None of these facts are in serious dispute.
We found out about the phone call due to a whistle-blower who had heard about this phone call from several officials who were listening in as part of their jobs. Subsequently the White House released a reconstructed transcript from notes taken by those who were listening in. The document released by the White House did not in any way contradict the substance of the whistle-blower's complaint.
Trump, as well as some of his supporters allege that the complaint was wrong and that it did not agree with the document released by the White House. He continues to say this, even though both documents are publicly available and do not contradict each other. Read them yourself.
Rep. Adam Schiff, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, read what he claimed was a parody of the White House document, where he added words that Trump did not say. Despite Schiff making clear that he was not reading the document verbatim, Trump and his supporters claim that the entire impeachment inquiry is based on Schiff's version. It is not. Trump is also claiming that the "transcript" was released after Schiff's bit of bad judgement and "set the record straight". It was not. Schiff had the "transcript" in his hands and it was publicly available before that. No one, including Schiff, is claiming that Schiff's version is the correct version, or anything other than theatrical exaggeration.
Trump and his supporters continually call for the whistle-blower's identity, despite the fact that federal law protects his identity if he wants to stay anonymous.
At least one person who was actually listening in on the call has verified both the whistle-blower's complaint, adding that several things, including specific references to Burisma, were left out. Top State Department officials confirm that, other than the phone call, there was an effort by Rudy Giuliani, at Trump's request, to push for an investigation into the Bidens. Rudy Giuliani holds no government post, but is merely Trump's personal lawyer.
Trump and his supports can't seem to make up their minds about the quid pro quo aspect. One day it's "there was no quid pro quo", another day "there was a quid pro quo, but that's business as usual".
The main defense from Republicans seems to be about process, rather than determining whether the allegations are true (which seems beyond argument) and whether the actions are impeachable.
After the Mueller Report came out, Trump and his sycophantic supporters hung their hats on the conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that there was coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia, and the available evidence was insufficient for charges of conspiracy. Now we have an admission that Trump himself colluded with a foreign head of state to take action that had no clear objective other than tarring a political opponent.
There doesn't seem to be any other option other than impeachment.
No comments:
Post a Comment