Ultimately the Democrats, their Deep State and elites behind these events are destroying the country and the US Constitution.
This past weekend attorney David Rivkin and professor Elizabeth Price Foley wrote an eloquent piece in the Wall Street Journal outlining how the House of Representatives impeachment inquiry is unconstitutional. They wrote –
House Democrats have discarded the Constitution, tradition and basic fairness merely because they hate Mr. Trump. Because the House has not properly begun impeachment proceedings, the president has no obligation to cooperate. The courts also should not enforce any purportedly impeachment-related document requests from the House. (A federal district judge held Friday that the Judiciary Committee is engaged in an impeachment inquiry and therefore must see grand-jury materials from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, but that ruling will likely be overturned on appeal.) And the House cannot cure this problem simply by voting on articles of impeachment at the end of a flawed process.
Here are eight ways that the Mueller Witchhunt and Lying Adam Schiff’s impeachment hearings of President Trump are similar –
1. Both Begin in the Ukraine –
The Mueller special counsel was created based on a bogus dossier with connections back to the Ukraine. As we reported in December 2018, Andrii Telizhenko was approached by DNC operative Alexandra Chalupa in early 2016. Chalupa wanted dirt on candidate Trump and his campaign manager Paul Manafort. The Ukrainian embassy in Washington DC worked CLOSELY with the DNC operative Chalupa.
Chalupa told Andrii she wanted Russian “dirt” on the Trump campaign.
The Gateway Pundit spoke with Telizhenko on the DNC Russia-gate Scandal –
Alexandra Chalupa was apparently hired by the DNC going as far back as 2013. According to Politico, shortly before the election:
A daughter of Ukrainian immigrants who maintains strong ties to the Ukrainian-American diaspora and the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, Chalupa, a lawyer by training, in 2014 was doing pro bono work for another client interested in the Ukrainian crisis and began researching Manafort’s role in Yanukovych’s rise, as well as his ties to the pro-Russian oligarchs who funded Yanukovych’s political party.”
According to Politico, Chalupa claimed that in October of 2015 she began investigating Trump’s ties to Russia. Why she began this investigation is completely unknown. The only thing of significance that had happened at this point was that Trump announced he was running for office. There was no apparent triggering event. Candidate Trump had very limited contact with Russia or Russia businessmen.
Lying Adam Schiff’s dungeon impeachment sham is based on this exact same scenario. President Trump asked the Ukraine’s newly elected leader to look into the beginnings of the Russia Witchhunt in the Ukraine. Liberal Democrats believe this is a crime even though their bogus Mueller investigation started based on the exact same bogus actions tied to the Ukraine and Chalupa.
2. Democrats Are Behind the Beginnings of Both Shams
As noted above, the Russia Hoax started in the Ukraine and was instigated by the DNC and Chalupa. It’s also been widely reported that Democrat Hillary Clinton paid for the dossierthat was used to surveil candidate and President Trump and which was the basis for the Mueller Witchhunt.
The Schiff Sham was also a Democrat creation. The ‘whistleblower’ who started the sham is widely suspected of being an Obama CIA spy in the Trump White House. This individual, suspected to be Eric Ciaramella, approached Congressman Schiff before filing the faulty ‘whistleblower’ report. If Schiff’s CIA ‘whistleblower’ is outed and if he was spying on President on behalf of Schiff, then they both should be held accountable for conspiracy and treason under the Espionage Act.
3. Both Shams are Based on Fake or Non-Crimes
We reported two years ago that the Mueller investigation was not based on a crime. Gregg Jarrett at FOX News wrote when Mueller initially brought charges against Manafort that Mueller is tasked with finding a crime that does not exist in the law. It is a legal impossibility. He is being asked to do something that is manifestly unattainable because there is no such thing as the crime of collusion with foreign countries in the US statutory code.
Jarrett wrote the most succinct article about the Trump – Russia Collusion investigation to date. In his post Jarrett makes many statements that are almost shocking, but none more than the fact that the entire Mueller investigation was lawless. Jarrett stated the following about the charges reported in the Russia collusion story –
George Papadopoulos pled guilty to a single charge of making a false statement to the FBI. He was not charged with so-called “collusion” because no such crime exists in American statutory law, except in anti-trust matters. It has no application to elections and political campaigns.
It is not a crime to talk to a Russian. Not that the media would ever understand that. They have never managed to point to a single statute that makes “colluding” with a foreign government in a political campaign a crime, likely because it does not exist in the criminal codes.
Rivkin and Foley point out that President Trump has similarly committed no crime in regards to his actions with the Ukrainian leader –
The effort has another problem: There is no evidence on the public record that Mr. Trump has committed an impeachable offense. The Constitution permits impeachment only for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” The Founders considered allowing impeachment on the broader grounds of “maladministration,” “neglect of duty” and “mal-practice,” but they rejected these reasons for fear of giving too much power to Congress. The phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” includes abuses of power that do not constitute violations of criminal statutes. But its scope is limited.
Abuse of power encompasses two distinct types of behavior. First, the president can abuse his power by purporting to exercise authority not given to him by the Constitution or properly delegated by Congress—say, by imposing a new tax without congressional approval or establishing a presidential “court” to punish his opponents. Second, the president can abuse power by failing to carry out a constitutional duty—such as systematically refusing to enforce laws he disfavors. The president cannot legitimately be impeached for lawfully exercising his constitutional power.
Applying these standards to the behavior triggering current calls for impeachment, it is apparent that Mr. Trump has neither committed a crime nor abused his power. One theory is that by asking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Kyiv’s involvement in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and potential corruption by Joe Biden and his son Hunter was unlawful “interference with an election.” There is no such crime in the federal criminal code (the same is true of “collusion”). Election-related offenses involve specific actions such as voting by aliens, fraudulent voting, buying votes and interfering with access to the polls. None of these apply here.
4. Both Shams are Led by Corrupt and Criminal Actors –
The Hillary email scandal, the beginnings of the Russia Hoax and the Mueller investigation were led by many of the same Obama Administration corrupt players. James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Andy McCabe, Bruce Ohr, James Clapper, John Brennan, and numerous others were behind setting up of President Trump and his team with bogus crimes. The actions of these individuals were so egregious that they are now the focus of a criminal investigation led by DOJ prosecutor John Durham.
Adam Schiff is running the sham impeachment of President Trump. He is arguably the most dishonest politician in US history. He and his gang of fellow Democrats and Deep State operatives are not concerned with the law or the constitution. If they were, this would never be in place.