The case for Impeachment #2 - Hallo friendsDARMO NEWS TODAY, In the article you read this time with the title The case for Impeachment #2, We have prepared this article for you to read and retrieve information therein. Hopefully the contents of postings Article culture, Article economy, Article health, Article healthy tips, Article news, Article politics, Article sports, We write this you can understand. Alright, good read.

Title : The case for Impeachment #2
link : The case for Impeachment #2

The case for Impeachment #2

The House should begin the process of impeaching Donald Trump. Yes, again.

The commutation of  Roger Stone's conviction is the most corrupt act ever committed by a President. Stone was convicted because he lied under oath to protect Donald Trump. Stone clearly signaled that, if he spent one day in prison, he would hurt Trump. Even Michael Corleone would have blushed.

How would a new impeachment probe affect the election? Nobody can predict the public's reaction. Perhaps a second attempt will convince the majority of America  that nothing will be normal as long as Trump remains in office. Conversely, the majority may conclude that nothing will be normal as long as Dems have any power. I'm pretty sure that the first scenario is more likely, but I'm not certain.

Bottom line: Impeachment is simply right. The facts certainly justify this course of action.

But the predictable nature of Trump’s action should not obscure its rank corruption. In fact, the predictability makes the commutation all the more corrupt, the capstone of an all-but-open attempt on the president’s part to obstruct justice in a self-protective fashion over a protracted period of time. That may sound like hyperbole, but it’s actually not. Trump publicly encouraged Stone not to cooperate with Robert Mueller’s investigation, he publicly dangled clemency as a reward for silence, and he has now delivered. The act is predictable precisely because the corrupt action is so naked.

In a normal world, this pattern of conduct would constitute an almost prototypical impeachable offense.

So what's wrong with normality? If you want a normal world, do normal things.

(Lindsey Graham justified Trump's action on the grounds that Roger Stone committed a "nonviolent" offense. Actually, Stone threatened a witness with death -- and someone threatened the jurors.)

Now let's look at the tactical arguments in favor of Impeachment II.

A new impeachment investigation will give the House a forum to interview witnesses -- including Roger Stone. Marcy Wheeler points to an impeachment-worthy line of inquiry:

People are conflating two issues of whether Trump's commutation is proper: whether it is valid (that is, whether Stone can stay out of jail) and whether Trump engaged in wrong-doing because of it (that is, whether Trump engaged in quid pro quo with it).

Also, Stone may fuck Trump anyway, or even may already have.

For those asking how Stone might fuck Trump -- Stone kept a notebook recording all his conversations with Trump. It's unclear whether Mueller got it in the raid of Stone's house (that's, in significant point, WHY they raided his house).

FWIW, I have an operative theory that Stone pawned off the notebook onto one of his Proud Boys and then bribed him to keep it safe. But that's just a WAG based off something Stone did in 2018.

A secret notebook? Ahhh. That's sexy. That's the sort of thing designed to capture the public's attention -- a classic Hollywood Maguffin.

That notebook was referenced in this warrant. Apparently, investigators learned about it while interviewing one of Stone's employees.

[redacted] provided information about a meeting at Trump Tower between Trump and Stone during the time [redacted] worked for him, to which Sterne carried a “file booklet” with him. Stone told [redacted] the file booklet was important and that no one should touch it. [redacted] also said Stone maintained the file booklet in his closet.

I'm having a flashback. Anyone else remember J. Edgar's fabled blackmail files?

A new impeachment inquiry could determine whether the FBI got hold of this important piece of evidence -- and if not, why not. (I doubt that Mueller got hold of it. If he had, we'd know.)

On the witness stand, Stone would of course deny that this notebook contains evidence of criminality. But Stone isn't that good a liar: He always says more than he should, as exemplified by the interview he gave just before the commutation was announced. Stone is incredibly cocky, he's intemperate, he's loquacious, he's getting on in years -- and, being an old hedonist, he may be a former or current user of drugs.

