Here We Go – Impeachment 2.0

The Democrats are going to meet today to decide on impeaching President Trump, with a statement by House Speaker Pelosi to follow.

Impeachment. Not over the Russian collusion/obstruction fiasco but, this time, over a “whistleblower” complaint that is based upon hearsay. A complaint that nobody in Congress has even seen. A complaint that has already been determined by Department of Justice lawyers to not fall under the law concerning intelligence community whistleblowers, simply because the person who made the complaint is not complaining about anyone within the intelligence community and the person the complaint allegedly concerns is not under the purview of the intelligence community.

If, as the Democrats seem to believe without evidence, the complaint involves President Trump, it would be good to note that the intelligence community exists to provide information to the president. The intelligence community does not exist to oversee the president, nor does the Congress. The intelligence community answers to the president, not the other way around. Nor do our spies exist to spy on our president!

It is beyond dangerous for people who wield the awesome power of our intelligence agencies to turn that power on a duly elected president.

Consider that someone has spied upon President Trump in order to report back to partisans so they can further an illicit coup against him, and by extension, upon the People of the United States. There is the real high crime.

This is what is going on, with the help of the complicit media. The same media that scoffs at President Trump and constantly claim that what President Trump says is said “without evidence.”

Where’s their evidence for this alleged high crime and misdemeanor? Why did they even report a story about which there is no evidence? No named accuser?

Just as with Justice Kavanaugh, Democrat members of the House (and Senate, and Republican anti-Trumpers, too) want to move directly to punishment before there’s even a credible allegation of wrongdoing.

What exactly is the charge?

No due process. No evidence. No sworn-under-oath-with-penalty-of-perjury witness accounts.

Not even an identified accuser.

In our system of justice, the accused is allowed to confront the witnesses against him. Who exactly are the witnesses, so that we may vet their credibility?

The complaint is based upon gossip allegedly heard by an anonymous person allegedly working in the intelligence community (note: this includes contractors, such as Fusion GPS), second-hand from another anonymous person allegedly with knowledge of what was allegedly said.

Sounds like grounds for impeachment to me.

Upon this shaky foundation, the Democrats presume to build an impeachment case against the duly elected President of the United States, despite that a majority of the people oppose impeachment and despite that President Trump’s poll numbers are increasing even as this new fake news narrative plays out.

Based upon this flimsy foundation, everyone of them who supports the impeachment of the President, with no evidence, should themselves be removed from office. They’re a disgrace to our country and to our system of government.

They have lost their minds.

Now comes word that the President intends to release the transcript of his conversation with the head of Ukraine’s government, all because the conversation is allegedly the source of the Democrats’ (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) concern.

This could be a huge mistake, because it undermines the office of the presidency. The contents of a president’s conversations with foreign leaders is privileged information. The Constitution does not give Congress the power or the authority to micromanage a president’s handling of foreign policy.

They’re not the president’s overseers. They’re not his nannies. They’re not his teachers. They’re not his bosses. They’re not his parents. They don’t get to review and approve or disapprove how he does his job.

Members of Congress have their own jobs to do, which they’re not currently doing, in their never-ending quest to oust a duly elected president.

Does President Trump have the constitutional authority to oversee and micromanage everything the Congress does or does not do? Can President Trump demand to see, for example, transcripts of every conversation Adam Schiff has in the course of allegedly doing his job?

I’m not alone in saying that I’m sick and tired of this dangerous game the Democrats are playing, all because they want to cover up for corruption in the Obama administration and because they didn’t win the 2016 election.

A president has to be able to have confidential conversations with foreign leaders, in order to ensure national security and to see that the laws and the Constitution of the United States are faithfully followed.

What foreign leader will henceforth want to speak openly and honestly with President Trump (or any subsequent president) knowing that all it takes is an unfounded hearsay allegation by anonymous partisans and a complicit media pile-on to have their confidences exposed to the world press?

But then again, maybe that’s the goal. The Democrats have never accepted President Trump as their president, so they’re doing everything in their power to undermine his presidency by preventing him from being able to do his job. One of the President’s main jobs is to oversee foreign relations.

If President Trump releases this conversation, then they will want more. They will want his next conversation, and the next, and the next. They will want all his past conversations.

If the President releases this conversation, then at the same time he should release every transcript of every conversation that President Obama had with any foreign leader.

It’s only fair. What’s good for Republican presidents should be good for Democrat presidents.

This is a precedent that should apply to all presidents.

Let the revelations begin.

#####