By Mike Huckabee
October 4, 2019
|
|
News about Trump and the attempts to undermine him is blasting like water from a fire hose. But we won’t let you drown; here are the highlights for today:
First, for those of you who (like me) have always suspected Rod Rosenstein was doing much more behind the scenes to facilitate the Mueller investigation, there’s new evidence that our suspicions were on target. Judicial Watch has obtained Justice Department documents that include an email from Rosenstein to Robert Mueller advising him that “the boss and his staff do not know about our communications.” On May 16, 2017, the day before Mueller’s appointment, he emailed former deputy Attorney General Mark Filip to say, “I am with Mueller. He shares my views. Duty calls. Sometimes the moment chooses us.” He also kept in touch with a number of strongly anti-Trump media contacts. There’s much more...this press release from Judicial Watch is a must-read:
Next, Trump’s former special envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, was supposed to be the Democrats’ star witness in the “impeachment inquiry” –- I use quotation marks because, without a floor vote, it isn’t official –- of President Trump, shedding all kinds of light on the alleged efforts of Trump and Rudy Giuliani to go after Joe and Hunter Biden.
The hearing on Thursday was interminable –- nine-and-a-half hours –- apparently because Democrats just weren’t getting what they needed from their witness. This was a closed-door session, but some who were present are saying that Volker’s testimony devastated the Democrats’ conspiracy theories concerning Ukraine. Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan said Thursday evening to Sean Hannity, “...I hope every American gets to read what took place in that room today, ‘cause when they do, they’ll see there’s no quid pro quo. They will see exactly...[what] was going on between these two countries, and they’ll see what a good ambassador, what a good diplomat Kurt Volker was...”
Unfortunately, the person who gets to decide about releasing the transcript is the chairman of the committee, who is...(heavy sigh) Adam Schiff. According to Jordan, Schiff had stringent rules for questioning Volker, such as limits on members’ ability to ask questions and even the staff they could have involved, and also a refusal to let State Department lawyers be present.
Even so, I think we’ll have more of the facts soon. (Pay no attention to anonymous leaks to the fake news.) President Trump wants to be as transparent as possible, so who is guilty of “obstruction” here? Right now, it looks like Schiff to me. In the meantime, here’s Catherine Herridge’s report:
In addition, the State Department IG has presented evidence of “collusion” between Ukraine and the Democratic National Committee. And Rudy Giuliani has also assembled a stunning timeline for the events linking Hunter Biden and Burisma Holdings, which Sean Hannity outlined Thursday night. Rudy’s got it all documented. A couple of items stand out to me:
May 2015 –- Hunter Biden (by now on the board of Burisma and getting $50,000 a month, though he has no qualifications) meets for breakfast with Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken regarding concerns about serious corruption within Burisma. By then Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin had opened a criminal investigation of Burisma, and Hunter had been identified as a person of interest.
October 2015 --- Hillary Clinton allegedly tells then-VP Joe Biden she won’t go after Hunter if Joe runs for President, but SHE CAN’T CONTROL WHAT HER STAFF WILL DO.
After that, we get into Joe Biden’s pressuring of then-President Poroshenko to dismiss Shokin and the “shakedown” we know took place concerning a $1 billion loan guarantee. But the alleged conversation with Hillary is particularly interesting, as it has always seemed to me that the main reason Biden chose not to run in 2016 wasn’t grief over his son Beau’s death –- as raw as that surely was –- but actually because he didn’t dare run against the Clinton Machine. (Hey, I know what that’s like, and you don’t do it unless you’re really up to it.) This business with Hunter would surely be why he felt vulnerable.
Of course, he would have been ready to step in if Hillary had been indicted in July of 2016, but that was when then-FBI Director James Comey stood up and with a straight face said that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a case against her. Hillary got to stay in, and that kept Joe out.
Moving on, to “impeachment”: Since there was no floor vote, California Rep. Kevin McCarthy wrote a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi to ask about the so-called impeachment inquiry. “Do you intend to grant co-equal subpoena power to both the Chair and Ranking Member at the committee level?” he asked. (In an actual inquiry, that would be the case.) “Do you intend to require that all subpoenas be subject to a vote of the full committee at the request of either the Chair or Ranking Member?” (Ditto.) “Do you intend to provide the President’s counsel the right to attend all hearings and depositions?...Do you intend to provide the President’s counsel the right to present evidence...[and] to object to the admittance of evidence?...Do you intend to prove the President’s counsel the right to recommend a witness list?...and more.
All of these would be required during a real impeachment inquiry. Pelosi does NOT want the President to have these rights. She especially doesn’t want Trump to be able to present evidence. Just from looking at the documentation Giuliani has in his possession, can you imagine an “impeachment” hearing getting into that stuff? Not gonna happen.
In fact, President Trump is sending Pelosi a letter essentially daring her to go ahead with her impeachment. He’s calling her bluff, and it’s delightful to see. He won’t cooperate unless it’s the real deal, requiring a House vote. According to Mark Levin, the Senate shouldn’t cooperate, either, as long as Pelosi isn’t following the rules, and should just vote to dismiss the whole thing. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can use the “nuclear option” to dismiss it with a simply majority.
Trump to send Pelosi a letter 'daring' her to hold impeachment inquiry vote
Meanwhile, the real evidence coming in is supportive of Trump. Of course, we now know the so-called “whistleblower” (reportedly a rogue CIA agent) went to Schiff first –- Schiff lied repeatedly about that –- and Schiff’s office reportedly told him to seek legal counsel and go to the IG. Why on earth would a whistleblower go first to a political officeholder? Why would he get such partisan lawyers? (We’ve talked about Whistleblower Aid, which was formed to take down the Trump administration.) And why would the complaint be not in the form a real whistleblower would offer but more like, as Mark Levin calls it, “a second impeachment document”?
There’s so much more, and it’s all coming out, though most media will ignore it or excuse it as long as they can. The fire hose will keep blasting. We’re all gonna get wet, but that’s okay. And if this phone call with Michael Goodwin is any indication, the President is more optimistic than ever…
Goodwin: Trump talks impeachment, Dems and de Blasio in interview
Leave a Comment
Note: Fields marked with an * are required.