Lion of the Blogosphere

Thoughts about impeachment

I did predict impeachment back in February, but I thought it would be caused by the Russia stuff and not a completely new allegation. But nevertheless it has finally started.

Regarding corruption: the Democrats are more corrupt than Republicans in general or Trump specifically. Even in Ukraine. Democrats previously pressured the Ukranian government not to prosecute organizations favored by liberals and Democrats, including the gas company that pays Joe Biden’s son $600,000/year for doing nothing, and they pressured Ukraine to investigate Paul Manafort.

But the Democrats know how to be corrupt in a way that’s technically legal or not called out by the fakestream media. The Clintons making more than $100 million from giving “speeches” to organizations and countries they had power over doesn’t sound above-board to me, but the fakestream media doesn’t care about it.

Partially, this is because Democrats have lots of loyal underlings and lawyers to do the dirty work. Obama would never personally talk about this stuff with a foreign leader. If there was any quid pro quo with respect to all of those Clinton speeches, it’s not something Bill or Hillary discussed personally with anyone. Trump, on the other hand, doesn’t know the rules, plus he doesn’t have any loyal underlings in politics (maybe he had some loyal underlings in real estate).

And, of course, partially because the fakestream media is the propaganda wing for Democrats and liberals. There mission is to run cover for Democrats and liberals, not expose their corruption.

* * *

Some commenters say something like “no way will Democrats really impeach him.”

To that, I say, “yes, way.” If Republicans could impeach Clinton for lying under oath about whom he had sex with, then Democrats can impeach Trump because they HATE, HATE, HATE him, and to get revenge against Republicans for impeaching Bill Clinton, even though under the current mode of #metoo thinking, Clinton was an evil misogynist rapist.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

September 25, 2019 at 9:26 AM

Posted in Politics

49 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. So are they gonna impeach him or not?

    Yakov

    September 25, 2019 at 9:37 AM

    • Probably. But I think history will not be kind to them for doing so. I don’t think voters will, either. If I were him, I would respond to the impeachment with a full-throated rejection and denounce House democrats for having done it. In layman’s terms, I’d give them the bird. At this point, everyone knows these attacks on Trump are a sham. When Clinton was impeached, his second presidency was severely weakened. But, if Trump plays it right, this could actually strengthen him.

      destructure

      September 25, 2019 at 2:58 PM

      • I think this is another Russia crapspiracy.

        Read “map” in the latest post. Sounds like much ado-do about nothing.

        gothamette

        September 25, 2019 at 6:17 PM

  2. Lion, there is no impeachment. Impeachment requires a vote in the House, and Pelosi knows she doesn’t have the votes for it, so it’s probably not going to come up anytime soon, not to mention that it’s political suicide for every D in a swing district. Muller, Nadler’s theatrics, et al are the “inquiries”, and we’ve been dealing with those since before Trump’s inauguration. All Pelosi did was announce that now we’re going to be using some fancy new nomenclature for what’s already been happening, which gave the moonbat left, NeverTrumpers, and the media a reason to cream their collective pants.

    Literally nothing of substance has changed.

    Belmont

    September 25, 2019 at 9:44 AM

    • Democrats WANT to vote to impeach because the HATE Trump, really HATE HATE HATE him, plus they want revenge against Republicans for impeaching Clinton (even though in the current era of #MeToo, Bill is actually an evil misogynist).

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 25, 2019 at 10:42 AM

    • If the Democratic party had any balls, which I’m not saying they do, they would tell any Dem House member in a swing state this:

      “If an impeachment article comes up for a House vote and you vote No, come 2020 we will shop for a new candidate for your seat.”

      njguy73

      September 25, 2019 at 1:07 PM

  3. How ironic would it be if it’s not Russia that brings him down but rather a former Russian republic that was maneuvering behind the scenes FOR Hillary.

    Brendan

    September 25, 2019 at 9:54 AM

  4. Yes, there is no impeachment. Just as the release of Trump’s tax returns will be never ever.

    Like the Mueller testimony, it’s all theatrics!

    Ok, what, who's this again?

