When the Dems Have Lost the AOC-Supporting, Warren-Sanders-Backing of ‘The Nation’ on Impeachment — it’s Over
When the Sanders-Warren backing, AOC supporting, socialist magazine The Nation writes in one of its headlines: “Impeachment Non-Bombshells Endanger Democrats in 2020,” things are going badly in the Dem hovels of the Swamp. “Impeachment Non-Bombshells,” (I call those duds).
But why take my word for it, from The Nation:
“When questioning began, [Ambassador] Sondland made clear that Trump never told him that the military funding was contingent on investigations. In fact, he said that Trump never mentioned that military funding at all. The idea that it was conditioned on the investigations did not come from Trump, but, as Sondland explained, from his own interpretation “in the absence of any credible explanation” for why the money had been frozen.
“Asked by Representative Adam Schiff whether “the military assistance was also being withheld pending Zelensky announcing these investigations,” Sondland replied: “That was my presumption. My personal presumption based on the facts at the time. Nothing was moving.” He then told Democratic counsel Daniel Goldman the same thing: “President Trump never told me directly that the aid was conditioned on the meetings. The only thing we got directly from [Rudy] Guiliani was that the Burisma and 2016 elections were conditioned on the White House meeting. The aid was my own personal, you know, guess.” And yet again: “Nobody told me directly that the aid was tied to anything. I was presuming it was.”
“Sondland repeated the same message again and again, including in this exchange with Republican Representative Mike Turner:
Rep Mike Turner
No one on this planet told you that President Trump was tying aid to investigations. Yes or no?
Rep Mike Turner
So, you really have no testimony today that ties President Trump to a scheme to withhold aid from Ukraine in exchange for these investigations?
Other than my own presumption.”
And then the real problems for the Dems begin, The Nation piece concludes:
“If the evidence presented by the Democrats’ star witness is in fact only his “personal presumption” on the core issue, then Democrats face a major evidentiary hole. To date, no one else has filled it.
“The impeachment hearings leave us with a gap between the evidence presented and the maximalist, ‘bombshell’ interpretations drawn from it. That’s nothing new. The same dynamic drove Russiagate for nearly three years until it collapsed. And just like Russiagate, a major driver of Ukrainegate is an underlying hawkish posture toward Russia. It is abundantly clear that witness after witness disagreed with Trump’s decision to briefly freeze the military funding, and firmly believes that the United States should arm Ukraine in its conflict with Russian-backed forces in the Donbass region.”
The Nation also objects to the policy of arming Ukraine. It mocks the arms suppliers and companies that would benefit from such military assistance, as well as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce because both the companies and the Chamber would call the National Security Council to find out what was holding up the military aid. (Building and shipping ammunition and weapons takes time and planning.)
The article in The Nation asks why the Dems are backing this play when: “In a different time, a liberal opposition movement might be raising concerns of its own about war-profiteering phone calls; or the merits of fueling a war on the borders of the world’s other top nuclear power; or doing so in a way that arms and empowers far-right forces incorporated within the Ukrainian military. Instead, Democrats have been enlisted to champion that proxy war and the coffers of the military firms that profit from it.”
This, of course, begs the question: Why is Speaker Pelosi attempting to impeach Trump? She knows that President Trump will not be convicted in the Senate. He will not be removed from office. Is this just some groupthink therapy that the media and Dems need to go through and put the country through for their own psychological and emotional reasons?
Senator Jones (D-AL) is reportedly at No on impeachment, now. (Given the above, you can see why.)
Speaker Pelosi cannot achieve President Trump being thrown out of the office of the Presidency, from where she and her hand-picked orchestrator, Shifty Schiff, has taken the Democrats.
And The Nation wonders:
“The domestic consequences are no less important. As Democrats and media outlets devote endless hours to venerating a procession of hawkish bureaucrats and parsing their every word, issues that materially affect the lives of average voters are going—just as they were in the Russiagate era—largely ignored.
“And for all of the speculation about a Trump presidency in peril and Republicans jumping ship, some signs point in a different direction. “As a political matter, the longer this goes, it is a real opportunity for Republicans to paint Democrats as unconcerned about the issues voters care more about,” a Republican strategist told The New York Times. Eyeing that chance, Republicans are discussing a strategy that would prolong a Senate impeachment trial as long as possible so as to overshadow the Democratic primary—“potentially keeping six contenders in Washington until the eve of the Iowa caucuses or longer,” The Washington Post notes.
“Two of those contenders include the leading progressive candidates, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Couple the prospect of slowing their momentum with an impeachment process that to date has failed to substantiate its core allegation, and it is hard not to wonder if Democrats are staging a Russiagate sequel in more ways than one: “bombshells” that fizzle out, dangerous Cold War chauvinism emboldened, and Trump handed another gift for the fast-approaching 2020 campaign.”
There is no doubt, now that all the evidence has been flushed out, just like he did on Russiagate, Shifty Schiff hood-winked the Dems into giving him the power to go fish. He came up fishless.
Shifty Shiff told the Dems what they wanted to hear, and now, it is dawning on them, just like Russia collusion, they’ve been Lucy-and-the-footballed again.
So really, why are the Dems doing this?
My own theory is that the main-stream-media-fed Trump Derangement Syndrome is making the Dems collectively think and act irrationally.
When I asked an influential Republican House Chairman of one of the Republican House Leadership Committees why Speaker Pelosi is doing this, when she knows full well President Trump will not be convicted (see above) the Congressman insisted, repeatedly, that the Dems he talks to often are honest with him, and that all of them, to a person, has such “contempt” for Trump and “can’t get over the election.”
“True Trump Derangement Syndrom?” I asked.
“Yes,” he said.
Irrational, Trump Derangement Syndrom (TDS) is driving impeachment and driving the Dems Presidential indecision, and maybe at the root of the divided voting blocks in their Presidential primary, which could force a brokered convention.
It is no wonder Trump wants a long Senate trial, which is, of course, the right of the accused, especially in the U.S. Senate.
But for Bloomberg, TDS would be enough for Trump to win the election next November.