The House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry amounts to an “orchestrated campaign” to undermine America’s democratic system by removing President Donald Trump, mainly based on “accusations and assumptions of unelected bureaucrats,” the GOP’s report on the quest to push the U.S. commander-in-chief out declared this week.
At the start of the impeachment probe investigation in September, however, the quid pro quo in which Trump allegedly pushed Zelensky during a July 25 call to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter in exchange for a meeting between the two leaders and foreign aid was at the heart of the probe.
Nevertheless, as repeatedly predicted by Breibart News, the Democrats were just looking for something, anything, to impeach Trump on. The House Democrats’ impeachment report confirmed that the investigation was a fishing expedition seeking to see what sticks.
Tuesday’s Democrat report, echoing recent media articles, confirmed the Democrats are moving beyond the July 25 call that triggered the whole investigation. Democrats had expressed an interest in expanding the impeachment inquiry into alleged bribery, extortion, and possibly other crimes unrelated to the Trump-Zelensky discussion in July. However, the New Democrat impeachment report does not cite bribery or extortion as crimes against Trump. According to Article II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, impeachment shall be for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
In their report, the House Democrats confirmed that the quid pro quo linked to the July 25 call, which they failed to prove because it is not illegal to ask for conditions for U.S. aid under the law, was a hook needed to expand articles of impeachment wherever they wanted, saying:
At the center of this investigation is the memorandum prepared following President Trump’s July 25, 2019, phone call with Ukraine’s President … Our investigation determined that this telephone call was neither the start nor the end of President Trump’s efforts to bend U.S. foreign policy for his personal gain.
The investigation revealed the nature and extent of the President’s misconduct, notwithstanding an unprecedented campaign of obstruction by the President and his Administration to prevent the Committees from obtaining documentary evidence and testimony. A dozen witnesses followed President Trump’s orders, defying voluntary requests and lawful subpoenas, and refusing to testify. … [And] refused to produce a single document in response to our subpoenas. …There remain unanswered questions, and our investigation must continue, even as we transmit our report to the Judiciary Committee.
The Democrats’ report appears to concede there is not enough evidence for impeachment based on quid pro quo on July 25 alone, now claiming the crime evolved.
Jamil Jaffer, an assistant professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, told Breitbart News the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) encourages quid pro quo or conditions such as combating corruption in exchange for aid.
Now, if Trump used the FAA to maliciously target a political rival, that could be troublesome, but lawmakers would have to prove that. Political candidates or their families are not shielded from investigation.
A December 2 press release announcing the release of the report authored by the staff of the Republicans on the Democrat-controlled House Committees on Intelligence, Oversight, and Foreign Affairs who conducted the impeachment inquiry declared:
Despite the abusive and fundamentally unfair process in the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, the evidence does not prove the Democrats’ allegations that President Trump abused his authority to pressure Ukraine to investigate his potential political rival, Vice President Joe Biden, for President Trump’s benefit in the 2020 presidential election.
In the report, the GOP congressmen add:
The evidence presented does not prove any of these Democrat allegations, and none of the Democrats’ witnesses testified to having evidence of bribery, extortion, or any high crime or misdemeanor.
The Democrats are alleging guilt on the basis of hearsay, presumptions, and speculation—all of which are reflected in the anonymous whistleblower complaint that sparked this inquiry.
Some Democrats are still intent on overturning the 2016 presidential elections, the Republicans stressed.
The Republicans argue in the report:
The Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is not the organic outgrowth of serious misconduct; it is an orchestrated campaign to upend our political system. The Democrats are trying to impeach a duly elected President based on the accusations and assumptions of unelected bureaucrats who disagreed with President Trump’s policy initiatives and processes.
They are trying to impeach President Trump because some unelected bureaucrats were discomforted by an elected President’s telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. They are trying to impeach President Trump because some unelected bureaucrats chafed at an elected President’s “outside the beltway” approach to diplomacy.
Combating corruption in Ukraine is part of U.S. policy.
At least two U.S. State Department officials, George Kent and to a lesser extent, Catherine Croft, expressed concerns about former VP Biden’s son, Hunter, working with Burisma Holdings, linked to corruption along with its owner from 2014 to this year.
Then-VP Biden was heading U.S. policy towards Ukraine.
Despite knowing of possible “conflict of interest concerns stemming from Hunter Biden’s work in Ukraine, the Obama administration allowed him to work there, lending credence to Trump’s concerns about misconduct linked to the Bidens.”
Yet, the Democrats in their report ignored all witnesses who highlighted concerns about Hunter’s work in Ukraine.
Released Monday, the GOP report notes:
There is also nothing wrong with asking serious questions about the presence of Vice President Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, on the board of directors of Burisma, a corrupt Ukrainian company, or about Ukraine’s attempts to influence the 2016 presidential election. Biden’s Burisma has an international reputation as a corrupt company. As far back as 2015, the Obama State Department had concerns about Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board. Ukrainian anti-corruptionn activists noted concerns as well.
Publicly available—and irrefutable—evidence shows how senior Ukrainian government officials sought to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election in opposition to President Trump’s candidacy, and that some in the Ukrainian embassy in Washington worked with a Democrat operative to achieve that goal.
While Democrats reflexively dismiss these truths as conspiracy theories, the facts are indisputable and bear heavily on the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry.
An allegedly partisan “whistleblower’s” complaint filed on August 12 accused Trump of engaging in a quid pro quo in which he abused his presidential power to urge Zelensky to investigate the Bidens in exchange for security aid and a White House meeting.
Democrats also accused Trump of trying to coerce Ukraine to investigate possible 2016 U.S. election interference in Ukraine on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
Former U.S. Envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker, in his opening remarks, acknowledged that it is “plausible” some Ukrainians may have interfered in the 2016 U.S. elections. Other witnesses denied interference, calling it Russian propaganda.
Zelensky, Trump, and a few impeachment inquiry witnesses have denied the quid pro quo claim. Other witnesses, however, have suggested that there could have been a quid pro quo based on hearsay.
House Democrat panels who have been pursuing the impeachment inquiry since late September — Committees on Oversight, Intelligence, and Foreign Affairs – sidelined the Judiciary panel thattraditionally carriers the fact-finding portion of the probe.
The Democrats appear to have already made up their minds that Trump committed an impeachable offence before the full House votes on the articles of impeachment that the Judiciary Committee has yet to craft.
In other words, House Democrats have already declared Trump guilty of impeachable offenses in the dark, much like most of the inquiry process, before the Judiciary panel decides what the impeachable offenses are.
Although it is unlikely the Senate will convict Trump, lawmakers in the House have set aside all other issues to deal with impeachment.