    September 25, 2019 at 10:18 AM

  5. If the only difference between Pocahontas and Trump was Medicare-for-all, I’d vote for the Medicare!

    Medicare-fraud-for-all. FIFY.

    Andrew E.

    September 25, 2019 at 10:24 AM

    • I will never vote for Warren. I would not vote for her if her platform included giving me, personally, a million dollars.

      In what moral universe does a person who lied about being a native, for professional gain, ever get to be president? Not the one I live in. I understand people shouldn’t necessarily be held forever accountable for their worst decisions, but that argument does not work for somebody trying to get elected president.

      Lowe

      September 25, 2019 at 11:05 AM

      • Lowe-dude, if honesty mattered in politics, the list of Presidents would end thusly:

        39. Jimmy Carter, 1977-1985
        40. Walter Mondale, 1985-1993
        41. H. Ross Perot, 1993-2001
        42. Ralph Nader, 2001-2009
        43. Ron Paul, 2009-2017
        44. Dennis Kucinich, 2017-

        njguy73

        September 25, 2019 at 1:18 PM

      • Lowe is right. And let me add that, while it’s skeevy for Warren to have lied about being an Indian, it would have been almost as skeevy, to my mind, to have claimed Indianhood even if she were a full-blooded Cherokee. Believers in racial quotas might disagree, but the notion of getting hired as a law professor based on one’s ethnic group strikes me as disgusting.

        Simon

        September 25, 2019 at 2:38 PM

      • I’ve heard people from Oklahoma, where there are many mixed people, say that there’s something in Warren’s looks that hints at NA ancestry.

        Peter

        ironrailsironweights

        September 25, 2019 at 2:58 PM

      • Minorities shouldn’t be getting preferential treatment in the first place. So I don’t really care that she was cheating a system that discriminates against whites. Think about it, every white person who gets marked as a minority is one less white person who is discriminated against to meet some HR quota. But I doubt Warren was thinking about that when she did it. I think Warren only cares about benefiting herself and to hell with everyone else. And I’m not down with that at all.

        destructure

        September 25, 2019 at 3:37 PM

  6. Not sure what’s going on here – is there an underlying master plan, or is Pelosi just catering to the leftist loonies who make up a big chunk of her party? An up-or-down vote on impeachment in the House would be interesting – how will the Democrats who got elected from traditionally Republican districts last year vote? Clearly not a single House Republican will support impeachment.

    But if the House does impeach, the matter will then move to the Senate for trial, a two-thirds vote being necessary for conviction. The Senate is composed of 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats (including two Independents who vote with the Democrats). So even if every Democrat votes to convict (which is far from certain), there will still be at least a twenty vote shortfall for conviction. Not one Republican will vote to convict, so the whole rotten mess will fail. Impeachment is generally unpopular with the public at large, so the Dems will have to carry this burden into the general election. I wonder how Democratic senators who are running for reelection fro states that Trump carried in 2016 will vote.

    The Democrats seem to be continuing their push for self-destruction.

    Black Death

    September 25, 2019 at 10:38 AM

    • Good explanation, but I doubt Pelosi plans for an impeachment vote. This is just talk, red meat for Democrat voters.

      Lowe

      September 25, 2019 at 10:59 AM

    • You say not one Republican would vote to convict. What about Romney?

      Jay Fink

      September 25, 2019 at 1:07 PM

      • Don’t think so.

        Black Death

        September 26, 2019 at 9:38 AM

  7. I’m a Democrat, and think that Medicare-for-all is politically fatal. “Medicare for all who want it” (in Buttigieg’s words) is what should be on offer. People like the insurance they get at work, or at least prefer it due to misplaced risk-aversion. And people on Obamacare like that, too.

    Anthony

    September 25, 2019 at 10:45 AM

    • In my neighborhood there’s a car with a “I Love Obamacare” sticker. But hanging from the mirror is a School District parking pass. In other words, she’s union and exempt from O-care.

      You know me

      September 25, 2019 at 11:39 AM

      • How do you know Lady School District doesn’t have a relative who’s only alive thanks to Obamacare?

        njguy73

        September 25, 2019 at 1:16 PM

      • …who’s only alive thanks to Obamacare?

        I severely doubt she would have been dead otherwise.

        bomag

        September 27, 2019 at 8:14 AM

  8. BTW, are we sure that the GOP Senate will side with Trump when you have unreliable cucks like Romney and Collins lurking about?

    Brendan

    September 25, 2019 at 10:48 AM

    • Removal requires support of 2/3 of the Senate.

      Richard

      September 25, 2019 at 11:58 AM

  9. This is my problem with non-lawyer politicians esp businessmen. They just don’t get it. They think they can ride roughshod over everyone, and the attorneys are just there to fix things with their “legalese.”

    A lawyer would be more circumspect.

    Mrs Stitch

    September 25, 2019 at 10:49 AM

  10. In other news, Biden is behind in NH and IA and has lost 18 points off his lead in SC.

    Richard

    September 25, 2019 at 11:11 AM

  11. Completely meaningless. All Trump’s people have to do to win the election is run a Knockout Game compilation tape.

    Wick

    September 25, 2019 at 11:47 AM

  12. Trump really needs to light a fire under Barr etc. to get some heads rolling. I mean for goodness sake, there are DOZENS of people involved in the Russia scam who ought to be arrested, up to and including Obama. But Obama will never be touched. Still, why aren’t these bums like Comey, Brennan, Strzok, etc etc being slapped in cuffs and taken to prison? Trump needs to be feared to finally shut up these Democrat nitwits.

    If only Trump were the “dictator” of Democrat fantasy, instead of an easy going, 100% play-by-the-rules guy.

    And I agree with Lion. The Dems will start formal impeachment hearings, whether or not anything comes of them. Their increasingly deranged base demands it, and it will help them with turnout in 2020. Not that they’ll need it, since they’ve already got “turnout” plans of 140% of eligible voters showing up and voting D in multiple key cities like Milwaukee, Philly, etc. 2020 is baked in the pie for a D win, UNLESS Trump starts arresting people. And even then.

    peterike

    September 25, 2019 at 11:58 AM

    • “there are DOZENS of people involved in the Russia scam who ought to be arrested, up to and including Obama”

      I agree. But if he did that then it would consume the remainder of his presidency the way the Mueller thing did. And does he want to make that the central theme of his re-election campaign? And how would his political supporters (I’m talking about influential people not voters) feel about it? They may not want to waste political capital with that. They have their own agendas they want to see passed. Or maybe Trump is just waiting until after his re-election to drop the hammer. Who knows what’s going on behind the scenes?

      destructure

      September 25, 2019 at 4:09 PM

      • Trump needs to prosecute in order to regain some/any legitimacy for the US government. I understand the perspective that prosecuting treason comes across as vindictive, which is against the positive, forward-looking message that Trump probably wants to create (as compared to the vindictive, backward-looking message of the Democrats).

        Nevertheless, a government must be seen as legitimate to have power. Rule of Law is a joke right now in the US. Letting Obama, Hillary, Comey, Clapper, etc. skate away freely without the necessary and proper executions under law is a mortal wound to the country. Justice must be served.

        Panther of the Blogocube

        September 27, 2019 at 1:16 AM

  13. I was going to mention this impeachment but I thought Lion would dismiss it and say, “it’s stupid, it’ll backfire,” but I’ll say it instead.

    It’s stupid, it will backfire.

    gothamette

    September 25, 2019 at 12:21 PM

  14. “Democrats previously pressured the Ukranian government not to prosecute organizations favored by liberals and Democrats, including the gas company that pays Joe Biden’s son $600,000/year for doing nothing, and they pressured Ukraine to investigate Paul Manafort.”

    This is the Trump/Giuliani spin, but it is simply false. Joe Biden was the US front man for pressuring Ukraine to remove Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin for failing to prosecute corruption cases. The UK, IMF and EU also wanted him removed for the same reason. Mykola Zlochevsky, the head of Burisma Holdings (with Hunter Bidden on board) was the poster child for Ukranian elites that Shokin was accused of protecting. Biden asked for Shokin’s removal because he failed to prosecute Zlochevsky, not because he was trying to protect him.

    Details:

    Mykola Zlochevsky co-founded Burisma Holdings in 2002.

    Under pro-Russian Ukranian president Viktor Yanukovych, Mykola Zlochevsky was Ecology Minister in charge of issuing oil and gas licenses. Zlochevsky has been accused of improperly issuing many licenses to his own companies.

    In February 2014 Yanukovych was overthrown by the Ukrainian revolution. Yanukovych fled to Russia on February 22.

    In late February and March pro-Russian forces occupied Crimea and parts of Eastern Ukraine.

    In March 2014 UK launched an investigation of money laundering by Zlochevsky and froze $23 million in UK banks. Ukraine also starts an investigation of Zlochevsky shortly after UK.

    On April 18, 2014 Hunter Biden was appointed to the board of Burisma Holdings.

    In 2015 UK courts unfroze Zlochevsky assets because prosecutors could not make a case. UK prosecutors blamed lack of co-operation by Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

    In a 2016 Joe Biden as front man for US foreign policy threatened to withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees if Ukraine did not remove Viktor Shokin. Both the UK and USA claimed Shokin was protecting elites. Mykola Zlochevsky was a prime example of an elite Shokin had failed to prosecute.

    Viktor Shokin was removed as Prosecutor General in 2016 and replaced by Yuriy Lutsenko. Lutsenko continued the investigation of Zlochevsky, but cleared him of all charges after 10 months.

    I have never seen any explanation why Lutsenko cleared Zlochevsky. Maybe Lutsenko was just as corrupt as Shokin. Maybe Zlochevsky bribed him to drop the case. Maybe Shokin had destroyed or hidden all the files so Lutsenko could no longer make a case. Maybe the Ukrainian government decided because it was heavily dependent on Russian natural gas and at war with Russia that Burisma Holdings was an important strategic asset and they just gave Zlochevsky a pass on his relatively small time corruption. Yanukovych is thought to have stolen $40 Billion, so Zlochevsky $23 million was small time.

    MikeCA

    September 25, 2019 at 1:39 PM

    • One other point. Hunter Bidden was not paid $600,000 a year. The NYT story says Hunter Biden was paid as much as $50,000 a month. That means he was paid $50,000 in one month, but less in most other months and likely a lot less in some months.

      MikeCA

      September 25, 2019 at 1:42 PM

      • “According to one official with ties to the company, Hunter Biden’s compensation was around $50,000 a month,” and lasted until April of this year.”

        Sounds like around $600,000/year to me. For just one company. Hunter Biden is rich and doesn’t even have to do any real work to be rich.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 25, 2019 at 3:16 PM

    • MikeCA is a spin doctor whose preferred tactic is obfuscation. The simple fact is that Hunter Biden was paid a ridiculous amount of money that he wouldn’t have gotten if he wasn’t the veep’s son. That smells like corruption to me.

      destructure

      September 25, 2019 at 4:20 PM

      • Hunter Biden’s business ventures did create the appearance of conflict of interest.

        Hunter Biden graduated from Georgetown and Yale Law School. He worked at MBNA America, a bank holding company, and at the Commerce Department. In 2001 he co-founded a lobby company. In 2006 George W. Bush appointed Hunter to the Amtrak board of directors. In 2009 when his father became VP he resigned from both Amtrak and his lobby company. He founded the investment firm of Rosemont Seneca Partners and worked as an attorney at Boies Schiller Flexner. In 2013 Hunter helped found BHR Partners, an investment company founded to allow Chinese investors to make investments outside of China. Rosemont Seneca Partners was one of the three companies that co-founded BHR. The other two companies are Chinese investment companies.

        After the Ukrainian revolution in 2014 Burisma Holdings wanted to assemble a high profile international board of directors. Obviously, Hunter was offered the position because his father was the VP. A former president of Poland was also added to the board. Hunter was the co-founder of an investment company and had served on the Amtrak board of directors, so claims that he was totally unqualified for this position are exaggerated. At the time officials in the Obama administration worried that this created the appearance of a conflict of interest and there were news stories suggesting that. Trump has claimed there was an actual conflict over the firing of Shokin, but Trump is lying. Shokin was fired in part because he refused to prosecute the founder of Burisma, not to protect him.

        I have seen accusation the the Bank of China paid Hunter Bidden $1.5 billion, but actually the Bank of China placed $1.5 billion into the BHR Partners investment fund. None of that money went to Hunter. Hunter claims he owns 10% of the company that manages this investment fund (I assume this is because he owns 1/3 of Rosemont Seneca Partners which owns 30%). Hunter also claims that so far he has not received any return from this investment.

        Clearly Hunter Bidden was offered positions he would never have been offered except that his father was a US Senator and later VP, but to make it corrupt you need to show that Joe Bidden did some official act to benefit Hunter Bidden. Trump’s pathetic attempt to suggest the Shokin firing was that act is totally backwards. Shokin had shelved the investigation of the Burisma founder the year before he was fired. The next prosecutor reopened the investigation.

        MikeCA

        September 25, 2019 at 7:14 PM

      • “Hunter . . . served on the Amtrak board of directors.”

        A position for which he was undoubtably the most qualified person for the job in his own right. Just as McCain’s spawn is the best choice for a talk show. Felicity Huffman, Lori Laughlin and that California Exec. who just pulled a four month sentence must feel pretty chuffed right now. All they did was pay to get their kid into college.

        Curle

        September 25, 2019 at 11:27 PM

    • You assume that UK, IMF, and EU involvement is somehow evidence of Joe Biden’s integrity. Consider rather that Biden’s son was probably not the only person being used to launder money and buy influence. Surely Burisma did not just stop at Hunter Biden when it came to distributing dirty money. I would be shocked if Burisma was not paying people in the UK, IMF, and EU to be equally corrupt.

      Also, how often is it that the US is so entangled in the politics of a country that it lobbies to have a prosecutor removed? It’s just bizarre that a VP would even be involved with this.

      Stilicho

      September 25, 2019 at 9:43 PM

    • Is it your position that Shokin had completed his investigation and had formally wrapped it up at the time he was fired following Biden’s call?

      Curle

      September 25, 2019 at 11:37 PM

    • Lion,

      Have you seen my reply to MikeCA regarding the Hunter Biden issue?

      map

      September 26, 2019 at 10:13 PM

    • MikeCA,

      So, let me see if I understand this correctly. You actually believe that Joe Biden was on some kind of “special assignment” to involve himself, the president of the United States, the EU, the UK and the IMF on what essentially amounts to a local fraud case with a total loss of approximately $23 million, judging by the amount of money that was frozen by UK authorities. You don’t think this whole matter is rather low-rent to require the attention of the top echelon of the US Executive Branch?

      Even if you believe that the above is perfectly reasonable, does it seem at all reasonable to you that the US Vice President would engineer a potential diplomatic incident by withholding $1 billion in aid in exchange for having one prosecutor fired, a prosecutor who Biden felt was somehow “corrupt” in not prosecuting a… $23 million fraud case?

      Even if you believe the above is perfectly reasonable, does is seem at all plausible that, a month after the company comes under investigation, Hunter Biden turns up on the board of directors of Busima a month after it comes under investigation? Wouldn’t it make more sense for Hunter to steer clear of such a potential mess, not involve himself and his high-profile family in it?

      And, in the end, Busima was cleared of any wrong-doing anyway and there was no corruption by the fired prosecutor to begin with?

      You have to be a complete idiot to believe this story. This is like a Scooby Doo cartoon designed for adults.

      None of this makes sense.

      What does make sense is Hunter Biden placed on the board of corrupt company acting as a laundering operation because Hunter was a bagman for the DNC, given that the previous Ukrainian regime was very pro-Russian and that Busima was probably stealing Ukrainian assets and moving them to other locations. I would not be surprised if that $1 billion was laundered in this way. A Ukrainian prosecutor discovered this fraud and Joe Biden had to step in to protect his son, otherwise the whole thing comes apart.
      That is the story that makes sense.

      map

      September 26, 2019 at 10:33 PM

      • From what I’ve read Shokin, the prosecutor, was still investigating. Biden had him fired to stop the investigation. And, of course, we know the replacement quickly dropped the whole thing.

        Biden is corrupt, end of story. This is deep state business at work here. The real issue is the Crowdstrike nonsense. This is the private company that was solely relied on by our intelligence services to develop the Russian hacking meme. The DNC never let our intelligence see their supposedly hacked server. Crowdsource told intelligence the Russians did it and our intelligence took them at their word and started working the meme. In all probability, a deep state con. The Russian anti-Putin fellow who founded (owns?) the company is a $10 million contributor to ding, ding THE CLINTON GLOBAL FOUNDATION.

        The deep state is trying to protect itself from Trump to hide their crimes and misdemeanors. That’s what this is all about. The ‘whistleblower’ thing is a just a means to leak the spin they want out there and give the House Ds cover to help them hide their crimes.

        Like old McMuffin during the election. The deep state getting their CIA employees to do their dirty political work for them.

        Curle

        September 27, 2019 at 5:56 AM

  15. Man, the transcript of the call is bat shit crazy.

    President Zelenskyy: … I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.

    The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows alot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the·:whole situation .. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they. say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

    Trump is ranting to the President of Ukraine about CrowdStrike??? CrowdStrike is an American company with headquarters in Sunnyvale, California. CrowdStrike also has offices in Virginia. CrowdStrike is a VC funded startup that recently went public. Trump seems to think CrowdStrike is a Ukrainian company owned by some wealthy Ukrainian and they hide some server in Ukraine. The DNC hired CrowdStrike to investigate the hack of their servers. Don’t know if this is one of the DNC servers he thinks is hidden in Ukraine or Hillary’s email server.

    Trump lives in some fantasy alternate reality and has no idea what is going on in the real world.

    MikeCA

    September 25, 2019 at 5:29 PM

    • Hired some shady private company instead of going to the FBI? Very fishy.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 25, 2019 at 10:42 PM

      • The FBI did not do any analysis of the servers on their own. Instead, relying completely on the CrowdStrike report.

        This is unprecedented. The FBI allowed a company allied with the DNC to conduct an investigation on one of the DNC’s members.

        This is the height of corruption. The entire Russian hoax is predicated on this company’s output.

        map

        September 26, 2019 at 4:13 PM

    • You are filling in too many of the unknowns in the conversation with your own, possibly faulty, inferences about the context and meaning of the crowdstrike reference. Perhaps crowdstrike ID’d the server as Ukrainian.

      Curle

      September 25, 2019 at 11:17 PM

    • “Trump lives in some fantasy alternate reality and has no idea what is going on in the real world”.

      For someone with no security clearance to say that of someone with the highest security clearance (of which the public is aware) easily reverses your statement to reflect back on you. The logic of which is bright and glaring. No offense.

      Mike

      September 25, 2019 at 11:59 PM

    • The CrowdStrike founder is a Ukrainian national.

      map

      September 26, 2019 at 4:13 PM

  16. I wonder what the real-life brake is on an impeachment attempt, specifically triggered by the fact that doing so will easily radicalize a large portion of this nation toward actively preparing for and waiting for an eventual civil war to kick off.

    This second attempt to depose Trump, especially if it passes, will widely mean functional disengagement from national political life by Trump supporters. There has to be a brake.

    This aforementioned half of this nation just lived through an attempted coup of their elected official. It witnessed a gross double standard in that there was no functional ability to hold their opponents accountable for corruption in pursuit of that coup. Now Trump supporters are supposed to witness the same group attempt to impeach? That’s a laugh. What are the sociological fail-safe’s in this nation that protect against the social rot resulting from extremist corruption at the top level?

    The only mechanism that I can think of is a military coup. Though, years ago I realized that this was essentially the only way out. That mechanism is merely more pertinent as time passes.

    Mike

    September 26, 2019 at 12:12 AM


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: