Blind Loyalty to Trump: Congressional Malfeasance; with Revenge to Follow
Remember when the issue of possible extortion of Ukraine by President Trump — seeking a personal, political favor — first came to light?
It was when a government whistleblower reported the disturbing essence of an otherwise perfunctory, congratulatory phone call from Trump to Volodymyr Zelensky, the recently-elected, reformist President of Ukraine, that occurred on July 25, 2019. A summary of which was subsequently released to the American public in September, but only after growing political and media pressure was brought to bear on the White House, and Congress began to demand answers about reasons for a hold having been placed on military aid to that country; an ally desperately fighting against unrelenting Russian aggression.
After that September 25 release of the White House summary — not a verbatim “transcript” — of the phone call was made public, a firestorm of media reporting accompanied calls for a congressional inquiry by Democrats; justifiably concerned that a sitting American president had committed a serious, potentially ‘impeachable offense’ by extorting a foreign ally — Ukraine — for political dirt on his likely chief 2020 re-election opponent, Joe Biden; holding up $391-million in prior-approved military aid as ransom.
“(b) Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.
(g) Solicitation, acceptance, or receipt of contributions and donations from foreign nationals. No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.” — 11 CFR § 110.20
Since then, Republican supporters of Trump in Congress have been all over the place, with ever-changing proffered defenses of the President that were then struck down, as evidence — and eventually sworn testimony — disproved or discredited each one in turn, corroborating all of the essential claims made by the whistleblower
Those defenses ran the gamut of ever-changing, incredible rationales that defied logic, common sense, and the evidence on record:
Just as the earlier defenses, in the Russian interference probe did — it began with: ‘It simply didn’t happen.’ Then — as the evidence became more damning, and the White House obstructed Congress by rejecting subpoenas for relevant documents and ordered those involved, or having direct knowledge not to testify; ‘It wasn’t a demand, or a quid pro quo.’
There were two other defenses that also bounced logic on its head. One — based on the now disproven claim that Ukraine was totally unaware of the months-long hold Trump ordered placed on their military aid — could be called; the ‘Frat Boy Rapist Defense’ wherein; if the rape victim was drunk or passed out cold,…then no crime occurred (or can be proven). And, the companion excuse that; ‘Ukraine eventually got the aid previously promised, so what’s the big deal?’ Or,…‘When the cops showed up, the bankrobber dropped the bag of cash and ran away,…so no harm, no foul.’ Hence; no provable crime, and no impeachable offense.
And finally; that it was ‘all politically motivated by an imbedded “deep state” furthering a conspiracy or “coup” — designed to remove a sitting president they never liked.’ Of course Trump, who placed that July 25th phone call the day after the congressional hearings on the Mueller Russian Interference probe ended anticlimactically, had (again) falsely claimed “witch hunt!” from the very beginning.
But now, we have come to a historical ‘fork-in-the-road.’ One path which allows us to continue as a democratic republic, committed to the ‘rule of law.’ One that says; no one is above the law. Or, one where this president (or any future president) may feel free to solicit (read: extort, or bribe) any foreign nation — friend or foe — to investigate anyone deemed a domestic political threat to their power.
Today, in Doha, Qatar, Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said as much; claiming it was not improper for President Trump to ask Ukraine to investigate the Bidens (former VP, Joe Biden and his son, Hunter). Furthering the false narrative that the most corrupt president in U.S. history was only concerned about Ukrainian “corruption” from the get go,…despite never having brought it up before in approving aid to that country.
Regardless of the Senate whitewash of Trump’s dirty dealings — about to take place in a fixed Senate Impeachment Trial — we should all be worried about the retribution sure to follow, after his pre-ordained acquittal.
No one — least of all, Republicans — should not expect a vengeful Trump to exact certain illegal, or career-damaging retribution against his critics and political adversaries (real or imagined); using the Justice Department, the IRS, or other federal government agencies as cudgels. Perhaps after firing all of those agencies’ inspectors general and replacing them with partisan political hacks (like his Roy Cohn-esque Attorney General, William Barr) — as a block against anyone else sounding the alarm in the fuure — to alert the American People of illegal, or even treasonous conduct of a chief executive officer entrusted to uphold the law and defend the Constitution.