I am so disgusted with this whole impeachment thing. I've come to expect certain things from the Democrats, but there is something really bothering me about the Republicans right now too and that includes President Trump.
What bothers me is that nobody seems to be asking the most pertinent question. Not even conservative talk radio really delves into this very much. Yes, that scares me and makes me question if I'm thinking straight on this matter, but it seems too friggin' simple to me.
That question is: Is there any national interest in having Ukraine investigate Burisma and Crowdstrike?
Why is that question important? Because every time we give foreign aid to another country, there needs to be something in it for this country. That is not in dispute. What is in dispute, is the idea that President Trump asked for something that only benefits him. The Democrats want us to believe that there is no other motivation for asking for those investigations other than to benefit Trump at the ballot box in 2020.
Is that true? I don't know. Nobody is asking the question. Trump specifically mentioned Burisma and Crowdstrike in his phone call to the Ukrainian president. Why wouldn't the Republicans insist on this being examined? Why wouldn't Trump make this a central part of his defense? It seems glaringly obvious to me, but I only hear it mentioned in ancillary discussions of impeachment.
A quick Google search shows that Burisma's founder was under investigation for massive embezzlement of government funds and money laundering. This dates to the time before they hired Hunter Biden but the investigation happened during his tenure on their board and Joe Biden also forced Ukraine to fire the prosecutor who was looking into the matter. Money laundering and embezzlement of government funds is something our government should be concerned about when we're about to give them large sums of our tax dollars. Related to that, I think it is important to know why Joe Biden held up $1 billion in aid until that prosecutor was fired. What was that guy accused of? What did Joe Biden know about him to want him fired so badly?
Crowdstrike... the DNC and its media acolytes keep claiming this is a "debunked" conspiracy theory. I'm not sure they understand the meaning of the word "debunked." What they have done is to present their version of what they claim is being said about Crowdstrike and then debunking that story. It is a classic strawman fallacy. Nobody has explained why the DNC would not turn its hacked server over to the FBI but instead sent it to Crowstrike The FBI has never examined the server to see who actually hacked it.
Debunked? Has this Politico article been debunked? https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446 For those unfamiliar, Politico is a hard left publication that is no friend of the President. If this article is even only partially true, Trump has good reason to be very leery of Ukraine and how they approach the American election system. They clearly manipulated information to benefit Clinton in 2016 and that lead to the Mueller investigation.
I say, let's have an honest impeachment inquiry. Let's see if President Trump's actions only benefit himself or if there is a greater national interest involved. Did any members of the Ukrainian oligarchy also get involved with the 2016 election? Are there things happening in Ukraine now that are carried over from previous governments that will affect our relationship and how our tax money is spent? Is it a country that we can trust with millions of dollars?
On a related but separate note, I am still baffled that people don't get what "draining the swamp" meant. The swamp dwellers think they run foreign policy. They don't... or shouldn't. They are unelected and their only function is to implement the foreign policy of the chief executive. The "inter-agency consensus" is irrelevant. If the President has to resort to "back channels" to get his policy implemented, then that is just more evidence of a deep state coup.
Everything a President does should benefit his reelection efforts. The better the country does, the better an incumbent does. The question is whether his efforts were for purely personal gain or if there were any national interests as well. Answer that question and impeachment becomes crystal clear. Unfortunately, nobody is asking that question.
