hadn’t ever met him. This type of testimony would be thrown out by a judge at trial.
C. The only witness who was on the call, the Colonel, said there was no quid pro quo on the call
D. Ambassador Sondland, the big witness, under cross examination admitted he was only presuming a quid pro quo. He then , upon further questioning admitted the following:
1. He called the president subsequent to the July call and asked Trump to clarify what he wanted and Trump responded that he wanted nothing, no quid pro quo. He somehow left this out of his written testimony.
2. He admitted that although the alleged quid pro quo required Zelinsky to make a public statement regarding a Biden investigation before he could get a meeting with Trump and the aid, the aid was released and a meeting was held without the statement.
E. Zelinsky has twice stated that he had not been pressured by Trump and in fact was not even aware the aid was being held.
F. Schiff’s impeachment hearings were one sided. Witnesses were not allowed legal counsel, Republicans were not allowed to call witnesses and most of the hearings were held in secret, with Schiff selectively leaking testimony to the media. Gee, I can’t imagine why Trump wouldn’t cooperate.
G. Refusal to cooperate with Congressional subpoenas is not illegal or an impeachable offense; it’s routine. The Executive is not subservient to the Legislature and has constitutional right to appeal to the Courts , the third branch of government. Had Congress not been in such a rush and appealed to the courts, and Teump still refused, that would be obstruction.
H. The 3 experts called by Nadler were a farce in that they’ve been advocating for impeachment since day one. Korman was so anti Trump that she couldn’t walk past the Trump hotel in Washington without crossing the street. Turley, although called by the Republicans, is a Democrat who voted for Clinton. His point was that the Democrats were incorrectly rushing the process to meet a calendar deadline. In the process too many witnesses hadn’t been called because it would have required time consuming court appeals. He wasn’t saying that Trump was innocent. He said that we were setting a terrible precedent by going forward with an impeachment based upon flimsy proof .
Menu