March 9, 2019
Much to the dismay of the Democrat party it is anticipated that the probe into Trump and Russian collusion headed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller is nearing the end; and evidence indicates that the findings will not implicate Trump or his campaign in nefarious dealings with Russian nationals to sway the election in his favor.
Mueller has indicted several people who were associated with Trump’s campaign, however, not one of the charges has anything to do with working with Russia to affect the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Even George Papadopoulos, the low level aid who learned from a Maltese professor that the Russians had “dirt” on Hilary Clinton, which was the supposed impetus for the initial FBI probe into collusion, was only charged with a process crime- lying to the FBI about the exact date of this meeting. If collusion had occurred it would be reflected in the indictments heretofore.
With this realization looming, proving that their Never-Trump animus was never about a fear Trump colluded with Russians, and always about finding a way to undo the outcome of the election, Democrats have now moved onto searching for new avenues to nullify the vote of the people and impeach Trump.
In a disturbing, but not surprising move, Jerry Nadler (D-NY) the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has recently opened a fishing expedition into anything and everything related to Trump, his entities, his associates, and his family. Last Monday Nadler served document requests to 81 agencies, entities, and individuals associated with Trump as part of the Democrat probe into “ alleged obstruction of justice, public corruption, and other abuses of power by President Trump. “
Even David Axelrod, former advisor to President Obama, tweeted that this document request by the Democrat-led Judiciary committee lends credence to the Republican claims that there is a witch-hunt against the president.
Maybe I’m missing something, but the hazard of an omnibus document demand by House judiciary versus discreet, serial ones is that, however legitimate the areas of inquiry, the wide-ranging nature of it is too easily plays into the “witch-hunt” meme.
— David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) March 4, 2019
On ABC’s Sunday morning “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos, Nadler actually admitted that the Democrat objective was to persuade the American people that impeachment “ought to happen”, and that Democrats are not “just trying to steal the last election…” That’s exactly what they are doing, and at the very least they are attempting to hamstring the president and damage him to the point of making his re-election impossible.
Trump’s Alleged Offenses
Obstruction of Justice
Nadler claims that one of Trump’s offenses is that he obstructed justice. His proof- Trump referred to Mueller’s probe as a witch-hunt 1,100 times. So, in the Democrat rule book claiming that you’re being treated unfairly is an obstruction of justice. Never mind that Trump has never fired Mueller, or the Deputy Attorney General, whom Mueller reports to, Rod Rosenstein, or anyone connected to the Special Counsel probe, which has been ongoing unabated for close to two years.
As further proof of Trump’s obstruction offense Nadler cited that Trump “tried to protect Flynn from being investigated by the FBI”. According to the then director of the FBI James Comey’s congressional testimony, when Trump’s then national security advisor, Michael Flynn was under investigation, Trump stated to Comey, “I hope that you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.” Comey added that he believed that Trump wanted him to drop the investigation against Flynn, who had resigned the day before, but was not referencing the wider Russia probe.
Background- Flynn was investigated by the FBI for speaking with the then Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak. First- this investigation should never have taken place. The only reason that the communication between Flynn and Kislyak came to the attention of the FBI is because Kislyak was being monitored by U.S. intelligence. As an American citizen, not under surveillance, Flynn’s identity ought to have been kept hidden. However, rogue Obama official(s) who have never been held to account or even identified, illegally unmasked Flynn’s name. Second- It is widely agreed upon that as the incoming NSA Flynn did not commit an offense by communicating with Kislyak.
Further, Trump did not demand that Comey cease his investigation of Flynn, it was a human expression of hope and empathy. It is clear that Comey did not feel that Trump ordered him to end the investigation, as it proceeded and Flynn was ultimately prosecuted. Where’s the obstruction?
In spite of Trump having the constitutional authority to fire the Director of the FBI for any reason, Democrats are also attempting to make the claim that Trump obstructed justice when he fired the then Director of the FBI James Comey. As proof that Trump made this move to derail the Russia probe they cite the interview that Trump gave with NBC News’ Lester Holt . However, they often only reference the first half of Trumps statement, in which he mentions the Russia investigation, and exclude the latter half, in which he states that firing Comey may actually lengthen the probe.
Trump said to Holt, “He made a recommendation, but regardless of recommendation, I was going to fire Comey, knowing there was no good time to do it. And in fact when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story. It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.”
“As far as I’m concerned, I want that thing to be absolutely done properly,” Trump said to Holt. “When I did this now, I said I probably maybe will confuse people. Maybe I’ll expand that — you know, I’ll lengthen the time because it should be over with. It should — in my opinion, should’ve been over with a long time ago because it — all it is an excuse. But I said to myself, I might even lengthen out the investigation. But I have to do the right thing for the American people. He’s the wrong man for that position.”
Campaign Finance Violation
According to Nadler campaign finance violation is the “major” crime committed by Trump. There are four major rebuttals to this claim. 1. Campaign finance violations often result in only a fine. 2. The John Edwards’ case has set the precedent regarding campaign finance violations. Edwards was charged, yet not convicted of breaking campaign finance laws, in spite of over $1 million in payments paid to his mistress during his campaign for president 3. If the Trump campaign had reported the payment paid to the porn actress Stormy Daniels, based on the timing of the payment (just weeks before the election) it would have been reported after the election. 4. Trump is and was a married man at the time. A valid case could be made that the payment was made, not to affect the election, but to protect his marriage.
Emoluments Clause
Nadler, along with many other Trump haters frequently cite that Trump is violating the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, which forbids the president from accepting payments from foreign and domestic governments. To comply with this prohibition, shortly before his inauguration Trump resigned from all of his roles in all Trump entities, and turned over the reins of the Trump Organization to his two oldest sons, Don, Jr. and Eric, and a company executive, Allen Weisselberg, through a trust.
The trust agreement stipulated that no new foreign deals would be made during Trump’s presidency, and that Trump would have no role in deciding whether the Trump Organization engages in a new deal. In spite of Trump’s actions to separate himself from his business, his detractors often tout that through his numerous entities he has profited from foreign government officials. For ex. when leaders from other nations stay at one of his hotels.
The purpose of the Emoluments Clause is to prevent bribery, not to prevent fair value exchanges, such as paying for a hotel room. Did you know that even though not constitutionally required Trump decided that all profits from payments by foreign governments made to his hotels would be donated to the United States Treasury?
If Trump is profiting from being president, as implied when he’s accused of violating the Emoluments Clause, then why, according to Forbes, is his net worth now $ 3.1 billion, when in 2015 it was $4.5 billion?
Democrats’ Objective- Destroy Trump
Sadly Nadler and his colleagues such as the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff don’t care about the truth, or respecting our constitutional republic, which legitimately gave us President Trump. They are not investigating crimes, they are investigating a man, Donald Trump, in search of a crime, with the objective of impeachment.
The Mueller problem will assuredly be critical of Trump to help justify its existence, and the $40 million dollars of taxpayer money spent, but it will not be the silver bullet needed to impeach, nor are any of the above mentioned “offenses” . Unfortunately, Nadler and company are now desperate, necessitating the casting of a wide net in the hopes of finding anything to damage Trump to destroy his presidency. The actual losers in this Democrat quest are the rule of law, ethics, American values, and the American citizenry.
