Day Two of the Impeachment Public Hearings

Dear Chairman Schiff,


           Another day of the impeachment public hearings where the former Ambassador to Ukraine testified before the Intelligence Committee . . . 


           Democrats asked the Ambassador how it made her feel to be the victim of a smear campaign.  She reasonably responded that she did not appreciate having her reputation impugned or maligned.  To be frank, this is a relatively trivial scene compared with the broader smear campaign that has been continuous for over three years to remove a duly elected President of the United States.


           Even Russia continues to be smeared when the Ambassador, at the prodding by Democrats, repeats the meme that Russia hacked into the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) server.  She even emphasized that it was a consensus by the intelligence community that Russia hacked into the DNC server.  As of this writing, no one has asked the Ambassador how the intelligence community arrived at that conclusion.  The obvious answer would be, Crowdstrike.  Who is Crowdstrike?  Crowdstrike is a private sector firm hired by the DNC to examine the server (this publicity certainly made company founders billionaires when the company went public).  The federal government was not permitted by the DNC to do the examination.  Thus, the “intelligence community” (including Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper and Director of the CIA John Brennan) took Crowdstrike’s word for it.


           What else do we know about Crowdstrike?  Former National Security Agency (NSA) technical experts refute the claims about what Crowdstrike found.  Others also investigated controversial connections between the Obama Administration, the Atlantic Council, George Soros, and Google.  Yet, Democrats and their smear campaign cohort would lead us to believe this is a crazy conspiracy theory advanced by an individual who has been relentlessly smeared.


           Goodness . . . now Democrats are getting emotional and saying with red faces, “I am ANGRY!!!”  Words matter!!!!!!!  Pay attention to these words.  Pay attention to the words we are saying to smear President Trump.  Let us be clear:  evidence has little to do with our smear campaign against a man we never, ever, from day one liked or accepted as a duly elected President.


           I’m surprised that no one asked the Ambassador to what extent she moved the needle on Ukrainian corruption during her tenure.  While some efforts were mentioned, there seemed to be no reportable outcomes.

           I'm also surprised that no one asked the Ambassador if she felt like she was in good company with General MacArthur who was fired (and not moved into a prestigious fellowship) by President Truman.


           Mr. Chairman:  If the President of the United States, under his authority in Article II of the Constitution, wants to achieve results in a country considered one of the most corrupt of those important to America’s national interests, why would he not want to put in key positions those he chooses?


Respectfully,

Gadfly