Tags: Donald Trump | Joe Biden | Trump Administration | Trump Impeachment | Ukraine | giuliani | zelinskiy

Where Are the High Crimes and Misdemeanors?

speaker of the us house nancy pelosi democrat of california
U.S. House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., leaves the House Chamber after announcing that the House votes 232-196 to pass resolution on impeachment procedure to move onto the next phase of the impeachment inquiry into President Trump, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., Thurs. Oct. 31, 2019.  (Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP)

By
Thursday, 31 October 2019 01:52 PM Current | Bio | Archive

The Constitution is quite clear: The president "shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Democrats are speeding toward the impeachment of President Donald J. Trump with this standard barely a pebble in their path. The Constitution does not permit impeachment because the House of Representatives finds the president loud, dislikes his policies, or simply regards him with uncontrollable, pathological, stammer-inducing hatred.

Nonetheless, Democrats despise President Trump and are determined to impeach him, no matter what.

Still, the question remains: How, exactly, is Trump even accused of "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors?"

Treason? No one has claimed that Trump provided aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime. At worst, he delayed aid to a friendly nation with which America is at peace.

That is not treason.

Bribery? At worst, Trump postponed some $391 million in assistance to Kiev, presumably in exchange for dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden. The aid was delivered, and no such dirt was received. None of this money ever got near Trump’s pocket or that of Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

So, where is the bribery?

"High crimes and misdemeanors?" While this criterion is more nebulous, it also seems far out of reach.

Democrats accuse Trump of extorting Zelenskiy to investigate for corruption any of the eyebrow-raising connections between Kiev and Joe and Hunter Biden, the former veep’s son. Democrats claim that such a probe was what Zelenskiy had to launch before receiving the aforementioned military aid.

This is the notorious quid pro quo.

But Zelenskiy has said repeatedly that he never felt extorted in his July 25 phone call with Trump. Zelenskiy told journalists on September 25, "nobody pushed me."

During extensive discussions with some 300 journalists in Kiev, Zelenskiy said on Oct. 10: "There was no pressure or blackmail from the U.S."

The available evidence, from the supposed victim of Trump’s vise, is: What vise?

Similarly, for Trump’s alleged quid pro quo to work, Team Zelenskiy needed to know that their military aid was being blocked, until they put the Bidens under magnifying glasses. Absent such awareness, Trump’s "threat" would have been as pointless as trying to rob a bank with a concealed handgun.

"I had no idea the military aid was held up," at the time of the call with Trump, Zelenskiy said on Oct. 10. Well after that July 25 conversation, the Ukrainians learned that the aid had been delayed, in part to see if Kiev would live up to its promises to fight corruption. Zelenskiy and Vice President Mike Pence discussed this in Warsaw on Sept. 1.

The assistance was released 10 days later.

"And after this meeting, the U.S. unlocked the aid and added $140 million," Zelenskiy said. "That’s why there was no blackmail."

Democrats and their bodyguards in the Old Guard media also seem deeply hurt that Trump fired former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.

How dare he? What a bully!

Yovanovitch, like every other U.S. ambassador, serves at the president’s pleasure. As the chief architect of foreign policy during his administration, Trump had every right to sack Yovanovitch, for slow-walking his initiatives, because he wanted a new American face in Kiev, or perhaps he didn’t like her shoes.

There’s no high crime or misdemeanor here.

Democrats are irked that Trump has deployed his personal attorney, former New York City mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, as his emissary, thus circumventing career diplomats.

As Eric Felten of RealClearInvestigations recalled,this is nothing new.

Democratic presidents have dispatched the Rev. Jesse Jackson and former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson on informal missions. Jimmy Carter used Coca-Cola chief J. Paul Austin as a back-channel envoy to Cuba. Even George Washington relied on Gouverneur Morris as his "private agent" in Europe.

Poor Democrats.

If the Constitution included a "We can’t stand the guy!" impeachment rationale, their divisive recklessness would be legit.

Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News Contributor, a contributing editor with National Review Online, and a senior fellow with the London Center for Policy Research.Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News contributor and a contributing editor with National Review Online. He has been a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University. Read more opinions from Deroy Murdock — Click Here Now.

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

   
1Like our page
2Share
Murdock
For Trump’s alleged quid pro quo to work, Team Zelenskiy needed to know that their military aid was blocked, until they put the Bidens under magnifying glasses. Absent such awareness, Trump’s "threat" would have been pointless.
giuliani, zelinskiy, misdemeanors
730
2019-52-31
Thursday, 31 October 2019 01:52 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved