“When a man begins to feel that he is the only one who can lead in this republic, he is guilty of treason to the spirit of our institutions.” – Calvin Coolidge

By Glen Reaux

On a day when the president and Republicans were granted what they wanted, both of them were no-shows.  President Trump and his Republican minions have been complaining about the impeachment process and demanding the right to present his case and have an attorney present during the impeachment hearings.  On yesterday, they were given that right.  Trump who was in Europe embarrassing the nation before all of NATO and chose not to have an attorney appear before the Judiciary Committee in his stead.  Republican members of the committee in attendance could not defend the president’s crimes.  Instead they chose to claim without any proof ‘The President did nothing wrong” and continue to complain about the process.  The Republicans process complaint centered on what they called the clock and the calendar.  In other words the Democrats are now moving too fast with the process.  The Democrats answered with; the President is attempting to compromise the 2020 elections by soliciting help from foreign powers to interfere in the 2020.  The elections are not safe and we must impeach to ensure the security of the 2020 elections.  According to three witnesses testifying to the committee on September 4^th, “The evidence and witness testimony is overwhelming” forcing Democrats to Draft Articles of Impeachment: Read the Report.”

The Judiciary hearing dealt with evidence provided in the Intelligence Committee Report that was simultaneously released to both Congress and the public on the 4^th. The witnessed that testified were all legal scholars that specialized in constitutional law.  The purpose of the testimony was to explain what impeachment is, if and how the president violated the constitution and if those violations are impeachable offenses.  Three of the witnesses, Professor Noah Feldman of Harvard Law, Professor Pamela S. Karlan of Stanford Law School, Professor Michael Gerhardt of South Caroline School of Law and Jonathan Turley of The George Washington Law School.  Other than Jonathan Turley, all of the Professors concluded that Trump committed impeachable offenses and posed as a threat to the nation’s national security.  Professor Turley did not dispute the findings of the other professor but took the position that the Congress was not spending enough time investigating the president’s alleged violations of the constitution.

Throughout the entire proceeding, Republican lawmakers contended that there was not enough evidence to impeach the president.  The witnesses disputed their claims and referenced the founding fathers and the federalist papers as proof for their conclusions.  The professors had been tasked with reading the Intelligence Committee Report, digesting the evidence and applying the constitution in efforts to determine whether or not the President committed high crimes and misdemeanors and bribery.

The report is 300 pages long.  But, unlike the Mueller Report that was two volumes for a total of 448 pages and hard to read, the committee took great care to make their 300 page report easy to read and research.  Section one of the report deals with the President’s Misconduct and Section tow deals with the President’s Obstruction of the House of Representatives Impeachment Inquiry.  This sounds like a lot to read and digest but to get the gist of the entire document one only needs to read the 22 page summary or the 3 page key findings of fact.  The key findings of facts are as follows.

Based on witness testimony and evidence collected during the impeachment inquiry, the Intelligence Committee has found that:

1. Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States—acting personally and through his agents within and outside of the U.S. government—solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The President engaged in this course of conduct for the benefit of his reelection, to harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and to influence our nation’s upcoming presidential election to his advantage. In so doing, the President placed his personal political interests above the national interests of the United States, sought to undermine the integrity of the U.S. presidential election process, and endangered U.S. national security.
2. In furtherance of this scheme, President Trump—directly and acting through his agents within and outside the U.S. government—sought to pressure and induce Ukraine’s newly-elected president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to publicly announce unfounded investigations that would benefit President Trump’s personal political interests and reelection effort. To advance his personal political objectives, President Trump encouraged the President of Ukraine to work with his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani.
3. As part of this scheme, President Trump, acting in his official capacity and using his position of public trust, personally and directly requested from the President of Ukraine that the government of Ukraine publicly announce investigations into (1) the President’s political opponent, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and his son, Hunter Biden, and (2) a baseless theory promoted by Russia alleging that Ukraine—rather than Russia—interfered in the 2016 U.S. election. These investigations were intended to harm a potential political opponent of President Trump and benefit the President’s domestic political standing.
4. President Trump ordered the suspension of $391 million in vital military assistance urgently needed by Ukraine, a strategic partner, to resist Russian aggression. Because the aid was appropriated by Congress, on a bipartisan basis, and signed into law by the President, its expenditure was required by law. Acting directly and through his subordinates within the U.S. government, the President withheld from Ukraine this military assistance without any legitimate foreign policy, national security, or anti-corruption justification. The President did so despite the longstanding bipartisan support of Congress, uniform support across federal departments and agencies for the provision to Ukraine of the military assistance, and his obligations under the Impoundment Control Act.
5. President Trump used the power of the Office of the President and exercised his authority over the Executive Branch, including his control of the instruments of the federal government, to apply increasing pressure on the President of Ukraine and the Ukrainian government to announce the politically-motivated investigations desired by President Trump. Specifically, to advance and promote his scheme, the President withheld official acts of value to Ukraine and conditioned their fulfillment on actions by Ukraine that would benefit his personal political interests:
   • President Trump—acting through agents within and outside the U.S. government—conditioned a head of state meeting at the White House, which the President of Ukraine desperately sought to demonstrate continued United States support for Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression, on Ukraine publicly announcing the investigations that President Trump believed would aid his reelection campaign.
   • To increase leverage over the President of Ukraine, President Trump, acting through his agents and subordinates, conditioned release of the vital military assistance he had suspended to Ukraine on the President of Ukraine’s public announcement of the investigations that President Trump sought.
   • President Trump’s closest subordinates and advisors within the Executive Branch, including Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Secretary of Energy J. Richard Perry, and other senior White House and Executive Branch officials had knowledge of, in some cases facilitated and furthered the President’s scheme, and withheld information about the scheme from the Congress and the American public.
6.  In directing and orchestrating this scheme to advance his personal political interests, President Trump did not implement, promote, or advance U.S. anti-corruption policies. In fact, the President sought to pressure and induce the government of Ukraine to announce politically-motivated investigations lacking legitimate predication that the U.S. government otherwise discourages and opposes as a matter of policy in that country and around the world. In so doing, the President undermined U.S. policy supporting anti-corruption reform and the rule of law in Ukraine, and undermined U.S. national security.
7. By withholding vital military assistance and diplomatic support from a strategic foreign partner government engaged in an ongoing military conflict illegally instigated by Russia, President Trump compromised national security to advance his personal political interests.
8. Faced with the revelation of his actions, President Trump publicly and repeatedly persisted in urging foreign governments, including Ukraine and China, to investigate his political opponent. This continued solicitation of foreign interference in a U.S. election presents a clear and present danger that the President will continue to use the power of his office for his personal political gain.
9. Faced with the revelation of his actions, President Trump publicly and repeatedly persisted in urging foreign governments, including Ukraine and China, to investigate his political opponent. This continued solicitation of foreign interference in a U.S. election presents a clear and present danger that the President will continue to use the power of his office for his personal political gain.
10. Using the power of the Office of the President, and exercising his authority over the Executive Branch, President Trump ordered and implemented a campaign to conceal his conduct from the public and frustrate and obstruct the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry by:
    • refusing to produce to the impeachment inquiry’s investigating Committees information and records in the possession of the White House, in defiance of a lawful subpoena;
    • directing Executive Branch agencies to defy lawful subpoenas and withhold the production of all documents and records from the investigating Committees;
    • directing current and former Executive Branch officials not to cooperate with the Committees, including in defiance of lawful subpoenas for testimony; and
    • intimidating, threatening, and tampering with prospective and actual witnesses in the impeachment inquiry in an effort to prevent, delay, or influence the testimony of those witnesses.

In so doing, and despite the fact that the Constitution vests in the House of Representatives the “sole Power of Impeachment,” the President sought to arrogate to himself the right to determine the propriety, scope, and nature of an impeachment inquiry into his own misconduct, and the right to deny any and all information to the Congress in the conduct of its constitutional responsibilities.

To implement this grand scheme of extortion and bribery, the president had to take other action over the period of nearly a year that would make this scheme possible.  These actions included:

1. The president’s removal of anti-corruption champion Ambassador Maria Yovanovitch
2. The president’s use of a hand-picked team consisting of Rudy Giuliani, Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to implement the scheme. This team worked outside of the State Department by establishing an irregular channel of diplomacy that worked outside of the State Department to benefit the president’s personal political interest of investigating the Bidens and Burisma.  This team’s scheme was contrary to the interest and national security of the United States.
3. The president froze $392 million dollars of congressionally approved and mandated military assistance to Ukraine as leverage to force the Ukrainian president to announce and investigation into the Bidens.
4. The president conditioned a White House visit by the president of Ukraine to an agreement to investigate the Bidens
5. The president’s team ratcheted up pressure on Ukraine to comply with the president’s demands

During the course of the impeachment inquiry and the testimony by the constitutional scholars, Republican lawmakers could not defend the president’s actions.  Instead they claimed that the president’s actions which were clearly crimes under the constitution and federal statutes claimed that they were not impeachable offenses.  They also claimed that Democratic lawmakers were more concerned about impeaching the president before the end of the year rather than on constitutional grounds.  Constitutional scholar, Jonathan Turley stated that Congress should slow the process and use the courts to get evidence that he believed would be appropriate for impeachment.

When Democratic lawmakers explained that the president had blocked nearly all witness from complying with subpoenas and testifying before Congress leaving them only with the evidence in the Intelligence Committee Report, he could not offer a solution.  With the president obstructing the investigation, fighting every subpoena in court could take another year or more by which time the president based upon his plans and efforts, would compromise the 2020 election insuring his re-election and denying American citizens their rights to a free and fair election.  These circumstances forced Speaker of the House Pelosi to continue with the impeachment proceedings which may end with the drafting of Articles of Impeachment.

The Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report is provided below in its entirety.

On Thursday morning, December 5, 2019, Speaker Pelosi announced that articles of impeachment will be most likely be drafted and voted upon by the House Judiciary Committee before being forwarded to the House body for a final vote.

https://www.gofundme.com/xplicit-news

Copyright © 2019, Glen Reaux, all rights reserved