Narrative Post-Mortem

by

Gadfly

          
Well, Democrats have competed their public hearings.  From Chairman Schiff’s perspective, there is clear evidence President Trump violated his Constitutional oath by abusing the power of his office to achieve a quid pro quo with the newly elected President of Ukraine—that is, to condition military aid and/or an Oval Office visit in order to get dirt on a political opponent.  In the process, Chairman Schiff (and other Democrats) kept emphasizing no one is above the law.

After an event such as the Democrat-controlled “impeachment inquiry,” it can be instructive to do a post-mortem drill, essentially “walking it back” to see how outcomes might have been different.

Let’s start with the notion that the former Vice President Joe Biden was not a candidate for the office of the President in 2020.  This fact then would eliminate the meme that Biden was a political opponent.  Thus, the argument that aid or an Oval Office visit in return for dirt on a political opponent would be irrelevant.  What then would constitute a quid pro quo?

If Biden were not a presidential candidate, would Democrats understand the rationale for investigating Burisma and his son (and possibly himself for any possible government influence)? 

Another consideration:  while many wonder about Biden’s motivation for running, was his entry an attempt to make him above the law?

Republicans never considered Trump’s request to include “dirt on a 2020 political opponent.”  Their understanding, clearly supported by language in the July 25 telephone transcript, was that President Trump wanted to follow up on evidence that Ukraine was somehow involved in getting dirt on candidate Trump during the 2016 election.  In addition to this, there was clear evidence that the former Vice President was actually involved in shielding Burisma and Hunter Biden from corruption investigations by the Ukrainians.  Frankly, the approach was by definition a bribe because a billion in loans were tied to the firing of the prosecutor looking into corruption by Burisma (and son Hunter).  Amazingly, Democrats saw no reason to pursue this apparent crime by the number two most powerful person in America ostensibly because Biden is officially a candidate for President in the 2020 elections.  This seems to be justification for making an exception that no one is above the law, even though there was no outrage by Democrats for the past three years when the left pulled out all the stops to “find dirt” and to prove Trump collusion with Russia.

Democrats would lead us to believe that President Trump pursued investigations for personal gain.  There is no doubt that President Trump is especially sensitized to the fallout of efforts to first prevent his election and then other efforts to deny his legitimacy as a duly elected President.  This is certainly an injustice that needs to be remedied and would no doubt vindicate the President.  But justice is not a personal benefit per se. 

In the longer run, “the big things” President Trump emphasizes (according to Ambassador Sondland) and that the little people at the National Security Council and State Department snobbishly trivialize represent the legitimacy of the institutions of our Constitutional Republic.  This is something many of those who testify on behalf of the impeachment inquiry either fail to understand or lack the capacity to understand.  America is not a democracy.  It is a Republic.  President Trump clearly intends to identify and cut out the cancer of faction that Madison warns us about in Federalist Paper 10 and emphasizes as the justification for a republic over a democracy.  

President Trump asked for a favor from another head of state.  How would Democrats have worded the exchange to avoid the appearance of quid pro quo?  The fact of the matter is that ALL aid to foreign nations is connected to conditions.  In this case, the unelected bureaucracy is coming across as “the woman scorned” because President Trump did not mimic their talking points. Imagine that.  President Trump unabashedly acts as the elected President of the United States that has the courage to fulfill his Constitutional oath to carry out the will of the people who elected him to the office.

Despite Democrat efforts to control the narrative via Democrat-controlled public hearings, polls appear to indicate that they have failed to convict President Trump in the court of public opinion.  Ironically, the Democrats’ moral righteousness targeted corrupt behaviors of President Trump; but, what the casual, objective (fact over feeling) observer witnessed is a considerable amount of corrupted reasoning play out in Congress, the unelected bureaucracy, and the media.