Impeachment Madness: Details Matter, One Side Transparent, the Other Rushing to Judgment

As Nancy Pelosi pushes House Democrats toward impeachment, we thought we would gather some reactions and responses from all sides of the spectrum that you may have missed.  But first off, we have to commend the President who has called for the release of the transcripts of his conversation with Ukraine President Zelensky and Senate Majority Leader McConnell and Senate Republicans who “hotlined” and voted unanimously to pass a resolution to provide the whistleblower complaint to Congress. 


As Brit Hume said tonight, “I can’t imagine the President putting out the transcript if it is incriminating.”  The Washington Times' Tim Constantine writes in Ukraine is nothing more than Russia 2.0:

An unnamed former employee of a US intelligence agency lodged a complaint upon leaving said agency claiming he or she heard that President Trump had an inappropriate conversation with a foreign leader, possibly promising something in exchange for political assistance with dirt on Democrat frontrunner Joe Biden. Sound familiar? Trump allegedly asks foreign nation to help him win election.

There are some real problems with the story right out of the gate. We don’t know who the former employee is. We don’t know why he or she left the intelligence job. We don’t know how he or she heard of the alleged conversation President Trump supposedly had. We do know that this employee didn’t hear the conversation personally. CNN, no fan of Trump, acknowledged as much last Friday when Stephen Collins reported the so-called whistleblower “didn’t have direct knowledge of the communications.” Even better, the information learned by the former employee was not even obtained during the course of their work. Where did this mystery person hear of it? Gossip around the coffee machine? Over drinks after work? We don’t know. . . .

Politicians are slow learners apparently because the new Ukraine hysteria is more of the same. An anonymous person with second hand alleged knowledge that has not been proven nor corroborated by anyone has again flipped the madness switch. Unproven allegations have the President’s critics calling not only for his removal from office, but has at least one calling for his death.

So someone who once worked for the government heard something from somebody and that’s now trumpeted as the new grounds for impeachment of a President?

As Byron York adds the phone call may help prove President Trump did nothing illegal but it won’t make a difference.

"The officials think release of the transcript would show definitively that Trump did nothing illegal. The president's adversaries, determined to use the issue to demand his impeachment, might still argue that he acted inappropriately, but release of the president's precise words, the officials believe, would make it more difficult for critics to claim that Trump did something wrong."

That gets to a fundamental fact of political investigations: They often uncover an inconclusive set of facts. Partisans can argue those facts one way or the other. There is no slam dunk, no smoking gun.

Most recently, Democrats who had accused Trump of conspiring or coordinating with Russia to fix the 2016 election were deeply disappointed by the release of the Mueller report. After all the media talk and all the accusations and after two years of investigating with full law enforcement powers, special counsel Robert Mueller could not establish that a conspiracy or coordination even took place.

So now, with many of the president's adversaries in a high state of agitation about the Ukraine story, the lesson of Trump-Russia is: Move fast, don't withhold judgment. And don't want for the results a long, ponderous investigation. It might not produce the ending Democrats want.

Also as House Rep. Doug Collins points out today’s news is not really news.  It is more of the same by Democrats as it is .


On the other hand, the evidence is arguably stronger that Joe Biden had a quid pro quo while Vice President. RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel called on Vice President Biden to do similarly as Biden walked away from questions on it today. 


Democrat Presidential Candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is against impeachment:

Fired FBI Director also believes the voters should decide President Trump’s fate.

The bottomline is this may backfire on Democrats and help Republicans.

Leader McConnell summed it up:

Washington Democrats have been searching for ways to reverse their 2016 election defeat since before President Trump was even inaugurated.

The result has been a two-and-a-half-year impeachment parade in search of a rationale. When investigations by Special Counsel Mueller and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence deflated their breathless accusations of a campaign conspiracy with Russia, Democrats have simply shifted to new arguments for their predetermined conclusion.

Speaker Pelosi’s much-publicized efforts to restrain her far-left conference have finally crumbled. House Democrats cannot help themselves. Instead of working together across party lines on legislation to help American families and strengthen our nation, they will descend even deeper into their obsession with relitigating 2016.