(I'm not saying I know one way or the other. But I've met a few hedonists in my time, and drug usage took its toll on their cognitive functions.)

All of these factors lead me to suspect that Stone just might have an interesting outburst or two on the witness stand. The guy's a braggart. Deep down, Roger Stone wants to shout "Goddamned right I ordered the Code Red! Cocksucker!"

Look at the way Stone threatened Randy Credico. Would a prudent man have done such a thing?

A new impeachment inquiry would have other benefits. Since the probe need not stay focused on the commutation, hearings could serve as an ongoing probe -- an daily reminder -- of Trump's various corruptions.

I mean, there's a new Watergate every week or two, right? That's what our lives have been like since January, 2017. If the Whitewater probe could morph into the Monica scandal (by way of Ken Starr's bullshit rationalizations), then Impeachment II could morph into an inquiry into whatever new Watergates pop up in August and September.

Not only that. Trump and Barr are going to try to change the narrative by launching massive smears against the Democrats. Impeachment hearings could offer a way to counterpunch.

Let me explain how that would work.

You can't investigate the Stone affair without talking about Bill Barr. If you don't understand why, go here, then go here.

So a Stone investigation can -- and should -- become a Barr investigation.

An ongoing investigation into Barr's corruption offers the House a magnificent way to counter the headline-grabbing smears will soon convulse the nation.

Consider the the John Durham probe. Here's a cute fact: The investigation of the investigation has lasted much longer than the original investigation. At the moment, most Dems aren't worried about Durham, but they should be. I predict that someone will be charged -- possibly Comey, possibly Brennan. Hell, maybe Obama.

The whole thing is propagandistic bullshit, of course. The FBI and the intelligence community had all sorts of excellent reasons to investigate the Trump campaign in 2016. Only the most wormy-brained Alex Jonesian would believe that the Bureau is an institution swarming with liberals. Bottom line: If partisanship motivated the Russia probe -- if an investigation of Team Trump was intended to prevent him from becoming president -- the fact that an investigation existed would have been public knowledge before the election that Trump.

Instead, Comey talked about Hillary while keeping mum about Trump. In doing so, Comey more-or-less elected Trump. That's the truth about Comey, even though nobody on the right wants to admit it.

Why is Durham heading up this bullshit excersize? Does Barr have something on Durham? Lots of people suspect as much, but so far, nobody has offered any informed speculation as to what that "something" might be. I do recall that Marcy once said (can't remember where or when) that Durham is just a figurehead, and that the real dirty work is being done by Barr's handpicked team of trolls. She's usually right about these things.

My larger point is this: Expect the Durham smear to hit hard -- at the worst possible moment. Don't get cocky. Prepare for disaster. Optimism is the gravest of sins.

The Dems need a mechanism to investigate the investigators of the investigators. An ongoing impeachment probe would serve that purpose perfectly.

Think about it: If Impeachment II is an ongoing thing, the Dems will have a seasoned team of professionals at their disposal. These probers can look into Barr's boys. They can demand unredacted copies of the raw materials underlying the allegations made by Barr and Durham. Since Barr has a history of protecting Trump, anything Barr does is fair game. Barr can stonewall and refuse subpoenas, but doing so will make him look guilty.

There are many more reasons why a new impeachment inquiry would help the greater cause, but the ones I've listed should suffice. 

Contact Pelosi. Don't let her tell you that Trump's fate should be left up to the voters in November. The voters may make the wrong decision if they don't have all the facts. An impeachment investigation will make the facts known. 

This corrupt Senate probably won't convict, but so what? Who cares?

Impeachment NOW!

Thus Article The case for Impeachment #2

That's an article The case for Impeachment #2 This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.

You are now reading the article The case for Impeachment #2 with the link address https://darmonewst.blogspot.com/2020/07/the-case-for-impeachment-2.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: